meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt/Musar/Shenei Luchot HaBerit/English/merged.txt"}
text: Shenei Luchot HaBerit
  שני לוחות הברית
  merged
  
  This file contains merged sections from the following text versions:
  -Shney Luchot Habrit by Rabbi Eliyahu Munk
  -
  -Sefaria Community Translation
  -
  
  Shenei Luchot HaBerit
  
  Toldot Adam
  
  Introduction
  
  
  
  Beit Hashem
  
  
  
  Beit HaChochmah
  
  
  
  Beit Yisrael
  
  
  
  Bayit Ne'eman
  
  
  
  Beit HaMikdash
  
  
  
  Bayit Acharon
  
  
  
  Beit Yisrael (tinyana)
  
  
  
  Beit Chochmah (tinyana)
  
  
  
  Beit Yisrael (telitaah)
  
  
  
  Beit David
  
  
  
  Beit Hashem (2)
  
  
  
  Beit David (2)
  
  
  
  Beit Chochmah (3)
  
  
  
  Beit Hashem Beit David
  
  
  
  Beit Ir Chomah
  
  And from this, we will understand very well what has disappeared from the eyes of researchers in what they have examined regarding, heaven forbid, a change in God's will.  The Almighty decrees a decree and then repentance, prayer and charity can change that to the better; and sometimes it changes from good to bad.  But they walk in darkness because there can be no change, heaven forbid.  Rather all is one and is only a matter of one desire.  That is to say this inquiry is a matter of faith.  I will also copy what I wrote as a child in my pamphlet, even though it is a little different.  In any event, it all goes together in one place.  These are my words.  Written in section of Godliness in the gate of unity.  And the whole faith of unity is complete; as there is no body nor strength of the body, nor a separate mind, and will not change from thought to thought or from action to action or from one leader to another.  It is a complete intellect and simple and unique in all parts of His names and in all attributes.  And a change in actions on the part of the leadership only exists from the side of the recipients.  Because the one who walks in innocence and straightness, and keeps a good home, receives goodness derived from God Almighty.  And he who perverts his path and distances himself, is distanced from the good derived from God and the opposite is derived from Him.  
  For if the reward and punishment were the arrangement, then, Heaven Forbid, it will look as if there is a change from desire to desire.  Because now he agrees one way and then agrees another way.  The matter of Desire is a secret that reveals the emanation that includes all the changes according to awakenings of awakening.  This is how it continues from the essence and in nature.  The idea is if we sanctify ourselves below, we sanctify Him above in the same nature of the matter that arises.  And if he defiles himself, he defiles him from above in the same nature of the matter that has arisen.  And if he awakens himself and throws of his ways of exile and binds himself in holiness, he is found in nature sanctified.  And the Will of heaven is not changed, for on the contrary, the will is revealed and everything is expected and the authority is given to do so.  
  
  .
  
  Beit HaBechirah
  
  
  
  Shaar HaGadol
  
  
  
  Conclusion
  
  
  
  Asara Maamarot
  
  Introduction
  
  
  
  First Maamar
  
  
  
  Second Maamar
  
  
  
  Third and Fourth Maamar
  
  
  
  Third Maamar
  
  
  
  Fourth Maamar
  
  
  
  Fifth Maamar
  
  
  
  Sixth Maamar
  
  
  
  Seventh Maamar
  
  
  
  Eighth Maamar
  
  
  
  Ninth Maamar
  
  
  
  Tenth Maamar
  
  
  
  Shaar HaOtiyot
  
  Emet Ve'Emunah
  
  
  
  Briyot
  
  
  
  Gerut
  
  
  
  Derech Eretz
  
  I am surprised that when it comes to smallpox outbreaks, which spreads from child to child, why do people not take their children out of the city? In the future, the fathers will be responsible for the deaths of their children who are nursing, and have committed no sin, and those who are weaned and have committed no sins, and died from the sickness whose fathers did not take them away [from the city]. Every man who fears god should fear every eventuality. These things that are included in protecting the body are included in the warnings of (Devarim 4:9) 'take utmost care and watch yourselves scrupulously' and this is also the way of the world to take care of one's body since it is the container that the soul is wrapped up in so it will be a throne for the soul.
  
  Hallel
  
  
  
  Vatranut
  
  
  
  Zehirut
  
  
  
  Chaver Tov
  
  
  
  Tahara
  
  
  
  Yetzer Tov
  
  
  
  Kaf Zechut
  
  
  
  Lev Tov
  
  
  
  Matun
  
  
  
  Ne'eman Ruach
  
  
  
  Sipuk
  
  
  
  Anava
  
  
  
  Piryon
  
  
  
  Tzniut
  
  
  
  Kedusha
  
  
  
  Kedushat HaAchilah
  
  Maachalot Asurot
  
  
  
  Emek Beracha
  
  
  
  Hagahot Emek Beracha
  
  
  
  Birkot HaNehenin
  
  
  
  Hilchot Biah
  
  
  
  Kedushat Kelal Komah
  
  
  
  Ratzon
  
  
  
  Shetikah
  
  
  
  Teshukah
  
  
  
  Aseret HaDibrot
  
  Introduction
  
  
  
  Chullin
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Shabbat
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Pesachim
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Matzah Ashirah
  
  
  
  Matzah Shemurah
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Shevuot
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Know - that the pious one (R. Yosef Karo) and I agreed to make a great effort on the night of Shavuot, and to keep sleep from our eyes.  Praise to God, so it was.  We didn't stop one moment - listen, and your soul will be revived...
  The moment that we began to learn the Mishnah, and we learned two mesechtot, our creator graced us and we heard a voice speaking from the mouth of the pious one.  A great voice, with clear enunciation, and all around us heard but did not understand.  It was very pleasant, and the voice gained strength.  We fell on our faces, and none could raise their eyes from fear.  The voice speaking to us began and said - "Hear my beloved ones, most beautiful, cherished, beloved, peace to you, fortunate are you and those that bore you, fortunate in this world and in the world to come, in that you took upon yourselves to crown me this night.  It is many years that my crown has fallen from my head, and I have no one to comfort me, and I am cast to the dirt clutching waste.  But you have returned the crown to its former glory...  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Taanit
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Rosh HaShanah
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Yoma
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Sukkah
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Tamid
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Megillah
  
  Ner Mitzva
  
  
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  Torah Shebikhtav
  
  Introduction
  
  In publishing this booklet I aim to fulfill two promises. I have undertaken to publish a commentary on the overriding nature of the מצות שבת, the commandment to observe the Sabbath, concerning which our sages Berachot 8 have urged that שנים מקרא ואחד תרגום, that a person should peruse the weekly portion twice in the original Hebrew, and once in an appropriate translation. I am convinced that the meaning of this statement is that one should not confine oneself to the mere study of the Torah but do so in order to teach it and to carry out the commandments contained therein. In order to do this a person has to know and understand the text of each weekly portion. He has to be able to identify the specific commandments (both positive and negative) contained in every one of these portions in order to have the sources of all 613 commandments at his fingertips. Although there are numerous weekly portions which do not contain any of the aforementioned 613 commandments, perusal of the portion is still a great מצוה, a section of the overall commandment to study Torah which is itself a division of the 613 commandments. After listing the relevant commandments contained in each portion we will endeavor to explain their obvious as well as their hidden meanings to the best of our ability. We will next pinpoint the ethical and moral content of these various portions of the written Torah. A person is obligated to study all these three aspects of the Torah diligently.
   These three approaches to Torah study are best described as 1) נר מצוה 2) תורה אור 3) דרך חיים תוכחת מוסר, (compare Proverbs 6,23: "For the commandment is a lamp; the teaching is a light; instructive rebukes are a way of life"). This booklet will revolve around these three principles. We refer to the numbered commandments as נר מצוה, to the significance of these commandments both exoteric and esoteric as תורה אור, and to the moral ethical teachings contained therein as דרך חיים תוכחת מוסר. The numerical value of the word אור, light is 207. It is the same numerical value as that of the word רז, secret.
   I have therefore undertaken to reveal a drop of the ocean of the mysteries contained in each portion of the Torah. I trust that you, the reader, will reveal much more by your being stimulated like a perennial fountain, i.e. מעין המתגבר.
  Actually, I should have dealt with all this during my commentary on the statement of our sages in Berachot 8, that "anyone who completes perusing the respective portion of the week together with the congregation will have his lifespan lengthened." However, I did not want to interrupt the commentary on the tractate Shabbat that I was involved in at the time; the digression would have been too great. This is why I devote a separate treatise to this part of Torah which I have decided to call תורה שבכתב, "the written Torah."
  The second promise I made at the time I wrote my commentary on tractate Shavuot, where I discussed the tremendous importance our sages have attributed to Aggadah, the homiletical material presented in the Talmud. I then stated that none of these sometimes mind-boggling stories are devoid of profound meaning. If any one is devoid of understanding it, it is the reader. The Torah in Deut. 32,47 כי לא דבר רק הוא מכם already goes on record that nothing in the Torah is "empty," devoid of deep meaning. If it appears to us as if it were "empty," this only demonstrates our own "emptiness." (Jerusalem Talmud Peyah 1,5) If you want to taste the sweet honey of the teachings of our great Talmud scholars make yourself familiar with all this homiletical material. This is why I made up my mind at the time to reveal part of the rules governing the structure of the Talmud, the various topics dealt with therein and the system which it is based on. In order not to interrupt the subject under discussion at that time, I resolved to write a separate treatise on that subject. That booklet I have called תורה שבעל פה.
  Since these two Torahs are in reality one single Torah, i.e. only together do they really form the "Torah," I have called these two volumes שני לוחות הברית, "the two tablets that form the covenant."
  The commentator Tolaat Yaakov puts it in the following words: "Know that the written Torah is the mystique of תפארת ישראל, i.e. Israel is compared to a king (who walks) in his splendour, beheld by your eyes (Isaiah 33,17). It is called תורת אמת, since Micha 7,20 has said: תתן אמת ליעקב and it is also written תורת אמת היתה בפיהו (Maleachi 2,6), "that a Torah of truth was in his mouth." The oral Torah on the other hand, is considered like the bride mentioned in the Song of Songs. The reason that we refer to the written Torah as תורה ש-בכתב and not תורה שב-על כתב as we would expect, seeing that it is parallel to the תורה שב-על פה is, that the Torah of the "higher" world is a written Torah that is essentially concealed from us mortals, and only a small part of which has been revealed. This תורה עליונה is kept in the Celestial Sanctuary in total isolation. The written Torah revealed to us is only a small part of the writings kept in the higher regions. When G–d tells Moses in Exodus 24,12 that He has written the stone tablets, the Torah and the Mitzvah, להורותם, "to teach them," the meaning is that Torah and Mitzvah (the operative legislative clauses of Torah), are the only ones that have been released to our world. The expression תורה ש-בכתב, the Torah which is part of the "Writing," or" Supreme Book," is therefore singularly appropriate. The concept discussed above is alluded to in Song of Songs in the words על שבאתיו אל בית אמי ואל חדר הורתי where Solomon speaks about the origin of Torah in the hidden recesses of heaven (Song of Songs 3,4). The Kabbalists compare the emanation בינה in which these "writings" are kept, to old wine that has been preserved within the grapes it is made of.
  The reason that the oral Torah is called תורה שב-על פה, is that it occupies a place in the lower Merkavot, carriers of the Divine entourage. This is the meaning of Genesis 2,10 that "from there it would be separated." [These concepts are all based on the interpretation of the word מקדם in Genesis 2,8 as referring to something that had preceded the creation of the physical universe, as stated in Pessachim 54. Ed.] Seeing that the oral Torah does not have its origin in the secluded regions of the heavens, the domain in which G–d is in total יחוד, Unity, i.e. privacy, and seeing that the oral Torah is not part of that sanctuary in the heavens, it is called על פה, [something the function of which is to communicate its content to the outside. Ed.] This entire mystical concept is called תורה שבכתב ותורה שבעל פה. The mystical relationship between the two Torahs is described in the verse שני שדיך כשני עפרים תאומי צביה (Song of Songs 4,3) Rabbi Yannai in Pessikta de Rav Kahane on Exodus 12,1: "This month shall be the head of the months for you," comments that in the verse יונתי תמתי אחת היא לאמה, ("My dove is perfect, she is unique to her mother," [this translation does not reflect the interpretation we deal with here, of course, Ed.]) the word תמתי, is to be understood as תאומתי, my twin. Each of the twins, the oral as well as the written Torah, proclaims that it is no more important than its counterpart. Seeing the written Torah is essentially a book that is concealed, emanates from regions hidden from us, the oral Torah must elucidate the hidden meanings contained in the written Torah for us. By means of the "bride," i.e. the oral Torah, the mysteries of the luminaries in the higher world become accessible. One may view the function of the oral Torah as putting a seal on the written Torah, converting something potential into something actual. The חכם הרזים, i.e. G–d Himself, alluded to this when Solomon was inspired to say in Proverbs 31,23: "Her husband has become known in the gates" (public gatherings). He means that through her acts of kindness her husband has become esteemed. The אשת חיל, woman of valor, in that chapter is none other than the oral Torah, and her husband is the written Torah. The influence of the oral Torah on the written Torah is described here. Not only this, but the holiest name of G–d has been revealed to the world through these שערי צדק. In the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunyah ben Hakanah we are told in the name of Rabbi Rechumai that Torah is the light of Israel and its lamp. How can we reconcile this with what is written in Proverbs 6,23 that נר מצוה ותורה אור, "that the commandment is a lamp, whereas the Torah is light," and we conclude that נר, "lamp," refers to the oral Torah, whereas אור, "light," refers to the written Torah? Why does this Midrash reverse the relative importance of "light and lamp?" Let us explain this by means of a parable. A lamp is able to penetrate with its light to the furthest corner of any room inside a house. However, even the greatest light in the outside world cannot illuminate certain hidden corners inside a house that are covered by shade. The only way such corners can be lit up is if the light of a lamp shines upon those areas. Similarly with the oral Torah. Even though the oral Torah is only comparable to a "lamp" when compared to the great "light" of the written Torah, the written Torah needs that lamp in order to illuminate the hidden recesses that the light of the written Torah cannot reach. The "hidden recesses" referred to are certain queries that arise from the wording of the text." So far the comments of the Tolaat Yaakov.
  According to the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunyah referred to earlier, Song of Songs describes the idyllic state of affairs when Israel studies both the written and the oral Torah for their own sakes, i.e. לשמה. This results in a union between the forces on earth and their counterparts in the Celestial Regions, and will release all of G–d's blessings onto the Jewish people.
  
   אור חדש
  Now to the commentary on the written Torah which we will call אור חדש.
  כי נר מצוה ותורה אור, ודרך חיים תוכחת מוסר, We have already mentioned that the weekly perusal of the relevant Torah portion has to include three distinct approaches. First and foremost, one must study the relevant commandments contained in the פרשה, be they positive or negative. This part of the weekly study comes under the heading of כי נר מצוה, “for the commandment is a lamp." Secondly, one must try to understand both the obvious and the more mystical significance of these commandments and their influence on our relationship with the "higher" world, each person according to his ability. In that connection it is important to be aware that no one part of the Torah is less important than any other part. If the Torah tells us for instance, that "the concubine of Eliphaz was called Timnah" (Genesis 36,12), this is no less important a sentence than שמע ישראל ה' אלוקינו ה' אחד, "Hear O Israel the Lord our G–d the Lord is One" (Deut 6,4). Every single part of the Torah reveals matters relevant to our world as well as matters relevant to the "higher" world. Our sages have given us an example of the importance of the verse quoted from Genesis by showing that the name of that concubine תמנע is composed of the first letters of certain words in the verse תורת השם תמימה משיבת נפש, עדות השם נאמנה מחכימת פתי (Psalms 19,8). The implication is that "the Torah is so perfect in totality" i.e. תורת ה' תמימה, that any part of it is מחכימת פתי, "makes the simple wise." All of Torah from beginning to end is משיבת נפש "renews life." The "life" referred to is the life in the "higher" regions. Anyone endowed by G–d with wisdom, חכמה, will be granted the kind of intelligence that enables him to touch base with חכמה-תבונה-ודעת. This is all included in the concept of תורה אור, that Torah is light. Any recipient of this "light," will discover in Torah the three dimensions of knowledge we have mentioned.
  Remember that Torah is the imprint of G–d; the universe, which is none other than אדם, i.e. Israel (which is the only nation called אדם), is the imprint of Torah. Torah and Israel then are strongly attached to one another. Just as physical man is composed of 248 limbs and 365 tendons, so the soul contains a similar number of hidden spiritual "limbs" and "tendons. These latter are the 613 commandments, 248 of which are positive commandments requiring us to do certain things, whereas the remaining 365 are negative commandments enjoining us not to do certain things. The negative commandments are perceived as emanating from G–d's attribute of Justice, and are "red" (description of tendons), whereas the positive commandments which emanate from G–d's attribute of Mercy are "white," i.e. the limbs, bones. Red is a symbol of דין, judgment, whereas white is a symbol of mercy. Both are branches of the hidden אדם עליון, a hidden mystical name, who sits on the throne in the Celestial Regions whose mystique is alluded to in Exodus 3,15 when G–d said to Moses: זה שמי לעולם וזה זכרי לדור דור. "This is My Name forever, and this is My Appellation for eternity." The Zohar points out that when you combine the numerical value; of the first half of Ineffable Name י-ה with the numerical value of the word שמי, the result is 365, whereas when you combine the numerical value of the second half of the Ineffable Name ו-ה with the numerical value of the word זכרי, the result is 248. Man was created in order to fulfil these 613 commandments which are "branches" of a higher world. The thought processes underlying the creation of spiritual forces in the "higher" world were all designed to eventually result in physical man fulfilling the 613 commandments on this earth and involving his נשמה, soul, in doing so. Although it can be argued that one cannot carry out the 365 negative commandments, seeing that observing them does not involve the performance of a deed but abstention from such performance, we shall explain later that there is no contradiction here. By fulfilling these commandments, our soul "garbs" itself in prestigious garments, a necessary prelude for its return to בית אביה, "her father's house," i.e. to the Heavenly Regions it originated from. 
  This is what Solomon has in mind at the conclusion of Kohelet 12,13: "The sum of the matter, when all is said and done: Revere the Lord and observe His commandments! For this applies to all mankind:" The words סוף דבר, mean: "this is the final purpose of everything." When Solomon speaks of את מצותיו שמור, "observe His commandments,” he refers to our observing the positive commandments, since כי זה כל האדם, the 248 limbs and 365 tendons are the sum total of man. I realise that these words seem unintelligible, however, I have elaborated on them in my introduction to the treatise called תולדות האדם. [The author recommends that the reader study that treatise. Ed.] 
   In the book Shushan Eydut the point is made that all the 613 commandments are an integral unit, similar to a garment knitted from a single thread. Any break in the thread threatens to destroy the entire garment, since it will unravel. It follows that if a person has failed to fulfill all the commandments he is incomplete, to say the least. 
  Since no individual can fulfil all 613 commandments, even at the time when the Temple is standing, we must ask ourselves how one can attain one's שלמות, perfection, both the perfection of one's body and that of one's soul. There are three reasons that some people cannot fulfil all the 613 commandments. Either a certain category of commandments applies only to a certain category of Jews, and such categories are determined at birth, or they cannot be fulfilled because certain events have not occurred during one's lifetime. A person cannot perform the commandment of the levirate marriage or the giving of חליצה, (an act demonstrating that one refuses to marry that sister-in-law) to his sister-in-law of a brother who died without issue, since such situations are beyond his control. One cannot take refuge in a city of refuge unless one had killed someone inadvertently. One cannot make the payments imposed by the Torah for having accused one's wife of not having been a virgin at the time of the wedding, unless circumstances had made such an accusation possible. The examples of all the commandments that most people are never called upon to fulfil are too numerous to list here. There is a third category of commandment which though easily capable of fulfilment, requires certain conditions, such as the affixing of a Mezuzzah on one's door post. If one dwells in a tent, this commandment does not apply since the entrance to a tent does not meet the requirements necessary to make that commandment applicable. Author's comment<i class="footnote">  I have found the following interesting comment in a book called Megillat Setarim. I quote verbatim: "The mystique of the 613 commandments is that they are divided into 248 positive commandments and 365 negative commandments. Nowadays (when the Temple is in ruins, and Israel in exile), only 126 of the 248 positive commandments are capable of being fulfilled. Only 243 of the 365 negative commandments are capable of being observed. This leaves us with a total of 369 commandments that are capable of fulfilment in our day and age. This is alluded to in the sentence אני ישנה ולבי ער, (Song of Songs 5,2) "asleep” which equals 365 to which you add one for each word, making 369. As a result we are unable to fulfil 244 of the commandments. The numerical value of 244 can be expressed as מרד, (insurrection, revolt). This is to remind us that due to our insurrection against G–d's rule, we lost the Temple. Only 48 of the 126 positive commandments that are capable of being performed nowadays apply to each individual. The other 78 positive commandments need to be fulfilled only when certain circumstances occur. Many such circumstances may never occur during a person's lifetime. Similarly only 222 of the 243 negative commandments that apply in our times are capable of being observed by every individual Jew. The remaining 21 negative commandments can be observed only when certain circumstances occur in a person's life. When you combine the numerical value of the 48 positive commandments that apply to every Jew today with the 222 negative commandments each one of us is duty bound to observe, you get the numerical value of the other half of the verse mentioned earlier namely ולבי ער, i.e. 270.</i>
  From all the above it is clear that there never has been a Jew who was able to perform all the commandments listed in the Torah. Even the patriarchs, of whom our sages said they kept the entire Torah, (Yuma 28), observed only what they were able to. They had not been commanded to do so. They are referred to as the מרכבה, the carrier of the Divine entourage, even though their performance of the commandments was of a lower order because they were not an act of obedience to G–d.
  It is important to appreciate that the מצות are so interwoven with one another, that each מצוה contains a part of all the spiritual aspects of every other מצוה. The מצות are bound up with the emanations, which are also interwoven with one another as will be explained on another occasion. This means that there is a general as well as a specific significance or purpose of each מצוה. As soon as man was created, G–d gave him a מצוה. We read in Genesis 2,16: "G–d commanded man saying, etc." The Talmud Sanhedrin 56 understands that verse to mean that the seven Noachide laws were commanded to Adam at that time. The Talmud dissects the verse to show how different ones of the seven commandments are alluded to in the various words. At any rate, these seven commandments conceal within them all the 613 commandments. The elite of mankind, men such as Chanoch, Methuselah, Noach, Sem, Ever, the patriarchs and their respective sons, all observed seven Noachide commandments until G–d decided to reveal the 613 commandments. Since attaining one's perfection is impossible unless one observes them, they had to do so even though each commandment contains spiritual elements of all other commandments also. Nonetheless, unless one translates the potential of the מצוה into an "actual" through its specific performance, one has not done what our sages call הוציא את הכח לפועל.
  Should you ask that, in view of the foregoing, the patriarchs and the other pious men who lived prior to the giving of the Torah, did not succeed in converting this potential into actual valid performance, know that they did manage to do so nonetheless. The key to perfection is the desire to joyfully perform the will of G–d to the extent that it has been revealed. Seeing that they were all prepared to do this, the latent elements of the 613 commandments -which are part of the seven Noachide commandments- provided the vehicle through which they observed the principles expressed in all the 613 "commandments." The only thing that was missing prior to the giving of the 613 commandments was the כסא למטה, "a throne of G–d's Presence in this world." Someone who was prepared to perform all the details of G–d's revealed will would have been able to focus this preparedness onto that "throne." A halachic allusion to this concept is found in the Talmud in Beytzah 4, where we are told by Rabbah that preparation from the weekday for the Sabbath is in order, whereas preparing on the Sabbath for the weekday following, or on a festival for the weekday following is prohibited. It is significant that the Talmud there refers to הכנה דרבה, i.e. refers to this הלכה as a ruling by Rabbah, although another scholar by the name of Rav who preceded Rabbah by two generations really introduced the discussion about permissible or prohibited preparations. The Talmud may have hinted that the preparations made by earlier generations to fulfill the will of G–d (even when not yet revealed) had been so strong that their very preparedness was accounted as if they had actually carried out such as yet unformulated commandments. The Talmud must then not be understood as referring to the specific halachic ruling quoted in the name of Rabbah, but as describing an intensive kind of preparation as “הכנה דרבה.”
  The question why G–d had not given man only a single commandment instead of seven is not valid, since we must allow the Creator to decide the minimum amount of actual performance that is needed by man in order to achieve his ultimate goal of becoming the מרכבה, carrier of the Divine entourage.
  G–d saw fit to reveal the remainder of the 613 commandments to man in His own good time, i.e. to the generation of Israelites who were released from bondage in Egypt. Since that time every Jew is expected to perform as many of these 613 commandments as his particular station in life enables him to perform. The key to his achieving perfection by such מצוה performance lies in the manner in which these מצות are fulfilled. If they are all fulfilled joyfully, then the "preparedness" of which we spoke earlier is enough to credit such individuals with also having fulfilled those commandments which they were unable to fulfil through no fault of their own. 
  Bear in mind that all 613 commandments are capable of being fulfilled collectively by the Jewish nation. The commandments which are designed specifically for the priests are performed by them, whereas the commandment to perform the levirate marriage is performed by whoever finds himself in the situation where this commandment applies to him. If someone was unable to perform certain מצות, but has fulfilled all those he was capable of fulfilling in the optimal manner i.e. לשמה, the merit of having studied the מצות which he had not been able to perform will accrue to himץ The meaning of לשמה is that he studies in order to be able to teach and to perform the commandment in question; this is called the proper הכנה, preparation. It will be accounted for such an individual as if he had actually performed the commandment which he had familiarized himself with in such a way that he could have performed it in all its details had the opportunity arisen. This is called הוציא מכח לפועל מתוך ההכנה שלו, "he translated a potential into an actual due to his intensive preparation." 
  Our sages had this in mind when they said that if someone intended to perform a מצוה, but did not get to perform it through some accident, it is considered as if he had performed it (Berachot 6).
  When Rabbi Meir says in Avot 6,1 that "he who occupies himself with Torah with a pure purpose acquires many things," he does not spell out what these things are (The continuation in that paragraph does not describe any of these "many things"). The reason is that it depends on what that particular person studied. The "many" varies with the kind of opportunity a person has to fulfill what he has studied with a view to fulfilling. Individual Jews may be viewed like soldiers in an army, many of whom have different tasks. If all fulfill their tasks to the best of their ability, they can all be considered as having fulfilled all tasks, since victory was due to their combined effort. (The author mentions that he has elaborated on this theme in his commentary on the first Mishnah of the fifth chapter of Avot.)
  Our sages have taught that anyone who nowadays studies the details of the sacrificial service in the Temple, is as if he had actually offered those sacrifices (Menachot 110). When someone observes that a second party is able to perform a certain מצוה that he himself is unable to perform, the "preparation," הכנה, that we described includes his advising the second party how best to fulfill such מצוה which he himself is unable to perform. If he does that, he too will be considered as if he had performed it.
  We read in Deut. 30, 11-14: "Surely, this Instruction which I enjoin you this day is not too baffling for you, nor is it beyond reach. It is not in the heavens that you should say 'who among us can go up to the heavens and get it for us and impart it to us that we may observe it?' Neither is it beyond the sea that you should say 'who among us can cross to the other side of the sea and get it for us and impart it to us, that we may observe it?' No, the thing is very close to you, in your mouth and in your heart to observe it.' The verses above reveal all that I have written concerning observance as well as vicarious observance of the Torah laws, i.e. that everyone is obligated to fulfill all the 613 commandments. When there are some מצות that he is unable to fulfill in practice, there are ways in which he can acquire the merit of having practiced them.
  There are four causes that may prevent a person from observing the commandments. One cause is that the specific commandment in question is applicable only to certain groups of people, such as the priests, i.e. people of superior parentage. Concerning such commandments, the Torah says: לא נפלאת היא, "you should not say that it is only for people of superior status." The second reason for not performing commandments is that they are of the kind that most people never have an opportunity to perform, such as remarrying one's divorced wife. Concerning such commandments the Torah says: "Do not say it is beyond reach," i.e. too unlikely. The third reason for not fulfilling some commandments, though the opportunity presents itself not infrequently, is one where the cause that triggers the applicability is absent, i.e. affixing a מזוזה to a door-frame, something that requires one to live in a house. Another example would be the law requiring that four-cornered garments be provided with ציצית. One cannot fulfill that commandment unless one owns a four cornered garment. Concerning such commandments the Torah says: "Do not say that this commandment is in the heavens," i.e. unattainable for you. Finally, the fourth reason for not observing certain commandments is that they are applicable only in ארץ ישראל, and you are unable to go there, seeing it is beyond the sea. Concerning this too, the Torah says: "Do not say that it is beyond the sea." All these obstacles are not really a hindrance to acquiring the merit of having fulfilled that commandment and thereby helping to achieve one's personal level of perfection, since the properly oriented study of these commandments affords one an opportunity to be as good as the people who actually live in ארץ ישראל Concerning all these four apparent obstacles to מצוה fulfillment, the Torah says: "For the matter is very close to you (to observe it) in your mouth and in your heart." In those four verses in Deuteronomy, the Torah alludes to exactly what I have been writing about in this chapter. 
  The Torah requires in the first instance: לעשותו, "to do it." If this proves impossible, the Torah settles for: בפיך, "in your mouth." When you use your mouth, i.e. study, this may replace doing in certain instances. How does all this apply to the negative commandments, which by their very nature can hardly be the subject of the instruction לעשותו, to perform it? I have dealt with the problem at length in my commentary on the beginning of the fifth chapter in Tractate Avot, where I pointed out that all negative commandments are really also included in the positive commandments, since the Torah requires more of us than not to transgress the negative commandments. Observance of negative commandments must include a conscious determination not to do certain things because G–d has forbidden them. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai phrased it thus: "A person must not say that he abhors pigs and the idea of eating pork is repugnant to him. A person should rather say that he is very interested in tasting pork, but since the Torah has forbidden it he must suppress his desire" (Sifra Parshat Kedoshim 20,26). This kind of observance of a negative commandment is considered a deed.
  This approach has helped me resolve what appears like a contradiction in outlook between Rabbi Simlai and Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryah. The Zohar and others quote the latter as describing the 248 positive commandments as corresponding to man's 248 limbs, אברים, whereas the 365 negative commandments correspond to man's 365 tendons, גידים. Rabbi Simlai, at the end of tractate Makkot, describes the 365 negative commandments as corresponding to the 365 days in the solar year. We must not jump to the conclusion that there is a conflict between the view of Rabbi Simlai and of Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryah. Moreover, it is very plausible, as stated in the Zohar, that the numbers of both the negative as well as the positive commandments should correspond to parts of man's body, seeing that their function is to bring about man's perfect physical and spiritual health. I have quoted a statement of Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryah earlier that man possesses both 365 inactive tendons, i.e. גידים נחים, as well as 365 active tendons, i.e. גידים דופקים. The 365 inactive, passive tendons correspond to the 365 nights of the year, whereas the 365 active tendons correspond to the 365 days (daylight) of the year. At night everything is in a passive inactive state, whereas by day there is activity When someone refrains from transgressing any or all of the 365 negative commandments, he is merely being inactive, comparable to night -a period of inactivity, passivity. If, however, observance of the negative commandments is a conscious act, the result of intensive study, then it cannot be described as inactivity; rather it is not unlike performance of positive commandments. This is what Rabbi Simlai had in mind when he described the 365 negative commandments as corresponding to the 365 days of the solar year. Rabbi Simlai also thinks of the 365 tendons. He merely indicated to us that there are 365 tendons which correspond to the 365 daylight periods during the solar year.
  I have found a very brilliant allusion to the 365 days of the solar year in the very name of the sun, in a book called Ginat Egoz. The author explains that we have three different names for "sun" in Hebrew. It is called שמש, חמה, חרס. When you combine the last letter in each of these three names for the sun you get 365= שהס. According to our tradition the sun is guided by an angel. When you spell the Hebrew word for "angel," i.e. מלאך, using words instead of letters, ממ, למד, אלף, כף you get a total of 365. When you spell the word מלאך in the conventional way, using only letters, you get a total of 91. This is an allusion to the four seasons in the solar year, each of which comprises 91 days.
  Let us now return to the subject we discussed previously. Our sages are on record as saying that every מצוה performed by a person creates a מלאך, angel (Avot 4,11). This is somewhat difficult. Granted that the performance of a positive commandment may create such an angel [a constructive force in G–d's universe ], how can the non-transgression of a negative commandment "create" such an angel? If we consider that observance of negative commandments through intensive study is equal to performance of a positive commandment we no longer have a problem with this statement of our sages. The fact that מלאך is alluded to in the names we have for "sun," is to make us aware that even the 365 negative commandments can be performed in a way that confers the same advantages on us as if we had performed positive commandments.
  The upshot of all the foregoing is that we must study Torah לשמה, as is spelled out beautifully in the benediction preceding the קריאת שמע prayer every morning. We say there: ללמוד וללמד לשמור ולעשות ולקים, "to learn and to teach to observe and to do and to fulfil the words of Your Holy Torah." This means that we ask G–d's assistance to fulfil all that is given to us to fulfil personally. Anything that through no fault of ours we cannot fulfil personally, we should teach others to fulfil -wherever possible. When this too is impossible, we ask G–d's assistance in what we recited a few lines earlier in that benediction, namely to enlighten us to gain insight and understanding of His Holy Torah. This is similar to King David's prayer in Psalms 119,18: גל עיני ואביטה נפלאות מתורתך, "Open my eyes that I may perceive the wonders of Your teachings." He meant, of course, the mystical aspects of the Torah.
  Now we can also understand Midrash Rabbah Vayikra in section 35, concerning Leviticus 26,3: "If you observe My commandments and carry them out;" Rabbi Chama said in the name of Rabbi Chanina that the meaning is that if you observe the Torah laws, I, (G–d) will consider this for you as if you had carried them out, the word אותם meaning the same as אתם, you." Rabbi Chaninah son of Pappa said that you will be considered as though you had created them yourselves, and, by extension, have created yourselves. Rabbi Chiyah taught: "He who studies to perform, not he who studies in order not to perform- for in such an instance it were better he had never been created. Rabbi Yochanan says that if someone studies with the intention of not performing, he should have had the afterbirth flung in his face so that he would not have been born alive. Rabbi Acha says that he who studies in order to perform (the commandments) will have the merit of welcoming the Holy Spirit. How do we know this? It is written in Joshua 1,8: למען תשמור לעשות ככל הכתוב בו, כי אז תצליח את דרכך ואז תשכיל. "So that you may observe faithfully all that is written therein (the Torah). Only then will you prosper in your undertakings and only then will you be successful." The expression תשכיל means that one is granted Holy Spirit as we know from Psalms 89,1: משכיל לאיתן האזרחי "An inspired statement by Eytan the Ezrahite." Thus far the Midrash in Vayikra.
  Let us now examine in what way the different Rabbis quoted in this Midrash differ. What nuances in the verse did each Rabbi find that he based his comment on? The central theme mentioned in the verse is "ועשיתם אתם." The word אתם seems superfluous. Even the word ועשיתם, is not needed, since the Torah could simply have said ואת מצותי תשמרו ותעשו. Why did the Torah have to say: ועשיתם אתם? Rabbi Chanina seems to explain this verse in the sense that I have written, that preoccupation with Torah should be לשמה, as I have defined; he will then be considered as having done the many things that he was unable to actually perform. The word תשמרו which precedes the word ועשיתם, would refer to study of Torah just as Rashi explained in Deut. 4,6: ושמרתם refers to study, ועשיתם to performance. The word שמירה would even include someone waiting patiently for the opportunity to perform a certain מצוה to present itself.
  I have previously stated that man cannot become perfect, i.e. "whole," except through performance of the whole range of the commandments, the effect of which is to perfect his 248 limbs and his 365 tendons. This is Rabbi Chaninah's understanding of our verse, and this is why he says that if you perform or study all the commandments you can be viewed as though you had made yourselves, i.e. made your body whole. This is why the Torah said ועשיתם and not תעשו, and this is also why the word Otam is spelled without the letter ו so that it can be read Attem. You are viewed as though you had created the very מצות you had performed.
  Rabbi Chiyah said that the above appplies only to those who study in order to perform the commandments; he who studies with the intent not to perform the מצות would have been better off had he never been created. I have already outlined previously that one must try to understand the deeper meaning of the מצות, and that having done so one is considered as if one had performed them. This applies only in the case of those מצות that one is unable to perform. Any commandment that a person can fulfil cannot however be vicariously fulfilled through the most profound study and understanding of its meaning. If vicarious performance only were acceptable, even when actual performance is possible, why would G–d have bothered to put the soul into man on earth? He would have been better off to keep the soul in heaven and let it contemplate the meaning of the 613 commandments! After all, when it comes to mental activities, the soul can function perfectly well without a body! The only reason it has been consigned to inhabit a body made of inferior materials is to perfect that body through actual performance of G–d's commandments. Rabbi Chiyah agrees that the meaning of the word ועשיתם is עשיתם, "as if you had actually performed," just as Rabbi Chanina understood this. However, Rabbi Chiyah explains the word אתם referring to those מצות that one is able to perform -as requiring them to be performed in practice and not merely through study, however intense that study may be. His understanding of עוסק בתורה לשמה, means performing those commandments one is able to in the best possible manner. If someone has studied merely to understand the meaning of the מצוה, he did not need to be born, since his soul [minus his body] would have understood the meaning of that מצוה anyways.
  Rabbi Yochanan, who said that such a person's afterbirth should be used to suffocate him, refers to the duty of a person not only to learn Torah but also to teach it to others and to encourage them to perform the commandments even though he himself might find himself unable to perform the commandment in question. He applies the Talmudic principle of גדול המעשה מן העושה, "greater is he who causes others to do, than the one who merely does himself" (Baba Batra 9). He interprets the words ועשיתם אתם transitively, i.e. "you shall make (others) perform them." He may well have punctuated the word לעשות in his statement by placing the vowel צירי under the letter ל, and the vowel קמץ under the ע. This would mean that "it is up to that person to see to it that G–d's commandments are performed." [I have not quoted the Hebrew version of his statement in the Midrash. Ed.] The remarkable thing is that Rabbi Yochanan speaks about a person who is perfectly willing to perform every commandment he is able to, but, because he is too lazy to step outside the doors of his house to encourage others to perform מצות, Rabbi Yochanan passes the harsh judgment that he feels such a person deserves to be choked to death [even retroactively if that were possible Ed.].
  Rabbi Acha understands the words ועשיתם אתם according to a Kabbalistic interpretation that performance of the Sacrificial Service is something required by Heaven. This is based on the perception that by performing מצות Israel enhances the honour and glory of G–d. This is also the approach followed by the Zohar in its commentary on the words ועשיתם אתם. The following is a quotation from that passage in the Zohar, (Sullam edition page 7) on Bechukotai: G–d says: "If someone performs the commandments and walks in My paths, it is as if he had made the heavens, had made ME and preserved ME." This is derived from the defective spelling of Otam without the letter ו, so that the reading is "you have made (them) yourselves," i.e. you have constructed the fabric of the Name of G–d which is Torah. Rabbi Shimon explained Samuel II 8,13: ויעש דוד שם בשובו מהכותו את ארם בגיא מלח, "David made a name when he returned from defeating Aram at the valley of salt." Did David "make a name?" The meaning is that because David complied with G–d's instructions and walked in His paths, he made a name for G–d. No other king in the world achieved this merit. David used to rise from his bed at midnight singing the praises of G–d, until G–d Himself, i.e. His Holy Name arose on His throne at dawn, a reference to the emanation מלכות. We have learned in Leviticus 24,11 that the reverse is possible also, when the Torah says, ויקוב בן האשה הישראלית את השם ויקלל "The son of the Israelite woman made a hole in the name (of G–d) by cursing it." This source is the reason we can interpret the verse in Samuel as we did. This is also why the Torah writes in Leviticus 26,3 ועשיתם אתם, meaning that if you perform them (the commandments), the result will be that you improve His Name. Thus far the Zohar.
  When Rabbi Acha said that true perfomance results in someone being endowed with Holy Spirit, he meant that if someone "repairs, reinforces," i.e. is מתקן the Holy Name in the Celestial Regions, as did David, then the Holy Spirit will come to rest on such a person in our world also because of the additional dimension of holiness such a person contributed to the heavens. I have explained this at length in my introduction to תולדות אדם. Although I plan to make my contribution to the understanding of the profound meaning of each מצוה, I am well aware that my efforts will not even comprise one millionth part of all those meanings.
  Having demonstrated the importance of the נר as well as the אור aspect of Torah, and how important performance is — 
  — the author now turns his attention to the different opinions about which precisely are the 613 commandments which are recorded in the Torah as such.
  There are many different ways the 248 positive and 365 negative commandments have been counted. The earliest compiler and the most authoritative one has been the author of הלכות גדולות, followed by the great scholar Shlomo Gabirol and subsequently the great master Maimonides. There followed Rabbi Moshe from Kotzi known as the סמ"ג or ספר מצות גדולות. The fact that we find far earlier attempts to determine how certain laws are derived from the written Torah, such as during the time of Rabbi Akiva and later Talmudic scholars, does not make those scholars we just mentioned arbiters as to who among the earlier scholars is correct. To mention just one example of different views, take the law of the סוטה, Numbers 5,14. It is debated whether the Torah when discussing the husbands's jealousy of his wife (and all the procedures prescribed when there is insufficient prima facie evidence of marital infidelity on her part) is something that is merely his right, or whether it is his duty. Whereas Rabbi Yishmael considers this merely a husband's privilege, Rabbi Akiva considers it the husband's duty. There are numerous disagreements between these two scholars concerning whether certain statements in the written Torah are merely indications of a permissible course of action or whether they make it mandatory.
  In some instances one scholar may see as many as three distinct negative commandments involving the consumption of חמץ, leavened things, whereas another scholar considers that there is only a single culpability for all of these prohibitions of חמץ, be it before Passover, during Passover, or after Passover. Even such universally known precepts as the recital of קריאת שמע, are subject to debate, one Rabbi claiming it is a Biblical precept, another saying that it is merely a Rabbinic injunction.
  The matter that all Rabbis are agreed on is that there are a total of 248 positive and 365 negative commandments. Midrash Tanchuma sees an allusion to this in the numerical value of the word ציצית when combined with the 8 threads and 5 knots that are part of that commandment. Since the Torah uses that commandment as an example of remembering all the commandments, the number 613 seems appropriately mentioned (compare Numbers 15,39 and Tanchuma on that verse). At the end of tractate Makkot folio 23, Nedarim 25, as well as in numerous other places in the Talmud, in the Zohar and other ancient sources, this number is unequivocally accepted by all scholars as the correct number of positive and negative commandments respectively. If the codifiers of the 613 commandments display slight variations from one another in their method of counting these commandments, this only reflects differences that existed already in Mishnaic times.
  I have elected to adopt the system used by Maimonides in his count of positive and negative commandments. Maimonides was clearly endowed by G–d with wisdom and insight and the ability to explain the reasons for his decisions, all of which are based on the fourteen principles which he enumerates at the beginning of his ספר המצות. Maimonides explains what motivated him to either include or exclude certain practices as being part of the sum total of 613 the commandments. Although Nachmanides has made several emendations to the count proposed by Maimonides, and has explained his reasons for such emendations, it is a fact that Rabbis of later generations have been able to justify Maimonides' count by answering Nachmanides' objections. As a result, the count of Maimonides is so well entrenched that all the winds of the world cannot dislodge it. When perusing the count of the סמ"ג, which contains a number of deviations from that of Maimonides, you will find that the author of the סמ"ג himself already withdrew his opposition to some of Maimonides' count, as we shall point out when discussing the commandment in question. Rabbi Moshe of Kotzi (the author of the סמ"ג), devoted a great deal of time to publish a book containing the 613 commandments, in which he sometimes departs from Maimonides, citing Talmudic sources for his emendations; we have to weigh his words very carefully. I have found it my duty to prove in each and every case that the count of Maimonides is justified, that all his teachings are well founded.
  The סמ"ג writes in the introduction to his book that Maimonides views the commandment of charging interest on loans to Gentiles as one of the 613 commandments (Deut. 23,21). He also considers Deut. 15,3 (calling on Jews to insist on repayment of oustanding loans from gentiles) as a positive commandment, in spite of the need to relinquish loans outstanding from Jews in the שמטה year. We do indeed find the ספרי on either of these two verses counting these statements as positive commandments, whereas we do not find this mentioned in the Talmud. In fact, the Talmud Baba Metzia 70 suggests that transactions with Gentiles involving interest are permissible but not mandatory. Charging interest to a Jew is considered a לאו הבא מכלל עשה, a negative commandment resulting from a positive commandment (the commandment to charge interest to gentiles). This is what the סמ"ג writes. I cannot understand how such a statement could be used to refute Maimonides who considers charging a Gentile interest a positive commandment! It seems to me that the quote from the Talmud supports the view of Maimonides. 
  To quote the Talmud verbatim: "We read in Proverbs 28,8 that 'he who increases his wealth through interest and usury only gathers in for him who is gracious to the needy.' Who is meant by 'the one who is gracious to the needy?' Rav says it is someone like King Shevor [since the money eventually will wind up in the king's treasury]. Rabbi Nachman says that he was told by Rav Hunna that it applies to someone who charged interest to a Gentile [for he will ultimately not benefit thereby]. This statement is challenged by Rava who questions the meaning of the word לנכרי תשיך, suggesting that it means: "you must charge interest,” only to be answered that the meaning is" "you must pay interest." Thereupon the Talmud queries whether it is conceivable that the Torah wishes to encourage us to take loans from Gentiles and to pay them interest?! The Talmud answers that the verse tells us not to pay interest to a fellow Jew. The Talmud counters that we already have an explicit statement governing this eventuality in Deut. 23,21: "You must not charge interest to your brother!" The Talmud answers that the reason the Torah writes two verses on the same subject is to make us culpable for violating both a positive and a negative commandment when charging interest to a fellow Jew.
  Rashi on that folio comments that king Shevor was a Persian king who taxed Jews excessively giving the money to "poor" Gentiles. He understands the word "poor", דלים, as applying to those who do not observe G–d's laws. Even the interest charged by a Jew to a Gentile eventually winds up in the king's treasury. Rashi, paraphrasing the Talmud, goes on: "Do you not think that לנכרי תשיך means "you may or must charge the Gentile interest?" The answer comes back: No! it means you must pay the Gentile interest." Thereupon the Talmud wonders why the Torah would command us to pay interest to the Gentiles?! Rashi adds that surely, if the meaning were only to permit payment of interest to the Gentile, there would have been no need for the Torah to tell us this.
  Tossaphot also elaborate on this segment of the discussion in the Talmud. They understand that the Talmud's question לא סגי דלאו הכי, "isn't it sufficient that you must not collect interest from the Gentile?" means that the Torah tells us we should even pay him interest when borrowing from him? The prohibition to loan him without interest is based on Deut. 7,2 "do not give them any gifts" (Avodah Zarah 20). the Torah adds that one must lend the Gentiles money only against interest so as to weaken them economically. Should you ask why the Talmud chose to raise this query from the verse of Proverbs 28,8, seeing that that verse is only the basis for a Rabbinic injunction namely to prevent people from learning from the ways of the Gentiles? The answer is that since the Torah writes that one should charge a Gentile interest on his loan, the Rabbis felt that they could not countermand the Torah. By referring to the verse in Mishley however, the sages felt justified in banning a practice that appeared already to have been forbidden by a decree of Solomon. The reason for the prohibition of loaning to the Gentiles was to discourage trade with them and learning from their amoral ways. So far Tossaphot.
  From the foregoing it is clear that Rava's query was based on his understanding the words לנכרי תשיך as Maimonides understands it, "you must charge the Gentile interest on his loans from you." Tossaphot's comments thus are completely in place.
  It remains true that Rashi wrote that he understands the expression as a permission for Jews to pay interest to a Gentile on a loan from him. Rashi may well feel that even if we read תשוך instead of תשיך this does not constitute a positive commandment, only a general permission. Rashi may have concluded this by understanding the words לא סגי דלאו הכי in the Talmud as referring to a Jew's preparedness to forego interest due to him, and the question whether he can be forced to charge interest on such a loan. It is possible that also the סמ"ג explains the Talmud in this fashion and that this is the reason he disagrees with Maimonides. He would then also interpret Rava to mean that תשוך means that though a Jew is forbidden to charge interest to a Jew, he is entitled to charge a Gentile interest. Such an interpretation is not possible according to the view expressed by the Tossaphot. 
  [The author continues for several columns to discuss the pros and cons of how to interpret that particular discussion in the Talmud. The conclusion he comes to is that Maimonides can certainly claim to base his ruling not only on the Sifri but also on Rava in the section of the Talmud quoted. Ed].
  
  
  
  
  
  In some instances Maimonides has also been attacked for his count of negative commandments. His words are as clear as sunshine at noon, however.
  The following is an excerpt of the סמ"ג’s introduction to the list of negative commandments: " Maimonides includes a widow and an orphan as a collective entity whenever the Torah enjoins us to treat the widow or orphan in a certain way, or not to treat them in a certain way. Similarly Maimonides lumps the Moabite and the Ammonite together. Whenever we read in the Torah that a Moabite or a member of the people of Ammon is prohibited from something, this constitutes a single prohibition in Maimonides' count. Maimonides also treats the prohibition of שאור ודבש, leaven and honey which are forbidden to constitute a smoke or incense offering on the altar, as a single negative commandment (cf. Leviticus 2,11). Maimonides similarly views the physical blemishes mentioned in Deut. 23,2 (someone whose member is cut off, or whose testes have been crushed and who is therefore prohibited from marrying a Jewish woman), as a single negative commandment. The same applies to someone eating the Passover sacrifice whether it is raw or boiled in water (Exodus 12,9). Because Maimonides has thereby reduced the number of negative commandments making up the required number of 365, he was forced to look for other negative commandments to make up the required number. We have already demonstrated in the name of Rashi that the prohibition of offering leaven or honey on the altar constitutes two separate Biblical prohibitions. Rashi also admits that though the widow and the divorcee that the High Priest is prohibited from marrying (Leviticus 21), are mentioned together we deal here with two separate prohibitions. When discussing these respective commandments in our book, we have demonstrated clear proof that this is so." So far the introductory comments of the סמ"ג.
  In his discussion of the prohibition of offering either honey or leaven on the altar (commandment 318), he quotes Rava in Menachot 58 that if someone offers both leaven and honey on the altar simultaneously, he receives the penalty of 39 ,מלקות lashes for either one of these offences as well as twice more for a mixture containing each of these forbidden substances. Abaye says that one does not administer this penalty on any prohibition which is known as לאו שבכללות, a prohibition introduced by such statements as כל, "all or any." A third anonymous opinion quoted states that the guilty party receives at least one set of 39 lashes. A fourth anonymous opinion quoted states that no lashes are administered in such a case altogether, the reason being that this prohibition is not expressed in a wording similar to that of the prohibition the ox while threshing, (Deut. 25,4) which is considered the classic example of all the prohibitions which carry the penalty of מלקות.
  The סמ"ג goes on to quote a Rashi in the name of a Rabbi Yitzchak demonstrating that Rava considers such a transgression as a transgression of at least two if not four prohibitions. [Although the Rashi in our edition of the Talmud on that folio merely mentions that four penalties of lashes are administered, this does not change the point the סמ"ג tries to make. Ed.]
  [At this point our author draws attention to the ninth שורש of Maimonides in which the latter addresses himself specifically to this problem. In the interest of brevity, I will only summarize a lengthy treatise.] 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  1) It is clear that in Maimonides' version of the Talmud it is Abaye who holds that we apply the penalty of lashes on 2 .לאו שבכללות) It is most likely that the version of the Talmud in front of Maimonides was correct, since in our version Rava is quoted first. This is most unusual, seeing that the halachic decision is usually according to Rava, and Abaye's opinion is always quoted first. 3) The author cannot understand why the סמ"ג has either failed to read the רמב"ם's lengthy and detailed introduction to his ספר המצות or has forgotten it. 4) Maimonides is so careful that at the end of that chapter he even makes clear that the examples of negative commandments which are apparently detailing separate offences are not all subject to the same interpretation, but rather that he had lumped certain examples together only because in those cases we find the same disagreement between Rava and Abaye.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  [In summation, our author demonstrates that Maimonides distinguishes between three different categories of לאו שבכללות, and that administering lashes or not depends on different factors, each according to the wording of the verse in question. At any rate, the author feels that he has vindicated Maimonides' method of counting the various negative commandments beyond any shadow of doubt. Ed.]
  
  Bereshit
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  
  
  This portion contains a single positive commandment, the duty to be fruitful and to multiply, since the Torah says: ויברך אותם אלוקים ויאמר להם אלוקים פרו ורבו. This commandment is repeated in פרשת נח. We will discuss the commandment in detail at that point.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The purpose of the above commandment is to populate the world, since G–d wishes for it to be populated, as we know from Isaiah 45,18: "for He did not create it a waste; for habitation did He form it; I am the Lord, there is none else." This is a very important commandment around which revolves the fulfillment of all the commandments. Torah was given to man and not to the ministering angels. It is incumbent upon man therefore to leave behind him those who can preserve Torah and fulfil its commandments, who can recognize the existence of a Creator who not only supervises what goes on in the universe but is able to direct history. This opportunity must not be denied to Israel [through failure to procreate Ed.] This is the meaning of Rashi on Genesis 6,9 that עיקר תולדותיהם של צדיקים מעשים טובים, "the most important contribution (descendants) that the righteous make are good deeds." The meaning is that it is incumbent upon someone who wants to deserve the title צדיק to see to it that he begets creatures who keep the commandments and perform good deeds.
  If one understands the deeper meaning of this commandment, one also gains an insight into the mysteries of Creation. We find a statement by Rabbi Eliezer in Yevamot 63 that anyone who neglects to fulfill the commandment to be fruitful is considered as having the sin of spilling innocent blood on his hands, the reason being that the Torah says in Genesis 9,6: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed." Since the Torah goes on to say : "Be fertile, increase, etc.," it is clear that failure to do so is considered a mortal sin. Rabbi Yaakov says: "Failure to try and have issue is a way of diminishing G–d's image in this world, since the Torah (still in verse 6 of this chapter) adds: 'For in His image did G–d make man.' Immediately afterwards follows the commandment to be fruitful." The Rabbis taught in Yevamot 64 that Numbers 10,36 ובנחה יאמר: שובה ה' רבבות אלפי ישראל, "When the ark came to rest, Moses would say 'return O Lord, You who are Israel's myriads of thousands,'" teaches that G–d's Presence is not found when Israel numbers fewer than 22000 souls." If Israel would number 21999 at any time and one of those Israelites failed to perform the מצוה of פרו ורבו, that person would be responsible for preventing the whole people from enjoying the Presence of the שכינה in their midst. We have now had three separate statements on the seriousness of failing to comply with the commandment to be fruitful. A) Failure to try and reproduce is equivalent to committing bloodshed; B) Failure to try and produce issue diminishes G–d's image in the world; C) Failure to fulfil this injunction prevents Israel from enjoying the Divine Presence in its midst. Prior to the statement quoted in the name of Rabbi Eliezer, the same Rabbi Eliezer is on record saying that a person who fails to marry is not an אדם, seeing that the Torah says of man (אדם) that "G–d created him male and female. He called their name Adam." (Genesis 5,2). You should appreciate that the statement of Rabbi Eliezer is to be understood as a general rule, whereas the subsequent statements are פרטים details, i.e. applications of the כלל. We must first understand Rabbi Eliezer. 
  The author views the creation of the emanations i.e. אצילות [a collective term used by the author of the book פרדס רמונים for all the ספירות. Ed.], as something akin to a "body." This means that the אין סוף (another word for G–d's Essence) needed to "wrap" itself in a spiritual emanation in order to eventually ennoble man through granting him some of the אור הנעלם. If G–d had not done so, man would not have a chance to get to know anything meaningful about G–d. The need for these emanations arises from the fact that without them the effect of the Revelation would be so overpowering that it would simply shatter us, much as noise at decibels that our ears are not attuned to would shatter our sense of hearing. [I have heard this explained as similar to a high voltage transformer which reduces such voltage in order to protect the electrically operated gadgets that we use in our household. If the voltage would hit our gadgets at full strength it would simply destroy them. Ed.]. When G–d said in Genesis 1,26: "Let Us make man in Our image and in Our likeness," this was a plan to create the most perfect creature, a creature that would effectively be the world, i.e. would be enthroned in this physical world much as G–d Himself is enthroned in the Heavens. The communication between man's soul and that soul's origin to the אדם העליון, [a term for the highest of the emanations], would be unimpeded. 
  Just as כוונה רצון and חפץ were the instruments G–d used to create the עולם האצילות the highest emanation, in order to give man a chance to gain some knowledge about Him, so man in turn must employ כוונה, רצון and חפץ in order to procreate in his own image. 
  The purpose of such procreation is the same as the purpose of man's own creation, namely to get an understanding of the greatness of G–d, to learn to carry out His will, etc. All this is explained at length in the Pardes Rimonim, in the chapter dealing with אצילות.
  This highest emanation, whose essence, i.e. סוד, is the ineffable four-lettered name of G–d ידו"ד, comprises two elements אב ואם and בן ובת. The former represent the first half of that name of G–d, i.e. י"ה. All lower emanations, i.e spiritual realms more and more closely approaching the physical עולם העשיה we live in, are outgrowths of this אב ואם in the highest of the emanations. The system of emanations recognizes "senior" and "junior" emanations. Of the senior ones, חכמה and בינה are viewed as "two faced," i.e. male and female. Among the "junior" emanations תפארת and מלכות are considered "two faced," i.e. male and female, and represent the בן ובת, son and daughter aspect of these emanations. It is important to appreciate that in order to "transform" spiritual power to dimensions that could eventually be comprehended by G–d's physical creature, man, the principle of 'father and mother, and son and daughter' was used.
  Since in Hebrew the name for man and woman i.e. איש ואשה each contain one of these two letters of the Ineffable Name, the י-ה, and the tribes of Israel are known as שבטי י-ה (Psalms 122,4), we can understand that man's duty, i.e. the duty of the אדם התחתון on earth, is to parallel G–d's activities. This means that man and woman are obliged to procreate, "in their image," a son and a daughter just as G–d created in His image a human being comprising male and female components. From the above it follows that when man and woman and son and daughter procreate, they perform the essential (סוד) function assigned to them by the Ineffable Name. When they do that they qualify for the appellation אדם, meaning that they do on earth, i.e. אדמה, something akin to what G–d has done in the Heavens. It is interesting that when you spell the Ineffable Name in words instead of in letters, i.e. 6=יוד-20, הא-6, ואו-13. הא, this adds up to the numerical value of the word 45=אדם. We have already pointed out that man is not called אדם except in conjunction with his mate, his wife. It is known that woman is the מלוי of man, i.e. complements him through her pregnancy. [The process of procreation for man would be impossible without this. Ed.] The alternate name for woman, i.e. 19= חוה. When you consider that the difference between the spelling of the Ineffable Name in letters rather than in words is 19, [45 instead of 26] this demonstrates that G–d's name too is made up of a masculine element and a מלוי, a feminine element. As a unit then, man and woman are called אדם.
  When looked at separately, each appellation for a human being has a significance of its own. One function of man is to represent to the best of his ability the דמות וצלם אלוקים, the image and likeness of G–d. A second function is to be the instrument that causes G–d's Presence to rest upon Israel. A third function is to cleave to the living G–d by means of the Tree of Life, and not to attach oneself to the alternate choice, the סטרא דמותא, the side of death, or bloodshed. When man endeavors to imitate the ways of G–d, his own appearance reflects the Divine, so to speak, and appellations normally reserved for G–d are applied to him. He is enabled to do this only by means of the Torah and the commandments and by using his freedom of choice constructively. Torah has not been given to the ministering angels but to superior human beings. When man chooses evil, he is merely עפר מן האדמה, dust of the earth, whereas when he chooses to do good he becomes the carrier of the אדם עליון, as we defined the first reduction of G–d's Essence previously.
  The Zohar, Parshat Acharey Mot states that there are three levels of existence in the world that can establish close contact with one another, G–d, the Torah and Israel, and that these levels of existence have both hidden and revealed aspects. The author refers to a lengthy explanation of this statement in his treatise תולדות אדם.
  The principle involved in that statement is bound up with the word בראשית, which some of our sages (including Rashi on Genesis 1,1) explained as the raison d'etre of the universe, בשביל התורה וישראל שנקראו ראשית, on account of the Torah and Israel which are called Reshit, G–d created the universe seeing that they are a "first," and the appellation "first" does not really belong to anyone but G–d Himself, who did not even have a "beginning, i.e. ראשית.” The meaning of the word Reshit is the "beginning of creation," that the very first thought concerning creation included thoughts of the final product of such a creation, i.e. אדם, Israel and the Torah which Israel was meant to accept. All of this is alluded to in G–d's words when He said: נעשה אדם. The word נעשה distinguished Israel at the time when they accepted Torah without insisting that they first wanted to know its contents (Exodus 24,7). G–d, the Torah, and אדם are entwined with one another. Kabbalists who are deeply immersed in these esoterics described it in these words: "Torah is the imprint (רושם) of Divinity, whereas אדם is the imprint of Torah. The true revelation of G–d's Divinity is through His holy names, and Torah itself is a string of G–d's holy names. It consists of 600,000 letters which represent the 600,000 souls of Israel. Torah also consists of 248 positive commandments and 365 negative commandments; they represent expressions of G–d's attribute of Mercy and G–d's attribute of Justice respectively. The 365 negative commandments correspond to 365 sinews or tendons in man. Seeing the latter are red, the Kabbalists see in this a symbolism for the attribute of Justice. The 248 positive commandments, however, represent the bones of man, something white, symbolic of the attribute of Mercy.
  I will now explain those three concepts very concisely since I have done so more elaborately in my treatise תולדות אדם.
  The deeper meaning, סוד, of the relationship between צלם and דמות, image and form, is the relationship between soul and body. The attachment of the Essence of G–d, the אין סוף, -to אצילות, the emanation closest to the אין סוף, -is similar to the attachment of our soul to our body. This is a comparison of a general nature, something we described as דרך כלל. The more detailed explanation of this, which I have given in my treatise תולדות אדם, describes the soul נשמה, as something Divine, originating in the upper regions of the Heavens. I have discussed also the sources of our other spiritual forces such as נפש and רוח in that treatise. Generally, we find those three spiritual forces as being mentioned in the Bible, though on rare occasions the Bible also uses two more names for our spiritual forces, חיה and יחידה. In my treatise תולדות אדם I have also discussed the meaning of such verses as ויהי האדם לנפש חיה, "Man became a living creature" (Genesis 2,7), as well as the verse היא היתה לאם כל חי, "She has become the mother of all living human beings" (Genesis 3,20), and הן האדם היה כאחד ממנו, "Here man has become like one of Us" (Genesis 3,22). The last verse alludes to the deeper meaning of the spiritual force called יחידה. In that connection we have also discussed the significance of דמות, the body. We have explained there that G–d created man with seven facets, the head to correspond to the upper three of the emanations כתר, חכמה, בינה, the two arms corresponding to the emanations, חסד, גבורה. The torso corresponds to the emanation תפארת, the "covenant" with the sexual organ draws the torso towards the emanation יסוד, whereas the two thighs corresponds to the emanations נצח, הוד. Man cleaves to his wife (Genesis 2,24) by means of the "covenant" with his sexual organ. The latter function of the body corresponds to the emanation מלכות. In the treatise בית ישראל, which follows the treatise תולדות אדם, I have dealt with the mystique contained in the various names for other parts of the body.
  We have a rule that in case a fire breaks out on the Sabbath, that whenever it is permitted to save the book, i.e. Torah scroll, it is also permitted to save the protective cover that such a Torah scroll is wrapped in together with the scroll (Shabbat 116). The relative importance of the body compared to the soul is similar to the importance in halachah of the ark of the Torah scroll to the Torah scroll itself. This is why in the future when the world will be full of knowledge of the Lord-a spiritual achievement-also physical matter such as the body will benefit through resurrection. It too will be able to absorb such knowledge. This is one of the important aspects in which the present sin-polluted world differs from an ideal world. The inferior status of matter in our world had its origin in Genesis 6,6, where the Torah says: ויתעצב אל לבו, He (G–d) was saddened concerning his (man's) heart. G–d saw that man no longer was using his body correctly, that the only area of spirituality left was man's heart. If man had "seen" with his heart instead of merely with his "eyes," [part of physical matter. Ed.] man's fall could have been avoided. We know from Samuel I 16,7: "for man 'sees' with the eyes whereas G–d 'sees' with the heart." Only G–d sees with His "heart." Man's decline began when the tree of knowledge appealed to Eve's eyes (Genesis 3,6). The purpose of man's creation had been to have the body as perfect as the soul, the body to be the היכל, "Sanctuary," whereas the soul would be the קדשי קדשים, "the inner Sanctuary." Both body and soul would have enjoyed a life of intelligence. 
  All other creatures on earth would have shared in a "higher" existence; there would not have been any trees that failed to produce edible fruit, for instance. When you look closely at the instruction issued by G–d to the Earth on the third day, you will find that the trees were meant to be edible themselves, i.e. the trunk, not just the fruit (Genesis 1,11). Earth did not comply with G–d's command completely, since it was aware that G–d would have to hide the Original Light due to the eventual emergence of wicked people. This prompted Earth to withhold some of its goodness also. The reason that the tree itself was to taste the same as its fruit is to elevate the קליפה, "peel," exterior, to the level of the essence, i.e. the fruit. When the level of spirituality is such that the קליפה has become insignificant, then the function of the tree of life has been fulfilled, i.e. every tree will be an עץ החיים.
  You may well ask whence Earth knew all this, seeing that the original light was not hidden until after the first Sabbath, whereas Earth withheld part of her services already on the third day of creation? We must assume that G–d had certainly revealed this secret to Earth. Anyone who grants a gift planning to withdraw it later must inform the recipient of the gift that it is subject to recall at the time the gift is first granted. Bereshit Rabbah 5,5 states that G–d made a condition with the Ocean that when the Israelites would approach the Sea of Reeds in order to cross it, it would split and let the Israelites pass. The scriptural allusion is found in the words וישב הים…לאיתנו, "the sea returned to its contract" (Exodus 14,27). The word איתנ contains the same letters as the Hebrew word for "condition, contract" i.e. תנאי. We have numerous similar statements throughout the Midrash, all of which refer to G–d having imposed such "conditions" on different elements of the universe in order to have the right to interfere with the laws of nature through the performance of miracles whenever the need arises.
  The luminaries, מאורות, were created on the first day, the intention being to provide light for a universe which had not yet been formed. No doubt, G–d had revealed to Earth the secret that these luminaries would be hidden later on, that a different light would be hung in the sky to provide light on earth. This is what is described in the Torah's report of the fourth day of Creation. The power of negative forces in this world, known as קליפות, is due to the diminution of the power of the original luminaries. This situation will continue through to the messianic age. In the present world the קליפה always precedes the fruit, even in the sequence in which man's children were born. 
  This is the reason that Cain, who represents the קליפה, was born before his brother Abel, who represents the fruit. The former said to G–d (Genesis 4,9) after having murdered Abel: "Is it my function to serve as the קליפה, "husk," for my brother?" Our sages understand this comment as Cain referring to this function in his life, because they understand the meaning of the word שומר to be the same as שומר הפרי, "the protective shell around the fruit." The letter ה in front of the word השומר indicates Cain's ongoing amazement. He cannot get over the fact that the evil urge within him, i.e. the קליפה, so overpowered him. His reaction was similar to ours when we acknowledge having sinned, blaming the evil urge within us.
  Let us now get back to the subject under discussion, the reason the Earth did not produce trees whose wood was as edible as its fruit, and how Earth was punished for its failure to heed G–d's instructions. Its very action in disobeying G–d's command caused Eve and Adam to sin, as explained by the Arizal. I shall quote his booklet, adding a few words of my own.
  First let me explain a few of the finer nuances in the verses which forbid man to eat from the tree of knowledge. The Torah twice says: ממנו, "from it," ומעץ הדעת טוב ורע לא תאכל ממנו כי ביום אכלך ממנו מות תמות "From the tree of knowledge of good and evil, do not eat from it, for on the day you eat from it you will surely become mortal" (Genesis 2,17). During the conversation between Eve and the serpent, however, the word ממנו occurs only once, i.e. ומפרי העץ אשר בתוך הגן לא תאכלו ממנו ולא תגעו בו פן תמותון, "And from the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, the Lord has said 'do not eat from it and do not touch it lest you die'" (Genesis 3,3). Another difficulty in the text is the fact that in the original command by G–d we find the words “2,16) ”עץ…ומעץ הדעת and 2,17), and also the serpent itself refers to "the tree itself" (3,1). Eve, on the other hand, mentioned only a prohibition of the fruit of the tree (3,3). Only afterwards do we read in verse 6 of the conversation between Eve and the serpent: ותרא האשה כי טוב העץ למאכל, "the woman saw that the tree was good for eating." Another difficulty is the fact that surely Eve was an extremely intelligent woman. What could have prompted her to tell the serpent of an additional prohibition, that of touching the tree, when such a prohibition had not been issued by G–d? A further difficulty is that since Eve knew that G–d had not prohibited touching the tree, why did the fact that the serpent pushed her against the tree and she did not die influence her to the extent that she accepted the serpent's argument that just as touching the tree had not proved fatal to her, eating from it would not have fatal consequences either? (compare Bereshit Rabbah 19,3 that the serpent pushed Eve against the tree). How did Eve deduce a prohibition from something that had not been commanded? Yet another difficulty is the wording of the punishment. The Torah quotes G–d as saying to Adam: ארורה האדמה בעבורך, "The Earth will be cursed on your account" (Genesis 3,17). This means that Earth was punished at that time for a former misdemeanour. Why was Earth not punished at the time it failed to produce the kind of trees it had been commanded to produce?
  The sin of Adam and Eve in eating from the tree of knowledge was directly attributable to the failure of Earth to respond fully to G–d's command. The reason that Earth had not been punished sooner for its departure from G–d's command was that its intention had been constructive, as we explained earlier. Now, however, there had been fatal consequences of Earth's failure to obey G–d fully; this is why Earth was punished at the same time man too was punished for his sin. This is why the Torah added the words בעבורך when describing its punishment. The very words כי ממנה לקחת, "for from it (earth) you have been taken" (Genesis 3,19), which is part of Adam's penalty, that of forfeiting eternal life, are an allusion to the fact that the sin had been made possible by Earth's behaviour at the time when it did not produce the right kind of trees.
  How exactly was the Earth the cause of Eve's sinning? If all the trees in the world would have tasted just as did their fruit, there would have been nothing special about the tree of knowledge, and the serpent would not have been able to seduce Eve by pointing out its special nature. Under the existing circumstances, however, the serpent found a means of sowing doubt in Eve's mind. It is not the nature of the evil urge to at first attack our obedience of G–d's commandments frontally. Only after it has succeeded in convincing us of the irrational nature of certain of G–d's commandments has the way been prepared for it to encourage transgression of the commandment.
  It is quite clear that the tree of knowledge responded to G–d's original command to earth, that its trunk was as edible as its fruit. This was because this tree had been planted by G–d Himself, was not the product of the general instruction to Earth on the third day of creation (Genesis 2,8). The serpent alluded to this fact when it said that G–d had only forbidden eating "of the tree of the garden," and made no mention of the fruit of the trees (Genesis 3,1). According to the serpent, man was not allowed to partake of the wood of the trees that G–d had planted. The reason this was forbidden, explained the serpent, was that these trees were supernatural creations. There was no reason however, for Eve to worry that the fruit of the tree was forbidden, seeing that the fruit was something natural, part of the laws of nature. The serpent was astute enough to use the language G–d had used to convince Eve that only the wood had been forbidden. 
  Eve replied that the prohibition not to eat from the tree included its fruit. We have a rule that when the Torah states something more than once without plausible reason, then the second statement of the Torah can be applied to a related matter (Kidushin 42). In our case the repetition of the word ממנו "from it," was used by Eve as applicable to a prohibition to touch the tree. She reasoned that since the tree itself represented something supernatural, and its fruit must not be eaten, the tree itself must not even be touched. 
  This gave the serpent a chance to push Eve against the tree and prove to her that touching the tree did not have fatal consequences. The serpent was smart enough to know that the repetition by G–d of the words "do not eat from it, for on the day you eat from it you will die," was not intended to prohibit touching the tree, but was in keeping with the rule that the Torah must state a warning of any transgression which is a capital offence, and must subsequently spell out the penalty applicable if the warning is ignored (Sanhedrin 56). G–d warned man not to eat; then He stated the penalty should the warning be ignored. The wording the Torah uses when issuing a warning and subsequently revealing the penalty for transgressing the commandment is always similar. This is why the serpent was quite sure Eve had misinterpreted G–d's meaning, and that pushing her against the tree would have no consequences The serpent did miscalculate in another direction, however. It assumed that Eve, just as most women, would first offer her husband part of the fruit as a token of her respect for him; the husband would then taste the fruit, die, and the serpent would be free to marry Eve. Once Eve had been proven wrong in her assumption that touching the tree would be fatal, the serpent now urged Eve to become openly rebellious by also eating from the fruit of the tree. 
  Eve was now ready to accept the serpent's statement that the only reason G–d had prohibited eating from the tree was that He did not want them to know good and evil just as He Himself did (Genesis 3,5). Reflecting on this, Eve saw that the tree was good as food, etc. (3,6). 
  It is clear that the fact that only this tree was fit to eat (not only its fruit) was what caused Eve to sin. Earth was not punished at once, since it had acted in accordance with the principle תיק הספר כספר, that the vessel containing the book should be of the same importance as the book it contains, i.e. that the body should be on a similar spiritual level to that of the soul. Since G–d had seen fit to withdraw some of the spiritual light, Earth considered itself justified in withdrawing some of the physical comforts for man, seeing that all of physical creation was only for the sake of man. We have now explained the relationship between צלם ודמות, image and form.
  Let us next turn to the relationship of man to Torah. We must appreciate that the spirituality of Torah consists of the souls of Israel. Our sages alluded to this in Menachot 99, when they said: "Torah was given in forty (days) and the soul was formed in forty days; anyone who takes care of his Torah has his soul taken care of." I have elaborated on this statement in my treatise on מסכת שבועות, section תורה אור. I have found the following among the writings of the Arizal: The total number of souls is six hundred thousand. The Torah is the root of the souls of Israel. This is why there are six hundred thousand possible interpretations of Torah. Each of these interpretations eventually will form the root of a soul. In the world of the future, each Jew will read and understand the Torah according to the interpretation that resulted in his individual soul being formed. So it had been in גן עדן. Some souls are able to assimilate a number of interpretations. The soul of Moses was able to assimilate all six hundred thousand possible interpretations of Torah. He was thus familiar with all possible interpretations of Torah. When at night our soul leaves our body to ascend to higher regions, it may be able to read the interpretation of Torah that is appropriate to its particular root which resulted in its creation; on different nights, however, man's actions during the preceding day may cause different verses of the Torah to provide different degrees of enlightenment even for the same soul. The Arizal was able to detect on a person's forehead which verse had provided a special understanding for such a person, and he would then proceed to explain Torah to him according to the interpretation appropriate for his soul. He would explain to such a person that if he would read (study) that verse while awake, his soul would ascend to Heaven and there it would have more aspects of Torah revealed to it even though his חומר, body was not used to such revelations. The six hundred thousand interpretations mentioned are all according to the plain meaning of the text; in addition to these there is an equal number of interpretations of a mystical, Kabbalistic nature. There is no soul that is not equipped to understand both פשט and קבלה. So far the quotation from the writings of the Arizal.
  Just as there are five books of the Torah, so the soul consists of five sections, נפש, רוח, נשמה, חיה and יחידה. This statement is baffling, seeing that neither in the Zohar nor in most other Kabbalistic writings do we encounter references to more than three parts of the soul נפש, רוח and נשמה. I have elaborated on this in my introduction to the treatise תולדות האדם. 
  Briefly, the matter is as follows: The last mentioned three parts of the soul stem from the three emanations below בינה, the origin of "two-faced" man being rooted in the emanations תפארת and מלגות respectively, i.e. the conditions applicable to the material world. חיה and יחידה, however, originate in the "senior" emanations חכמה and בינה, which contain the key to עולם הבא. There are only a select few who attain such a high level of spirituality that they may glimpse their עולם הבא already in this life. Those who do also possess the two parts of the soul we have called חיה and יחידה. The souls of Adam and Eve belong to this latter category, and I have explained the verses 2,7) ,ויהי האדם לנפש חיה) and (3,20) וחוה היתה אם כל חי, in my aforementioned treatise.
  To come back to the statement that all the souls are the root of Torah. There are two תורות. One Torah which was revealed to us from the "two-faced" region (emanation) of תפארת and מלכות, is both the written and the oral Torah. We find an allusion to these two תורות in Deut. 4,36: מן השמים השמיעך את קלו ליסרך ועל הארץ הראך את אשו הגדולה ודבריו שמעת מתוך האש, "From the heavens He let you hear His voice to discipline you; on earth He let you see His great fire; and from amidst the fire you heard His words." Heaven and Earth in this verse are the reference to the "two faces" of Torah [the written and the oral]. There exists, however, an "earlier" Torah which our sages alluded to when they told us that Torah had been created two thousand years prior to Creation. This Torah was "hidden" together with the original light. Kabbalists have explained that each emanation, ספירה, is equated with the number one thousand, [based on multiplying ten by ten by ten, at which point we return to the original number 1, i.e. אלף, representing G–d's unity, seeing that the letter אלף is identical with the word for one thousand, i.e. Eleph. Ed.] Construction of the material world began with the emanation חסד, in descending order. This is the reason why our sages always say עולם חסד יבנה, "the universe is built on חסד.” (Psalms 89,3) If this is so, we understand the two thousand (years) that the "higher" Torah preceded our universe as referring to the emanations חכמה and בינה which preceded the emanation of חסד [in the process of צמצום, the self-imposed limitations, which the Essence of G–d, אין סוף, imposed upon Himself in order to create the universe and for His creations in that universe to be able to relate to Him Ed.]. 
  The root of the emanations of תפארת and מלכות -the "two-faced" basis of the entire structure of our universe-have their original beginning in the emanations חכמה and בינה. This must be understood within the context of בנין, a structure. In the "hidden" regions of the "senior" emanations חכמה and בינה however, there is another Torah. This is the Torah that preceded the revealed Torah. Our sages had this in mind when they said הנסתרות לה' אלוקינו, "Concealed matters are the Lord's alone" (Deut 29,28). These aspects of Torah have not been revealed to us. The aspects that have been revealed to us, i.e. והנגלות לנו ולבנינו (ibid.) represent the last two letters of the Ineffable Name of G–d, i. e. ו-ה The overwhelming majority of the revealed Torah belonged to the emanations "below" בינה; in those "regions" in which a merger of תפארת and מלכות is possible some people are endowed with נשמה, others with רוח, and still others only with the נפש type of spiritual potential, each according to his individual level. The select few, usually referred to as בני העליה by our sages, are able to penetrate into the regions above תפארץ, since they have also acquired the חיה or even יחידה type of soul, i.e. spiritual capacity. In that capacity they are able to absorb teachings from the תורה הקדומה, that Torah which remained hidden to the rest of us. When the sages of the Midrash have said that the concept of "Israel" was in G–d's mind before He commenced to create the universe, they referred to these בני העליה. The language of the Midrash עלה במחשבה -is a clear allusion to בני עליה. 
  Thus we can now also understand that the same sages described G–d's original blueprint of the universe as being based on the attribute of Justice. Only when G–d saw that such a universe would not be able to endure for long, did He decide to co-opt the attribute of Mercy (Bereshit Rabbah 12,15, and Rashi on Genesis 1,1). Why do the sages talk about ideas of G–d that were never executed? All that needs to concern us surely is what did transpire, not what could or should have transpired? Another difficulty is whether what the sages describe means that G–d had re-considered? Surely this cannot be; do we not have it on good authority that one of the things that distinguishes G–d from man is כי לא בן אדם ויתנחם, "For He is not human that He should reconsider or regret!" (Numbers 23,19).
  When we think about G–d we must appreciate that G–d does not only possess the knowledge of all that has been, is, or will be, but that He also has the knowledge of all that could have been or could be. Having considered the possible outcome of any number of possible activities, G–d sets in motion only those activities that hold the greatest promise of ultimately achieving what He had in mind since the beginning. Our sages had this in mind when they spoke about G–d having considered creating a universe dominated by the attribute of Justice, whereas in actual fact the universe G–d did create was based on a predominance of the attribute of Mercy. There was no change of direction by G–d. Not only must we understand the Midrash Rabbah we have quoted in this vein, but we must also understand the famous statement by Rabbi Abahu that "G–d created many worlds only to destroy them again," in the same vein. G–d toyed with a variety of blueprints for possible universes. The one He actually created was the one that corresponded most to His will, רצון. Rabbi Abahu referred to the careful evaluation of all possible consequences of undertaking certain steps as בנין. When one foresees that certain steps one takes would eventually have negative consequences and one desists from proceeding with such steps he calls this הריסה, destruction (compare Midrash Shocher Tov 34,1 where the statement is attributed to Rabbi Tanchum). This is the way we must explain these statements in the Midrash according to the Peshat.
  However, I believe there is a different dimension to the statement quoted, one that permits us to view all the thoughts of G–d as being "alive and well," none having been abandoned. We must understand first the dictum of our sages that G–d is far more exacting with the righteous when He examines their conduct than He is with ordinary individuals. He is described as being so exacting with them that He will measure the thickness of an individual hair. (Yevamot 121). The closer one wants to be to the king, the more refined one has to be. If a person wishes to be close to the King of Kings, to be at home not only in His courtyard but in His palace, he must measure up to higher than ordinary standards. There are numerous steps a person ascends before sitting at the feet of G–d's throne; the more he has ascended the closer his conduct is examined. Chagigah 18b puts this concept into a halachic framework. The Talmud states that the garment of an עם הארץ, an average person, is considered as afflicted with טומאת מדרס (an impurity imparted by a person who suffers from a seminal flux by sitting on a mat, for instance), in his relations with people whose normal status is that of פרושים, a category of people who carefully refrain from contact with ritual impurity. The garments of these פרושים, on the other hand, are considered as afflicted with the same degree of ritual impurity when they come in contact with people whose level of ritual purity is such that they are permitted to eat תרומה, i.e. parts of the harvest allocated to the Priests. The garments of those priests who are of the level of ritual purity that permits them to eat תרומה in turn, are still considered as afflicted with the same degree of impurity when they come into contact with things that could only be consumed within the precincts of the Temple. This only illustrates that just as "ritual purity" is a relative term, so the term צדיקים, is also relative.
  One of the thoughts of G–d prior to the creation of the universe focused on those select human beings that would become בני עליה. With such people G–d could afford to be more exacting than with the rest of mankind. As far as they were concerned, G–d had no reason to reconsider creation of a universe dominated by the attribute of Justice. G–d intended the תורה הקדומה for that very category of people.
  The meaning of מתחלה עלה במחשבה לברא את העולם במדת הדין, does not mean that G–d thought something at the beginning, and then changed His mind, G–d forbid; it means that G–d was concerned with the root of things, the שורש. The root is the "beginning," from which all other developments evolve. The root is in a domain concealed from us, נעלם. It is the beginning of any further expansion. Things become visible from that point on. G–d was able to apply the מדת הדין to those people whose soul was rooted in the שרש, the hidden domain since they possessed the חיה and יחידה dimension of soul. This approach also explains the answer G–d is reported to have given to Moses to whom He had shown a vision of the life and death of Rabbi Akiva, and who questioned how G–d could allow such a man to be tortured to death (Menachot 29). The words G–d reportedly used were שתוק, כך עלה במחשבה לפני , "Be silent so it suits My plan." Normally, we understand this answer as a warning not to question G–d's ways when these seem beyond our understanding. However, this is not what G–d meant to convey by this answer. G–d simply explained that people such as Rabbi Akiva who are part of the בני עליה can be judged by higher standards than ordinary people, and therefore G–d applied the מדת הדין when judging them. 
  The Talmud frequently states אדם חשוב שאני "different yardsticks apply to important people." (Berachot 19, Shabbat 51, 142 et al.) It is no more than appropriate that people who desire לחזות בנועם ה', באור הגנוז, of which it is said הנסתרות לה' אלוקינו, "to gaze upon the beauty of the Lord," i.e. the original light which has been hidden, of which the Torah says that the "hidden things are G–d's alone," should be judged according to a different scale of values.
  G–d realized immediately (remember that the word in the Midrash used for this is ראה) that the kind of people whose souls (spiritual capacity) are of a lower order, seeing that they are further removed from the שרש, would not be able to survive for long in a universe that was based solely on the attribute of Justice. The word ראה implies a situation of גלוי, that something had already been revealed, was no longer in a realm hidden from all but the highest בני עליה.
  When our sages say (Shabbat 10a) that "any judge who hands down a true verdict can consider himself as G–d's partner in creating the universe," they refer to this co-opting of the attribute of Mercy. Tossaphot query why the Talmud repeats the words דין אמת לאמתו and concludes that the Talmud wants to exclude a judgment based on deception. If we follow our approach there is no need to query the repetition of the word אמת. There are two kinds of judgments, both of which are אמת, true. One of these judgments is more true than the other, however. Our sages have commanded the judges to attempt to reconcile conflicting demands by litigants and to arrive at a mutually agreed compromise, before proceeding to adjudicate strictly on the basis of the law. When the judge succeeds in arranging a פשרה, he has performed both חסד and אמת. When he has achieved this he has ensured the continued existence of the world, since we have learned from G–d that our universe cannot endure if the only yardsticks to be applied were to be those of strict justice. On the other hand, a פשרה, can certainly not be termed "strict justice." The Talmud therefore needs to stress that "true justice" i.e. דין לאמיתו is compromise, since the objective of justice is to ensure the continuity of this universe, and that is precisely what is achieved when people agree to compromise. Any judge who initiates such a compromise has earned a share in the credit for the continued existence of our world. When we are told in Psalms 85,12 that אמת מארץ תצמח, "truth has to grow from earth," the idea is that judges on earth have to see to it that truth prevails.
  There can however, be a situation when both parties to a dispute are truthful, no one denying the other party's claim or how he presents his case. Both are righteous people, neither one wants to obtain something from the other dishonestly. Both parties however want to know which one of them is legally correct in his demands. When the judge hands down a decision based on such considerations he is דן דין אמת לאמיתו, "he hands down an absolutely true judgment." Although, as we have stated truth "must grow forth from the earth," in order to enable peace and harmony to prevail on earth, the litigants whom we have described last are also interested in a fair outcome. Each one wants the judge to be sure to award to the other litigant no less than he deserves. When the judge, being in the center, gives his ruling, that ruling is described as אמת לאמתו. Such a judge becomes a partner in מעשה בראשית. Before G–d began creating the universe, He already had thought of the need to have judges on earth administer His design for constructive development of the world; this makes those judges His partners whenever they further His design.
  
  
  When we stated earlier that Torah is the source of all the Jewish souls, we referred both to the revealed Torah and to the Torah that we described as belonging to the domain of הנסתרות לה' אלוקינו.
  We have explained earlier that man is the imprint of the Torah, [much as Torah is the imprint of G–d]. When we speak about "Torah" within this framework, we predominantly mean the revealed Torah, referred to by the Torah's statement והנגלות לנו ולבנינו. The בני העליה, of whom there are but a few, are the ones referred to in the Torah as כי אתם המעט, "For there are very few of you." (Deut. 7,7). This is why G–d deals with those few on a different basis i.e. that of the attribute of Justice, seeing that the root of their souls is in the domain of the תורה הקדומה, the Torah that had preceded Creation by two thousand years. 
  We can explain two apparently contradictory statements of our sages by keeping this point in mind. The Talmud in Kidushin 33 states that if one needs to rise from one's seat when a Torah scholar enters the hall of learning, how much more so must one rise from one's seat when the Torah scroll itself approaches! On the other hand, we find the Talmud in Makkot 22 saying: "How foolish the people who rise from their seats when the Torah scroll is brought in, but fail to rise when the Torah scholars approach! Tosaphot say that the reference is to ignorant people who are unable to arrive at the logical conclusion mentioned in Kidushin. Had they been able to make such deductions, they would not have displayed their ignorance. It follows that those people were aware that one needs to rise when Torah scholars enter. The Ran explains at the end of the tractate of Kidushin that undoubtedly Torah is on a higher level of sanctity than Torah scholars, and one has to rise when a Torah scroll is brought in. The fools referred to in Makkot are simply too ignorant to appreciate that fact. Their knowledge of Torah is limited to what they hear from the mouth of Torah scholars.
  Considering the above, we see that both statements in the Talmud are quite true. The level of those people who have access to the תורה הקדומה is superior to the level of the Torah that has been revealed, since they are the people whom G–d had in mind way before He created the universe. Kohelet 1,4 alludes to this when he says והארץ לעולם עומדת. The Midrash on that verse says that Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai quoted Isaiah 65,22: כי כימי העץ ימי עמי, "For the days of My people shall be as long as the days of the tree." We know that "the tree " refers to Torah from עץ חיים היא למחזיקים בו, "For she is a tree of life to all who grasp her" (Proverbs 3,18) [The subject matter in that chapter is wisdom=Torah Ed.]. Who was created for whose sake? Was the Torah created for the sake of Israel, or was Israel created for the sake of the Torah? Torah was created for the sake of Israel. If Torah, which was created for Israel's sake endures forever, how much more so must Israel live forever?" We find a similar statement in Bereshit Rabbah 1,4 where Rabbi Abba bar Kahane is quoted as saying that Torah preceded the throne of G–d. He supports this statement with the scriptural quotation ה' קנני ראשית דרכו, "G–d has acquired me at the beginning of His way" (Proverbs 8,22). Also, Rabbis Hunna and Yirmiyahu say in the name of Rabbi Shmueli bar Yitzchak that Israel was the original concept that G–d entertained in His mind. They explain this by a parable: A king was married to an aristocratic lady who bore him no children. When the king once strolled in the market-place, he instructed his servants to purchase reeds and ink for his son. People who saw this were heard to comment that this was strange seeing the king did not have a son. Upon reflection they concluded that the king must be a great astrologer seeing that the purchase reflected his certainty that he would have a son from his present wife otherwise he would not have given such instructions. The same is true of G–d. He was aware that after twenty-six generations Israel would accept the Torah at Mount Sinai, otherwise how could G–d have written in the Torah such lines as: "Speak to the Israelites," "command the Israelites, etc?" This concludes our second premise that Torah is the soul of Israel.
  The third premise is that G–d's Torah is essentially the Torah of אדם, instructing man to shun evil and to do good, teaching man the principle of reward and punishment. It is called "man's teaching," תורת האדם, since man possesses free choice. We know this from Deut. 30,15: "Behold! I set before you this day life and prosperity, death and adversity….. Choose life!" We have discussed these concepts at length in the treatise תולדות האדם, section בית ישראל. 
  The 365 negative commandments which are inspired by the attribute of Justice, and the 248 positive commandments which are inspired by the attribute of Mercy, are closely intertwined with one another as I have explained in my introduction. This is why the righteous are able to transform matters which emanate from the attribute of Justice into the domain of the attribute of Mercy, whereas the wicked are responsible should the reverse occur. The righteous proceed from their position on the סטרא דימינא, the "right" side of the emanations, whereas the wicked proceed from a position on the סטרא דשמאלא, the "left" side of the emanations. [Picture the diagram of the emanations as displaying חכמה, חסד, נצח in descending order on the right side of such a diagram, whereas the emanations — דין, גבורה, הוד בינה, — appear parallel to the other three on the left side of the diagram Ed.]
  I have explained at length that "evil" is distilled from "good,” that it has only been created, נברא, for the sake of the good, i.e. הטוב. Without רע, "evil," there could not have been such a concept as טוב, "good." G–d arranged that people should fear him; this is why the advantage of light is something that is due to the potential power of darkness. This is the deeper meaning of the Torah saying that both luminaries were created equal in size even though the word מארת is spelled defective, without the letter ו indicating the plural. The idea is to tell us that the luminary later described as המאור הקטן, the smaller luminary, is really part of the overall expression "luminaries." The טוב must be understood as the "great luminary," whereas the "small luminary" refers to darkness, חשך. When you look closely at the letters in the word מאורות (when spelled plene), you will find the words for "light" and "death," i.e. אור and מות. The word מות is separated by the letters spelling אור, light. This is a hint that light (the light of Torah) separates or neutralises the power of מות, death. The same does not apply to the Gentiles or to the wicked. They walk in [unbroken] darkness, not in light, and in the language of our sages are referred to as "dead" even while their bodies are "alive" (Berachot 18). For them death is an ongoing experience, not broken or interrupted by light. Of the righteous the Psalmist says (Psalms 116,15): יקר בעיני ה' המותר לחסידיו, "The death of His pious ones is a precious event in the eyes of G—d." Elsewhere I explained the meaning and nature of death at length. The letter מ is an allusion to the angel of death. It is the very letter from the word מפריו from Genesis 3,6 :"ותרא האשה…ותקח מפריו ותאכל ותתן". We have the letter ו and ת four times in that verse plus the letter מ. This is an allusion to Eve having surrounded herself with the angel of death from all four sides. I have written more about this in my treatise תולדות האדם. Anyone who wants a deeper understanding of this must take the trouble to read the entire introduction even though it is lengthy.
  To come back to the three views expressed in the Talmud concerning the severity of the sin of failing to procreate. The three sages refer to different elements in the basic interrelationship between G–d, Torah and Israel.
  Rabbi Yaakov said that such a person diminishes G–d's image in the world His statement presupposes that Torah is the imprint of G–d, and that Israel is the imprint of the Torah. The scriptural allusion to this state of affairs is: ומבשרי אחזה אלוקה, "but I would behold G–d while still in my flesh" (Job 19,26).
  This imprint of G–d is the mystical factor that causes the Presence of the שכינה in Israel since the spirituality of the Torah is represented by the souls of Israel. These souls enable G–d to fulfil His promise ושכנתי בתוכם, "I shall dwell among them" (Exodus 25,8). The Torah refers to messianic times and the revelation of G–d's Presence at that time. Concerning that era we have the prophecy of Isaiah 25,9: "On that day it (the people of Israel) will say: "This is our G–d; we trusted in Him, and He delivered us; this is the Lord in whom we trusted." This whole development depends on the progressive evolution of many souls to higher levels. The Ari zal has explained the verse הקטן יהיה לאלף, והצעיר לגוי גדול, נאום ה' בעתה אחישנו "the smallest shall become one thousand; the least, a mighty nation; I the Lord will speed it in due time" (Isaiah 60,22). The obvious difficulty here is that either the redemption comes at a time appointed by G–d, i.e. בעתה, or there is no timetable for redemption, and G–d is free to bring redemption at any time. Different commentators deal with this problem in different ways. The Arizal sees in the verse an allusion to a statement in the Talmud that אין בן דוד בא עד שיכלו כל הנשמות שבגוף, the Messiah will not come until all the souls of the body have been "exhausted" (Yevamot 62). The meaning is that nowadays, while we are in exile, the existing souls of Israel are mostly revolving around themselves and not progressing to higher dimensions. Once these souls have all exhausted their stay on earth, and "new" souls arrive, redemption will occur, and with it the revelation of the original light that G–d withdrew from this earth after the seven days of Creation. G–d called this "the smallest will become one thousand." It is a process of increasing the Jewish birth-rate so that the "store" of souls that has not yet been placed in bodies will be exhausted sooner. In this way the date for the redemption can be advanced dramatically. There is then no contradiction between the words בעתה, and אחישנה. As a result the Presence of the שכינה is directly related to fulfillment of the commandment to procreate. Even though we have quoted proof from a verse in Numbers 10,36 that the Presence of G–d is possible when there are 22,000 souls present (compare page 2 of this chapter), this was only meant to illustrate that G–ds Presence does manifest itself on earth. The extent to which this is possible when all the souls that have been assigned to bodies have fulfilled their task is beyond our experience, and cannot be compared with what occurred in the desert.
  Whereas someone who fails to procreate by not emitting his semen is considered כאלו שופך דמים, as if he had spilled blood, a person who emits semen for purposes other than procreation has actually spilled blood and is guilty of death. This is why the people of the generation of the deluge were condemned to die, as we have outlined elsewhere. The important thing is that even if a person is סור מרע, abstains from doing evil by not wasting his semen and merely not impregnating his wife who is of childbearing age, he is still considered as if he had spilled blood. The reason is that man is to act like the אדם העליון (a facet of G–d), whose very function is the unending dispensation of שפע, abundance, acts of generosity. If, due to our sins, we do not experience this generosity on earth i.e. in the sphere of מלכות, from the emanation תפארץ which channels such שפע to Israel, as hinted at by the words אשר זרעו בו על הארץ [G–d's first command to provide that שפע in Genesis 1,11. Ed.], such שפע is granted to חצונים, unworthy creatures, and results in ותשחת הארץ, corruption of the earth (Genesis 6,11). The word זרעו should be read as 6) ,זרע-ו) since the sixth emanation is תפארת.
  Not only is the דמות, likeness of G–d, diminished in the eyes of man, but it actually turns into the blood of death, ד"ם מות, since an additional letter מ which symbolizes the angel of death has become part of that דמות. All of this is the result of the שפע having been redirected to the חצונים, the unworthy recipients. At that point we reach the situation described by Solomon in Proverbs 16,28: ונגן מפריד אלוף, “the quarrelsome one alienates the “אלף.” When the letter א is detached from the word אדם, only דם, blood is left, and Eve surrounded herself with four times ות, and one מ in the center, as we have already pointed out. All this is due to the fact that semen originates in the brain, the area from which our thoughts originate; not using it makes its source dry up. On the other hand, he who uses his semen constructively thereby enhances the צלם and דמות of G–d, provided his intention is to do so as part of his service of the Lord to sire children who will serve the Lord. When man acts in this way he becomes the מרכבה, the carrier of G–d's Presence.
  This מרכבה is what we described as the ineffable four-lettered name of G–d which comprises both the elements of אב and אם, as well as the elements בן ובת. Since in the mystical realm of תפארת and מלכות the whole concept of-בנין comprising the "two faced" man-is included (compare page 12), we can understand why in terms of הלכה, Jewish religious law, one has not fulfilled one's duty until one has sired both a son and a daughter (in order to reflect this "two faced" original man). In our "lower" world the "two faced" aspect of original man has been replaced by two sexes of separate bodies. By siring both a son and a daughter, the parents have duplicated — to the extent they are able — the basis of this world's structure which is rooted in the emanations of תפארת and מלכות. The result of such a union of איש ואשה, whose names contain one half of the Ineffable Name, i.e. י-ה, is דעת. 
  This is why the Torah says: והאדם ידע את חוה אשתו, "man knew his wife Eve." We find a similar description of the union of Elkanan and his wife Chanah, a holy union which resulted in the birth of the prophet Samuel (Samuel I 1,19). Just as the emanation יסוד is the link between the "junior" emanations תפארת and מלכות, through the covenant of circumcision, so “כתר represents the link between the "senior" emanations חכמה and בינה. The inseparable bond between G–d, Torah and Israel is forged in this manner. I have written on these concepts elsewhere at greater length, and will come back to them later. 
  Concerning this inseparable bond, the Torah says in Exodus 19,5 prior to the revelation at Mount Sinai: והייתם לי סגלה, "You will be My treasured possession." The means by which Israel becomes G–d's most treasured possession is the Torah. The word, i.e. vowel, סגל is comprised of three sounds, i.e. three times the letter י. Between them they represent the ten emanations, the ten commandments and the ten directives by means of which G–d created our universe. The Zohar at the end of Parshat Nasso where the offerings of the princes are described, comments that the verse עשרה עשרה הכף, (Numbers 7,86) "ten, ten the כף" which at first glance seems superfluous, for who does not know that twice ten equals twenty, means that the first ten represent מעשה בראשית, whereas the second ten represent the Ten Commandments when the Torah was given. The Torah wishes to tell us that the creation of the universe was justified only when Torah was revealed and accepted by the Jewish people. Together these "twenty" formed a unit, seeing that when one spells the letter י ten, as a word i.e. יוד, the numerical value is 20, i.e. כ. The inseparable relationship between G–d, Israel and Torah is thus amply documented. Israel is attached to these "twenty," as is mentioned in Deut. 4,4: ואתם הדבקים בה', "as for you who cleave to the Lord etc." The congregation of Israel, עדת ישראל, are ten (i.e. the minimum number of a quorum amongst which a part of the Presence of G–d can be found is ten). This number applies both to the spiritual part of the people, נשמה, as well as to their bodies, since the Talmud Nidah 31 tells us that there are three partners in the creation of a human being, G–d, father and mother. G–d's input is described as comprising ten parts, the soul and its various potentials. Father and mother between them also contribute ten components, the body and the materials it is formed of. This makes man a partner of G–d in the Creation of the universe in a manner of speaking Just as the purely spiritual world, עולם האצילות, had been "born," so now the אדם תחתון, man of the lower world was "born" in order to get to know G–d. This is what is meant by the Talmud Shabbat 119 saying that whoever says his prayers on the Sabbath Eve including the recital of Genesis 2,1-3, becomes a partner of G–d in His work of Creation. It is well known that this is the night our sages especially recommend for man and his wife to cohabit and fulfill the commandment to procreate.
  We have discussed earlier the elevated level of those Jews we described as בני עליה, towards whom G–d's planning was directed in the first instance, and whose rank is higher even than that of the תורה במקומה. The position of the תורה הקדומה, however, is on an even higher level than the souls of most Israelites. There is a discussion in Chagigah 12 between the school of Shammai and the school of Hillel as to whether heaven was created before earth or vice versa. The former argued that heaven was created first, citing scriptural proof, whereas the latter argued that earth was created first, also citing proof from the scriptures. The third view held by a group of unnamed scholars maintained that both heaven and earth were created simultaneously. This group of scholars also supported their view with quotations from the Bible. Each group of scholars were correct in their views. 
  Remember that heaven, - i.e. even the part that is visible to us, - is merely an expansion of a heaven that originates in "higher" emanations as high as the emanation תפארת, origin of the written Torah. The existing luminaries and stars may be viewed as branches of the Torah, as based on Daniel 12,3: והמשכילים יזהירו כזהר הרקיע ומצדיקי הרבים ככוכבים לעולם ועד, "And the wise will shine like the radiance of the firmament, and those who make the many righteous, like the stars, forever and ever."
   Midrash Kohelet adds that the ultimate purpose of Torah is that its teachings be performed in practice, as we know from the statements of our sages in Kidushin 9 that "study is great since it leads to performance." Similarly, at the time when the idea of creation was conceived the realization of its ultimate purpose was in G–d's mind. This purpose was the creation of man, not of the ministering angels. The Torah was not given to the latter, seeing that they are not physical creatures. Only someone who is an integral part of this earth is able to perform the commandments of the Torah. The angels themselves admitted this when they are quoted as saying in Psalms 8,2: "O Lord, our G–d, How majestic is Your name throughout the earth, You who have covered the heavens with Your splendor!" [according to the interpretation of the Talmud Shabbat 88 this was said by the ministering angels. Ed.] The same thought is expressed in Psalms 115,16: "The heavens belong to the Lord, but the earth He gave over to man." The "earth" referred to in that verse is the Earth of a higher world in which the כנסת ישראל is rooted, since the name of G–d א-ד-נ-י, is the root of Israel; I have explained elsewhere, that the emanation מלכות is the uppermost level of the physical world, beyond which there is only a world of thought. Before creating man G–d took "dust" [raw material Ed.] from all the various worlds including parts which to us are known as "heaven," i.e. Torah, and "earth" i.e. Israel. 
  If we look at this in this vein, both the school of Hillel, the school of Shammai and the other scholars are quite correct, each group having used the words "heaven" and "earth" in different contexts. My commentary is very similar to that of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero in his treatise on the מיעוט הירח, chapter 3 (chapter 18 of the פרדס רמונים).
  Another allusion to this triple concept of G–d-Torah-Israel is found at the very beginning of Bereshit Rabbah, where Rabbi Aushiyah deals with Proverbs 8,30: ואהיה אצלו אמון, ואהיה שעשועים, יום משחקת לפני בכל עת, "Then I was with Him as an artisan; I was His delight daily, always rejoicing before Him." Rabbi Oshiyah says that the word אמון in that verse means both פדגוג, "a male nurse or tutor," a term used by Moses when he complained to G–d how he was expected to play nursemaid to the Jewish people (Numbers 11,12). He also understands the same word to mean something מוצנע, hidden, based on Esther 2,7 describing Mordechai as "hiding" Esther so that she would not have to participate in the Royal beauty contest. Rabbi Aushiyah adds that some understand the word אמון to mean "big." This is based on Nachum 3,8: התיטבי מנא אמון, "Were you any better than No Amon?" which the Targum renders as: הא את מבא מאלכסנדריא רבתא דיתבא בין נהרותא "are you better than the important city Alexandria which is situated between two rivers?"
  Let me first explain the difference between two expressions for something that is hidden, i.e. מכוסה, and מוצנע respectively. The former term is used when an object has not been buried, but is in front of us covered by a cloth or something similar in order to conceal it from view. As soon as the cover is removed the object in question is visible to all. This is the meaning of Lamentations 4,5: האמונים עלי תולע, that the people who were used to wear garments made of precious purple, (were now naked), i.e. uncovered. The verse goes on to say that those same people now had to embrace refuse heaps. The term מוצנע, however, describes something that is concealed due to its having been buried, as in the verse describing Mordechai hiding Esther, i.e. locking her up. How are we to understand the expression פדגוג, male nurse, in that Midrash? How does that description fit the Torah? We may say that G–d employed the Torah just as a king employs a tutor to teach and discipline his son. G–d employed the Torah to create through it the means to train and discipline man. G–d appointed the Torah to be in charge of all creatures, as we shall shortly explain, and as has been explained both by the author of קו ונקי, as well as by the רלב"ג. 
  Nonetheless it is difficult to see how the terms אמון, and פדגוג can be equated. The word that should have been used by the Midrash is אומן, the same word used by the Torah in Numbers 11,12. Posssibly the word אמון means tutor in the sense that the tutor is faithfully carrying out the master's instructions, much as Esther is described as maintaining her loyalty to Mordechai's instructions even when she was in the king's palace by the words כאשר באמנה אתו, "just as when she had still been in the house of Mordechai" (Esther 2,20). We would have to regard the letter ב in the word באמנה as something that could have been dispensed with just as it has been dispensed with in Psalms 45,8 משחך אלוקים שמן ששון, "the Lord anointed you with oil of gladness" (the letter ב in front of the word שמן being conspicuously absent, though implied). Alternatively, we can accept the view of Ibn Ezra that the word is a noun. Ibn Ezra explains that G–d had been Esther's tutor, that the word אתו refers to Him, that Esther's loyalty was to G–d. According to this view we deal with an allusion to the tremendous power of Torah and its exalted position in G–d's scheme of things. [I believe this is a printer's error as I have not found such an Ibn Ezra, and it is not his style at all. Perhaps the author means the קו ונקי, whose text I have not seen. Ed.]
  At any rate, Rabbi Oshiyah sees three meanings in the word אמון. The last view he quotes, those saying that אמון means something important, see a fourth meaning in that word. There is no disagreement between the four views expressed. We will demonstrate that all these interpretations are relevant to פרשת בראשית, although the author of יפה תואר writes that any attempts to link these words of the Midrash on Parshat Bereshit are foolish, and that people attempting to do so simply do not understand the reasons the Midrash quotes outside verses, etc. He quotes Rashi as supporting his view. It is my conviction that if one can find an interpretation of this Midrash which also links it to the first verse in Parshat Bereshit, this constitutes a perfectly legitimate exegesis.
  Both Targum Yerushalmi and Targum Yonathan translate the word בראשית as meaning "with wisdom' [not in my version of the T.Y. Ed.]. Onkelos however, renders it as בקדימן, and not as we might have expected בקדמייתא. Both translations really amount to the same thing, seeing that they allude to ראשית חכמה, the beginning of planning, and that חכמה consists of 32 paths of wisdom. This is why Onkelos employs a word meaning "multiple" beginnings i.e. "olden days." The meaning of the letter ב at the beginning of the word בראשית, is to tell us that the tool G–d used was "wisdom," i.e. חכמה.
  According to Pardes Rimonim, Shaar Eyn Heyn Sof chapter 3, the reason the letter ב at the beginning of this portion is larger than usual is that both the word ראשית, and the ב are descriptions of wisdom. The Torah wanted to indicate that two different wisdoms were involved in Creation, and that is the meaning of the Zohar (page 31 Warsaw edition).
  Our author concludes from this that the word ראשית alone means חכמה; otherwise Targum Yerushalmi would have not rendered it בחוכמה, but simply חכמתה. Clearly, the letter ב adds an additional dimension of חכמה to what occurred at Creation. Since the word ראשית normally refers to a beginning, and we therefore could have thought that חכמה represents the beginning, i.e. the highest level of the עולם האצילות, (whereas in fact the highest emanation is כתר), the letter ב had to be appended in front of the word ראשית. The result is that though חכמה is ראשית, it is still only number two in the scheme of the emanations. This then is the meaning of the Zohar saying that due to the fact that there is a second "wisdom," which is called ראשית, the Torah had to start with the letter ב. The question which arises, of course, is: If חכמה is only second, why does the Torah refer to it as ראשית, i.e. "first?" The answer is that from the view of the beholder it was indeed "first," seeing that the real "first" remained hidden, חכמה is the most senior of the emanations which is (capable of being) revealed. Even though it is not appropriate to refer to the emanation כתר as "first" then, it still is the most senior in the system of the ספירות, emanations. Because that emanation is part of the count of the ten ספירות, it is referred to as קדמאה, "first" in the Zohar.
  Rabbi Akiva says that when the letter ב is asked: "who created you?" it points with its עוקץ, point, towards the letter א. This means that it is well aware that though it represents חכמה, it knows that it is not the most senior in the ranks of emanations but only follows כתר. The reason the letter ב also has such a point behind it is because if it is asked "were you created by the מאציל, i.e. an original creative force, or by the נאצל, i.e. a secondary force which had itself been created, it could show that it was the second in the string of creations having been preceded by the אלף, the emanation כתר.
  The Pardes Rimonim writes in the third chapter of שער האצילות, that Nachmanides explains the reason for the opening word בראשית in a similar way. it alludes to חכמה, etc.
  We have several sources for our statement that the גלוי ספירות, the revelation of aspects of the ten emanations begins only with the emanation חכמה downwards.
  [The author details aspects of the ten emanations and how different permutations of G–d's name depict different emanations. This is a subject reserved for the more advanced student of Kabbalah. I have therefore decided to omit it. Ed.]
  
  
  Concerning the Midrash calling the פדגוג, אמון instead of אומן, the reason is that the Midrash understands the word בראשית as alluding to two concepts. One is the תורה הקדומה, which remains hidden, i.e. which is "be-omnah-itto," still attached to Him" [in the sense of Esther 2,20]. This is the imprint of G–d that we have described earlier. It is a reference to the שורש of the soul of the בני העליה we have spoken of as being the mystical concept of the elite of Israel that was first in G–d's mind. The other is the תורה הנתונה, the Torah that was to be revealed, which acts as tutor, פדגוג, for Israel in the sense an אומן does. What is alluded to is the mystique of the number י when referring to G–d and the same number 10=י, when used in the context of Israel. When the Torah describes the creation of man as taking place as בצלם ובדמות, the meaning must be that man of the "lower" regions is to reflect אדם, "man" of the "higher" regions. The only way this can be achieved is through the "light" of Torah that remains hidden with G–d.
  We have pointed out the difference between the meaning of the words מכוסה, meaning covered, and the word מוצנע, meaning hidden in the sense of "buried." The latter term is applicable to the תורה הקדומה, a reference to the original light which G–d withdrew. The term מכוסה, refers to the תורה הנתונה, the Torah that was eventually revealed at Mount Sinai. The reason it is called מכוסה, is that it is accessible when we make the effort, when we study it, immerse ourselves in it. When we do make that effort it proves to be our אומן, tutor, guide, nursemaid in life. The three terms “אמון פדגוג, אמון מכוסה, אמון מוצנע," between them reveal the meaning of the word בראשית. Our sages therefore alluded to this when they said that the universe was created for the sake of the Torah and Israel. 
  When we explained earlier that G–d's "day" comprises the equivalent of one thousand years in our world, and that Torah was created two thousand "years" prior to the universe, this means that two important concepts had to precede the creation of the physical universe.
  The fourth definition of the word בראשית that had been mentioned in the Midrash we quoted, (page 25), namely אמון רבתא, is the reference to the emanation כתר, which is above that of חכמה as explained by Nachmanides, and as illustrated by the parable quoted in the name of Rabbi Akiva.
  I believe that I can add another dimension to the understanding of this מדרש, and to relate it to the commandment of פריה ורביה, the duty to procreate. I also mean to explain why the Talmud (Megillah 27) says that the only reason one is allowed to sell a Torah scroll is to enable one to fulfill the commandment to get married and to beget children. The Talmud there simply says that the reason for this is the verse in Isaiah 45,18: "He did not create it to be a waste, but formed it for habitation." why does the Talmud not quote the commandment from the Torah which is very specific, and is content to quote an indirect reference from the prophets? The same question can be raised against a statement in Chagigah 2b, where the Talmud also denies a person who is partially a slave and partially free the right not to marry by citing the above verse in Isaiah as its reason. Tosaphot, in addressing themselves to that problem, come to the conclusion that the statement in Isaiah is more compelling than the commandment פרו ורבו. No explanation is offered why this should be so.
  Let me try and explain part of the mystique of the story of Creation, and in the process reveal part of the mystery of two of G–d's names, namely the ineffable four-lettered name [the author uses the letter ד in his spelling instead of the letter ה] i.e. א-ד-י-ד and the same name i.e. אדי"ד, with the letter ו added. Rabbi Aushiyah had quoted Proverbs 8,30 at the beginning of Bereshit Rabbah in which this name occurs twice: ואהיה אצלו אמון ואהיה שעשועים, יום יום משחקת לפניו בכל עת. Although the acts of creation described in Proverbs in that chapter clearly refer to the creation of the physical universe, the language implies allusions to the spiritual universe. If the Mishnah in Avot 5,1 tells us that the physical universe was created by ten מאמרות, directives issued by G–d, the same applies to the creation of the Spiritual Universe. Already Nachmanides and Ibn Ezra comment on the Torah's description of גן עדן and the four rivers issuing forth from it which preceded it, that the language of the text also implies what went on in the heavenly regions. 
  According to Nachmanides the act of creating something out of an absolute nothing, אפס, is called בריאה, and resulted in something he calls יסוד דק מאד, which, though not a substance, is the כח, form of energy that produces all matter. Heaven and earth were created from the same "material".
   This original "substance" is called by the Greeks <i>Hiyuli</i>. Having created this, G–d did not "create," i.e. ברא, anything further. All further acts were of the type called יצירה, formation of existing raw material. The Torah calls the original raw material תהו, whereas our sages have called it אבן שתיה. G–d "garbed" this original material to provide it with some form, and the result was the four basic elements. As a result, the original תהו now became בהו. The latter word could also be read בו הוא. In later developments matter was further developed, i.e. what happened now was the development of יש מיש. [The following is a brief summary of the author's description of symbolisms seen in the shape of the letters used to spell the name of G–d. Ed.] All creative directives, i.e. עשרה מאמרות, from that stage on involved the four basic elements. They are all symbolized in the spelling of the letter י as a word, i.e. as י-ו-ד. The letter י symbolizes the original נקודה, or as Nachmanides puts it יסוד דק מאד. The letter ו symbolizes expansion from that נקודה lengthwise, whereas the shape of the letter ד suggests expansion in the other two dimensions, i.e. width and depth. All of this represents the goodness of G–d, who by definition endows the world with His goodness.
  A further aspect of this spelling of the letter י is the fact that G–d has set limits to the otherwise ever-expanding universe. These are also alluded to in the shape of these letters. The author deals with such points as whether by definition something called נקודה, point, can be considered as having dimensions such as length width and depth. He concludes that the very definition of matter presupposes that such matter is limited in size in each of those dimensions. He distinguishes between matter that is one-dimensional i.e. a line, matter which is two-dimensional, i.e. an area, and matter which is three-dimensional i.e. a body, גוף. If one strips such a body of its respective dimensions, what one is left with is called נקודה, "point." According to another view, נקודה is a "negative term" describing the absence of dimensions, not the fact that it is a minimal material existence (conclusion arrived at by Rabbi Cordovero in his Pardes Rimonim in his Sha-ar Taam Ha-atzilus.). The "point" then is basically only a figment of our imagination.
  Regardless of whether we conceive of the נקודה as something real or as something figurative, the letter י represents that concept, a point from which all potential creative forces proceeded to be translated into actual matter. The letter ו adds the dimension length, i.e. "height," and the letter ד adds "area". When we translate these concepts into the spiritual realm, the letter י represents חכמה, i.e. the letter י of the name of G–d י-ד-ו-ד something the Zohar calls נקודה חדא סתימה עילאה. This beginning of מחשבה also embraces the סוף המעשה, the end product of all that G–d sets out to do. The letters ו and ד symbolise the "two-faced" nature of the spiritual structure תפארת and מלכות which we have described several times. The overall nature of that structure is the emanation תפארת, represented by the letter ו, indicating expansion, whereas the letter ד symbolizes the "area," שטח of that spiritual domain. The emanation which enables the latter two emanations to "expand," is בינה.
  The author proceeds to explain that whereas the shape of the letter י symbolizes the concept of G–d creating יש מאין, the letters ד and ו, symbolize by their shape the development of the physical universe. 
  The four-lettered name of G–d therefore alludes to the whole creative process. Without this name, no physical universe could have come into existence. When we pronounce His name, we do not have in mind the shape of the letters, but that He is the source of all existence past, present and future. Nonetheless, the collapse of the universe, were it to occur, would not detract in any way from His Essence. 
  We find an allusion to this function of the letters in G–d's name in their use in the first acts of creating the physical universe, i.e. the directive י-ה-י אור ו-י-ה-י אור. The letters of the Ineffable Name, slightly re-arranged, appear constantly again in such statements of the Torah as ו-י-ה-י ערב, ו-י-ה-י בוקר, ו-י-ה-י כן. This list can be expanded- as you are all aware....
  
  
  
  
  The letters of the Ineffable Name spelled in words יוד-הי-ויו-הי, total 72 in numerical value, as does a different kind of spelling called גלגול י-ה-ו-ה י-ה-ו י-ה י. This combination too totals 72. In that combination the first name symbolizes the original Existence, the mystery of G–d's Essence, the second three-lettered name which totals 21 symbolises that G–d created the universe out of "nothing," and the fact that He existed independent of such a universe. The name א-ה-י-ה which also totals 21, being a form of the future tense, tells us that in the future G–d will reveal Himself. The name י-ה, is also used in the past tense in Job 17,6 "ותפת לפנים אהיה," "I have become like Tophet of old." This means that the name א-ה-י-ה i.e. the "three-lettered name י-ה-ו," is a development of the original four-lettered name. The name י-ה is employed to remind us of how G–d guides history and the fate of man through the system of reward and punishment. A typical example is Psalm 130,3: אם עונות תשמר י-ה מי יעמוד? "If You keep account of sins, O Lord, Lord who will survive?" Another well known example of the use of that two-lettered name of G–d is Psalms 118,18: יסר יסרני י-ה ולמות לא נתנני, "The Lord punished me severely, but did not hand me over to death." On the other hand, the same name is used when discussing man's reward, such as in acknowledging Israel's salvation from the pursuit of the Egyptians in Exodus 15,2: עזי וזמרת י-ה ויהי לי לישועה, "The Lord is my strength and might; He is become my deliverance." Another example is Psalms 118,5: מן המצר קראתי י-ה ענני במרחב י-ה, "In distress I called on the Lord; the Lord answered me and brought me relief."
  As to the remaining letter י, it is never used as a word; on the contrary it represents something very comprehensive as we have explained elsewhere.
  From what we have shown it is clear why only parts of the four-lettered Ineffable Name of G–d appear in the story of creation, seeing that the process of creation was accomplished only by outgrowths, derivatives of that name.
  Whereas we perceive the full four- lettered name (when spelled according to the גלגול system) to be totally apart from anything developmental, the sequence of the letters י-ה-ו י-ה, י, (what they represent) are all part of the מרכבה, the part of G–d's visible entourage that is represented by the alphabet, i.e. א-ת, plus the five "final" letters ם-ן-ץ-ף-ך, which gives us a total of 27 letters. The letter י represents (10 אבגד). The letters י-ה represent (15 אבגדה), the letters י-ה-ו of the four-lettered name represent (21 אבגדה) of that part of the מרכבה.
  You do not find the number represented by the 4-lettered name, (26), in this Aleph Bet sequence of the letters of the מרכבה. In order to arrive at the number 26 in that constellation, you have to start with the sequences הו-זח (i.e. 26). This is an allusion to the total apartness of the four-lettered Ineffable Name.
  Since the word ו-א-ה-י-ה, that we have quoted from Proverbs 8,30 totals 27, i.e. one beyond the 26 of the Ineffable Name, this suggests that all development or ראשית דרכו, as Solomon describes G–d's activity in Proverbs 8,22, commences after the name of י-ה-ו-ה (which totals 26) by resorting to the Aleph Bet as G–d's tool.
  It is a cornerstone of the system of Kabbalah that the letters of the Torah are the "bricks" with which the universe was constructed. They can therefore be considered the יסוד, foundation. From this foundation all else developed. The name א-ה-י-ה is that foundation since it alludes to a new existence. The development of that existence is represented by the name א-ל-ה-י-ם. This is why you find the letters א-ה-י which are the three letters that appear in the word א-ה-י-ה in the name א-ל-ה-י-ם.
  [The author continues in this vein quoting extensively from the ספר יצירה. Since this is a complicated subject for the uninitiated, I have limited myself to small parts of his commentary. Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Let us turn our attention to the statement of Rabbi Yitzchak quoted by Rashi in his first commentary on the first verse. Rabbi Yitzchak says that the Torah did not really have to commence prior to the twelfth chapter of Exodus when the commandment to sanctify the New Moon is given to the people of Israel. He goes on: "ומה טעם פתח בבראשית, משום כח מעשיו הגיד לעמו, לתת להם נחלת גוים, "what is the reason that G–d commenced the written Torah with the story of Bereshit?, It is to tell us that G–d revealed to His people His powerful works, in giving them the heritage of nations." (Psalms 111,6) The commentator elaborates that if the nations of the world would challenge Israel's right to the land of Israel accusing Israel as having illegally dispossessed its seven Canaanite nations, Israel could reply that since the earth belongs to G–d seeing He has created it, He is free to give any part of it to anyone He chooses. Since Israel found favor in His eyes, G–d gave that land to Israel. This premise raises a major question, as do the repeated words "when He wanted to, He gave it to them, and when He wanted to, He gave it to us." What kind of justice is it to give someone a gift only to revoke the gift at a later stage, especially when such gift has become a נחלה, an inheritance, i.e. something inviolable?
  
  
  When one gives as a gift, say, an (unspecified) apartment, this is something abstract, and is not binding in law. When one gives as a gift a particular house, rooms, etc., this is binding since the objects given actually exist. The emphasis on the word בראשית is to remind us that G–d created the world ex nihilo, that He even created the original raw material <i>hiyuli</i> as we have mentioned repeatedly. 
  
  
  This is why Rashi emphasized הוא בראה, "He created it out of nothing." These words are the answer to those who believe that they own something outright. As far as the words "why did the Torah begin with בראשית" are concerned, Rabbi Yitzchak means that if the Torah had started with the words אלקים ברא בראשית we would not have understood G–d's role as the Creator of the ראשית correctly. We might then have concluded that G–d acts arbitrarily, allocating lands to those whom He chooses without due regard for the legalities of the matter.
  This fact also explains why the Torah does not commence אלקים ברא בראשית, as this would not have conveyed the idea that He created the ראשית. As far as G–d is concerned, He created something that is not tangible, and that is why the legal rules that apply to tangible property do not apply to Him, and it is perfectly legal for G–d to retain the right of disposal of any part of his Creation. There is no such thing as an absolute ownership of something by any of His creatures. An earthly king is in the habit of announcing plans of what he is going to accomplish etc, before setting out to do so. In other words, he allows his fame to precede him. Not so G–d. He performed first, and only afterwards do we hear who it is that performed all these mighty works. When we read in Deut. 32,4: הצור תמים פעלו וכל דרכיו משפט, "The Rock!-His deeds are perfect, Yea, all His ways are just,” this description is true because He created the "beginning." This is what Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai meant when he said that from the report of the Creation in the Torah we get an idea of G–d's "modesty,” seeing the Torah commences with the letter ב instead of א. (Modesty is mentioned in Psalms 18,36: וענותך תרבני.)
  
  We had raised the question in the introduction to Parshat Bereshit, why the Talmud in Chagigah 2 did not quote the commandment of פרו ורבו in Genesis when it wanted to tell us about the severity of neglecting to fulfill the commandment of procreation, and chose the line from Isaiah about G–d not having created the universe in order for it to remain תהו, in an elementary state. We can now understand this when we consider that the message the Talmud wanted to convey was that someone who fails to heed that commandment is as if he arrested the whole process of creation and its purpose by allowing the universe to remain static, in the state of Tohu, its very beginning.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  Seeing that the list of virtues which the Torah tries to teach us both in this portion and in all other portions is very lengthy, I am not able to record more than a tiny fraction of them in my comments on this as well as on the other פרשיות. The reader will no doubt apply to himself the verse from Proverbs 1,5: ישמע חכם ויוסף לקח, "The wise man will hear and increase learning." 
  Naturally, he will learn to stay away from evil and do good. We have learned in Avot 4,28 in the name of Rabbi Eleazar Hakappar that "jealousy, the desire for honor, and greed hasten man's exit from this world." We have proof of this in our portion when we see Adam and all his descendants for all generations driven from this world by becoming mortal. The cause was the greed of Eve lusting after the fruit of the tree of knowledge, her need for honor, seeing she desired to be like G–d. This was also prompted by jealousy of G–d's superior status.
  Another lesson we have to learn from this portion is to be careful not to use our power of speech to speak slanderously as the serpent had done, seeing that for every other sin there is some way to atone through some punishment, but the only sin that could not be atoned for was the slanderous use the serpent made of its tongue. Its punishment was not designed to elevate and rehabilitate. Of course, we also learn to be careful with what we eat, seeing that Eve sinned by eating forbidden food. Seeing that the Torah permits the cutting down of a tree only "if you know that this tree is not a fruit bearing tree" (Deut. 20,20), we learn that food is to be treated as something sacred and must not be wasted. We have a tradition that the prophet Ezekiel did not eat any meat if there was a question of the animal having been healthy etc., i.e. if a halachic ruling was deemed necessary concerning its fitness to be eaten. Just as consumption of food of a forbidden kind caused death, so fulfillment of the command to eat in sanctity which is hinted at in the words מכל עץ הגן אכל תאכל, "From all the trees of the garden you shall surely eat" (Genesis 2,16), is a commandment which promises life. The expression אם כל חי, which contains all the letters of the word for food, i.e. מאכל alludes to this. I have discussed this at length in my treatise dealing with the letters of the Aleph Bet when discussing the letter ק, at which point I have also explained the rabbinic statement that the word בראשית tells us that the world was created for the sake of the חלה תרומה and בכורים Jews separate from their dough or harvest respectively and dedicate to G–d. So much for the lessons of סור מרע, "desist from doing evil."
  On the positive side, the עשה טוב aspect of the ethical lessons to be gleaned from this portion is first and foremeost that we should model ourselves after our Creator who displayed so much generosity of heart in providing for others. He did not do so expecting to be repaid in kind, since a person who does that cannot be described as a "donor." Such a person is no more than a trader. A person who practises generosity with others because he expects sooner or later to become the recipient of generosity, is on the level of אני לדודי ודודי לי, "I for my friend and my friend for me." We must learn from G–d who does good without thought of compensation. He has no need of the universe, and still He provides for it generously.
  A further positive virtue to be learned from this portion is to be humble, unassuming and modest, something that G–d has demonstrated in this portion. He took advice from His inferiors before creating man, as is evident from the plural of .'נעשה אדם וגו
  
  ענין כתנות אור שנהפך לעור . Originally, man wore clothing made from "light" i.e. the word Or spelled with the letter א, whereas after the sin G–d had to provide man with clothing made from hide. This teaches the need to refine one's body until one again reaches the spiritual level when one can wear clothing made of אור. One way of qualifying for such garments once more in the future is to accept any afflictions we experience in life with love, to perceive them as acts of G–d designed to help us refine our body. Even death itself is a means of refining the material the body is made of. This is why the Psalmist says: יקר בעיני ה' המותה לחסידיו, "The death of His pious ones is precious to G–d." There is a very interesting comment in the book עמק ברכה page 85 on Genesis 3,22: "What if man were to stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat from it and live forever!" G–d's fear of that eventuality was based on His not wanting man to miss his chance at rehabilitating himself through death. 
  The lesson we have to derive from all this is that if we do perchance commit a transgression, we should repent immediately and try to repair the spiritual damage such a transgression has inflicted upon us. Failing to do so brings about the great danger that one transgression leads to another, as indicated by the verse we have just quoted. Had Cain heeded G–d's warning to mend his ways (Genesis 4,7) he would not have become the first murderer in history. Having failed once to heed G–d's advice he not only murdered but turned heretic when he responded to G–d's question: "Where is your brother Abel," with the words "Am I my brother's keeper?" (Genesis 4,8-9), implying that there is neither judge nor justice in this world.
  
  Noach
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named מגדול עוז.
    The commandment to be fruitful and multiply that we find in Genesis 9,7, is a repetition of the same commandment already recorded in פרשת בראשית in 1,28: "G–d said to them: "Be fruitful and multiply, etc". We have devoted considerable space to discussing that commandment in connection with the discussion in the Talmud Yevamot that failure to comply with this commandment is very serious. This commandment is obligatory for males only. Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka notes that in both instances this commandment is introduced in the Torah as a blessing, i.e. "G–d blessed them and said to them…" From this he concludes that the commandment applies equally to both men and women. The author of the Mishnah in Yevamot 65 bases his statement that only males are obligated to procreate on the fact that only males are in the habit of "conquering," and that the Torah connects the commandment with the directive to "conquer or subdue" the earth (Genesis 1,28). At any rate, both these rabbis understand the words פרו ורבו, "be fruitful and multiply," as a command. Bar Kappara in Ketuvot 5 says that the reason a widow should be married on Thursday evening is that when cohabitation takes place this will be on Friday, the day that G–d blessed mankind with the blessing to be fruitful. 
  Although one could conclude that he views the verse as being only a blessing, just as in Genesis 1,22 when G–d blessed the creatures of the waters, using the same expression, it would be a grave error to accuse Bar Kappara of disagreeing with the views of the scholars in Yevamot. All the sages are agreed that, unlike the blessing for the fish, the verses in question are both a blessing and a commandment. In the case of the blessing for the fish this is not followed by another directive such as when G–d addressed man. There it says ויאמר להם…, "G–d said to them. .." The blessing aspect must be understood as being a result of fulfilling the commandment to procreate. The nature of the blessing is that procreation will be successful, i.e. man will multiply, be healthy, etc.
  Our view is confirmed by the Talmud Sanhedrin 59 where the verse 9,7) ואתם פרו ורבו) is automatically accepted as a commandment which was referred to by the Torah again as a commandment for the Jewish people when G–d tells them to return "to your tents," after the revelation at Mount Sinai (Deut. 5,27).
  Having demonstrated that all our sources understand the meaning of the words פרו ורבו to be a commandment, we need to explain why Rashi (9,7) says: לפי פשוטו הראשונה לברכה, וכאן לצווי, "according to the plain meaning, the first time this expression is used it is a blessing, whereas in this instance it is a commandment." Rashi adds that the homiletical meaning to be derived from the verse is that anyone who does not practise the commandment to procreate is compared to someone who sheds blood. It appears from Rashi's words that he disagrees with the teachers of the Mishnah, all of whom had understood the words פרו ורבו each time to convey a commandment. If so, Rashi would find himself contradicting the Talmud in Sanhedrin 59 which we quoted earlier.
  The author quotes Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi, who addresses himself to that difficulty in his commentary on Rashi and opines that both in Genesis 1,28 and 9,1 the Torah expresses a blessing which subsequently is followed by the words פרו ורבו as a commandment. The latter statement is to be understood as an elaboration of the blessing. The actual commandment however is derived only from Genesis 9,7: ואתם פרו ורבו. This sentence does not contain a blessing and is in agreement with the statement in Sanhedrin 59. 
  According to this, the homiletical meaning Rashi speaks about, namely the comparison of someone who fails to carry out that commandment to a murderer as stated by Rabbi Eliezer in Yevamot 63, is based on the verse immediately prior to that in which the Torah proclaims: שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed." He apparently holds that only males are commanded to fulfil this commandment, and disagrees with Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka. The latter holds that the line "He blessed them," applied to both man and woman. The reason that the other scholar disagrees is that he holds that just as only males are in the habit of conquering, a condition in Genesis 1,28, so only males have to fulfil the condition of being fruitful. Clearly then he must hold that the words "He said to them, etc." must be understood as a commandment. The same reasoning applies to the first time the words פרו ורבו appear in Genesis 9,1. Rabbi Yochanan would then be in disagreement with Bar Kappara and the Talmud Sanhedrin 59, who both hold that the commandment is only found in Genesis 9,7, i.e. ואתם פרו ורבו. Nonetheless he interprets these verses homiletically on the basis of Rabbi Eliezer who believes that a homiletical explanation based on matters which appear side by side in the Torah is almost a commandment in itself [words are mine. Ed.]. Rabbi Eliezer bases his approach to exegesis on Psalms 111,8: סמוכים לעד לעולם, that words next to one another always, i.e. under all conditions, have an exegetical significance. Rabbi Eliezer applies that principle even when the verses in question are not "free" for homiletics but have already been explained as necessary in a different context. 
  Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi also quotes Nachmanides in his comment on Rashi who claims that the homiletics Rashi mentions only tell us not to apply the principle of סמוכים, i.e. that subject matter that is mentioned side by side must have halachic consequences. He too views the first פרו ורבו in 9,1 as a blessing and derives the commandment only from this latter ואתם פרו ורבו. He sees in the additional words שרצו בארץ an exhortation to be extremely fruitful so that the earth may be populated all over. Rabbi Mizrachi does not agree with the position taken by Nachmanides, and argues that the Midrash quoted by Rashi may well be in agreement with the opinion of the Talmud as expressed in Yevamot, and that the word ורבו, even though it is introduced by the words ויברך both here and in Parshat Bereshit, are not part of the blessing but constitute a separate commandment. The latter verse (9,7) only serves to establish the comparison with the preceding verse, namely that failure to procreate is a mortal sin. The reason that this verse is necessary is that Rashi agrees with Rabbi Yehudah who does not employ סמוכים, (verses that are following one another but dealing with separate subject matters) as a basis for halachic exegesis -unless such verses cannot be explained otherwise. He also disputes that one could interpret the verse in פרשת בראשית as introducing a commandment, whereas the similar verse in 9,1 would only be a blessing.
  Our author finds the reasoning of Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi very forced, and he feels that all the statements of the sages in the Talmud are totally acceptable and do not contain any internal contradictions. Before elaborating further we must be clear that the verse in Genesis 1,28 represents both a blessing and a commandment. The proof is simply the insertion of the words "G–d said to them." Why would the name of G–d appear twice in the same verse otherwise? Genesis 9,1, in which the name of G–d is not mentioned twice as a subject, is however capable of being interpreted in either direction.
  Rabbi Eliezer, who upholds the principle of סמוכים under all conditions, reads this verse as a blessing only, whereas he interprets verse 7 in the same chapter as both a commandment and a warning about the seriousness of failing to heed that commandment basing himself on the preceding verse. Rabbi Yehudah, however, sees a command in both 9,1 and 1,28; the fact that in one of these verses the words "G–d said to them" does not appear twice does not concern him, since the fact remains that both times the verse adds the words "He said to them." It follows that the words ואתם פרו ורבו ושרצו in 9,7 are totally superfluous and thus available for a conceptual comparison i.e. הקיש, with the preceding verse. 
  It is most improbable that Rabbi Yehudah would read 9,1 as a blessing only. To assume that would mean that he maintains that 9,7 is both a positive commandment and a warning of the sin (or even penalty) involved. The desire to interpret 9,1 as a blessing only stems from the fact that one does not like to have the Torah appear to merely repeat a commandment which had already been stated, in this case in 1,28. [I have abbreviated this discourse a little. Ed.]. 
  At any rate the statement in Sanhedrin 59 that the commandment to be fruitful and multiply is stated in פרשת נח, which is not attributed to any particular scholar but seems unanimous, is fully justified. The Talmud cites 9,7 because more than any other of the verses discussing the commandment this verse lends itself to the interpretation of the nature of the punishment for its non-fulfillment. All Rashi wants to tell us is that 9,1, according to its plain meaning, can be understood as a blessing only, whereas 9,7 is clearly a command. Since Nachmanides accepts the method of exegesis of Rabbi Eliezer, there is no conflict betweeen his view and that of Rashi.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  We now need to explain why both the blessing and the commandment to be fruitful and multiply had to be recorded twice, both to Adam and to Noach. I will endeavour to explain this as best as I can, and in the process I hope to deal with several puzzling aspects of the deluge, the rainbow and the building of the Tower. I also hope to clarify what is meant by the statement that failure to procreate diminishes G–d's image in the world. I will explain the apparent inaccuracy of Rabbi Yaakov in Yevamot 63 when he speaks about diminishing G–d's דמות, whereas the verse cited in support of his observation mentions צלם, not דמות. The fact is that the Torah's report when describing man's creation mentions both צלם, and דמות.
  The Zohar Parshat Noach, (Sullam edition page 14) writes as follows: Had Adam not sinned, he would not have begotten descendants that had their roots in the סטרא דיצר הרע, the emanations of the left side, the side of the evil urge, but his תולדות, descendants, would all have been rooted in the סטרא דרוחא קדישא, the side of the emanations housing the Holy Spirit. The reason that all the descendants of man failed to endure was that they were rooted in the סטרא אחרא, the left side source of the serpent's pollutants, or that such element was at least part of such descendants. Anything containing such an element cannot endure indefinitely. If, however, Adam had not sinned and had not been expelled from גן עדן as a result, his descendants would have been like the ministering angels and they would have lived forever. Since he sinned and begat children outside גן עדן because he did not merit to beget children within the garden, these children did not live forever and did not even become firmly rooted in this earth until Noach the righteous came along and entered the ark. All the generations of mankind had their origin in the ark; after leaving the ark mankind spread out all over the earth. So far the Zohar. [Another edition adds the words: This is why the Torah writes אלה, "These are the generations, these and not previous ones." Ed.] Anyone with eyes in his head who wants to explore this statement in depth will experience several revelations.
  First of all, the universe was created for the sake of man who was formed in the image and likeness, i.e. בצלם ודמות of G–d, so to speak. This means that אדם התחתון is patterned after אדם העליון, a heavenly version of man. This means that not only his heavenly counterpart but also he himself is holy, or that "the book and the cover" are both holy. The book and the cover in this instance are the soul and the body. When in such a state, man's clothing are כתנות אור, garments woven of the original light with which G–d created the universe. The word דמות describes the holiness of the body, whereas the word צלם describes the state of man's soul. We have discussed this at length in the treatise תולדות אדם. As long as such ideal conditions prevailed man's immortality was not limited to his species, but each individual person enjoyed everlasting life. The system of procreation would have paralleled that of the angels who develop from one another much like a candle which can light another without the light of the original candle thereby decreasing or “aging.” As a result of this type of procreation G–d's צלם would have expanded continuously, each new human being would have had the צלם אלוקים transmitted to it with the drop of semen it originated from, though such a human being had not been formed by G–d Himself as had Adam. The drop of semen would not then have been described as "an evil smelling drop," as it is described nowadays in Avot 3,1.
  Adam ruined this state of affairs by interfering with the סוד היין, the mystical properties of the grapes. [I suppose that this is based on the tree of knowledge having been a grape bearing tree. Ed.] He followed an evil path by squeezing a cluster of grapes (and consuming its juice). Had he not done so, that "wine" would have remained in the state of what our sages call the יין המשומר בענביו, "the wine that remained preserved within its grapes (compare Berachot 34).” In that event he would have been like "the cistern that does not lose a single drop” [hyperbole for total recall, see Avot 2,11. Ed.]. He would have retained all the holiness that had been his when he was created. When Adam sinned, he did not only lose some of his former glory, fall from a "high roof" (to the ground), but he fell into a "very deep pit" (below the ground). This was a בור רק, an empty pit [allusion to the pit Joseph had been thrown in. Genesis 37,24], since it did not even contain the ingredients for the survival of the species. The species was wiped out at the time of the deluge as a direct consequence of Adam having polluted that "drop of sacred semen," and made it "evil smelling." Due to G–d's personal intervention, Noach was saved seeing he was righteous, and the righteous are the foundation of the universe. The present universe was founded by him as a result.
  We have discussed elsewhere that the צדיק is linked to the emanation יסוד, and that this emanation is linked to מלכות through the covenant of circumcision. Noach's position in the world was demonstrated by the fact that he was born circumcised, i.e. without foreskin, according to Avot de Rabbi Nathan 2,8. Our sages say that "he guarded the covenant," and that though he did not succeed in reversing the decline of mankind to the extent of restoring man's stature to what it had been prior to Adam's sin, i.e. to have man clothed in garments of light so that individual immortality would be restored, at least he succeeded in restoring the immortality of the species. The reason that Noach did not succeed beyond this is that he drank afterwards from the vineyard he had planted, something not unlike Adam who had squeezed the juice from the grapes of the tree of knowledge. Actually, when he planted the vineyard (the tree that G–d Himself had planted in גן עדן), Noach had intended to repair the damage done by Adam, but he sinned by indulging in too much wine. Proverbs 25,27: "It is not good to eat too much honey” alludes to that incidentAuthor's comment<i class="footnote">The author mentions in an annotation that Pardes Rimonim describes the whole subject matter of the vineyard, wine, etc as something that can either be a fountain of spirituality or a source of debauchery, drunkenness. Although Noach strove to regain the יין המשומר, the reservoir of spirituality which Adam had lost by imbibing from what had been forbidden to him, Noach debased himself when he planted that vineyard; the fruit of its wine did not become his כוס ישועות, cup of salvations, but turned out to be the גפן סדום, the vineyard of Sodom, and its grapes turned out to be ענבי רוש and אשכלות מררת למו, "the grapes for them are poison, a bitter growth their clusters" (Deut. 32,32). In short, Noach had drunk the wrong kind of wine.<i>.</i></i>
  [What had happened to Noach was similar to what happened to the colleague of Rabbi Akiva who investigated the mysteries of the link between G–d and man only to emerge with his mind deranged (Chagigah 14). One must not overestimate one's spiritual capacity, just as one must not underestimate it. Ed.]. In spite of all this, G–d swore not to cause the extinction of the human race again, as had occurred during the deluge. When G–d promised this, He alluded to His previous statement of קץ כל בשר, in Genesis 6,13; this suggests that the present condition of immortality of the species only will continue during the length of mankind's natural history. Only after the arrival of the Messiah will there be a change, and when "G–d will rejoice in His handiwork again" (Psalms 104,31), the state of the universe will revert to what it had been at the time Adam was created. We will return to this later. The "descendants" which are the true descendants G–d had wished to see will not occur till the Messiah; this is indicated in Ruth 4,12 ואלה תולדות פרץ, where we find the word תולדות, descendants, spelled with two letters ו, to indicate that such descendants will correspond to all that G–d has hoped for from mankind. Peretz, of course, is another name for the Messiah.
  Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman in Bereshit Rabbah 12,6 says that there are only two instances in which the word Toldot is spelled plene: the example of Ruth we have quoted and Genesis 2,4: אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם. Why do all the other instances have one letter ו missing? Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Avin says that this is due to the six (letter 6=ו) items that G–d has withdrawn from Adam. These are: His זיו, his resplendence [all the editions have זיווג which is an obvious error. Ed.], his life (immortality), his physical height, the fruit of the earth, the fruit of the tree, and the luminaries. All of these are to be restored in the world of the future. Another statement made in that Midrash 23,5 concerns Genesis 4,25, where Eve is reported as naming her third son שת, because "G–d has presented me with another offshoot in place of Abel." Rabbi Tanchum comments that Eve looked at the offshoot (seed) and realized that he had originated from a different sphere, and that would eventually be the Messiah. 
  What she meant to say was that this seed would not live indefinitely until the era of the Messiah, but would at that time fulfill the promise of Numbers 24,17: וקרקר כל בני שת, "and he will dig up the foundation of all the children of Sheth." In Kabbalistic terms: This means that the Messiah will remove all the קליפות, the negative influences surrounding the fruit, the pure interior. At that time the world will be founded on the principles envisaged by G–d at the time of Creation. G–d will then truly derive pleasure from His creatures, death will be banished and people will live forever wearing garments woven out of light -as I have explained in the introduction to my treatise תולדות אדם. Israel will then be known as אדם, בצלם ודמות עליון, as reflecting the likeness of man's celestial counterpart. Procreation will take place at a fast pace, as described in Shabbat 30: "In the future, a woman will give birth daily. When Noach came out of the ark, however, and his descendants are described (10,1), the word תולדת is spelled defective since only the survival of mankind as a species had been assured, seeing that man had forfeited the true צלם. What man had retained was only a דמיון הצלם, a resemblance of the Divine image, something more like the דמות. The so-called צלם nowadays is more like man's shadow, צל, sometimes more visible, other times less pronounced, depending on the spiritual level of the individual.
  Bereshit Rabbah 24,6 comments on Genesis 5,1 זה ספר תולדת אדם, "This is the book of the descendants of man," that those mentioned now are descendants, whereas the previous ones were not descendants. What then were the earlier ones? Were they deities perhaps? [sarcastically] The answer given is that the generations אדם-שת-אנוש were indeed תולדות. [The Midrash goes on to elaborate on all the changes that took place on earth during Enosh's lifetime, indicating a radical decline in man's spirituality. Ed]
  The commandment as issued to Adam was of one category, whereas the identically worded commandment when issued to Noach and his sons was of another caliber. The former emanated from the Holy Spirit, the "right" side of the emanations as we have stated, whereas the latter is rooted in man's sex drive, derives from the "left" side of the emanations. G–d pronounced His blessing in both instances; G–d's blessing is the covering they have in common.
  This blessing which originates in very holy regions is extremely necessary as an accompaniment to the sexual act, even though that act nowadays cannot be compared in purity to the time Adam and Eve performed it in גן עדן. Adam was under the influence of צלם, whereas nowadays the highest level of man's holiness is דמות. When the Torah writes in 9,7: ואתם פרו ורבו שרצו בארץ, the meaning is: "prepare yourselves thoroughly so that you contain enough holiness to attract the blessing and sanctity from the "higher" regions, since now that you are dressed only in כתנות אור, garments made of hide, the sex act is rooted in ערוה, unchastity." But for the sin of Adam, obscenity would not have existed and the sexual act would have been the fulfillment of a מצוה, no different from the putting on of תפילין. Ever since the serpent seduced Eve the act became one of unchastity, ערוה. This is why it has become necessary to sanctify oneself prior to performance of the commandment to procreate, and why wherever the Torah mentions unchastity it also mentions קדושה, sanctity, to urge us to elevate such acts from merely being something profane to being something sacred.
  You may well ask why the commandment of procreating, which was addressed to Adam has been recorded in the Torah altogether, seeing that its original dimension as applicable to Adam had already become incapable of fulfillment? This argument is especially strong seeing that Sanhedrin 59 states that any commandment issued to mankind as such which has been restated after the giving of the Torah at Sinai applies both to mankind at large and to Israel, whereas any that has not been restated applies to Israel only. The Talmud seems clear that the commandment to procreate is not one of the seven commandments that apply to all mankind. Why then was this commandment to Adam written down altogether? We must answer that the reason it was recorded was because of its applicability in an ideal world, a world after the arrival of the Messiah.
  Let us get back to the basic difference between this commandment as issued to Adam and as issued subsequently to Noach and his family. In order to comprehend this properly, let me first explain a comment by the Zohar which writes that actually the performance of that commandment should originate in the סטרא דרוח קדישא, emanations on the right side, whereas nowadays it emanates from the side in which the evil urge resides. We have a statement in the Midrash Tanchuma Nasso 16 that at the time G–d created the universe He desired to have a residence on earth just as He has in the heavens.
  We also have a statement by our sages explaining the two different introductions of the Psalms with ,לדוד מזמור or מזמור לדוד. In the former, the holy spirit came to David only after he had commenced to play the harp, whereas the words מזמור לדוד indicate that the holy spirit overcame David even before he commenced playing the harp (Pesachim 117). לדוד מזמור represented the highest spiritual achievement of man, seeing that he initiated his spiritual achievement. If man only responds to an "injection" of holy spirit the achievement is of a lower order. Malachi 3,7 exclaims: "Turn back to Me and I will turn back to you;" He asks Israel to initiate repentance. He urges us not to wait for G–d to initiate the Redemption since it would then be merely an act of love and mercy. When G–d says in Exodus 33,19 וחנותי את אשר אחון, ורחמתי את אשר ארחם, "I will be gracious to whom I choose, and I will be merciful to whoever I shall be merciful to," Shemot Rabbah 45,6 on this verse describes G–d as showing Moses all the rewards that he had stored up in His treasure chambers for the righteous. When Moses inquired who all these treasures were for, G–d answered that those people who possessed merit would receive some as a reward due them, whereas those who did not have any merits would receive a free gift from Him. Obviously, the amount of the handouts granted by G–d as unearned gifts is smaller than those gifts in store for the righteous.
  In our times, when the Presence of G–d has withdrawn from earth, we have to strive to bring it back to us. In Adam's time however, before he sinned, G–d had a residence on earth, and all that Adam had to do was to increase this Divine Presence much as one adds light when kindling lights from a master candle. In the future this situation will prevail once more, as promised by G–d in Exodus 25,8: ושכנתי בתוכם, "I will dwell among them."
   The Zohar refers to this as a time in the future when it says הוה עביד תולדות מסטרא דרוח קדישא, that the "descendants" will then originate from the side of the emanations which are the home of the Holy Spirit. At such a time, procreation will proceed along the lines originally planned. Nowadays, however, man must consecrate himself at the time he sleeps with his wife and he must concentrate on begetting children that will serve the Lord if he wants to succeed in having such children. After having observed the above his physical part will enjoy immortality as a species or by means of his children and grandchildren, and in addition his soul will enjoy individual immortality.
  The Talmud (Sotah 2a) speaks about זווג ראשון, as well as זווג שני, "a first and a second matchmaking, mating." The "first one" is described as being proclaimed in Heaven, whereas the "second one" is man-made. The reference is to the commandment to be fruitful and multiply commanded to Adam and the subsequent commandment given to Noach and his descendants. The success of the second זווג, mating, marriage, which is on the basis of man's actions, depends on man's spiritual input being the first ingredient, whereas in the future, when the input from Heaven comes first, such זווגים, will be far superior to the matches being made on earth nowadays.
  Having explained all this, we can now understand the difference between Genesis 6,1 את האלוקים התהלך נח, "Noach walked with the Lord," and Genesis 24,40 when Abraham describes himself in these words: ה' אשר התהלכתי לפניו, "G–d before Whom I walked" Noach needed G–d to "hold his hand," so to speak, whereas Abraham was self-propelled, took the initiative. Noach was afraid to mix with the corrupt society he lived in and isolated himself with only G–d as his companion because he was afraid of the possible influence on him of contemporary society. Abraham was not only confident that he would not succumb to the corrupt society around him, but he tried to lead his fellow-men back to the path of monotheism and a life of good deeds. I have elaborated on this elswewhere. This is the plain meaning of those verses.
  According to the path we generally follow, it will be shown that Noach's strength was not as great as Abraham's in other matters. Abraham had "awakened" himself to recognize and serve his Creator. As a result he received considerable input from the Holy Spirit. This is what is meant when I said that rapprochement to G–d must proceed from "the bottom up," i.e. man must be the initiator Noach, on the other hand, relied on Divine inspiration to be the first step. Walking with G–d means after G–d had inspired him first. The "awakening" came from Above.
  On Genesis 6,7 and 8, “כי נחמתי כי עשיתם. ונח מצא חן בעיני השם," Rav Kahana comments in Bereshit Rabbah 29,1 that the end of verse 6 shows that even Noach had not really been found to be worthy. He was "lucky" to have found favor in the eyes of G–d. Whereas Noach מצא, "found," G–d did not "find " The meaning is that Noach "found" that G–d awakened him, G–d however, did not "find," i.e. did not see in Noach, something He felt he had to "respond" to. The reverse was true of Abraham, as demonstrated by the verse we have quoted. This is also the meaning of ומצאת את לבבו נאמן לפניך, "You have found his (Abraham's) heart loyal before You." (Nechemia 9,8)
  A view quoted in Midrash Rabbah 30,10 points out that the words בדורותיו, "in his generations," mean that had Noach lived in another generation, he would not have been considered outstanding, is well known. Whereas the Midrash compares the generations mentioned in our פרשה with those of Moses or Samuel, Rashi compares them with the generation Abraham lived in. The Torah says of Moses: בכל ביתי נאמן, "He is trusted throughout My household" (Numbers 12,7). 
  Chronologically, Abraham preceded Moses in this area of self-propelled upward spiritual motion. He did so so persistently that G–d revealed Himself to him to an extraordinary extent. When it came to the attachment, דבקות, to G–d and His ways, Moses excelled over Abraham. This is why G–d paid him the compliment recorded in Numbers. The ultimate compliment it is possible to pay a human being is to describe him as a fully fledged member of G–d's "household."
   The reason that Moses separated from his wife, i.e. from family life and the fulfilment of the commandment to be be fruitful and multiply, is that משה עלה אל האלוקים, "Moses ascended to G–d" (Exodus 19,3). Having reached such a stage, further "upward" motion was not necessary. This is the deeper significance of someone becoming איש האלוקים, as described in the ZoharAuthor's comment<i class="footnote">If Ben Azzai refused to marry and procreate because "his heart cleaved to the Torah," this may have been due to his being descended from a root such as that of Moses (cf Yevamot 63).</i>.
  Noach then was righteous in terms of his generation since he responded to inspiration from "above." G–d "encouraged" Noach during the one hundred and twenty years prior to the deluge. He sent him on a mission to warn his contemporaries to repent of their wicked ways. The Torah however, records only מקצת שבחו בפניו, וכלו שלא בפניו. The usual meaning of this concept is that one does not reveal all of a person's merits while he is alive, whereas when eulogizing such a person one must reveal all his merits. In this instance the meaning of שלא בפינו is that Noach did not initiate his role as the conscience of mankind, but he was prompted to do so by G–d.
  This is the real meaning of "Noach found favor in the eyes of G–d, whereas G–d did not find." He stood out in his generation, since his generation did not respond to the exhortations, whereas Noach responded to G–d's "grace," i.e. וחנותי את אשר אחון. He had never become corrupt, nor was he put off by the failure of his fellow-men to heed him. Noach's contemporaries were ערלי לב, had uncircumcised hearts. When they did not respond to calls from above either, they demonstrated that they were also ערלי בשר, remained uncircumcised in their flesh and continued in their perversions. This is why both their bodies and their souls perished. This means that at the time of the resurrection their individual "files" will not be re-opened to determine if some of them qualify for another round of life on earth. Rabbi Aba in the Zohar, (Sullam edition page 75) comments as follows on Genesis 7,23: וימח את כל היקום … וימחו מן הארץ, "The words כל היקום אשר על פני האדמה, include all rulers past and present of the Gentile nations. Before G–d metes out retribution to the ordinary individual, He deals with those whose obligation it is to teach their subjects to be G–d-fearing, and who have failed to discharge their duties.
  Although Noach did not compare favourably with Abraham, it is entirely possible that, had he lived during the time of Abraham, he would have been so inspired by Abraham that he would have equalled the latter in stature. After all, also Abraham had been told by G–d: "Walk before Me and become תמים, perfect" (Genesis 17,1). The view that Noach did not compare to Moses can be explained by the statement of Rabbi Berechyah in Bereshit Rabbah 36,3 who proves that Moses was more beloved of G–d than Noach since the Torah first refers to Noach as 6,9) ,איש צדיק) and later on as 9,20) איש האדמה). In the case of Moses we find him first referred to as an Egyptian, i.e. איש מצרי (Exodus 2,19), whereas later on he is called איש האלוקים (Deut. 33,1).
  Rabbi Berechyah means to tell us that from the moment Moses had become an איש, he was headed towards his ultimate achievement. His early youth foreshadowed his career. This is true in spite of the fact that at one point the Midrash Shemot Rabbah 45,5 comments that when Moses began to prophesy he was a relative child, i.e. immature in the ways of prophecy, since he had asked to be shown G–d's glory. Moses progressed constantly, until at the end of his life the Torah testifies that no one ever again attained his stature as a prophet and a man of G–d. The reason that he is described as איש, a title denoting that he was someone of stature already when he was a young man, is to indicate that sparks of G–dliness already came forth from him, such as when -as an act of jealousy on behalf of G–d- he killed the Egyptian who had tortured a Jew. He displayed his close attachment to G–d already at that time. Our sages expressed this thought when they said that Moses slew the Egyptian by uttering the Ineffable Name of G–d when cursing the Egyptian (Midrash Hagadol Exodus 2,20). We observe that even when engaged in an act at the beginning of his spiritual development, Moses is already described in a complimentary fashion, –
  – whereas Noach even at the height of his spiritual accomplishment, after he had been called צדיק, and after G–d had made a covenant with him and promised never again to bring a deluge, is still called איש האדמה, a man of the soil. All of this means that even Noach was included in G–d's comment in Genesis 6,7 כי נחמתי כי עשיתם, and that, if he was saved, this was due to the אדמה, which was destined to exist indefinitely and which could not be left to be completely desolate -or its existence would become meaningless. The meaning of איש האדמה, when viewed from this perspective is: "he remained as an איש, for the sake of the earth, אדמה." This consideration explains why at the very moment Noach is described as צדיק he is also called איש האדמה.
  Yalkut Shimoni on Proverbs 31,30: שקר החן והבל היופי, אשה יראת ה' היא תתהלל, "Grace is deceptive, beauty is vain, a G–d fearing woman is the woman who is truly praiseworthy," explains the words שקר החן as applying to the grace of Noach, i.e. "Noach found favour, grace;" the words הבל היופי are taken to refer to the beauty of the original Adam, whereas אשה יראת ה' היא תתהלל is applied to Moses. [The Yalkut goes on to explain that the reason prophets are compared to women is that they do not feel ashamed to ask G–d for Israel's material needs, just as a wife is not ashamed to ask her husband. Ed.].
  The above proves that the approach we have taken is based on ancient tradition. But I would like to suggest a mystical approach: We do not find that any person had enjoyed G–d's "light" from the time of Adam until the appearance of Chanoch whom G–d took from this earth and made into an angel (Genesis 5,24), the one usually referred to as Matatron. During the ten generations that elapsed between Adam and Noach, the latter was the outstanding צדיק of his time, refined enough to become the instrument of man's survival as a species. This is why the Torah reminds us that נח, whose name is half of that of חנוך, is referred to by the words זה ינחמנו, "This one will comfort us" (Genesis 5,29). His name also amounts to half the name of the angel מטטרון, Matatron, since the first three letters in that name equal 58, i.e. the same as the numerical value of נח. The remaining letters in the name of that angel spell נור, a burning light, to signify that חנוך had been turned into a flame of fire and become that angel. What had remained of חנוך after the 58=חן had been removed is וך, i.e. 26, a number equaling the numerical value of the Ineffable Name of G–d. Of the name מטטרון we are left with נור), a form of אש, fire, an allusion that "the Lord your G–d is אש אוכלה, a fire that consumes" (Deut. 9.3). We note that though there was an element of the quality of חנוך about נח, this was still שקר, deception, as it was not a true quality, seeing that even the "beauty" of אדם הראשון was only הבל, vain, since he had pursued values that are vain.
  Alternatively, the word הבל as used by the Yalkut, refers to Adam's son הבל, who on the surface at least seemed to have pleased G–d since the Torah reports G–d as favoring his offering, i.e. וישע ה' אל הבל ואל מנחתו (Genesis 4,4). This indicates that the true beauty of Adam was Abel; Cain was rooted in the סטרא אחרא, as we have pointed out previously. Abel had a soul of a higher calibre, and Kabbalists consider that Moses was the reincarnation of הבל. According to that view, הבל-שת-משה, shared the same soul. The reason הבל represented Adam's beauty is that whereas Adam's "heel" was responsible for "darkening the light of the sun," the face of Moses is considered as having restored that darkened light; our sages compare him to the sun itself (Baba Batra 75). The personalities of הבל and subsequently שת developed through these reincarnations until eventually in the person of Moses they reached their zenith on which the Torah reports: ומשה עלה אל האלוקים, "and Moses ascended to G–d" (Exodus 19,3) and separated from his wife. At that point Moses became the "husband" of מטרוניתא [a heavenly being that was his זווג ראשון, ideal mate. Ed.], as mentioned in the Zohar. This is what the Yalkut had in mind when it explained the meaning of אשה יראת ה' היא תתהלל.
  There is an enigmatic statement in the Talmud Chullin 139 which reads: משה מן התורה מנין? Whence do we have evidence in the Torah that Moses existed? The Talmud answers that this is proven from Genesis 6,3 where the Torah refers to G–d's spirit not being able to predominate in man while the latter is flesh, i.e. בשגם בשר. The numerical value of the word בשגם is 345, the same as the numerical value of the name משה. [The Talmud's query must be understood as "where is Moses' name alluded to already in the story leading up to the deluge?" Ed.]
  Let us return to Noach who was the kind of צדיק who derived his original inspiration from "above," whereas an Abraham proceeded from "below" upwards. Moses ascended to the point where he became איש האלוקים. Both Noach and Moses spent time in an ark, i.e. תיבה. There is a world of difference between Noach's ark and the one Moses was placed in.
  Before explaining the meaning of the "arks," let me mention a comment by the Zohar on Proverbs 18,10: 13 מגדל עוז שם ה' בו ירוץ צדיק ונשגב, "The name of the Lord is a tower of strength; the righteous runs towards it and is elevated." The "tower" is a reference to the ark, the "righteous" is a reference to Noach. While on the subject, I shall also explain the difference between the word Migdol in Samuel II 22,51, and the alternate reading of the same word as Magdil both in Samuel and in Psalms 18,51. We are in the habit of reciting this verse at the end of saying Grace, and our sages suggested that on weekdays we should recite the version Magdil, whereas on Sabbaths and New Moons we should recite the spelling Migdol. There is a further third spelling, Migdal David in Song of Songs 4,4 כמגדיל דויד צוארך, בנוי לתלפיות, "Your neck is the Tower of David, built as a landmark."
  Before revealing the reasons for all this we must still refer to Bereshit Rabbah 29,3, and we shall then see that all these statements are in accordance with what we have written above. The Midrash in question states: Rabbi Simon states that G–d made three "discoveries." He "found" Abraham, as we know from Nechemiah 9,8: "You found his (Abraham's) heart trustworthy before You." He "found" David since we read in Psalms 89,21: "I have found My servant David." He also "found" Israel as we know from Hoseah 9,10: "I found Israel like grapes in the desert." When his colleagues asked him why he did not include Noach in G–d's "discoveries," seeing the Torah says "Noach found favor in the eyes of G–d," Rabbi Simon responded that Noach did indeed "find," whereas G–d did not "find." There are several difficulties here. Why does Rabbi Simon not list G–d's "discoveries" in their chronological order, i.e. Abraham, Israel, David?
  
  
  We have already explained that Noach did not develop from the "bottom up," i.e. G–d did not discover that Noach had come closer to Him, but he had required an injection of Divine guidance before he walked with G–d. Abraham, on the other hand, developed from the "bottom" up, and this is why G–d said to him: "walk in front of Me and become תמים, perfect." 
  David was at times self-propelled, whereas at other times he waited for Divine inspiration, as we have explained in connection with the usage of מזמור לדוד, or לדוד מזמור, as the case may be. The words מגדול and מגדיל express similar ideas. מגדול is the house of the Lord i.e. the manifestation of some Divine Presence rising from earth heavenwards, since the vowel Chirik, the "dot" under the letter מ symbolises earth, and it concludes with the "dot" above the letter ו i.e. above the consonant instead of below it. מגדול therefore symbolises upward mobility, that David strove to elevate himself.
  The word מגדיל, on the other hand, commences with the vowel Patach suggestive of G–d's outstretched hand, His initiating relations with man. Accordingly, the vowel Chirik in that word occurs later and under the letter ד near the end of the word. A complete treatise dealing with the symbolism of the vowels is found in Pardes Rimonim in the שער הנקודות. Consider also that the spelling מגדול used in Samuel represents a higher degree of sanctity, since the Holy Spirit with which the Books of Prophets have been composed is of a higher order than that of the Hagiographa, which include the Book of Psalms. It makes sense therefore, that on such days as Sabbaths and New Moons, days on which we are suffused with more spirituality than during the week, we should say מגדול rather than מגדיל. Both the Sabbath and the New Moon are days on which we are aware of our ultimate destiny to be worthy of the אור של בראשית, and of a world which is filled with sanctity daily, not only on the Sabbath.
  We have explained in our commentary on בראשית, that the letter מ is an allusion to the מלאך המות, angel of death. Keeping this in mind, one may view the moral challenge of the ark i.e. מגדל, to Noach: the hope that he should be man enough when descending from the “מ” of that מגדול to become גדול, morally equivalent to what the last letter in that word גדול represents, and to thereby be able to overcome the power of the angel of death. In other words, he should fulfil the promise inherent in נח איש צדיק תמים, to be not only righteous but "perfect." The ark would then have become equivalent to the ultimate Temple, the מגדל עז, whose glory will outshine that of the previous Temples. He, Noach, would have been the צדיק that is described in Proverbs 18,10 as being elevated.
  The מגדל עז, "tower of strength," which the Zohar had described as referring to the ark, refers to the three separate levels of accommodation in the ark. It symbolises the three domains of עולם העשיה, the lower level; the עולם היצירה, the middle level; and lastly the עולם הבריאה, the highest level of the emanations. The lowest level contained a lot of garbage, comparable to our world. The middle level which contained the animals may be understood to symbolize a world in which creatures can fly, similar to the Zohar's understanding of the commandment in Genesis 1,20: "let the waters swarm with living creatures and birds that fly over the earth, over the expanse of the heavens..”
  The Zohar sees in this a reference to the angels who fly and whose residence is in the עולם היצירה. The word ועוף in that verse is understood as specifically referring to the archangel Michael, of whom we are told in Isaiah 6,6: "Then one of the Seraphim flew over to me with a live coal." The second time that word occurs, i.e. יעופף, refers to the archangel Gabriel of whom we are told in Daniel 9,21: והאיש גבריאל … מעף ביעף, "and the man Gabriel was lifted in flight, etc."
  The third and highest level of accommodation in the ark was reserved for אדם, man, who is the יסוד העולם, foundation of the universe, seeing the image of Jacob is engraved in G–d's throne. Concerning all three levels of the ark, we apply the verse בראש מגדול הוא שם ה', בו ירוץ צדיק ונשגב of Proverbs, that G–d is above those levels.
  It is worth remembering that whereas angels are considered spiritually stationary, man is equipped to advance from one spiritual level to another, level by level. Zachariah 3,7 describes the High Priest Joshua as one who is able to move amongst the angels who are described as merely מהלכים, stationary. If someone progresses faster than normal he is called רץ, running, and attains a station no one else can reach. All others can be viewed as מהלכים, stationary when compared to the runner. Proverbs then views such a צדיק as superior to the angels. G–d hinted to Noach that this would be his real task in building the ark. The ark was to be as much a spiritual sanctuary as a physical sanctuary. The צוהר, window, Noach was instructed to place in the ark was a hint that Noach should ascend "from the bottom up” as it were-spiritually. Alas, Noach failed in mastering that challenge.
  [The author continues to see additional symbolisms in the juxtaposition of certain vowels in the words מגדול, מגדל. I have decided to omit those. According to these symbolisms it was David's task to rescue mankind from the effects of the Tower מגדל בבל, and this is why we have these various spellings of the word מגדל in the Book of Samuel. Ed.] The result of G–d's dispersing the people who had built the מגדל, Tower, in Genesis 11,5 was to create seventy nations. It will be the task of the Messiah, i.e. David reincarnate, to repair the damage caused at the time that Tower was built. He will conquer all those nations and he alone will rule. We find an allusion to this when the people of the generation of the Tower justified their action by saying: נעשה לנו שם, "Let us make a name for ourselves." We also find that it is said of David: ויעש דוד שם, "David made a name for himself" (Samuel II 8,13).
  We must appreciate that when G–d created different worlds, He named, i.e. formed and defined them by means of a combination of the letters of the alphabet. Our sages say that Betzalel understood the mystery of the combinations of all of these letters which make up the names [definitions] of all things found in this world (Berachot 55 based on the word שם in Exodus 35,30). Early man, who was still בצלם אלוקים, was still able to understand the significance of the names of G–d, and used these names to serve Him in holiness and love in order to cleave to Him. This condition came to an end with the generation of Enosh, as we have explained earlier based on Bereshit Rabbah. When we read in Genesis 4,26 that during the lifetime of Enosh אז הוחל לקרא בשם ה', "then one began to profane the name of the Lord," the meaning is that people no longer used His Name in holiness but desecrated it. The expression הוחל indicates something that is profane, חולין. This situation continued until the advent of the deluge. When the Torah speaks about המה הגבורים אשר היו מעולם אנשי השם, "they were the heroes of old, men of the "Name" (Genesis 6,4), this means that these people used the name of G–d to manipulate the universe, as described in the Zohar, Sullam edition page 209. The expression אנשי השם in Genesis, and the expression ויקוב את השם in Leviticus 24,11, where the Torah refers to the blasphemer, suggests a similar misuse of the Holy Name of G–d in both instances. It was the ability of these people to use G–d's name in order to manipulate it that made them disregard the warnings of an impending deluge. All this is described at greater length in the Zohar. We find that the people of Jerusalem are described by the prophet Ezekiel 12,19 as also having displayed misplaced optimism concerning the prophecies of doom by Jeremiah. The people's very knowledge of G–d's name was what misled them. This is the justification for the reference in Ezekiel to these people as "dwellers in ruins" when in fact they were still dwelling in Jerusalem.
  According to the Tziyoni, the instruction to Noach to build an ark meant that he was to employ combinations of the letters in G–d's name to do so and to build what could become the equivalent of a Holy Temple. The Tziyoni also quotes the verse from Proverbs about the מגדל עז, that the Zohar discussed. He demonstrates that the letters in G–d's Ineffable Name were manipulated in a manner which enabled Noach to build the ark according to the measurements reported in the Torah.
  Even when the generation of the Tower set out to build the Tower saying "we want to make a name for ourselves, they still meant to serve and respect G–d. That part of their intention was laudable. Their sin consisted in their wanting to isolate G–d's name, (which represented the attribute of מלכות, dominion), to the heavens. They wanted a clear separation of earthly and heavenly authority. The earth was supposed to be under human sovereignty only. All this is explained in detail by Nachmanides, Rekanati and the Tziyoni. When G–d dispersed those people all over the earth, He only practiced the principle of מדה כנגד מדה, measure for measure. Just as they had tried to separate G–d from themselves, so G–d separated them from each other.
  In the case of David we find the reverse process. David, who always tried to involve G–d in all that goes on here on earth, tried to build a sanctuary to provide G–d with a permanent abode here on earth, and thereby to reverse any separation between man and G–d. This is the deeper significance of the מגדל דוד … בנוי לתלפיות, "the tower of David built as an ornament" (Song of Songs 4,4). The Temple was the structure that all mankind is meant to turn to as a symbol of G–d's Presence on earth. Despite David's intentions and endeavors, G–d's ultimate Sanctuary has not yet been built on earth; a structure built by humans would not endure. This is what the Psalmist means when he says אם ה' לא יבנה בית שוא עמלו בוניו בו, "if G–d Himself does not build the house, its builders labor in vain with it" (Psalms 127,1). 
  When that time arrives, the Talmud's statement about the three "finds" that G–d has made will really be true. The word תלפיות, is the reference to that ideal world when all the potential G–d has placed in man will become realized. At that time the word תולדות, will once again be spelled plene, just as it had at the time when the Torah could still write אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם. The reason Israel is mentioned as the last of these finds -contrary to the chronological order- is, that at that time Israel will truly fulfill its function, only then will Israel truly be a “find.”
  When the Midrash described the six attributes that were withheld from earth after the sin, three of these were attributes possessed by Adam such as the כתנות אור, the garments woven of "light,' referred to in the Midrash as זיוו, his 'life,' i.e. his unlimited lifespan, and his קומתו, exceptional physical height and stature. All these will be restored in the period under discussion. At that time all trees will not only bear fruit but produce wood that tastes just as the fruit, and the original “light” will be restored to this world. 
  We should remember that just as the "garment" of the body will be woven of light and will be prestigious, so the body itself will be the distinguished clothing of the soul. Israel experienced a glimpse of such a future while in the desert. This is why the Torah tells us in Deut. 8,4: שמלתך לא בלתה מעליך, “your clothing did not wear out, etc. during all these forty years. The first step in restoring man to the garments that he ought to be wearing were taken by two of Noach's sons when they covered their father by taking hold of the שמלה and covering him with it (Genesis 9,23). 
  By feeding all the animals in the ark for a full year, Noach himself had begun the process of repairing the damage done by Adam in the area of food. When Jacob prayed (Genesis 28,20) that G–d should give him "bread to eat and clothes to wear," he may well have referred to a world in which man would wear clothing made of light, and in which all the trees would bear fruit and their trunks would taste just as their fruit. Because Noach had commenced the process of repairing the damage to the production of food caused by Adam, he was given the right to improve his diet and that of mankind after him. He was allowed to include meat in his diet (Genesis 9,3). His son Shem, who had begun to repair the damage to the kind of clothing man was allowed to wear, merited that his descendants, Israel, when wearing ציציות on a four-cornered garment, could ignore the prohibition of mixing wool and linen. In other words, a linen garment may have ציציות made of wool. Ever since the dispute between Cain and Abel linen and wool symbolized their strife, hence the prohibition of mixing them. The people of Israel kept rising to higher spiritual levels until they qualified for food made in the heavens, i.e. the מן, Manna. The jewelry that the Jewish people wore from the time G–d revealed Himself until they forfeited it through participating in the sin of the golden calf, was symbolic of the כתנות אור Adam had worn before the sin (compare Exodus 33,5).
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  
  
  The Zohar in its commentary on this פרשה, warns repeatedly that one must be careful not to expose oneself to danger at a time when danger lurks all around. We have discussed the letter מ as alluding to the angel of death. As long as the angel of death does not come face to face with a potential victim he has no control over such a person. It is best to hide in one's house during wars and other times when violence erupts, so as not to expose oneself to the forces of destruction.
  'ויאמר ה' לנח בא אתה וגו. We learn from here that a guest does not have the right to enter his host's home unless invited to do so. Even Noach did not want to enter the ark until G–d the owner asked him to. Only then does the Torah report that Noach entered the ark.
  כי אותך ראיתי צדיק. This teaches that one should not entertain a guest unless one had satisfied oneself that such a guest is a person of good name. We also learn from this short paragraph that a guest is not entitled to bring other guests with him without the host having expressed his consent. Noach needed special permission from G–d to bring along his family into the ark (Genesis 7,1).
  
  Lech Lecha
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named: The Sanctity of the Holy Land.
  This portion contains the positive commandment that males should be circumcised. The Torah says: זאת בריתי אשר תשמור ביני וביניכם ובין זרעך אחריך המול ימול כל זכר. This commandment is repeated in Parshat Tazria where the Torah says: ביום השמיני ימול בשר ערלתו. There are many commandments which are recorded twice in the Torah. There is always a compelling reason for this, as our sages have demonstrated.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  I have explained the deeper meaning of this commandment elsewhere at length. However, we cannot simply pass by this opportunity to comment on such an important commandment and some of the secrets contained in that מצוה. This is especially so in view of the Torah relating the fulfillment of this commandment to Israel's possessing the Holy Land, seeing that G–d said to Abraham: "I shall give to you and to your descendants after you the land in which you sojourn, the whole of the land of Canaan as an everlasting possession; I shall be their G–d" (Genesis 17,8). Our sages comment that G–d told Abraham: "If your offspring will observe the commandment of circumcision they will enter the Holy Land; if not, they will not enter." (Compare Rashi on Joshua 5,4) We observe that the land of Israel is closely tied up with the rite of circumcision, the relevant verse in Scriptures (Deut. 32,9) being כי חלק ה' עמו, יעקב חבל נחלתו, "For the Lord's portion is His people, Jacob His own allotment (the "allotment" being the land of Israel). 
  G–d chose us from all the other seventy nations to be our G–d, and chose us to be His people. He gave the other seventy nations their respective languages and countries, all under the supervision of seventy representatives at the Celestial Court. Our tongue, however, is a holy tongue. To us He gave the Holy Land, a land that is supervised by G–d directly and not through one of His agents. This land is situated "opposite" its counterpart in the Heavenly Spheres. We cannot lay a claim to this land except through removal of the foreskin, which represents the קליפה, the symbol of the serpent's pollution, the influence of the סטרא אחרא. If Jews should fail to observe this commandment, G–d forbid, then this would be something shameful for the land, i.e. ערות הארץ, since all students of Kabbalah are aware that the ארץ ישראל in the Heavenly Regions, i.e. the emanations of יסוד ומלכות symbolise the secret of the relationship between Zion and Jerusalem on earth. They are surrounded by קליפות, known also as ערלים, uncircumcised people, seeing that Mount Zion and Mount Moriah are surrounded by the mountains of Esau and his offspring Amalek. As long as Isaac had been alive, Esau's descendants observed the מצוה of circumcision, but as soon as Isaac died they abandoned it (Tanna deBey Eliyahu chapter 24). 
  All the wicked people surround Jerusalem, as is written: כל גויים סבבוני, "All the Gentile nations surround me" (Psalms 118,10). Jerusalem can be compared to the "lily amongst the thorns," Solomon's description of Israel in Song of Songs 2,2. Because terrestrial Jerusalem is surrounded by such secular turbulence, the ערלה in the emanation יסוד has to be removed as a first step so that the covenant called ברית המעור, the mystical root "סוד" of the emanation יסוד can be revealed and the עטרה be laid bare. 
  This is the secret of the relationship between מילה, removal of the foreskin and פריעה, the splitting and pulling down of the thin membrane beneath the foreskin (which is part of the operation, and without which the rite of circumcision is halachically invalid). Once this has been accomplished the form will resemble its Creator, and man will emerge in the image of G–d. We have discussed elsewhere how different parts of the human body correspond to different regions of the ספירות, emanations. Just as there can be no peace and harmony in the Heavenly Regions until the power of the emanation מלכות has been revealed as the ultimate objective G–d had in mind when He started the creative processes, so man on earth is not "complete" until his member has been revealed minus the foreskin and the membrane underneath it. This is what the sages had in mind when they said מל ולא פרע כאלו לא מל, "If someone removed his foreskin and failed to split that membrane, he might as well not have removed the foreskin at all" (Shabbat 137). Similarly in the case of a Sotah, (a woman who has to disprove accusations of marital infidelity), the Torah demands that the hair of her head be loosened and thereby prominently displayed to indicate that she had committed a violation of religious norms (Numbers 5,18). [It is considered an act of ערוה, unchastity, for a married Jewish woman to thus display her hair. Ed.]
  We read in the Sefer Habahir, that the reason the Torah commands circumcision to be performed on the eighth day of the infant's life is that man possesses eight extremities, i.e. his right and left hand, the right and left foot, the head, the body, the male member and its mate, since the Torah describes man as "ודבק אשתו והיו לבשר אחד, "he cleaves to his wife so that they become one flesh” (Genesis 2,24). When G–d said to Abraham: אני הנני בריתי אתך, "I, here My covenant is with you," this is a reference to the fact that the שכינה is known as <i>Ani</i>, and that the heavenly covenant is symbolized on the body by a ציון, a mark. Once the male glans is uncovered, this enables the שכינה to return to ציון, Zion, and man on earth remains whole, retains the image of G–d. When that condition exists, all his 248 limbs are whole, and this is what the name 248=אברהם represents. When in that condition, Abraham is able to enter the Zion on this earth. We can then be a nation on our own land for the imprint of G–d is on our bodies. This seal signifies that we are permanently different and distinct from the other nations and are indeed part of the holiness of G–d.
  This consideration explains what our sages had in mind when they interpreted the words בעצם היום הזה נמול אברהם, "Abraham was circumcised on that very day" (17,26), to mean that if he had circumcised himself at night the other nations would have said: "we would have prevented you from doing this had we known about it" (Bereshit Rabbah 47,9). We must ask ourselves the question why the Gentile nations should have objected to this commandment more than to any other. Clearly, the reason is that performance of that very act drew a clear distinction between Abraham (and later the Jewish people) and the remainder of mankind.
  The theme of the linkage between the sanctity of the land of Israel and the giving of the land of Israel to Abraham and his descendants is repeated no less than three times in this portion of the Torah. At the beginning of the פרשה Abraham is invited to move to the land of Canaan and to traverse it. Once he had done so G–d promises the land to Abraham's descendants in 12,7, without specifying any boundaries. We find the specification of the boundaries spelled out in the middle of the פרשה in 15,18: "On that day G–d concluded a covenant with Abraham saying: to your descendants I have given this land from the river of Egypt up unto the great river, the river Euphrates." The promise is reiterated a third time near the end of the פרשה in 17,8 where G–d says: "I have given to you and to your descendants after you the land in which you sojourn, the whole of the land of Canaan as an everlasting inheritance, and I shall be their G–d." Each of the three promises represents an "improvement," something additional. 
  Here is an instance that shows that the sequence in which the Torah reports events is not necessarily the chronological order in which things occurred. Remember that Abraham was seventy years old at the time of the covenant between the pieces in 15,18 (as we know on the authority of סדר עולם). Our sages also consider the count of the four hundred years that the Torah mentions in that covenant (15,13) as commencing with the birth of Isaac. When Exodus 12,40 mentions a period of 430 years that the Israelites "resided" in Egypt, our sages compute that period as having commenced at the ברית בין הבתרים "the covenant between the pieces," i.e. when G–d revealed Himself to Abraham in 15,1. [Rashi's commentary that this number includes the years spent elsewhere as strangers by Abraham and his descendants, may be based on the letter ו (and), before the word מושב in 12,40. Ed.]
  Since Isaac was born when Abraham was one hundred years old, the covenant must have preceded his birth by 30 years, and that places the events reported in chapter 15 as having preceded chapter 12 in which Abraham is reported as seventy-five years old when he emigrated to the land of Canaan. Since Abraham was in the land of Canaan during the time G–d concluded that covenant with him, how is it that he is reported to have emigrated from Charan only at the age of seventy five? The answer must be that Abraham had visited the land of Canaan earlier for some private reason, not at the behest of G–d. During that visit G–d appeared to him and he subsequently returned to Charan. Five years after that visit G–d commanded Abraham to move to the land of Canaan. 
  The principle אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה, that the Torah is not bound by a rule to report events in chronological order, also enables us to explain the question how Genesis 15,12 can speak about the "sun being about to set," when the Torah had reported previously that G–d asked Abraham to try to count the stars in the sky, clear proof that it must have been night at that time (15,5).
  The principle I have outlined is confirmed by Tosaphot in Berachot 7b who address themselves to the statement in the Talmud that up until Genesis 15,8 when Abraham said: א-ד-נ-י אלוקים במה אדע כי אירשנה, "O G–d, the Master, how will I know that I shall inherit it?" no one had ever called G–d by the appellation Master. Tosaphot explain that the reason the Talmud did not quote the verse in 15,2, in which Abraham uses the same appellation when addressing G–d is, that verse eight may well have been spoken before verse two seeing that the Torah is not bound by rules requiring it to report chronologically. The paragraph commencing with the words: אחר הדברים האלה, which follows the report about the war between the four and the five kings respectively, and Abraham's intervention on behalf of Lot, must have occurred when Abraham was about 73 years of age. The city of Sodom existed only for a total of 52 years as we know from Shabbat 10. Deduct 12 years from the 52 during which the Sodomites were vassals of King Kedor-Leomer, (14,4) and 13 years of rebellion, and there now remain 26 years during which the city functioned normally. When the city was destroyed Abraham was 99 years old, since Isaac was born a year after that. By deducting 26 years from Abraham's age we arrive at the figure 73 as being his age when the battles between the combined kingdoms of the valley and the forces of Amrafel/Kedor-Leomer took place. It follows that the "covenant of the pieces" preceded that war by three years, though the latter paragraph concludes with the words ויחשביה לו צדקה, "G–d considered it as an act of righteousness for him (Abraham)." This verse forces the Torah to report events contrary to their chronological order. Tosaphot conclude by resolving Rashbam's objection how 15,12 can speak about sunset, when we have previously heard about the stars in the sky in 15,5, by stressing that the two parts of this chapter could not have occurred at the same time. According to this calculation the ברית בין הבתרים came first, followed by Abraham's immigration into the land of Canaan, followed by the commandment to circumcise himself and his male household members.
  We have frequently stated that G–d's purpose in creating the universe was to create man, who in turn would be the instrument through which G–d's greatness would be revealed. This is the reason man had to be the last creature to be created at the end of the process. Physical man was created for the sake of "the giant among men” i.e. Abraham. We have an allusion to this in Genesis 2,4: אלה תולדות שמים וארץ בהבראם, where the letters in the word הבראם, are identical with the letters in the word אברהם. It was Abraham who spread the word about G–d's Power, Kindness, etc., to the rest of mankind. An allusion to this is found in the letter ה in the word בהבראם. When we remove this "small” ה from that word we are left with the name אברם. This demonstrates conclusively that that small ה is meant to draw our attention to אברהם when we read that verse. 
  Nechemiah 9,6-8 is even more convincing. He says: "You made the heavens and the heaven's heaven, and all their host, the earth and everything upon it, the seas and everything in them… You are the Lord G–d who chose Abram, who brought him out of Ur .. and changed his name to Abraham.” Why does Nechemiah bother to mention that Abraham used to be called Abram? The reason is that he wanted to allude to the fact that heaven and earth were created for the sake of Abraham, and to make us take note that Abram's name had been changed. Once you appreciate this, you will also find a hint of this transformation already in the report of creation, i.e. Genesis 2,4. Just as Adam's abode was in גן עדן, and he was expelled from there only because of his sin, Abraham's true abode was the Holy Land, the land which according to Ezekiel 36,35 will become once more like גן עדן. We find that prior to the destruction of Sodom and the neighboring towns, the valley is referred to in the Torah as כגן ה' כארץ מצרים "like a garden of G–d, like the land of Egypt." There is, however, a difference between something described as גן, "garden," and גן עדן.
  Creation i.e. בריאה, is divided into three "days." On the first "day," G–d created; on the second "day," He ensured that what He had created would endure. This was the day on which the Torah was given to the Jewish people, when the earth was both frightened and reassured in turn. G–d had added the letter ה to the Torah's report that "it was evening it was morning יום הששי, "the sixth day." [an allusion to Israel having to accept the Torah so that earth's continued existence would be assured based on Midrashim we quoted elsewhere. Ed.] יום הששי, "The sixth day," refers to the 6th of Sivan, the date on which the Jewish people accepted the Torah. G–d had threatened that non-acceptance would result in the world again being turned into Tohu (compare Shabbat 88). The third "day" of creation is the day when G–d's handiwork will undergo a complete rejuvenation in the messianic future, seeing that G–d's original handiwork had been largely ruined through Adam's sin (and that of his descendants). At that time the verse ישמח ה' במעשיו, "G–d will rejoice in His works," will be fulfilled (Psalms 104,31, the word ישמח having the same letters as the word משיח).
  We now understand why the promise of the land of Israel to Abraham and his descendants is repeated three times in our פרשה, each time including a dimension not previously revealed. The first promise was made at the ברית בין הבתרים. At the beginning of the story of creation the eventual four exiles of the Jewish people had been hinted at according to the view of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in Bereshit Rabbah 2,4. He understands the words והארץ היתה תהו as a reference to the Babylonian exile; the word בהו refers to the exile of the Medes; the word חשך refers to the exile under the Greeks, and the words על פני תהום refer to an exile that has no limit, whereas the words ורוח אלוקים מרחפת, refer to G–d's spirit, i.e. the era of the Messiah. In our portion, too, G–d hinted to Abraham during the covenant of the pieces that his descendants would undergo four periods of exile, as indicated by the words: אימה, חשיכה גדולה נופלת עליו "fear, great darkness, descending upon him"(15,12). The word אימה refers to Babylonia, the word חשיכה to the exile under the Medes; the word גדולה refers to the exile under the Greeks, and the word נופלת refers to the exile under the Romans, all according to Bereshit Rabbah 44,17.
  At first glance we are perplexed why G–d should be mentioning or even alluding to periods of distress at the very time when the Torah reports creation, i.e. something positive. Do we not have a principle that at a time of joy one only concentrates on joyful matters?! (based on Rashi Genesis 6,7 and more ancient sources).
  Actually, the matter is not quite so. When G–d saw that His handiwork was going to be damaged, He decided to make allowance for this and to provide a method by which such damage could be repaired. This method is the principle of exile. Through the mechanism of exile, Israel, or even mankind itself, could be saved from utter destruction. Mentioning or even merely alluding to such exiles is not something that spoils a happy mood therefore, but on the contrary helps to reassure us that all G–d's plans for His universe will eventually bear fruit.
  A different approach to the meaning of the expressions אימה, חשיכה, גדולה-נופלת, is taken by the Arizal, who sees in אימה, an allusion to the generation of Enosh, during whose lifetime one third of the earth was flooded. G–d had done this in order to inspire fear and reverence for Him in mankind, hence the word אימה, fear. חשיכה refers to the generation of the deluge, when according to our sages the luminaries ceased to function, hence the word חשיכה, darkness (Yerushalmi Pesachim 1,1). The word גדולה refers to the generation of the Tower, i.e. מגדל, and the word נופלת refers to the destruction, i.e. תהפוכה of Sodom whose inhabitants were destroyed body and soul. What Abraham experienced was the awareness that these four events represented delays in G–d's plan for His universe, and that the earth needed תקון, a reformation in order to get back on the "right track." Abraham was seventy years old when He received G–d's first assurance that his descendants would possess the Holy Land. An allusion to this is found in the verse יצב גבולת עמים, "He establishes the boundaries of the nations" (Deut. 32,8).  In that verse Israel is contrasted with the other seventy nations.
   It is no accident that when Abraham's descendants moved to Egypt they numbered seventy, i.e. a counterweight to the seventy nations of the world. There they became refined through their bondage to the Egyptians. When G–d took them out of there they had been prepared to exchange bondage to the Egyptians for becoming servants of the Lord, as G–d says: כי עבדי הם, "For they are My servants" (Leviticus 25,42). G–d instilled in the Israelites the feeling that they were slaves so as to make the transition to becoming G–d's servants easier for them. This is also what G–d had in mind in the first of the Ten Commandments which states: "I am the Lord your G–d who has taken you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage," i.e. in order to become My servants.
  Abraham expressed the fear that his slave Eliezer would inherit him (Genesis 15,2). G–d told him: "Not this one will inherit you, but someone who is your very own issue will inherit you" (15,3). The message was that a different servant, i.e. Israel My servant will inherit you.
  The reason that in the Bible the Holy Land is referred to as the land of Canaan quite often even after the Jewish people took possession of it, is that Canaan was the first "slave" (Genesis 9,25). The word כנען also is derived from the word כנען, submission. The message to Israel in all this is that as long as they submit to the will of G–d the land remains theirs. When the people rejected their status as servants of G–d, they became slaves of the nations instead.
  When our sages tell us that there are three gifts that can be obtained only through (submission to) afflictions, and one of these three is the land of Israel, we have experienced as a nation that we were very close to G–d when we first took over the Holy Land (received that gift). Subsequently, G–d expects more of us; when we disappoint His expectations we are dealt with as severely as a father deals with his son, since he has the son's rehabilitation at heart. Being punished for transgressions immediately after one has committed them is the greatest sign that one is beloved of G–d. In such a situation it is an error to expect G–d to employ His attribute of being נושא עון, suspending punishment for a while. I have explained this at length in my treatise on the letters of the alpha-bet under the heading of the letter ק. When someone who resides in the land of Israel experiences afflictions this is an expression of G–d's love, seeing G–d wishes him to be cleansed of his sins immediately and not to accumulate more sins by deeming himself in G–d's good graces when there is no cause for this. This is precisely what Rabbi Eleazar in Ketuvot 111 tells us when he states that anyone who resides in the land of Israel is devoid of sins. 
  Anyone who is privileged to live in the Holy Land must constantly bear in mind that he is in the "land of Canaan;" this will remind him of the need for servitude and submission When Noach said of his grandson כנען that ארור כנען עבד עבדים יהיה לאחיו, "Canaan is cursed he will be the slave of slaves to his brothers," we must ask ourselves why Noach did not say ארור יהיה כנען "Canaan will be cursed etc. (Genesis 9,25). Although a simple explanation would be that Canaan had already been cursed, i.e. he was polluted by the original serpent to whom G–d had said "you are cursed," we prefer to believe that Noach had something else in mind. In the future the name Canaan would be associated with those who submit to the will of G–d. This particular "Canaan" is distinguished by not being G–d's עבד, servant, but by being עבד עבדים, a servant of others who are themselves only servants. The servants Noach had in mind are the Jewish people. Canaan is destined to become a slave of the Jewish people.
  What we learn from all this is how careful we must be when we reside in a land that enjoys G–d's daily personal supervision. We must conduct ourselves submissively vis a vis G–d. King David expressed this sentiment when he said גר אנכי בארץ , "I am merely a stranger in the land (of Israel)" (Psalms 119,19) David considered himself as at most possessing the status of a stranger in that land. When G–d told Abraham in Genesis 15,13: "Know that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs,” we must ask why He added the words "in a land that is not theirs?" Is it not clear that one can only be a stranger in a land that one does not own? Rashi addresses this problem and says that this expression includes the times when Abraham's descendants would also at times be strangers in countries other than the land of Egypt, during the 400 years which start with the birth of Isaac. Other commentators see in this expression an allusion to the fact that Israel would reside in Goshen, i.e. not Egypt proper, the expression לא להם, referring to the Egyptians who did not "own" Goshen, seeing it had been given to Sarah by Pharaoh. Alternately, it could refer to the resettlement policy of the Egyptians which Joseph had initiated in Genesis 47,21, where Rashi explains that as a result none of the Egyptians themselves had a real claim to the land they were settled on It is clear in our context, that Abraham's descendants, i.e. Israel, were meant to become strangers and subsequently slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt. At a later stage in their history they would become strangers in their own country. This is why G–d emphasized that during these first four hundred years or part thereof they would be strangers in someone else's country. Afterwards they would be strangers just as David described himself as a stranger in ארץ ישראל. 
  The moral lesson is that just as strangers must not take for granted their right to live in their host country, so Jews must not take for granted their entitlement to the Holy Land not even after they have settled there. When our sages criticise Jacob of whom the Torah said: וישב יעקב בארץ כנען, "Jacob settled down in the land of Canaan," this is exactly what they had in mind. The fact that the Torah underlines in that very verse that Jacob's fathers had only sojourned there, only reinforces our sages' criticism (compare Genesis 37,1 and Bereshit Rabbah 84,1). An allusion to the fact that the tendency of Jews who display a vested interest in their residence in the Holy land can be counter-productive is found in the description of the land by the spies as ארץ אוכלת יושביה היא, "It is a land that consumes those who settle in it" (Numbers 13,32). This is expressed more forcefully in connection with someone selling his house in the Holy Land permanently. The Torah states clearly that the land cannot be sold permanently by ignoring the laws of return to the original owners in the Jubilee year, when G–d goes on record in Leviticus 25,23: כי גרים ותושבים אתם עמדי, "For you are strangers and settlers with Me." The moment Jews want to treat the Holy Land as the Gentiles treat their soil, i.e. for merely secular enjoyment, the land is liable to react by "consuming" those who presume to "own" it. The spies portrayed the land of Canaan in a derogatory manner and thus profaned something sacred; their mouthings had no effect on the land. The Torah has seen fit to quote their words in order to instill in us a positive teaching: 
  Anyone while dwelling in ארץ ישראל must take to heart the lesson that he must be like a stranger in that land; only in such a way will he merit his place in the World to Come. This is what is meant by Ketuvot 111 that anyone who walks a distance of four cubits in the Holy land is assured of his share in the Hereafter. The significance of the "four cubits" is that someone progresses within the ארבע אמות של הלכה; he who has made his guiding principle in life the adherence to Halachah will enjoy such a future. G–d Himself is described by our sages as having retained only the four cubits of Halachah on earth ever since the destruction of the Holy Temple (Berachot 8). A person who conducts himself in that fashion merits an abode in the ארץ ישראל העליונה, about which it is written ועמך כולם צדיקים לעולם יירשו ארץ, Your people are all righteous, they will inherit the earth forever" (Isaiah 60,21). The reference is to the Hereafter, a region "opposite" the ארץ ישראל on earth. G–d told Abraham these glad tidings when He said to him (Genesis 15,15) ואתה תבא אל אבותיך בשלום, תקבר בשיבה טובה, "And you will join your fathers in peace and be buried in a ripe old age." The word שלום refers to Abraham entering the World to Come immediately after his death on this earth, whereas the word טובה is an allusion that the earth, the country he will be buried in, is a "good" land, i.e. ארץ ישראל. The reason it is called "good" is that anyone buried in that land will be spared the wanderings of the bones of his body until they come to rest in ארץ ישראל (Ketuvot 111). All of the aforesaid was revealed to Abraham in the first recorded communication to him from G–d when he was seventy years old. We have previously referred to this period as ראשית הבריאה, the "beginning" of creation, i.e. the first "day."
  The second "day" followed later when G–d told Abraham to go to the land of Israel. This represented the fulfilment of the first part of G–d's promise. The extra letter ה in the description of יום הששי, refers to the day when Israel accepted the Torah at Mount Sinai.We are told in Avodah Zarah 9 that the two thousand years of "Torah" commence with the time that the Torah mentions Abraham and Sarah as having succeeded in converting people to monotheism, i.e. ואת הנפש אשר עשו בחרן (Genesis 12,5). [The foregoing is based on the tradition that mankind prior to the Messiah experiences three periods of 2000 years, the first period described as "Tohu," the second as "Torah," and the last as "days of the approach of the Messiah." Ed.] Abraham and Sarah respectively had proselytized, he the men and she the women. Abraham was 52 years old at that time. 
  When G–d told him: לך לך, "Go forth for yourself," this meant that he was to embark on a mission that would lead him to still higher spiritual awareness and perfection. Bereshit Rabbah 39,1 describes this command in the following parable quoted by Rabbi Yitzchak. We read in Psalms 45,12: שמעי בת וראי, והטי אזנך ושכחי עמך ובית אביך, "Take heed, lass, and note, incline your ear; forget your people and your father's house." Rabbi Yitzchak says that the verse can be understood as addressing itself to a person who wanders from town to town until he comes to a town that is ablaze. He exclaims that people will say that city surely has no leader. Thereupon the owner of that town takes a look at the wanderer and identifies himself. Before G–d addressed him, Abraham believed the earth [as distinct from heaven Ed.] to be without a supervisor. This is why G–d appeared to him in order to teach him that the earth is supervised. The quotation from Psalms 45,11 continues with the words: ויתאו המלך יפיך כי הוא אדוניך והשתחוי לו, "and let the king be aroused by your beauty; since he is your lord, bow down to him." Thus far the parable quoted by Rabbi Yitzchak.
  This parable has been interpreted by many commentators as meaning that Abraham progressed in his philosophical inquiry from one truth to another, i.e. "from town to town," until he perceived that there is indeed an overall force that guides the fates of men on earth and that this force had also created the universe out of nothing. How can we reconcile such an interpretation with the tradition quoted in Nedarim 32 that Abraham recognized his Creator at the age of three?! Surely he not only knew this but also many other relevant pieces of information about philosophical matters.
  We must therefore refer to the Zohar who explains on Genesis 11,31 (Sullam edition Lech Lecha page 11) in which the Torah reports Terach, Abraham, Lot and family as having left Ur Kasdim with the intention of moving to the land of Canaan, that the intention to move to Canaan sufficed for G–d to offer Abraham assistance. Up to that point Abraham's intellectual achievements in the field of philosophy had been unassisted. From this point on he received Divine guidance. The crucial factor in bringing about G–d's manifest involvement was that Abraham had made the first move. We learn from here that deeds in our world act as the catalyst that evokes heavenly responses. As soon as Abraham had demonstrated his intention to move to Canaan, G–d told him לך לך. We can apply the same to the ultimate redemption, i.e. until "black light" wakes up, "white light" will not be able to merge with it and suffuse it, i.e. restore the state of the world to what it had been prior to Adam's sin.. This is the message in Isaiah 62,6 that המזכירים את ה' אל דמי לכם, "when (you -the watchmen-) mention G–d, do not practice silence." The prophet cautions the watchmen that silent contemplation is not enough. Whenever man makes the first move towards Him G–d can be depended on to respond and lead man on to greater things. Thus far the Zohar.
  A further quote from the Zohar at the beginning of our פרשה (Sullam edition page 12) has Rabbi Elazar saying that the meaning of לך לך is that Abraham is asked to perfect himself further, that the move to the land of Canaan was for the sake of his spiritual advancement. The secret in that command was that G–d instilled in Abraham a spirit of wisdom which enabled him to understand which cosmic forces are active in which parts of the universe. [Expressed in Kabbalistic terms this means which emanations predominate in which happenings in the world. Ed.] 
  Abraham's previous journeys must be understood in the light of his search for the force that exercises central power in the universe. Every time he thought that he had located such a point, he found that he had been mistaken. He finally arrived at the conclusion that the land of Canaan was the area where all cosmic activity was centered and whence it emanated. This is what prompted his family's move in that direction. The reason he had stopped in Charan was that he had arrived at a point where he could make no further progress. He knew that cosmic mysteries lay beyond, but he could not penetrate them. This resulted in his intellectual progress being arrested, i.e. Charan symbolized the highest intellectual plateau an unassisted intellect could attain.
  The expressions מארצך, ממולדך, ומבית אביך, are references to perceptual boundaries that Abraham had encountered in his philosophical quest up to that point. They represented comprehension of the cosmos in astrological terms without taking into consideration that astrology is only part of the forces that activate our universe. [I have deliberately used my own words and summarized the comments of the Zohar. Ed.].
  Abraham had known for five years, ever since G–d had concluded the ברית בין הבתרים with him, that the land of Canaan was the Holy Land, and that since G–d had promised that land to him and to his descendants it must be a land in which קדושה resides. Basically, what he had come to appreciate was that holiness is not something totally abstract, but that a country which at first glance seems no different from any other country can still be the repository of holiness, sanctity. This is the reason Rabbi Yitzchak in his parable has the wanderer, i.e. Abraham, refer to that town as one that is ablaze. He means that it is lit up by the presence of G–d's spiritual force. Abraham, however, desired to acquire further spiritual insights without success. The reason Abraham failed to make further spiritual progress was that ארץ ישראל is under the immediate, direct control of G–d. Abraham's knowledge on the other hand, was restricted to cosmic forces which act as G–d's agents. They do not lead to the perception of the Essence of G–d, nor to the awareness that there are areas in this universe in which ordinary cosmic forces do not operate. 
  Once Abraham determined to locate in that land in the hope of exploring these mysteries further, G–d responded to his quest. He did so, in the words of the parable, by identifying Himself, by revealing Himself as the "owner" of that "town" to the extent that this is possible. G–d continued to reveal more and more about Himself until eventually, Abraham and his descendants after him became the מרכבה, "chariot," or carrier of G–d's entourage. Once they had attained that spiritual level, the שכינה, G–d's Presence, would rest over them. 
  This is the reason we refer to G–d in our daily prayers as אלוקי אברהם, אלוקי יצחק, ואלוקי יעקב. This is not strictly accurate. Is G–d not the G–d of all mankind? The patriarchs in their close attachment to G–d, have provided Him with a "throne" on earth. That is why we single out their names when we identify G–d.
  We can now understand why we are told in Ketuvot 110b that "anyone who resides outside the Holy Land is compared to someone who has no G–d, whereas anyone who resides in the Holy Land is comparable to someone who has a G–d." Why would the Talmud say that someone who resides in ארץ ישראל is only “compared” to someone who has a G–d? Surely he does have a G–d The first half of the statement quoted is not difficult, since, though of course, G–d is omnipresent, He is manifest only in the Holy Land. Therefore, the Talmud does not say that someone who resides in חוץ לארץ does not have a G–d, but that he only does not appear to have a G–d. However, the second half of that statement surely presents us with a problem? The answer lies in the very word דומה, used by the Talmud. This word can mean "is comparable,” but it could also mean "appears as", "it is apparent." The Talmud clearly uses the word in the latter sense. By living in the Holy Land, a person demonstrates (makes it apparent) that he thinks G–d's Presence there is manifest. He includes himself amongst those who wish to serve as a מרכבה for G–d.
  When G–d revealed Himself to Abraham at the ברית בין הבתרים, the Torah reports that He took Abraham "outside," showed him the stars, and challenged him to "count them" (Genesis 15,5). The Zohar (immediately following the part we have quoted previously), states, that this verse means that Abraham was told to free himself from the limitations which his astrological studies up to that point in his life had imposed upon him. When G–d asked him at the beginning of chapter 12 to leave his father's house, the message is that "as long as you adhere to part of your traditional philosophy you will not achieve further philosophical/spiritual success. In order to gain further insights, you must go אל הארץ אשר אראך, to the land I will show you." G–d told him that he would not be able to make this "Aliyah" under his own steam. [Why else would G–d need to show Abraham the way to a land in which he Himself had revealed Himself to Abraham already five years earlier? Ed.] The promise ואעשך לגוי גדול is the reason we say in our daily prayers that G–d is אלוקי אברהם; the word ואברכך is the reason we say אלוקי יצחק; the words ואגדלה שמך, is the reason we recite אלוקי יעקב. The final words in that verse והיה ברכה, are equivalent to a signature, and that is why we conclude the first benediction in our daily עמידה prayer with the words מגן אברהם.
  On the difference between the מרכבה on earth and the מרכבה in the Celestial Regions: One must appreciate that just as there is a carrier of G–d's Presence here on earth, so there is a parallel carrier, מרכבה in the heavenly regions. This is alluded to in Song of Songs 3,10 ומרכבו ארגמן, "its carrier was purple red," and in Song of Songs 6,12 where we find: מרכבות עמי נדיב, "amid chariots of Ami Nadiv.” We will first explain what is meant by the "purple red carrier," and later, with G–d's help, the meaning of the words מרכבות עמי נדיב. The land of Israel and the Holy Temple have their counterparts in the Heavenly Regions. The Holy Temple consists of a Sanctuary called קדש, holy, as well as an inner sanctuary, קדשי קדשים, Holiest of Holies, and we find an altar outside the Sanctuary as well as a golden altar inside the Sanctuary close to the Inner Sanctum. Both altars were square seeing the Torah describes them as such i.e. רבוע יהיה (Exodus 27,1). Because the Torah has given the exact dimensions of the altars, the statement "it shall be square," seems superfluous. We understand it therefore as an allusion to the heavenly counterparts of these furnishings of the Sanctuary, each one of which is also four-cornered representing four celestial armies headed by the angels רפאל, גבריאל, מיכאל, and נוריאל. The word ארגמ"ן is an acronym composed of the first letters respectively of the angels heading these four armies plus the letter א meaning the One and Only, i.e. G–d. He, of course is the One, who is "carried," i.e. supported by these four armies.
  מיכאל represents the attribute of Mercy, uniquely associated with Abraham who is known as an exponent of G–d's kindness, חסד, as we know from Michah 7,20 "who gives kindness to Abraham". גבריאל is the angel in charge of גבורה, the attribute of justice, something Isaac was the prime exponent of, as we know from Genesis 31,42. נוריאל also known as אוריאל to Kabbalists, is in charge of the emanation תפארת which combines the attributes of חסד and גבורה. He is called אור-יאל, inasmuch as he represents חסד, i.e. אור, and נור-יאל, inasmuch as he represents the aspect of גבורה. This latter is an attribute in which G–d appears as a consuming fire, therefore the אור of חסד is turned into נור. There are those who understand the letter א in the acronym ארגמ"ן as an allusion to the dual name of that angel. At any rate, the five letters in that acronym symbolize four camps or armies; רפאל, as the angel in charge of the emanation מלכות, which "receives" from the three aforementioned ones, [seeing that מלכות is the "lowest” of the emanations, the one closest to our physical domain, the word "receives" may mean that it is the recipient of the input of the higher emanations. Ed.]. So much for the meaning of ארגמ"ן.
  Although all the patriarchs have been described as the מרכבה, they are all included when Abraham is mentioned; he, being the "father" of them all, represents them also. This is the reason that the first benediction in the daily עמידה prayer concludes with the signature מגן אברהם, "shield of Abraham." The term "shield" is used to describe those who support the מרכבה, namely חסד, גבורה, תפארת. This too is the deeper meaning of the words (15, 1) אנכי מגן לך שכרך הרבה מאד, "I am your shield, your reward is very great." Malki Tzedek, king of Shalem, alludes to something similar in Bereshit (14, 19-20): ויברכהו, ויאמר: ברוך אברם לא-ל עליון קונה שמים וארץ וברוך א-ל עליון אשר מגן צריך בידך. "He blessed him saying: Blessed be Abraham of G–d Most High, Owner of Heaven and Earth. And blessed be G–d Most High, who has delivered your foes into your hand." The Zohar on that verse understands this as a reference to the daily עמידה prayer when we say very similar sounding words in the first benediction. If one examines the composition of that benediction closely one can view the words אלוקי אברהם, אלוקי יצחק, אלוקי יעקב as corresponding to the words ברוך אברהם. The words א-ל עליון גומל חסדים טובים correspond to the words וברוך א-ל עליון. The words קונה הכל corresponds to Malki Tzedek's words קונה שמים וארץ. We find similar wording in the repetition of the Friday night עמידה. Finally, the signature of that first benediction of the daily עמידה is מגן אברהם, corresponding to the last words in Malki Tzedek's blessing אשר מגן צריך בידך. It is true that we also encounter the formula in מגן דוד, "shield of David." The difference is that whereas מגן אברהם includes the other carriers of the מרכבה as we have explained, David is the recipient of the foregoing including the parts of the מרכבה that Abraham comprises, seeing that he, David, personifies מלכות. As such David provides the "fourth leg" of that four- cornered מרכבה that we have described as the מרכבה ארג"מן. At any rate, the significance of the promise to Abraham in 12,2 והיה ברכה, "be a blessing," is that בך חותמים, "they will conclude the benediction using your name," is clear. We shall come back later to the meaning of מגן דוד.
  The words ונברכו בך כל משפחות האדמה, "Through you all the families of the earth will be blessed" (12,3), mean that after Abraham follows G–d's directive and immigrates to the land of Canaan, thereby personally accumulating merits in that land, these merits will also devolve on all other families of the earth, seeing that the land of Canaan is the source from which G–d's bounty is dispensed to all of mankind, in the case of the seventy nations or countries through their respective representatives, שרים, at the Celestial Court. The respective שרים, are viewed like the branches of a tree that expand beyond the fence within which the trunk is situated. The expression that the Torah employs, i.e. ונברכו, is based on the expression בריכת האילן, (placing a shoot into the earth to propagate a tree).
  Concerning the interval of a year until such shoots take root, or, allegorically, until Abraham's physical transplantation to the land of Canaan is reflected in his entry into the ארץ ישראל העליון, the celestial counterpart of the land of Israel, the Torah goes on to say in 12,6: וירא ה' אל אברם ויאמר לזרעך אתן את הארץ הזאת, ויבן שם מזבח לה' הנראה אליו. "G–d appeared to Abram saying: To your descendants I shall give this land. He (Abram) built an altar there for the G–d who had appeared to him." Why does the Torah in this instance preface G–d's appearance with the words וירא ה' ויאמר, something that we do not find in 12,1? 
  Another difficulty is why does the Torah add the words הנראה אליו, "who appeared to him," in verse 6? Would it not have been sufficient to tell us that "Abraham erected an altar to G–d?" A simple way of answering this difficulty is that it represents a compliment of the Torah to Abraham who did not build the altar as an act of gratitude for the physical gift/promise of the land and the promise that he would have offspring, but that he built the altar to give thanks for the very fact that he had been found worthy of a private vision of G–d.
  In accordance with our method of explaining such nuances in the text, however, we see in this an act of gratitude by Abraham for having achieved deeper insights into the workings of G–d and His universe than he had been able to achieve before entering and settling in the land of Canaan. The Zohar on our verse comments that the new dimension of insight revealed to Abraham here was that G–d rules over earth, and this is why he could now understand matters that had remained hidden from him previously. He therefore built an altar, having noted that although the Torah describes the cursed Canaan as appearing to predominate in the land, (12,6) it was G–d who ruled it.
  Rabbi Eliyah Mizrachi explains Hagar's experience and her comments in 16, 13/14 in a similar way. The Torah says: ותקרא שם ה' הדובר אליה אתה א-ל ראי כי אמרה הגם הלום ראיתי אחרי רואי. "She called the Lord who spoke to her 'You are El-ro ee,’ by which she meant: 'have I not gone on seeing after He saw me'!" Hagar had entertained doubts about what she saw in her vision. She was not sure whether it had been an angel of G–d, i.e. a spiritual light, or whether what she had seen was merely physical light. She became convinced that it had to be spiritual light, since one cannot see two successive bursts of physical light, for one is so blinded by a burst of strong physical light that one becomes unable to perceive further visions of light. [Our editions of the commentary of Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi do not have this comment, at least not in connection with 16, 13. Ed.] The altar Abraham built alludes to the square altar that I have described earlier and to the fact that Abraham moved from "his birthplace and his father's house," both of which are hyperboles for the philosophies that he had acquired in his original environment as described by the Zohar as the meaning of ויוצא אותו החוצה, "He took him outside” (15,5).
  On 12,6 "Abraham traversed the land," Rashi comments נכנס לתוכה, "he entered into it." This is most appropriate, since Abraham began to understand the inner significance of ארץ ישראל. Later on we read in 12, 10 that Abraham descended (into Egypt) and subsequently (13, 1) that he ascended from Egypt. The Torah teaches that one does not recognise the advantage of light over darkness until one has experienced the latter. This was Abraham's experience in Egypt, [when he came from Charan his arrival in the land of Canaan is described only as "Abraham went…..they came to the land of Canaan (12,4/5), not a word about an עליה, an ascent. Ed.]. Egypt was considered a secondary מרכבה, as is alluded to in Genesis 41,43 when Joseph rides in מרכבת המשנה, "Pharaoh's number two state coach." Our sages understand these words as referring to the fact that next to the land of Israel, Egypt serves as an alternate מרכבה for G–d's Presence. The Zohar (Sullam edition Parshat Mikeitz page 23) describes it thus: G–d has a מרכבה עליונה and a מרכבה תחתונה. The latter one is called מרכבת המשנה, "the secondary carrier." Abraham utilized all the great wisdom he had acquired while he was in Egypt. Afterwards he ascended "southward" (13,1). Our sages have taught us the principle that "anyone who wishes to acquire wisdom should turn southward" (Baba Batra 28). Thus when Abraham returned to the "South" of the land of Canaan he began to learn the "real" wisdom, an appreciation of Jewish theology. It was then that he began to appreciate the real advantage of spiritual light over spiritual darkness.
  On that subject, the Zohar (Sullam edition Lech-Lecha page 44) comments on 12,11: ויהי כאשר הקריב אברם לבא מצרימה, "It was when Abram came close to arriving in Egypt," that the word the Torah should have used for approaching is קרב. Why then did the Torah use the word הקריב? The answer is that the Torah used an expression it uses about Pharaoh in Exodus 14, 10 when the latter was in hot pursuit of the Israelites. Pharaoh caused Israel to become ready to repent when they realised the immediate danger Pharaoh's pursuit posed for them. This is the meaning of the causative form הקריב. In Abraham's case too, his experiences in Egypt brought him closer to G–d, seeing that all his calculations about protecting himself and Sarah had not prevented her from being taken to the King's palace to become his concubine. Abraham took a closer look at the inadequacies of the Egyptian culture and separated himself from that culture.
  In view of the additional insights that we have described Abraham as having acquired, it is difficult to understand how he could allow a wicked person such as Lot to remain in his company. The Zohar answers this simply by saying that Abraham foresaw that David would be a descedant of Lot and that this is why he did not want to do something that might prevent such a development. We need to understand how David is relevant to what transpired here.
  First we must know what Nachmanides has written on the subject of the Torah's reports about our patriarchs' experiences. On 12,6"Abraham traversed the land," Nachmanides writes as follows: Let me tell you a general principle that applies to all the stories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, something that our sages expressed very concisely when they said מעשה אבות סימן לבנים, that "the experiences of the patriarchs foreshadowed the experiences of the Jewish people later on." This is the principal reason the Torah spends so much time on telling us of the journeys, the digging of wells and similar details in the lives of the patriarchs. Those who ponder these details think at first glance that these stories are superfluous and do not serve a useful purpose. Actually, all these events foreshadow events in the future. When these events occur to a prophet in the future they will be understood as something that had been decreed by G–d a long time ago during the lives of the Patriarchs as ordained to happen to their descendants. Whereas during the lives of the Patriarchs these were merely potential happenings in the history of the descendants, they became reality in their respective eras by means of the prophets. This is why the prophets performed certain deeds such as Jeremiah (51,63) ordering Baruch to tie his book to a stone and upon having finished reading it to throw it into the river Euphrates. He added that that act symbolized the descent of the Jewish people into the Babylonian exile. A similar reason prompted Elisha in Kings II 13, 17 when he told King Joash to take a bow and shoot arrows, an arrow of victory for the Lord, an arrow of victory over Aram. Subsequently, Elisha told the king to strike the ground with the arrows. The king did so, but only three times. Elisha was very angry and told him that if he had struck the ground five or six times this would have resulted in the king annihilating Aram in battle totally, but now, Israel would prove victorious over Aram in three wars only. G–d made Abraham experience certain things in the land of Israel in order that these experiences might serve as the forerunners of the later experiences of the Jewish people. [Rabbi Chavell in his commentary on Nachmanides points out that it was not Baruch but the ministers who had been commanded to throw the book into the river. Ed.]
  On the verse "There was famine in the land" (12,10), Nachmanides writes as follows: Abraham descended to Egypt on account of the famine, in order to spend some time there to keep alive during the drought, and the Egyptians oppressed him by robbing him of his wife. G–d took revenge on them by striking them with great afflictions and G–d led Abraham out from there with livestock, silver and gold. Pharaoh even ordered his men to make sure that Abraham would depart. Abraham's experience was repeated when Jacob and family descended to Egypt to escape the famine in Canaan, when they were eventually oppressed and the Egyptians separated them from their wives. The Israelites were eventually liberated but only after the Egyptians had been smitten with many plagues. Everything that their patriarch Abraham experienced, his descendants experienced on a national scale. The whole matter is explained by Rabbi Pinchas in the name of Rabbi Oshiyah in Bereshit Rabbah 40,6 who has G–d tell Abraham that he should pave the way for his descendants, and that as a result you find that Abraham's experiences foreshadowed those of his descendants. Example: Abraham experienced famine and moved to Egypt; Joseph told his father Israel that there would be five more years of famine (Genesis 45,6).
  On 14,1 Nachmanides writes that the whole occurrence was to teach Abraham that there would be four empires that would rule the earth at different times, but that ultimately Abraham's descendants would prevail over them all and that all their property would be restored to Israel. The first such empire would be the Babylonian Empire, as we know from Daniel 2,38: "to whom He has given dominion over them all -you are the head of gold." Possibly the name of the king Elassar, (14,1) corresponds to a town in Persia by the same name. King "Eylam" may be the name of a town in Greece also. He may have been the first king of that empire, Darius being a later one after the empire expanded. [There are some confusing versions here as to who is who, seeing that Darius was a king of the Medes. This does not matter in our context. Ed.] There is a view among our sages that this king ruled for six years in Eylam before ruling the whole civilized world. The name “מלך גויים" refers to a variety of kings appointed by the king of Eylam as his deputies in different parts of his empire. There is a hint here of the method of the Romans who appointed governors in different parts of their empire. Similar views are expressed in Bereshit Rabbah 42,2 by Rabbi Avin who claims that since the chapter opens with four kingdoms (the problems of Abraham), so his descendants also will suffer at the hands of four kingdoms. [Rabbi Avin, as do others, assumes that the campaign against Sodom was really intended as a campaign against Abraham, and that his involvement was not quite voluntary. Ed.] Rabbi Avin sees in Amrafel king of Shinor a reference to Babylon, in Aryach king of Elassar (a reference) to the Empire of the Medes, in Kedor-Leomer king of Eylam a reference to the Greek Empire, and in Tidal king of "Goyim," (a reference) to the present exile since it comprises numerous kingdoms all of which exercise dominion over the Jewish people. The king "Bela" is called so because he ruled only over a small city with few inhabitants. Thus far Nachmanides' comment. His words are truly those of a wise man. Abraham's experiences foreshadow both the bondage in Egypt and the redemption that was to follow. Later, it foreshadowed Jewish exile (after the destruction of the Temple) and finally the Redemption at the hands of the משיח בן דוד, the Messiah son of David, a descendant of Lot.
  On 13,5: וגם ללוט ההולך את אברם היו צאן ובקר ואהלים "Also Lot who went with Abram possessed sheep, cattle, and tents." In Bereshit Rabbah 41,4 Rabbi Tuviah comments that the tents mentioned refer to Ruth the Moabite and Naomi the Ammonite. This is also why later on in Genesis 19, 15 the angels urge Lot to take "your wife and your two daughters הנמצאות, i.e. "who will have an enduring existence, i.e. they will be two tents." Rabbi Yossi says the word הנמצאות, is equivalent to מציאות, finds. The two finds are Ruth and Naomi. Rabbi Yitzchak portrays G–d as saying "I have found My servant David." Where did G–d find him? In Sodom. 
  Rabbi Tuviah interprets the words "tents" as referring to two women since the place of women is in the tents. Rabbi Yitzchak also understands the verse in that sense although he draws his inference from the word הנמצאות. Perhaps this is also the inference to be drawn from the Torah's report about the exploits of the four kings. As soon as they had captured Lot, they went on their way, i.e. 11 ,14) ויקחו את לוט … וילכו). Although the four kings had never set eyes on Ruth and Naomi they had seen through their horoscopes the role that Lot's issue would play in the history of the Jewish people, and their prime purpose became to prevent the emergence of a Jewish people and thus to frustrate the concept of the Messiah and what he represents. This is the reason why Abraham set out immediately to rescue Lot and to pursue those kings and their armies. He also rescued the king of Sodom and his people in the process, seeing that in Messianic times even the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah will be restored, something we know on the authority of Ezekiel 16,53-55. 
  When Bereshit Rabbah 41,6 says that the facial features of Lot resembled those of Abraham, what they mean is that just as Abraham was a spiritual giant among men, i.e. אדם, so the numerical value of the letters in the name לוט add up to 45=אדם. We have repeatedly set out that the word אדם is an acronym for אדם-דוד-משיח. Lot wanted to take possession of the land of Israel prematurely, believing himself to be Abraham's heir, as explained by Rashi on 13,7. Since Abraham, however, had not yet acquired that land, seeing the Torah described it as belonging to the Canaanite and the Perisite at that time, this proved impossible. Lot thought that Canaan being cursed however, could not possibly claim legal title to the land. Actually, at that time Lot was also in the category of someone who is cursed since the word לוט is also an expression of לטותא, the Aramaic word for "curse." Even though his facial features may have resembled those of Abraham, he was like an ape i.e. only similar when compared to אדם but not a real אדם. Only at the coming of the Messiah will Lot's facial resemblance become translated into the equivalent of אדם.
  We find a clear allusion to this in 13,9 where Abraham says to Lot: "Is not the whole land before you, separate yourself from me; if to the Left, I will go to the Right, and if to the Right, I will go to the Left." The meaning of the verse is that Abraham asks Lot why he quarrels needlessly, seeing there will be a time when he will have the entire land to choose from and does not now need to take things before they are ripe. When would that time come? At the time the kingdom of David will be established, seeing that David is descended from Ruth. That same Ruth had said to her mother-in-law Naomi "only death will part us" (Ruth 1,17). Abraham meant the same thing when he spoke to Lot about הפרד נא מעלי, "please separate from me." According to Rabbi Yitzchak Arama in his commentary on Ruth, the latter made a very significant statement, namely that when members of the other nations die, that does not create a disparity among them because all of them proceed towards an eternal void. Since every Jewish person however has a share in the world to come, death creates a disparity amongst them, seeing their shares in that World To Come are not the same. Bamidbar Rabbah 21,22 comments that any bridegroom who is "greater" than his fellow-bridegroom will be burned by the fire G–d provides for the wedding canopy of the other, [a penalty for being envious of somebody else's status, see Baba Batra 75. The whole discussion is about G–d bestowing honor on the righteous in the world of the future. Ed.]. Thus we see that not everyone's share in the World To Come is equal. Hence the division between people will occur when they die and move to different parts of a new world.
  Abraham hinted to Lot later that there is an ארץ ישראל העליונה, a spiritual equivalent to the terrestrial land of Israel, as we know from Sanhedrin 90 based on Isaiah 60,21: "Your people are all righteous, they will inherit an eternal land." Abraham hinted to Lot that both he and Lot would qualify for that future and that they would both reside in Heaven close to G–d. Yalkut Shimoni on Psalms 110,1: The Lord said to my lord "sit on my right side while I make your enemies your footstool," quotes Rabbi Yudon saying that in the future G–d will seat the Messiah on His Right and Abraham on His Left, and that Abraham will feel aggrieved at being assigned the left saying "how can my grandson be assigned the right side while I have to be content with the left side?" G–d will placate him saying: "Your grandson sits on My right, whereas I sit on your right side, וענותך תרבני, "and Your providence has made me great" (based on Samuel II 22,36). Thus far the Yalkut. 
  Here we have Abraham prophesying that both he and Lot would sit next to G–d, but he did not know who would sit on which side of G–d until the time came. This is the deeper meaning of Abraham saying to Lot that one of them would find himself on the Left whereas the other would find himself on the Right. This also explains why the word ve-eyminah is not punctuated with the vowel patach under the letter aleph as we would have expected, seeing that is the vowel used under the word ve-assme-ilah. Although Rashi says that we have a similar construction in Samuel II 14, 19, the fact is that when the vowel tzeyre is used it indicates an immediate activity. 
  The message in our case is that Abraham's entire striving from then on was to achieve a position on the right side of G–d. He constantly moved in a spiritually "southward" direction, i.e. striving to come closer to G–d. This is expressed in the Torah by the words 12,9) הלוך ונסוע הנגבה). He achieved his goal: though he sat on G–d's left side, G–d portrayed Himself as sitting on Abraham's right side. Performance of acts of kindness, charity, hospitality, etc. are all expressions of drawing people near with one's right hand, i.e. a symbolic way of expressing one's desire to sit on the right side of G–d. All of the Messiah's eventual accomplishments are merely an extension of a process that Abraham had set in motion, a process of drawing near to G–d. This is the reason that Psalm 110 which the Yalkut quoted commences with words indicating that G–d invites Abraham to sit on His right, meaning that since Abraham had activated G–d's "right," the position of David (the Messiah on G–d's right side) is due to Abraham's accomplishments.
  David is the fourth leg of the Divine carrier, מרכבה. This is the innermost secret of the emanation מלכות, seeing it corresponds to the fourth letter ה of the Ineffable Name. It represents both the mystique of ד, inasmuch as it is the fourth letter of G–d's name, as well as the mystique of ה, inasmuch as that fourth letter is the letter ה. Berachot 51 states in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that when one recites a blessing over wine the cup must have been washed outside, inside, be full and be potent, i. e. conform to four criteria, הדחה, שטיפה, חי, מלא, the first letters of those criteria spell חמשה, five. This is a reference to David (who in the Talmud is always portrayed as pronouncing the benediction over the cup of wine), and the Messiah as the Kabbalists have pointed out. The letter ד symbolizes minimal bounty (since דלת means door, i.e. a closed door). The ה on the other hand symbolizes something open, and also the shape of the letter suggests that something is open. Actually the shape of the letter ה is a combination of the shapes of the letters ד and ו. The latter being within the former suggests that the time will come when the light of the moon will equal the light of the sun, i.e. when the דו פרצופים, the “two faced” appearance will be restored. Something similar is in the offing now. Abraham found out that the kingdom of David will be relatively insignificant i.e. ד, and sandwiched between 5 exiles (one in Egypt). In the end however, the four countries which had dominion over us after David will all be swept away forever by Abraham's descendants. When we hear about the five kings of Sodom against the four kings with Kedorleomer, this is a preview of how four will be conquered by five in that rosy future, since we have seen that Sodom will be restored because G–d made a find, i.e. he found Ruth as a seed of Lot.
  Let us now get back to our previous statement that when at the beginning of our פרשה G–d asked Abraham to move to the land of Canaan and promised possession of that land to him and his descendants, this was already the second time G–d promised him ארץ ישראל, the first time having been five years earlier at the ברית בין הבתרים. The first promise corresponded to the "first" part of Creation; the second promise was in respect of the "second" part of Creation, i.e the period in history that represents "Torah." That period commenced with the verse telling us that Abraham and Sarah had "made souls in Charan," i.e. had converted pagans to the belief in the One and Only G–d who created the universe (12,5). We have explained the principle that Abraham represents the סוד (real reason) for the creation of the universe as alluded to in the spelling of בהבראם. When G–d speaks about making Abraham's name "great" in 12,2, using the expression ואגדל-ה, this is an allusion to the addition of that letter ה to his name אברם, the way his name would have been spelled in Genesis 2,4 without the "small" letter ה. G–d tells אברם in 12,5 that when in the future he would be ready to be circumcised (17,5) his name would be changed to אברהם.
  Another important allusion to be found in the word ואגדלה is the assurance that this universe would endure, i.e. that Abraham is the guarantee that this would be so. The word ואגדלה contains the six first letters of the א-ב, six letters corresponding to the six days of Creation. Although the letter ל in ואגדלה, seems to contradict this allusion, we shall explain this. 
  [The author constructs an intricate framework of allusions. Suffice it to say that just as the first letter of Creation i.e. the Torah's report, is ב, a letter indicating division, (the opposite of unity), so the last letter in the Torah (לעיני כל ישראל) is a ל indicating the שלום prevailing in the world of the future. If Abram's name were really to be "great," that letter had to be included in the promise ואגדלה. Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  
  We now come to the third and final "day" or stage of Creation. We refer to the period when the handiwork of G–d will undergo complete rejuvenation to finally correspond to the Creator's hopes, the time of which the prophet has proclaimed: ישמח ה' במעשיו "G–d will rejoice in His works." At that time the ירושלים של מעלה will be revealed as being "opposite" the ירושלים של מטה, the former together with the letter symbolized by the covenant of circumcision, i.e. the performance of both מילה and פריעה which together represent the union of ציון, spiritual Jerusalem, and ירושלים, terrestrial Jerusalem. At that time Abraham will emerge as having attained his ultimate spiritual perfection, i.e. he will serve as both the terrestrial and the celestial מרכבה. Whereas at the point of לך לך in his career he had been merely the מרכבה described as ארגמן, he will have qualified by that time to become the מרכבה described as מרכבות עמי נדיב.
  Kabbalists have explained that the name אברהם contains an allusion to the מרכבה of the four חיות, described as supporting the throne of G–d in the first chapter of Ezekiel. They are אדם-אריה-שור-נשר. The שור was turned into a כרוב, cherub, after Ezekiel asked G–d to have mercy on that חיה according to Chagigah 13. The reason was that the shape or face of the שור would have reminded G–d of the Jewish people's sin with the golden calf. Therefore we find that the מרכבה described in Ezekiel consisted of אדם-כרוב-נשר-אריה. When you take the name אברהם, the letter א refers to G–d, that He is One who "rides" on His מרכבו, i.e. on בר"הם, which are the final letters כרוב, נשר, אריה, אדם. The word נדיב in Song of Songs 6, 12 alludes to that מרכבה when we employ a method called אבגד. (This means that we take the first letter of the word נשר, the second letter of the word אדם, the third letter of the word אריה, and the fourth letter of the word כרוב). Who is this Nediv? It is none other than אברהם אבינו who is the subject of Psalms 47, 10: נדיבי עמים נאספו עם אלוקי אברהם, "The great of the peoples are gathered together, the retinue of Abraham’s G–d. When our sages comment on Genesis 17,22: ויעל אלוקים מעל אברהם, "G–d "rose" from above Abraham," they had in mind that the patriarchs were the מרכבה, G–d's entourage, (Bereshit Rabbah 47,6).
  I have found additional allusions to my claim that Abraham was the end-purpose of Creation and that Creation, i.e. בריאה, is under the aegis of the name אלוקים, in a number of places in the commentary of the Zohar, when he discusses the deeper meaning of the words מי and מה respectively when used in connection with Creation. Isaiah 40,26 says: שאו מרום עיניכם וראו מי ברא אלה, "Raise up your eyes high and behold who has created all these?" We also find in Psalms 8,4: כי אראה שמיך מעשה אצבעתיך … ה' אדונינו מה אדיר שמך בכל הארץ, "When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fingers,…O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name throughout the earth!" The word מה also appears in connection with G–d's Creation in מה רבו מעשיך ה' כולם בחכמה עשית, "How many are the things You have made, O Lord, You have made them all with wisdom" (Psalms 104,24). In the Zohar a great deal more attention is paid to the deeper meaning of the word מי, than to that of the word מה. 
  A great deal of attention also is paid to the meaning of the word ברא. This word with the letters reversed i.e. אבר, is considered as a limb, or better, link to what are called תולדות עליון, "developments having their root in the spiritual and abstract sphere of the heavens," such as are implied by the verse אלה תולדות השמים והארץ. When combining the word מי and the word אלה, we get the word אל-הים, or the answer to the question מי ברא אלה. Now we see how to understand the word ברא as a link, i.e. as אבר, as the "organ" that procreates or initiates creation of a physical universe. Since this process cannot continue endlessly, G–d also functions as the One who commands די, "enough." Hence one of G–d's names is שדי, "the One who says enough!" We have explained on another occasion that the emanation יסוד symbolizing the covenant מעור, is called שדי, and this is why G–d introduces Himself to Abraham when He commands him to circumcise himself as אני א-ל שדי. Coming back to the "small" letter ה in the verse אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם, which we had taken as an allusion to the world having been created for the sake of Abraham, we find that the letters ברא-אבר, when combined with the word מה, result in the word אברהם Keep in mind that the spiritual level represented by the word מי is superior to the spiritual level of the word מה; the former resulted in the attribute of G–d as אלוקים the Creator, whereas the word מה only triggered the appearance of this gigantic human figure called Abraham.
  Summing up, we find that the paragraph dealing with circumcision contains three great gifts 1) The kingdom of David will endure forever. 2) The gift of the land of Israel to the Jewish people will be a permanent possession of the people. 3) The Presence of G–d will rest visibly over the people and the land of Israel. Concerning the first promise Abraham is told ומלכים ממך יצאו והקמותי את בריתי, "kings will come forth from you; and I will maintain My covenant" (17,5). Correspondingly, we find in connection with the dynasty of David: כרתי ברית לבחירי, נשבעתי לדוד עבדי, עד עולם אכין, זרעך ובניתי לדור ודור כסאך סלה, "I have made a covenant with My chosen one; I have sworn to My servant David. I will establish your offspring forever, I will confirm your throne for all generations selah” (Psalms 89 4/5). Concerning giving the land of Israel to Abraham's descendants, G–d said: ונתתי לך ולזרעך אחריך את ארץ מגורך … לאחוזת עולם, "I will give to you and to your descendants after you the whole land of Canaan the land you sojourn in, as an eternal possession" (17,8). This means that even while we are in exile, the land will never be an inheritance of our enemies, but they will only be there on a temporary basis since it will be desolate while they occupy it. Once we shall return to it as an eternal possession the Presence of the שכינה will become manifest, and there will be fulfilled the last line of G–d's promise to Abraham "I shall be their G–d."
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  The Zohar in the part of its commentary called סתרי תורה, explains the entire פרשה as describing the relationship between body and soul. Abraham represents the mystique of the soul, whereas Sarah represents the mystique of a pure body, and Lot represents the body in which the evil urge predominates. The commentary is extensive. Rabbi Yitzchak Arama, author of עקדת יצחק, also touches on that allegory (when he sees in the king of Sodom's offer to Abraham of the material part of the booty, whereas the king claimed the נפש), an allusion to Abraham being asked to "sell" his soul in return for material goods. [See this Editor's translation of the Akeidat Yitzchak end of chapter 16]. It is a great מצוה to draw one's relatives close to one. We must learn this from Abraham's selfless conduct in liberating Lot.
  From the line הנה נא ידעתי כי אשה יפת מראה את, "Here I know (now) that you are a very attractive looking woman," we learn that Abraham was so chaste that up to that point he had remained unaware of Sarah's physical attractiveness. This quality of chastity is most inspiring.
  And Abraham was very wealthy with livestock, silver, and gold, and he went on his journeys." We have explained earlier that "his journeys" are spiritual journeys, that he advanced to ever higher spiritual plateaus. The moral lesson here is that his growing material wealth did not interfere with his spiritual growth which continued unabated.
  One must make great efforts to avoid personal strife. If a quarrel is in the offing, one must immediately strive to remove the cause of such quarrel, as our sages said in Sanhedrin 7 when commenting on Proverbs 17,14: פוטר מים ראשית מדון, "Starting a quarrel is like opening a sluice." Abraham demonstrated this virtue when he said to Lot: "let there not develop a quarrel between us." I detect a special meaning in Abraham employing the feminine form for the word strife, i.e. מריבה, although the Torah had already reported a "strong" quarrel, ריב, having occurred between their respective shepherds (Genesis 13,7). Abraham considered מריבה as a development of ריב. He considered the "fruit" of ריב to be מריבה. The latter word is akin to מתרבה, "constantly increasing." Since women produce children, he used the female form of the word ריב, i.e מריבה, in order to allude to the peculiarity of quarrels which keep increasing. He viewed ריב as something masculine, unable to give birth.
  Another important moral lesson to be learned from our פרשה is that one should not derive material benefit from miracles. We have several examples in the Talmud, such as Taanit 24 and Shabbat 53, of people either rejecting sudden wealth due to a miracle, or criticism of someone who needed to accept the miracle in order to nurse a baby who had lost its mother in childbirth. The very fact that G–d needs to interfere with natural law to provide sustenance for someone implies some criticism of the person for whom such a miracle had to be performed. This is why Abraham rejected the spoils of his war against Kedarlaomer. Did Abraham prefer that G–d would make it rain silver and gold for him from heaven that he rejected the "gift" of the King of Sodom as not befitting to him? Of course, nothing is further from the truth. We know that Abraham had previously accepted gifts from Pharaoh (12,15). When the cause for sudden wealth is plausible, it is perfectly acceptable to accept and use such wealth. Abraham considered his victory in that war [with his 318 men against the four mightiest armies of that era] as so miraculous that the spoils were not a plausible way for G–d to provide for him.
  Man must give thanks for whatever worldly goods G–d steers in his direction, since on the basis of his deeds he personally is not entitled to G–d's bounty. Our livelihood, be it ample or of subsistence level, is an act of צדקה, charity, for us by G–d.
  
  Vayera
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named הר המוריה – the significance of Mount Moriah.
  The paragraph commencing with "G–d appeared to him," until the angels had eaten, describes the commandment of being hospitable to guests, though it is not numbered as one of the 613 commandments. It is a subsection of the general positive commandment והלכת בדרכיו, "you shall walk in His ways." 
  This is the way the סמ"ג describes the commandment as number seven in his list of positive commandments. "One must walk in His good straightforward paths, seeing that the Torah says והלכת בדרכיו, as well as אחרי ה' אלוקיכם תלכו (Deut 13,5), which is interpreted in the Talmud Sotah 14a as a reference to G–d's virtues. Just as G–d provides clothing for the naked, since the Torah says: 'G–d made leather aprons for Adam and his wife and He clothed them,' G–d also visits the sick, as we know from the beginning of this פרשה. G–d comforts the mourners as we know from Genesis 25,11: 'After the death of Abraham G–d blessed Isaac.' G–d also buries the dead, as we know from Deut. 34,6: 'He buried him (Moses) in the valley in the land of Moab.' This is the way I explained the contents of this paragraph to the scholars of Spain. You should know the G–d of your fathers, and serve Him, for just as He is gracious and merciful, so you should be gracious and merciful. Just as He performs acts of kindness, justice and charity on earth, so should you. You have two examples. In Jeremiah 22,15 it is reported of King Josiah that 'he ate, drank and performed justice and righteousness, whereupon all was well with him. Then he judged the poor and the needy, and all was well with him. That is truly heeding Me, says the Lord.' We have another verse in Jeremiah 9,22: 'Thus said the Lord: Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom; let not the strong man glory in his strength…but only in this should one glory; in his earnest devotion to Me, For I the Lord act with kindness, justice and equity in the world; for in these I delight, says the Lord." Thus far the סמ"ג.
  It is obvious to me that the מצוה of being hospitable to guests, (which is certainly included in the overall commandment to follow in G–d's footsteps), represents an additional virtue. The Torah has singled out this story of Abraham personally performing chores to entertain these strangers. It also alludes to the reward accruing to him, i.e. that everything he did personally for these guests, G–d later on personally did for Abraham's descendants, whereas whatever Abraham had designated to be done by someone else, G–d also performed for the Jewish people only by means of one of His agents. You should not think that all we talk about here is merely a part of a virtue. Whoever performs such an act such as Abraham's, performs the positive commandment of emulating G–d, and he will receive the reward due to someone who has performed a מצוה which has been specifically commanded. G–d performs acts of hospitality at all times, at every moment. Were He to desist from doing so for even a single moment the world would be lost. All creatures are His guests, we are all like strangers vis-a-vis G–d, and just as strangers we need a place to sleep. G–d enables us to survive. If He were to withdraw life-support for even a moment, we would all perish. 
  This is what the Talmud Shabbat 127 has in mind when it states that the entertaining of guests is an even greater accomplishment than the welcoming of G–d's Presence since the Torah reports that Abraham asked G–d to wait a few moments: אל נא תעבור אד-ני, אם נא מצאתי חן בעינך מעל עבדך, while he would attend to the guests who had arrived suddenly (18,3).
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  This particular act of הכנסת אורחים on the part of our patriarch Abraham involved three profound truths, and during the meal Abraham and Sarah were already alerted to the eventual עקדת יצחק, binding of Isaac on Mount Moriah. When Rashi in Genesis 22,2 mentions three different reasons why the Mountain is called Mount Moriah, these three names reflect the three truths revealed to Abraham during that meal. Rashi personally equates Moriah with Jerusalem, quoting Chronicles II 3,1 as his source. Bereshit Rabbah 55,7 describes the name as indicating the site whence הוראה, (moral) instruction to Israel originates. This is also the site from which reverence for. G–d emanates. Onkelos sees in the name a reference to the incense-offering which contains מור, דרור and other spices.
  All three commentators address themselves to the three truths surrounding the commandment to Abraham to offer Isaac as a total offering. The commandment to Abraham to offer Isaac as a sacrifice is terribly difficult to understand. Especially so the fact that it is called מאכלת, "something that feeds," i.e. that the people of Israel still "feed" on the merit accumulated by our patriarch Abraham who took his only son and pre-ordained successor in order to slaughter him with his own hands because G–d had commanded him. Also the merit accumulated by Isaac who went along with this cheerfully, viz: Genesis 22,8: וילכו שניהם יחדו, is totally astounding. Thus it appears to anyone who reads the text of our story. If you examine the text carefully, however, you will find that both Abraham and Isaac made efforts to escape this particular death, as has been pointed out by our sages. When Abraham answers his son's question "where is the lamb for the offering? by saying: G–d will select the lamb for Himself, my son," this is to be understood as a prayer to G–d to select a different offering (22,7-8). We must read the verse as: "If G–d does not select a different lamb, then לעולה בני, "my son will be the offering." Thus we find that Abraham prayed for a miracle by G–d. Because of Abraham's prayer and the fact that G–d responded favorably, we say nowadays in our סליחות prayers that "May the One who answered Abraham at Mount Moriah, also answer our prayers." In view of all this, why does the Torah heap so much praise on Abraham? Do we not have a statement in Sifra Vayikra 22,32 that if someone undergoes martyrdom for the sake of the Holy Name of G–d hoping that G–d will save him by some miracle, no miracle will occur? Even if such a miracle does occur, such a person can certainly not be considered as having become a martyr for the sake of G–d's name!
  The Yalkut on Bereshit (22,9) וישם אותו על המזבח describes both Abraham looking at Isaac, and Isaac looking towards Heaven. Both were crying. The Yalkut presents a most moving picture of the great quantity of tears which covered Abraham from head to toe. All this in order to implore G–d to save Isaac. Abraham told his son that seeing he had wept so many tears, G–d has provided a different offering in his place. At that moment Isaac broke out in bitter cries proclaiming: "I raise my eyes towards the mountains, whence will my salvation come?" (Psalms 121,1). All this proves that both Abraham and Isaac had been willing to go through with the sacrifice, but how could they have been described as having served the Lord with joy, as is required?!
  Another difficulty is the commentary of our sages quoted by Rashi on 22,5, where Abraham said to the lads accompanying him ואני והנער נלכה עד כה, "I and the lad will go until there." This is interpreted as a severe criticism of G–d by Abraham who queried, "I want to see where is G–d's promise of כה יהיה זרעך, thus (i.e. so numerous) will be your descendants" (Genesis 15,5). At first glance it appears as if Abraham questioned that G–d would fulfil His promise. How do we reconcile this with G–d's reported rebuke to Moses in Exodus 6,2 describing G–d as having appeared to the patriarchs as א-ל שדי, meaning that G–d did not have any need to justify Himself, seeing that the patriarchs accepted all of G–d's commands without the slightest question (compare Shemot Rabbah 6,4). G–d's comment that He is sorry that the likes of the patriarchs no longer exist seems totally out of place in view of Rashi's interpretation of the words עד כה!
  G–d has given me the insight to explain these difficulties by concentrating on the three different meanings of the name Mount Moriah that we listed earlier. Before explaining the problem of the עקדה let me first explain what precisely occurred at the meal the angels partook of.
  Hospitality is a practical expression of the virtue of חסד, a virtue that Abraham excelled in. We have explained repeatedly that the world is based on חסד, and the world in turn was created only for the sake of Abraham (and his descendants), as we showed based on the spelling of the word בהבראם in Genesis 2,4. The characteristic of חסד is one in which a person's inner love for G–d is expressed, and this is why G–d refers to Abraham in Isaiah 41,8 as אברהם אוהבי, "Abraham who loves Me." The Zohar Mishpatim 114 (Warsaw) defines חסיד, a pious, loving person, as someone who is on intimate terms with his Creator, as we shall explain in detail. Here too Abraham displayed such loving concern for his Maker, as we shall demonstrate. We will explain more about this when we shall discuss the banquet Abraham gave celebrating Isaac's birth.
  
  
  Now to the triple significance of the word "Moriah." When Abraham saw the three men approach he was in doubt as to whether they were angels or just Arabs; it was the hottest part of the day and normal people stayed indoors; there was no escaping from G–d's heat. He therefore concluded that – if they were angels – these three men must be angels dressed up as human beings possessing a body impervious to the emanations of heat. On the other hand, if they were angels, why would they bow down to the dust of their feet? They therefore had to be Arabs bowing to the dust of their feet under the mistaken impression that the sun causes the accumulation of dust, and that therefore bowing to the dust was a form of sun-worship. Considerations such as these went through Abraham's mind. He was convinced that they could only be either angels or sun worshipers as no one else would risk being out in such a heat.
  There are several difficulties in 18,2: "He raised his eyes and saw three men standing by him; he saw and ran to meet them from the entrance of the tent. He bowed down to the ground." Why does the Torah repeat that Abraham "saw?" If the men stood beside him, why did he have to run towards them? We are familiar with what the Talmud says and Rashi quoting it, but we will ignore that for the moment. According to our approach, the repetition of the word "he saw," is justified; Abraham's intellectual vision told him that these men were angels, whereas his physical vision led him to believe that they were human beings. Abraham's doubts were reinforced by the fact that he had seen angels frequently, but they had not appeared to him in the guise of human beings. The words "he raised his eyes" (heavenwards) indicate that he wondered if they were angels. The words נצבים עליו, are appropriate when one speaks of angels as we know from Daniel 7,16: "I approached one of the standing ones and asked him, etc." We also know from Zachariah 3,7 that human beings are described as מהלכים, progressing, whereas angels are described there as בין העומדים האלה, "between these stationary ones." According to Yerushalmi Berachot 1,1 המלאכים אין להם קפיצה, angels do not experience miraculous transposition from one area to another [as happened to Eliezer on his journey to Aram Naharayim for instance in Genesis 24,42, see Rashi Ed.]. Abraham afterwards saw that the appearance of these men was that of human beings. He thought that they might be Arabs, and since humans walk, move, even if they might stand still briefly, he ran towards them. When he came close to them everything that he said to them could be interpreted as appropriate both to angels and to humans. If they were angels, they would interpret what he said to them in a certain manner, whereas if they were men, they would also interpret his words as appropriate. 
  For instance, he said: "my lords, if I have found favor in your eyes do not pass by your servant." Our sages already are divided in their opinions as to the meaning of the word א-ד-ניי here. Some say that Abraham addressed the שכינה, whereas others say that he addressed the leader of the three strangers. If the former, the word is sacred, if the latter, it is ordinary. Both opinions present difficulties. According to the view that the word is used as an appellation for G–d's Presence, the word should have been written before "he ran towards them." If, however, the words were addressed to the leader of the three men, and the word is ordinary, the vowel under the letter נ should have been a Chirik, and not a Kametz. There is no point in assuming that our sages disagreed as to the vowel that should appear under the letter נ.
  I believe that Rabbeinu Bachyah has provided the most plausible reason for the spelling with the vowel kametz. He states that the purpose of the kametz is to demonstrate that G–d is self- sufficient, and that therefore no possessive form can be used concerning Him. His words are truly inspired. There is another allusion in that vowel, however, namely that the vowel kametz is really a combination of the two vowels patach and chirik. If one were to use only the vowel chirik, the word would apply to human beings, whereas if one were to use only the vowel patach, it would apply to all three men, i.e. it would be a plural, meaning "you (all) are my lords." The vowel kametz then is a combination of the singular and the plural. Abraham's intention then was to say: "Even though there may be many 'lords,' You O G–d are my only true Lord, the Lord of Lords." Psalms 136,3 also speaks of אדוני האדונים, "the Lord of Lords." 
  Now we understand that even if the appellation was meant to be ordinary, addressed to humans, the vowel kametz was still in order, since, though Abraham addressed only the leader of the three men directly, the others were included in Abraham's invitation. Proof of this is the plural ending that Abraham used when saying ורחצו רגליכם, "and wash (pl) your feet" (18,4). To the leader Abraham said: "Do not go away, neither you nor your companions; you are all considered by me as my lords. But you, the leader are my special lord, seeing that you are also your companions' lord." In this manner the use of the vowel kametz is justified even though the word is not used in the sacred sense.
  If we follow the view that Abraham addressed the שכינה when he said אל נא תעבור מעל עבדך, we must presuppose that he considered the three "men" to be angels. He addressed them by the name of their Master, i.e. the name of G–d. Being angels, holy beings, G–d's name hovered above them, as Nachmanides explains: We find frequently that the messenger is referred to by the name of his sender. Rashi already pointed this out when he comments on the angel saying שוב אשוב אליך, "I will surely return to you" (18,14). The angel did not refer to himself specifically, but referred to G–d whose messenger he was. G–d appeared here to Abraham in the guise of the מרכבה consisting of the angels מיכאל, גבריאל , and רפאל. G–d's Presence "rode" above those angels. It also rested on Abraham, seeing the Torah had said that He appeared to him. When the angels arrived Abraham realized that they were the מרכבה, the carriers of G–d's Presence. He therefore begged the שכינה not to depart from him until he had a chance to run towards the angels. When that occurred, we hear Abraham say one set of words from which we get two messages. The "hidden" message is that the שכינה should not depart now.
  Those who understand the word א-ד-נ-י as merely ordinary, believing that Abraham at that point thought he was addressing mere mortals, understand the vowel kametz as referring to the most distinguished looking of the three men who appeared to be in charge of the other two. There is no disagreement between these views, each side agreeing that Abraham was still in doubt about the real identity of his visitors.
  If these men indeed were angels, the meal that Abraham prepared for them has to be understood as an offering, whereas if they were Arabs, i.e. men, the meal represented an act of hospitality in keeping with Abraham's character. Abraham afterwards performed an act of kindness vis-a-vis his Creator, as was his wont, when he tried to introduce these strangers to the realisation that they had eaten from G–d's property, not from his, and that therefore they should say grace. Rashi quotes this view on Genesis 21,33 where the Torah describes Abraham as planting an orchard in Beer Sheba. When the Torah adds ויקרא שם בשם ה' א-ל עולם, "He called there in the name of the Lord, the Lord of the universe," this means that Abraham had asked all the people who enjoyed the fruit of that orchard to bless the Lord for His bounty. He explained to one and all that they would have been mistaken if they had thought they had partaken of Abraham's generosity; what they had partaken of was G–d's bounty since it was He who called the universe into existence. Thus Rashi. In the event these people were humans, Abraham's intention was to introduce them to the ways of G–d. We find Abraham first performing an act of kindness by offering food and drink to fellow- humans, and subsequently he performed acts of piety vis-a-vis G–d by trying to bring these people nearer to Him.
  I have already discussed why Abraham thought that if these guests had been human that they must have been sun-worshipers worshiping the dust of their feet. In order to remove that dust, he asked that they wash their feet by saying: יוקח נא מעט מים ורחצו רגליכם. We need to understand why he inserted the word מעט, a little, when he referred to the water they would wash their feet with. There is a deep significance in this. 
  Remember that Abraham's principal attribute was his characteristic of חסד. The mystical element of חסד is found in the מים העליונים, pure unpolluted waters of the Celestial Regions. The attribute of חסד is also the mystical domain of אהבה, love, as we shall explain. Once Abraham had acquired the virtue of חסד he could enter the domain of אהבה, love, and that is why G–d called him אוהבי. We are told in Song of Songs 8,7 that even מים רבים, many waters, cannot extinguish love. The waters referred to are the מקור מים חיים, the source of truly life-giving waters. There are, however, many cisterns, broken and yet filled, which cannot retain the waters in them. In Kabbalistic jargon these are called קליפות; they are alluded to in Genesis 37,24 as והבור רק אין בו מים, "the pit was empty it did not contain any water." We know from Psalms 52,3: חסד אל כל היום, that "G–d's חסד lasts all day long," though we also have a verse in Psalms 7,12 which appears to contradict this, namely א-ל זועם בכל יום, "G–d pronounces doom each day." The answer is simply that G–d pronounces doom over these קליפות, negative forces, reducing them to impotence. This is the חסד G–d performs all day long. Ezekiel 36,25 may have alluded to this when he says: וזרקתי עליכם מים טהורים וטהרתם מכל טמאותיכם, "I shall sprinkle on you pure waters and you will be cleansed from all your impurities. These waters wash off the accumulated pollution known as קליפות, the result of sins. It is these waters which are called מעטים, little. The reason that "a little water" is sufficient is that קליפות do not increase or multiply naturally, as opposed to קדושה, which increases and multiplies naturally; that is why מים רבים, many waters, are unable to extinguish the "fire" of love, and love continues forever. The principal aspect of the virtue of kindness is deeply rooted in the mystical domain of those מים רבים discussed above On occasion some of these waters have to be used in order to rinse off the קליפות and to "humble" such outgrowths due to sins. This is why Abraham spoke about "a little water to be taken." 
  This also explains why this act was performed by a messenger and not by Abraham personally. Abraham represented the essence of that virtue, i.e. מים רבים. It would not have been appropriate for Abraham also to personally perform this secondary function of the waters. Even G–d provided purification for the people of Israel through an agent, i.e. the waters which came forth after Moses struck the rock, as distinct from the manna which G–d Himself supplied from the Heavenly Regions. We are taught here that man should do good and not need to be purified by waters except after he has committed sins. When man lives up to these criteria he can achieve דבקות בה' on what is known as a פנים אל פנים "face to face" basis rather than through an intermediary. This very characteristic is described in Job 28,25 as ומים תכן במדה, "He set the measure of the waters."
  On 18,4 והשענו תחת העץ, Onkelos says "rest under the tree." This was appropriate in the event that these three visitors were humans. The branches of the tree would provide protection against the heat of the day.
  Abraham continued by saying: "I shall take a loaf of bread, etc." We note that he prepared a great deal of bread as proved by the quantity of flour the Torah describes as being used, i.e. three סאים of fine flour. [This is the equivalent of about 432 eggs. Ed.] Since an amount of 3 סאים קמח equals the measure known as איפה, we must ask ourselves why Abraham did not specify that one איפה קמח be used. The reason is that if one measures a particular amount three times, in this case a סאה, the total that one winds up with is liable to be in excess of what one gets when measuring only a single איפה. Our Rabbis describe that little extra amount whenever one measures [so that one does not shortchange the customer] as קלבון. The Torah's point is to draw our attention to Abraham's generous spirit. Interestingly, though a great amount of bread was prepared, we do not read about any of it being served. Rashi, basing himself on Talmudic sources, writes that this was due to Sarah having unexpectedly menstruated while preparing the dough. We will follow a different approach. Seeing that only a small fraction of that amount would be served during that meal, the Torah did not consider such a fraction worth mentioning. Why did Abraham want so much bread to be baked? We can understand why he had to slaughter three oxen if we accept the view expressed in Baba Metzia 86 that he wanted to serve each guest a tongue with mustard. But why would he need so much bread? We must read the sequence as follows "He said: I shall take a loaf of bread and you can refresh yourselves. After that, you may depart." Abraham indicated that the excess bread would be given to them as provisions for the rest of their journey so that they would have refreshments also after having departed from him. This would correspond to the advice of our sages in Pessachim 112: השכם ואכול בקיץ מפני החמה, ובחורף מפני הצינה, "rise early to eat your bread, in the summer because of the heat, and in the winter because of the cold." Since it was very hot at that moment, Abraham provided bread for them to eat when it would be cooler, towards evening.
  The verse continues saying that "Abraham stood over them under the tree while they ate." We must understand this as being similar to Exodus 24,11: ויחזו את האלוקים ויאכלו וישתו, "They had a vision of G–d and ate and drank." Abraham stood by them in order to introduce them to monotheism and an appreciation of the kindness and love of G–d for His creatures. While all this transpired, Abraham still had not resolved his doubts as to the true identity of his guests. 
  After that they told him about the forthcoming birth of Isaac, the essential feature of whom would be his allowing himself to be bound as a sacrifice. This is another aspect of displaying piety vis-a-vis one's Maker as we shall explain later. The whole episode of the עקדה would be a further step in Abraham's demonstrating to mankind how one needs to relate to G–d. Keeping this in mind, we understand the definition of הר המוריה as the site whence moral-ethical instruction, i.e. הוראה emanated.
  The second method of explaining these verses is based on Abraham's speculating that these visitors were angels. Thus the meal must be understood as an offering to G–d by Abraham. When Abraham "ran to the cattle," this means he went to prepare a bull for the sacrifice. This is what Vayikra Rabbah 27,9 means when it comments on the paragraph שור או כשב או עז, Leviticus 22,27 that the entire legislation of animal as well as meal offerings and the ability to atone for our sins by means of these animal offerings is due to the patriarchs. In the case of Abraham this is because אל הבקר רץ אברהם, "Abraham ran to the cattle" to select a suitable offering for G–d. The previous verse describing Abraham rushing into the tent to give instructions to Sarah what and how she was to bake, is a reference to the קרבן מנחה, the meal offering. Instead of mentioning a libation of wine, something that usually accompanies such offerings, Abraham took milk and butter. The reason he did so is that milk is conceptually connected to the attribute of Love, חסד, whereas wine is a symbol of the attribute of justice. At this point in Abraham's life the entire emphasis is on the acts of חסד he performs.
  Our sages in Baba Metzia 86, explain that the reason the bread was never brought to the table was that Sarah had unexpectedly menstruated, become ritually unclean through having become biologically rejuvenated as of that day. 18,11 which reports that Sarah had experienced her menopause some time ago, refers to her situation prior to the arrival of the angels. It was Abraham's custom not to eat anything that was not ritually pure. Still, even assuming that Abraham personally conducted himself on that basis, how could he apply such stringent yardsticks of conduct to others? One simple answer is that it is not good manners to offer guests dishes that the host himself is not prepared to partake of. Rabbeinu Bachyah answers the problem quite differently. Sarah had stopped handling the dough the moment she became aware of her condition, since she knew that otherwise her husband would not touch the bread. Abraham therefore had no need to worry about that. However, Abraham was concerned about the חמץ aspect, seeing the date of the angels' arrival coincided with the calendar date on which Passover would occur in the future. During the time in which Sarah had to make arrangements for someone else in her household to handle the dough, the dough could have become leavened and as such forbidden. The date is alluded to by Abraham saying to Sarah לושי ועשי עגות, "knead it and make into cakes." The expression עגות, occurs in connection with מצה, i.e. עגות מצות, Exodus 12,39. Since Rashi does not follow the above line, we prefer to accept the approach of the Midrash, who regards the whole procedure as sacrificial gifts. It is of course, totally inadmissible to offer as a sacrifice something that is ritually unclean, hence the bread could not be served.
  The great sage Rabbi Moshe Nachmanides already alludes to the קרבן aspect of this meal when he writes as follows: "Perhaps Abraham knew that the part of the food offered first would disappear." One may infer from those words that just as Manoach experienced the sudden disappearance of his offering together with the angel (Judges 13,20), Abraham was aware of the procedure and expected the angels to disappear. It is quite clear that Manoach had not built an altar, he had only made use of an existing rock to offer an offering upon it. (ibid.) The "altar" mentioned there in the book of Judges refers to the Celestial Altar, the region the angel had descended from. This is why he had said to Manoach "do not detain me, since I cannot eat from your bread." The reason he could not do so was that it was פיגול, unacceptable in principle, seeing that one must not offer a sacrifice to one of G–d's angels or other agents. Offerings, even when acceptable, must be offered only to G–d directly. (Judges 13,16). We also have a specific verse in the Torah precluding the offering of sacrifices to an intermediary i.e. בלתי לה' לבדו, "only to G–d Himself" (Exodus 22,18)צ Assuming Abraham was aware of this, he could not have meant for this bread to be eaten, for he knew that angels do not eat. His intention had been that this bread would serve exclusively as a meal offering to G–d in recognition of the fact that G–d had appeared to him while he was awake and able to move around freely. Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 48,4 take the view that G–d's appearance was in response to Abraham having circumcised himself. G–d reasoned that just as He appears to someone who builds an altar for him and offers a sacrifice (by allowing that sacrifice to be consumed by Heavenly fire), if someone performs circumcision on his own body, such an act certainly deserves to be acknowledged by G–d appearing to such a person. Abraham understood the fact that G–d had revealed Himself to him as an outpouring of G–d's bounty, as is normal when G–d accepts someone's offering. He now wanted to offer a real (additional) offering in order to draw down still more of G–d's blessings.
  It is possible that Satan's argument which is seen as responsible for the command to Abraham to offer Isaac as a sacrifice, has its basis in our story. According to Sanhedrin 89 Satan argued that Abraham's motivation in offering sacrifices had always been only in order to secure the birth of his son Isaac. As soon as that objective was attained, the Torah no longer reports Abraham as building altars and offering sacrifices.  G–d told Satan that he was mistaken, that Abraham would be prepared to offer his son Isaac as a total offering if that were required of him. The weak point that Satan had found to focus on may have been that at this meal, when Abraham did offer sacrifices, he had done so initially to the angels as intermediaries. The Talmud, quoting the dialogue between Satan and G–d, has Satan stress the word לפניך, meaning that Abraham did not offer a sacrifice to G–d directly. Only after that are the spiritual forces awakened and G–d bestows of His bounty, as explained in the Zohar on פרשת ויקרא. The complaint of Satan was that no mention is made of Abraham offering anything in the nature of an offering during the feast he made on the occasion of Isaac being weaned (21,8). He added that Abraham did not even offer a sacrifice at the time he received the tidings from the angels that Isaac would be born the following year. The meal presented to the angels, though a sacrifice, should not have been offered to an agent of G–d but to G–d directly. 
  G–d answered Satan at that time, that Abraham already had offered such a sacrifice at the time he circumcised himself and again when he circumcised Isaac, seeing that circumcision rates as a major sacrifice. When he did this he fulfilled the commandment of Leviticus 1,2: אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן, "when someone offers a sacrifice it should be part of you," i.e. part of your very self. We have an allusion to this in Genesis 12,11 ויהי כאשר הקריב לבא מצרימה, when the use of the word הקריב instead of קרב, indicates that he brought himself closer to G–d (see our commentary page 80). G–d compensated the Jewish people for Abraham's devotion at the appropriate time. We know that circumcision itself rates as a major sacrifice from the boast of Ishmael to Isaac that whereas he, Ishmael, had submitted voluntarily to that painful procedure at the age of thirteen, Isaac as an eight day old baby had not suffered, nor had he accumulated a merit for consenting to that act. Isaac responded that if G–d were to ask him to sacrifice his entire body he would be prepared to do so (compare Sanhedrin 89). According to this last version the words אחר הדברים האלה in 22,1 refer to this conversation between Ishmael and Isaac. We will demonstrate that both approaches are true and reflect valid Torah viewpoints.
  We therefore see that this "meal" was an עולה, total offering, unaccompanied by the customary meal offering, seeing there was no bread. When Isaac lay bound on the altar, he too was a total offfering unaccompanied by a meal offering, seeing that the offering was in response to a קטרוג, an accusation by Satan as we have explained. The lamb that substituted for Isaac was also not accompanied by a מנחה. I have found that the reason the afternoon prayer, מנחה, is called by that designation, (although the other prayers also represent offerings that were accompanied by a meal offering), is because Isaac had questioned the absence of that מנחה, and subsequently introduced תפלת מנחה as a separate prayer to compensate for that missing meal-offering at the עקדה (cf Genesis 43,63 and Bereshit Rabbah 60,14). The Torah alludes to this in Leviticus 2,1 when, instead of saying ואדם כי תקריב מנחה, the Torah says: ונפש כי תקריב מנחה, hinting that מנחה is associated with someone who had offered up his own נפש.
  To come back to יקח נא מעט מים ורחצו רגליכם; Kabbalists know that the angels מטטרון and סנדלפון are known as מנעל and סנדל, shoe and sandal with which the "feet" of the emanation מלכות are covered, and concerning which we read in Proverbs 5,5: רגליה יורדות מות, "Her feet descend towards death" (the reference is to an immoral woman). These shoes and sandals are a hyperbole for the קליפות around which the wicked people walk. The "tree" mentioned by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai in the Zohar without further identification, is the tree of knowledge. All that is below the emanation מלכות, is somehow associated with that emanation. The angels themselves adhere to the essence of the tree of knowledge of good and evil in its designation as "good." The fact that that tree is also associated with "evil," is something peripheral, i.e. when wicked people try to use that tree they fail to penetrate to its essence due to their קליפות, which preclude their getting to the essence which is” good." [The last few lines are my substitution of the author who quotes on the subject from Pardes Rimonim Shaar Heychal Hatemurot chapter 7. Ed.] When Abraham invited the angels to rest under the tree, he referred to the essence of the tree of knowledge and when he said וסעדו לבכם, "refresh your heart," instead of לבבכם, "refresh your hearts," he indicated that he was aware that they were angels and therefore had only one heart, seeing angels have no evil urge.
  The angels responded to Abraham, saying כן, תעשה כאשר דברת, "all right, proceed in the manner that you have said." The emphasis here is on the word תעשה, a reference to Abraham"s good deeds. They encouraged Abraham to continue in his ways of dispensing חסד and thereby opening celestial sources of blessing by means of his own soul. They realised that they would be blessed themselves through Abraham's deeds.
  To get back to the point that, from the angels' point of view, the meal was considered a sacrifice to G–d. The essence of a sacrifice is that the person offering it signifies that he offers his own person to G–d. Abraham offered his own person when he circumcised himself, something from which he was still sick on this third day after the operation. During this meal which was a sacrifice, he was informed when Isaac would be born. This is a hint that Isaac represents circumcision at its best, seeing he was the first one to be circumcised on the eighth day. Circumcision on that day is considered an עולה תמימה, a total offering of perfect dimensions. Abraham was inspired with sufficient Holy Spirit to realise that there would be forces such as Ishmael and Satan which would accuse Isaac which we have quoted in connection with the introduction to the עקדה. This is why Abraham sanctified his son Ishmael by instructing him to participate in this offering by helping to prepare it (Bereshit Rabbah 48,13). He is the lad referred to in 18,7 ויתן אל הנער, "he gave it to the lad." He wanted to prevent Ishmael becoming rooted in the קליפות, so that his words would remain ineffective.
   Ishmael's accusation is alluded to here when the Torah says in 18,10: ושרה שומעת פתח האוהל והוא אחריו, "and Sarah heard at the entrance of the tent and he was behind it." Targum Yonatan understands the word והוא, "and he," as referring to the נער. i.e. Ishmael. Bereshit Rabbah also understands the reference as being to Ishmael. At any rate Abraham's efforts to raise Ishmael as a G–d-worshiping son were successful inasmuch as he prevented him from sinking too deeply into the domain of the קליפות. The dialogue between Isaac and Ishmael that we have reported shows that the latter was proud of his circumcision; the dialogue also triggered Isaac's offer to be a sacrifice, and G–d giving Abraham a chance to demonstrate that his reverence for G–d exceeded his love for his own flesh and blood. Hagar, Sarah's maid servant, humbled herself and adopted at least part of Sarah's lifestyle. This is why she is called קטורה later on, meaning that her deeds were as dear to G–d as the incense-offering called קטורת. Another reason cited in Bereshit Rabbah is that even though she had been expelled she refrained from cohabiting with anyone after she had left Abraham's household. The word קטורה then is equivalent to קשר, the aramaic equivalent for קטר, knot. The Midrash uses this hyperbole to describe Hagar's chastity. When Isaac lay bound on the altar, these various deeds of Abraham and Hagar were seen to be foreshadowing future events. Abraham bound and tied Isaac on Mount Moriah as a sacrifice. 
  It is quite possible that the altar that he built on that mountain was exactly on the site on which the Jewish people later on would offer the incense-offering in the inner sanctum of the Holy Temple. This would be most appropriate, seeing that of all the sacrifices the incense-offering is the one most beloved by G–d. Similarly, the offering of Isaac was the act to which G–d responded with more love than any other before or after. When discussing the meaning of 22,11: "An angel of the Lord called to Abraham from the Heaven and said …do not touch the lad," a Midrash explains that the angel's voice came from between the "two cherubs," i.e. the traditionally holiest spot within the Inner Sanctum. It is evident from this that Isaac is perceived as having been bound on the מזבח הפנימי, the altar within the Sanctuary. The angel's voice then called out to him from very nearby. Put differently, this means that "Heaven" was very nearby. Every offering, when accepted, is described as being ריח ניחוח, "a sweet smelling fragrance for G–d." We also find that when the Tabernacle was consecrated that G–d's voice did not penetrate beyond the walls of that structure.
  This is precisely why that Mountain is called הר המוריה, since the קטורת, the best-beloved offering in the form of Isaac was offered there, and it is from there that G–d's responses are heard. The meal that Abraham had prepared for the angels also was the kind of קרבן of which Berachot 43 says: "which is the kind of thing that the soul derives pleasure from? it is ריח, fragrance."
  Abraham, who was blessed with a degree of Holy Spirit introduced Ishmael to the concept of holiness through his educational efforts, so that he could eventually become instrumental in the binding of Isaac and the offering of incense also known as ריח ניחוח, sweet fragrance, that this binding represented. We have an allusion to this in the numerical value of the name הג"ר, which is identical to the numerical value of the name יצח"ק. 
  Abraham received a further injection of the Holy Spirit which enabled him to neutralize the accusation of Satan, as the accuser of Isaac the צדיק. Abraham, on the other hand, "donned" the garments of a counsel for defense, and pleaded on behalf of the people of Sodom. 
  This may be the reason why when Abraham is reported as "sitting" in 18,1 the word Yoshev sitting is spelled defective without the letter ו. [maybe the letter ו symbolizes upright posture. Ed.] This indicates that he tried to rise. At that point G–d told him that he would be a symbol for his descendants, for G–d Himself would rise as a member of a collegiate of judges. How does the subject of "judges" enter the picture here? The meaning is that at that point G–d revealed to Abraham that the attribute of Justice was extended over Sodom. The reason Abraham was informed of this, now that he was circumcised, is that justice is something that can only be administered by people who have been circumcised, as we know from Exodus 21,1: ואלה המשפטים אשר תשים לפניהם, "These are the judgments you are to place before them. "The words "before them" are to exclude Gentiles who have not been circumcised, as we learn from Gittin 88. Being uncircumcised is not only a matter of the foreskin, but the same concept also applies to one's thinking processes. This is why we have ערלי לב, people whose hearts have remained "uncircumcised" (Ezekiel 44,7). All the Gentiles fall into that category; they therefore cannot be entrusted to administer the laws of the Torah. The Torah calls the judges א-להים, the same letters as in מילה, (allowing for the addition of the letter א for G–d), and that is also the name of G–d which represents the מרכבה. This is the meaning of Genesis 17,22: ויעל א-להים מעל אברהם, "G–d "rose" from Abraham." Judges have to be סמוכים, i.e. close to G–d, a condition that cannot be attained until after circumcision. [Nowadays סמוכים means ordained. Ed.] The letter א that the word מילה falls short of being equal to the word א-להים alludes to the fact that man, even when at his spiritually highest plateau, still remains one little bit below the spiritual level of G–d, as we know from Psalms 8,6: ותחסרהו מעט מא-להים, "You have made him a little less than divine. The same is true of the 50 levels of intelligence and insight. The most any man, (Moses), was granted was 49 levels of such knowledge and insight. Our sages in Rosh Hashanah 21b have derived this from reading the word מעט in Psalms 8,6 as מט, i.e. 49.
  Let us return to our statement that G–d revealed to Abraham that the attribute of Justice was in full control of the fate of the people in the cities Sodom, etc., and that thereupon Abraham immediately began to defend them. By doing so at this time he was able to atone in the future for the accusation that would be leveled against Isaac, about whose birth he had been informed at this meal. 
  To sum up: all that transpired at the meal which was a sacrifice of the ריח ניחוח category, is clearly a hint of the other sacrifice of that category, the binding of Isaac on an altar that stood on the site where eventually the Jewish people would offer incense to G–d in the Holy Temple. We can therefore justify the second reason offered for the name הר המוריה, namely the place of מור and אהלות, which are part of the ingredients that made up the incense offering קטורת.
  The third approach to this meal is based on the mystical dimension behind the "delicacies," מטעמים, that Isaac wanted to taste before blessing Esau in Genesis 27,4. Our sages state that this was symbolic of the meal G–d will prepare for the righteous in the World to Come. The time frame for that event: After the world will have rejuvenated itself and has reached the spiritual level it should have maintained since the time Adam was created, and would have maintained if only Adam had not sinned. At such a time matter will have been so refined that men will need to wear only the כתנות אור, the garments woven of "light," as Adam had done before G–d had to provide him with leather aprons, i.e. כתנות עור. Then indeed G–d's blessing /command in Genesis 2,16 that man could eat from every tree in the garden will be fulfilled. Abraham alluded to this condition when he said to the angels "rest under the tree." He referred to it as representing the tree of life, seeing that at that time in the future death would be banished from the earth.
  The angel himself alluded to that kind of life when he said that his return would take place כעת חיה, ולשרה בן, "at a time of eternal life, when Sarah would have a son" (18,10). The news about the birth of Isaac was the message that it was through Isaac that such idyllic times would eventually return. This is also what is meant in Shabbat 89 when Isaiah 63,16 is discussed. The prophet says: "You are our father, for we did not know Abraham, and we were not familiar with Israel (Jacob); You Lord have always been our Father and Redeemer." The Talmud reported a conversation between G–d and Abraham in which G–d accuses the Jewish people as having sinned, and Abraham suggests that they be wiped out for the sake of G–d's Holy Name. Thereupon G–d says: "I shall tell this to Jacob who has understanding for the difficulty of raising children, perhaps he will pray for mercy for them." Jacob's response however, was the same as Abraham's. Finally, G–d spoke to Isaac: "Your children have sinned!" Isaac replied: "Are they only my children and not Yours?! When they volunteered to accept the Torah saying "we shall do and we shall hear" (Exodus 19), You called them "My first born son" (Exodus 4,22); now that they have sinned they suddenly are mine? Isaac continued to argue with G–d in this vein. As can be seen, in that conversation Isaac proves to be the only one of the patriarchs who defends Israel. This is what Isaiah referred to when he has Israel deny the other two patriarchs. Many readers are non-plussed by this Aggadah in the Talmud, seeing that we associate Abraham with the attribute of חסד, love, and Isaac with the attribute גבורה, justice, and we would have expected Isaac to have been rigid in his attitude and Abraham to have made excuses for his children. Jacob, who represents a mixture of these two attributes, should also have found it in his heart to come to the defense of his children in Isaiah's story. How then can we explain that the real good devolved upon the people of Israel through their patriarch Isaac?
  Those who ask this question do not really display much wisdom. The very quality that enabled Isaac to be judged by the attribute of Justice is what secures Israel's eventual lofty status, its joining the ranks of בני עליון, superior beings. First we must examine the meaning of the מדרשים, Bereshit Rabbah 12,15 et al., which report G–d as having wanted to create a universe that would be administered solely by the attribute of Justice. These Midrashim report that when G–d realized that such a universe could not endure for long, He co-opted the attribute of Mercy. I have dealt with this problem at length on page 14 of this volume, where I also explained that one must not conceive of G–d as having "changed His mind," having abandoned a previous plan, seeing לא בן אדם ויתנחם, "He is not human that He should have regrets" (Numbers 23,9). All that happened to G–d's original plan is that instead of the yardstick of the attribute of Justice being applied universally, it is applied only to בני עליה, the truly righteous. To them G–d applies the most stringent yardstick. It is the application to them of the undiluted attribute of Justice which stamps them as superior creatures, בני עליה. They are but few in numbers. G–d applies a mixture of the attributes of Justice and Mercy to the vast majority of people. In the future under discussion, however, when everybody will qualify as a member of that formerly select group, everybody will be judged by the undiluted attribute of Justice and will prevail even under such scrutiny. It is impossible for people nowadays to qualify for such a status until after their bodies, i.e. the raw-material their bodies are made of, have undergone a process of refinement such as the experience of exile and other afflictions. The more of such suffering the Jewish people experiences, the greater the evidence that G–d has decided to become very exacting with us in order to prepare us for that idyllic state. When viewed under this perspective, we understand that the application of the attribute of Justice is really an expression of the greatest love, חסד, of G–d for the Jewish people. 
  If Isaac is usually referred to as יצחק בן אברהם, this means that Abraham, who represented the attribute of חסד, was the natural forerunner of Isaac, who achieved the status of being worthy of the מדת הדין, attribute of Justice. The power of the son in this case proves to be greater than the power of the father, seeing that the attribute of Justice is the highest form of the attribute of Mercy. G–d, so to speak, rises from the throne called Justice and sits on the throne called Mercy. At that time the name יצחק, which is synonymous with Justice, will be revealed as the source of joy, the deeper meaning of that name spelled as ישחק, as in Psalms 105,9 for instance. The Zohar sees in the letters of Isaac's name when spelled ק"ץ ח"י, a hint of the attribute of Justice, since judgment ends in death, i.e. Ketz Chay. In the future his name will symbolize joy as in Psalms 105. We have repeatedly explained how Abraham was the real reason Heaven and Earth were created as hinted in the spelling of the word בהבראם in Genesis 2,4. Isaac, however, was the spiritual equivalent of Adam before his sin, since he was the first person who was both conceived and born by parents who had sanctified themselves. The removal of Abraham's foreskin repaired the damage Adam had done by sinning and acquiring a קליפה, husk (symbol of sin). Our sages expressed this by saying that אדם הראשון משוך בערלתו, Adam pulled, i.e. disguised, the fact that he had no foreskin, as distinct from Isaac, sanctified (from birth), who became the equivalent of first man who had been formed by G–d from holy soil. This may well account for the fact that he was not allowed to leave the holy soil of ארץ ישראל (Genesis 27,2).
  In order to appreciate the dimension of holiness Isaac represented, it is fitting that we first see what the Zohar says on the subject of the עקדה. When Abraham was about to slaughter Isaac, the latter's soul flew away to be replaced later by a holy spirit from the Celestial Regions. It follows then that Isaac's life after the עקדה, was the life of a human being who had not originated from a drop of semen. We must view Isaac as someone re-born in consequence of that experience: a totally new creature. G–d had applied the strictest yardstick to him by letting him die, and subsequently by infusing him with a new soul. He had also sanctified his body; from that time on Isaac's body resembled that of אדם הראשון, also not the product of a drop of semen. Now we understand also why the ram which Abraham sacrificed in lieu of Isaac was not the product of natural procreation, i.e. through semen, but was created during the period of dusk on the sixth day of Creation as reported in Avot 5,6. When Genesis 22,13 describes this ram as והנה איל אחר נאחז וכו' "and here a ram after was caught, etc.," this means that this ram was created after all the other mammals had already been created and had procreated. The word אחר therefore is to be understood in the same sense as the same word when Abraham said to the angels אחר תעבורו. Isaac teaches us about G–d's very first objective when He set out to create this universe which would develop to become as perfect as He envisaged it. 
  Abraham, as the progenitor of Isaac, who had removed the foreskin which Adam had been gross enough to "pull down," had managed to become the person who is fit to be the carrier of the מרכבה, the Presence of G–d, as is clearly indicated in Genesis 17,22 "G–d ascended from Abraham." This ascent occurred after G–d had concluded an eternal covenant with him, as is specifically stated here ואת בריתי אקים את יצחק, "and I will maintain My covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear for you." This is a promise that in the future the world will achieve its perfection, as always planned by G–d. In view of the above, the meal at which the timing of Isaac's birth was announced was certainly an event of spiritual significance, something not unlike the meal G–d is said to serve the righteous in the future.
  The line 18,7) ,ואל הבקר רץ אברהם) may be understood as parallel to the heavenly meat that the angels are reported as having fried for אדם הראשון, as reported in Sanhedrin 59. Abraham prepared the bread but did not serve it, since the time for manna which would be ground for the righteous in the heavenly region called שחקים was not yet ripe. Since Adam, however, had already been the recipient of meat from the heavenly regions before he sinned, Abraham saw no reason not to offer meat to these guests from heaven. The bread he prepared assumed a sacred character, seeing Abraham had been feeding the poor at all times, and the reason his descendants were found worthy to feed on heavenly bread was because of their ancestor Abraham's mercy. Unfortunately, the Israelites sinned when they made derogatory comments about the manna, describing it as לחם הקלקל, "bread that is lacking in substance" (Numbers 21,5). This heavenly bread will only appear again in the future that we have spoken of. The reason that 
  Abraham did not offer wine, though Adam had his wine sieved by the angels while he was still in גן עדן, is that the Talmud describes that heavenly wine as something no one on earth has ever seen the like of, something משומר בענביו, "preserved within its grapes," i.e. it exists as yet only in the potential. (Berachot 34).
   The milk and butter which Abraham did serve symbolize the ascendancy of the attribute of Mercy over the attribute of Justice. This ascendancy of the attribute of Mercy will be demonstrated during the life of Isaac, as indicated in Sanhedrin 89b.
  The Torah provides a strong hint of the perfection of such a future world when it describes Abraham as "standing over the angels under the tree while they ate" (18,8). We read in Kohelet 11,3 מקום שיפול העץ שם יהוא, "wherever the tree will fall, there it remains." [The following is based on the word יהוא meaning יהיה-הו. At least this is the spelling of the word in that verse adopted by Avodah Zara 31. Ed.] In this instance Abraham is described as והוא עומד as opposed to having fallen. We find in Zachariah 14,9: ביום ההוא יהיה ה' אחד ושמו אחד, "on that day G–d will be One and His name will be One; this is an allusion to a perfect world when G–d's name will be complete, not as in our imperfect world where G–d appears only with half His name as we are told in Exodus 17,16 כי יד על כס י-ה מלחמה לה' בעמלך, "that as long as G–d has to make war against Amalek, a hand is raised against His throne which is described as כס instead of as כסא. Also, His name is only י-ה, instead of י-ה-ו-ה. We have explained that the first two letters in G–d's Ineffable Name represent more of the attribute of Mercy than the last two letters. In the future as described in Zachariah not only will G–d's name be complete, but the last two letters will equal the first two letters. The name will then be as if it were spelled יהיה. This is the real meaning of "on that day G–d and His name will be One."
  This message is also alluded to in the wording of Genesis 1,3 where G–d gave the directive יהי אור, and the Torah reports: ויהי אור. The letters in G–d's name י-ה-ו-ה, are really only י-ה-ו, seeing that the letter ה appears twice. If Adam had not sinned, the name would have been י-ה-ו-ה. Unfortunately, the spiritual level necessary for that name never existed, not even when we merited the building of the Holy Temple, at which time the Ineffable Name of G–d was of the י-ה-ו-ה variety. This is what Solomon refers to in Kohelet 11,3 that במקום שיפול העץ שם י-ה-ו, the word שם has to be vocalised Shem, i.e. the Name will consist of the letters Yud-Heh-Vav. Genesis 1,3 hints at G–d's original plan which provided for יהי instead of יהו. When the Torah reports ויהי אור, i.e featuring the three letters of the present "full" name of G–d, this is a hint that part of the "great light" was already withheld; G–d anticipated Adam's נפילה, "fall." אדם הראשון caused that "fall"' by eating from the tree of knowledge. The meaning of Kohelet is now clear. "The place the tree fell is the cause that the letters in the name of G–d remain י-ה-ו. The world as it is cannot rise above that level of G–d's name. When G–d says of Abraham in Genesis 18, 18 that ואברהם היו יהיה לגוי גדול, we have the implied promise that in the future, as a result of someone like Abraham, that configuration described as “היו,” will eventually be changed to the configuration “יהיה.” If Abraham is previously described as standing under the "tree,” this is a hint that he "stands guard,” insures that the original design for the world will materialise: that the fall from grace due to having eaten from the tree will be reversed. 
  I have elaborated on this theme in my introduction to the treatise תולדות אדם. This summarizes the spiritual aspect of the meal Abraham provided for the angels and the message about Isaac that he received at that time, which in turn explains the significance of הר המוריה.
  I shall explain the עקדה from three further aspects:
  The first method of exegesis is based on an understanding of איזהו חסיד? המתחסד עם קונו, Who is a pious person? He who practises piety with His Maker (Zohar Mishpatim 114). This means that such an individual performs the commandments of G–d with more love and goodwill than he is obliged to. Abraham demonstrated this by binding Isaac in anticipation of slaughtering him as a sacrifice. Abraham could have based himself on strict legality, and challenged G–d's command by saying that he believed in the promise of G–d that 15,5) כה יהיה זרעך), as well as on 21,12 or 17,19, both of which promise that Isaac would have seed and that his seed would perpetuate Abraham's name. In order to make certain that G–d's earlier promise would indeed come true, Abraham could have argued that he was under orders not to slaughter Isaac. Bereshit Rabbah 56,10, commenting on why Abraham called the site of the Akeydah. 22,14) ,ה' יראה) i.e. "G–d will see," quotes Rabbi Yochanan: O G–d, at the time You told me to take my first born, the one I love, I could have remonstrated saying that You Yourself had told me only "yesterday" that my seed would be perpetuated through Isaac. I carefully refrained from becoming guilty of such an argument. I rather suppressed my natural feelings of pity for my son than not to comply with Your will."
  The Midrash clearly means that Abraham could have legally avoided complying with this request by G–d. Abraham stressed that he had acted against his natural attribute of חסד. The Zohar understands Isaac's saying to his father in (22,7) אבי!, "Father!" as an outcry meaning "You who are my father appear now in the guise of your son who represents גבורה, דין, instead of חסד ורחמים” (compare Sullam edition Vayera page 151 approx. as quoted by author). When Abraham said in 22,5: נלך עד כה , "we shall go thus far," he meant he wanted to see (Yireh) what happened to G–d's promise of כה יהיה זרעך, "this is how numerous your descendants will become." Abraham, by later naming the site on Mount Moriah Yeraeh indicated that he had indeed been shown that G–d's promise would be kept. We must not understand the allusion עד כה, as an implied criticism of G–d, but rather as emphasizing how far Abraham was prepared to go to comply with G–d's request to offer up his son Isaac. If Abraham would not have had to wrestle with his fatherly feelings he would not have performed the מצוה in the best possible manner, just as someone who does not eat pork because he has no desire to eat it does not get the same credit for abstaining from it as does a person who really fancies pork but restrains himself only because the Torah forbids it (compare Rashi on Parshat Kedoshim 20,26).
  Both Abraham and Isaac separately prayed to be spared such a death. They did not do so out of opposition to G–d's command, but in order to cause G–d to give more weight to His original promise of making Isaac the one through whom Abraham's seed would develop. Had G–d never made this promise thrice previously, the idea of prayer to escape that death would never have occurred to them.
  The second approach is connected with our exegesis of the meal during which Abraham was told about the impending birth of Isaac being itself a sacrifice, since Abraham had already sacrificed himself when he performed circumcision on his own body. This was the reason that Ishmael boasted about his own מסירת הנפש, dedication to G–d, in having his father perform this operation on him without his objecting. Satan found an excuse to malign Abraham for not having offered a sacrifice during the feast he gave after Isaac was born, and also for not offering a bull and ram to G–d directly, instead of to G–d's intermediaries, the angels, during this meal after he had successfully recovered from the circumcision.
  We shall demonstrate that both the view which interprets 22,1 as referring to Satan's accusation, and the view that the test was caused by Isaac's provocative boast to his brother Ishmael that he would be willing to offer his entire body to G–d, are true and totally compatible with one another. We must understand that anything which is due to Satan or a malignment by Satan, has its origin in the סטרא אחרא, the side of the emanations which is separate from sanctity. On the other hand, the statements ascribed by our sages to Ishmael, who boasted of his having demonstrated genuine obedience to G–d, originates in the side of the emanations that contains קדושה, sanctity. Abraham was not sure whether the entire נסיון, test, was because G–d had heeded Satan's malignment of him or whether the test was due to the words of Ishmael and Isaac's reply that he was willing to sacrifice body and soul for G–d. When we consider that Abraham and Isaac rose early in the morning to undertake this journey to Mount Moriah, and that Abraham personally saddled his donkey instead of leaving this chore to one of his servants (compare 22,3), and when the Torah immediately afterwards describes Abraham and Isaac as "going together," the meaning that they both rejoiced in planning to fulfill G–d's will becomes clearly apparent. 
  On the other hand, why does the Midrash describe both of them as shedding an ocean of tears? Why does that Midrash describe Abraham as expressing wonderment how the promise of “כה” will be fulfilled, and as praying for Isaac to be spared from death? They reasoned as follows: If the whole נסיון was the result of Ishmael's boast and Isaac's provocative response, then they were both extremely happy to be able to prove themselves adequate, seeing that the matter emanated in the regions of sanctity. If, on the other hand, this test was the result of Satan having maligned Abraham, i.e that it all originated in the סטרא אחרא, then the tears were certainly called for, as well as the prayers to be saved from a death which would have resulted from the machinations of Satan. In such circumstances a prayer that G–d's promise of כה יהיה זרעך, be fulfilled, would be most appropriate. The objective of the prayer was to enlist G–d's help in thwarting Satan's objective.
  The truth is that this test was due to Ishmael's and Isaac's dialogue, a competition who could serve the Lord better. Such a dialogue certainly reflected the "right" side of the emanations. Rabbi Yossi the Galilean describes the matter in Bereshit Rabbah 55,5 when he says that the words והאלוקים נסה את אברהם must be understood as "G–d placed Abraham on a high mast, like that on a ship." His meaning is that G–d simply wanted to demonstrate to the whole world the devotion of an Abraham to the most difficult demand G–d could make upon him. Nonetheless, there is no denying that Abraham had found a detractor in Satan, and we have it on the authority of the Zohar that any accusation leaves some impression that G–d has to address Himself to, even if He does not do so immediately. In such a situation G–d hands someone else to Satan as a ransom, as alluded to in Isaiah 43,4: ואתן אדם תחתיך, "I give men in exchange for you." Abraham was afraid that the effect of Satan's accusation against him might have negative effects on Isaac's descendants. This is why G–d told him immediately after the binding of Isaac (Genesis 22,21) that the ransom had already been assigned to Satan: עוץ בכורו, "Utz the first born of Nachor," otherwise known as job, as we know from Job 1,1 "there lived a man in the land of Utz, Job was his name." We know that G–d delivered the fate of this man into the hands of Satan (ibid.). The mechanics of how this ransom works are discussed at length in the Zohar.
  Isaac was "crowned" with an even higher degree of sanctity, becoming an offering of the highest degree of holiness, perfect, a sweet fragrance to G–d, seeing that the ram Abraham eventually slaughtered was to be considered as if he had slaughtered Isaac himself. Because of this offering the Mount is called הר המוריה, from the word מר, one of the principal fragrances of the incense offering called קטורת. Just as that offering is G–d's favourite, so Isaac became G–d's favourite.
  Our third approach to the meal Abraham offered the angels is that this meal is to be considered an allusion to the meal in the distant future that G–d will serve to the righteous, and that the message Abraham received during that meal was that it would be Isaac through whom such eventual idyllic circumstances would become possible at a time when G–d's original plan for the universe would be realized. We have stated that Isaac's holiness was due to his being the first human to be circumcised on the eighth day as prescribed by the Torah. At that time his body would become as holy as possible. When G–d asked Abraham to offer such a human being as a total offering, Abraham rejoiced. Isaac also rejoiced seeing he had been found worthy to become a total offering to G–d during his lifetime, a privilege which had not been granted to any other righteous human being until after death, at which time their souls would be "sacrificed" on a celestial altar by the archangel Michael; we have mentioned this previously. 
  Abraham was very worried that Isaac might not accept death entirely willingly due to the physical pain involved. In that event he would turn out to be a blemished offering instead of an עולה תמימה, a perfect offering. This is what his prayer was all about. He was not concerned with G–d revoking His instructions, but he asked G–d's help to make the death the experience it was meant to be. Abraham simply invoked the principle הבא לטהר מסיין לו, that he who sets out to purify is entitled to a heavenly assist (Yuma 38b et al). The entire prayer was that both he and Isaac should be able to fulfil the imperative עבדו את ה' בשמחה, "Serve the Lord joyfully," as we have been taught in Psalms 100,2. 
  When G–d said to Abraham after the 22,12) ,עקדה) "Now I know that you are G–d-fearing," this is what is meant. We find in Sotah 31 that this expression of "G–d-fearing" is supposed to mean that Abraham served G–d out of love. This seems paradoxical. Why would the Torah use the word "fear," when what is meant is "love?" The Talmud there is at pains to justify this statement by citing that G–d called Abraham “אוהבי, “the one who loves Me," in Isaiah 41,8. There are actually three levels (in ascending order) in which one relates to G–d. There is fear which eventually results in love; there is love which eventually results in reverence, another level of "fear." I have explained all this at length in my treatise בעשרה מאמרות נברא העולם. Briefly, the lower level of fear is the fear of punishment. The higher level of יראה, fear, is a kind of reverence, i.e. the fear to do something displeasing to G–d irrespective of any consequences. The mere idea of being unworthy is something abhorrent. This latter "fear" is one that is the result of having developed a love for G–d. It is this fear that Abraham was being complimented on by G–d after the successful trial of the עקדה. The Talmud therefore is quite correct in associating that fear with "love," seeing it was the product of love. The fear that Abraham entertained during the steps leading up to the binding of Isaac was that somehow his own and Isaac's performance might not be optimal, i.e. whole-hearted and joyful.
  We have to understand what the Yalkut Shimoni on 22,9 means when he quotes Abraham's prayer as telling Isaac that since he had begun to offer G–d a רביעית of his blood, G–d would find a substitute offering for him in his place. The words used by Abraham are: הואיל והתחלת, "because you have commenced." Abraham knew that up to that point Isaac had submitted not only willingly but gladly. Seeing that Isaac had commenced in the right spirit, Abraham assured him that G–d would assist him to complete the process successfully. This too is the deeper meaning of Psalms 44,23: נחשבנו כצאן טבחה, "We are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered." This means that we deliver our lives up to sanctify the name of G–d, and attach our souls to G–d so that what is left on earth is only the body like that of an animal. That body we abandon to be slaughtered. 
  After all it is well known that the term אדם is used for man only because of his spiritual component. The animalistic נפש within us that enables us to remain "alive" entitles us only to the description בשר אדם. This point is often repeated in the Zohar. What happened at the עקדה is quite in line with these considerations. Abraham's prayer was for Isaac's soul to cleave to G–d so that the body that would be left behind would be merely body. When Abraham promised Isaac that G–d would accept קרבן אחר, another offering in his place, the reference was not to the ram Abraham found later, but to Isaac's body devoid of his soul. Issac's essence was his soul. Once Isaac's body remained without his soul, it was someone else who served as the sacrifice. When Kabbalists describe the souls of the righteous as being נקרבים למעלה, which loosely translated means "sacrificed in the Celestial Regions," this is quite inaccurate. The expression נקרב means that something is being brought close. The souls of the righteous are being brought so close to G–d that they become an almost integral part of G–d Himself. We must appreciate that, just as there are different kinds of sacrifices, some being more beloved by G–d than others, [as we have explained about the קטורת, incense-offering, Ed.] so different souls achieve a greater or lesser degree of closeness to the Essence of G–d, depending on the degree of self-sacrifice for G–d they represent. When someone's soul has achieved this optimal closeness to G–d, the body it inhabits also achieves a high degree of קדושה, sanctity, and can become a real קרבן. When no such closeness between one's soul and G–d exists, the only part of the human entity that becomes קרבן, = closer to G–d is the soul. 
  Abraham's prayer was that Isaac's body should qualify as the קרבן. When he said: אלוקים יראה לו השה לעולה בני, he meant that Isaac's body should be like a lamb, ready for this close relationship with G–d. Rashi's comment on these words is quite in place, since Abraham wanted Isaac to know that if he, Isaac, was not able to rise to that spiritual level which he as his father prayed for, then לעולה בני, he would still serve as a sacrifice, but that such a sacrifice would not transport him to the highest degree of closeness to G–d. G–d listened to Abraham's prayer benevolently, and Isaac's soul achieved the prayed for degree of closeness with G–d's Essence. He received an additional input of Holy Spirit, and represents the deeper meaning of אדם ובהמה תושיע השם (Psalms 36,7) that his body too remained intact, and that G–d invited a ram to serve literally in lieu of Isaac, as we will explain.
  This leaves us with the meaning of Abraham's saying עד כה, which had been interpreted as Abraham wondering how the promise of כה יהיה זרעך could now be fulfilled. Instead of understanding this as a degree of doubt on Abraham's part, we must understand this as Abraham hoping that Isaac would really be able to live up to the highest expectations one can make of human beings. He prayed that כה, "thus", i.e. of such superior calibre, would be his descendants. If G–d had meant that hyperbole in Genesis 15,5 to describe the physical dimensions of Abraham's offspring, He should have compared them to the dust of the earth or the sand on the beaches of the sea, as we repeatedly read. G–d, however, referred to the spiritual dimension, and that is why He told Abraham to look towards heaven, and chose the hyperbole of "like the stars in heaven."
  When G–d told Abraham in 22,12 אל תשלח ידך אל הנער ואל תעש לו מאומה, "do not raise your hand against the lad and do not do anything to him," Abraham was stunned, fearing that maybe Isaac was found blemished, not worthy as a sacrifice. It was then that G–d took Abraham into His confidence, explaining that when He had said in 21,12 כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע, "for through Isaac your seed will be known," that had only referred to part of Isaac, i.e. ב. Now, after the עקדה, however, when Isaac has been cleansed of any unworthy parts, My promise refers to כל יצחק, all of Isaac, i.e. Isaac's entire personality qualifies to be your descendant. When Abraham receives a "second" message from G–d in 22,15, this is merely to assure him that G–d will certainly not change or qualify any promise He had made to him, and that the soul that inhabited Isaac's body now was שנית, a second one, his original soul having ascended to Heaven. It was because of the ריח ניחוח of the ram that Abraham slaughtered that Isaac's soul could ascend to Heaven, seeing that that ram had been a heavenly creature having been created at dusk of the sixth day of creation, as we know from Avot 5,9. The physical body of Isaac, who had been born of semen, was also replaced with sacred flesh. This is why he was forbidden to leave the holy soil of the land of Canaan.
  I have discussed this matter in greater detail in my sermon delivered on the Sabbath before Rosh Hashanah in connection with Deut. 30,11. Isaac then represents the מדת הדין, meaning that he is on a spiritual level that enables G–d to be as exacting with him as He had envisaged at the very beginning, before He began to create the universe. He represents what is called ראשית המחשבה. 
  I have explained earlier how Abraham is the source of the fulfilment of G–d's Name becoming י-ה-י-ה instead of י-ה-ו-ה, and how this is alluded to in the name Abraham called Mount Moriah, i.e. השם יראה.
  Since we are already on the subject of verse 22,14, let me tell you something interesting. The expression יראה is employed here twice; once it is vocalized Yireh, the other time it is vocalized Ye-ra-eh. I have already mentioned that a great promise is contained in this verse. We have also a promise in Isaiah 52,8 כי עין בעין יראו בשוב ה' ציון, that G–d's return to Zion will be witnessed visually. I believe that the two words יראה in our verse are an allusion to a statement by our sages in Chagigah 2 that בדרך שבא לראות כך בא לראות, "just as one sees with both eyes so one is seen with both eyes." The Talmud uses our verse to draw a comparison between the way G–d sees us and the way we see Him. It concludes that if someone is blind in one eye he need not make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem on the holidays since the Torah requires him to be "seen," i.e Ye-ra-eh. 
  Rashi comments that the spelling is Yireh, whereas the reading is Ye-ra-eh. He says of G–d (interpreting the Talmud) that "just as He comes to see you." Tosaphot challenge this commentary by Rashi, saying that the expression "He comes to see you,” used by Rashi as applicable to G–d is inadmissible, seeing that He is omnipresent and has no need to "come” anywhere. Tosaphot argue further that the traditional reading of ייראה would precede the spelling ירשאה, not vice versa.
   It seems that Tosaphot understand Rashi as applying both words to G–d regardless of the vocalization. When the traditional spelling, מסורה, is used, the Torah describes G–d as coming to see you, whereas the מקרא vocalization used by the Torah describes the manner in which man should appear before G–d. It is the former interpretation that Tosaphot challenge, saying that one cannot speak of G–d 'coming to see you." Besides, it would not be reasonable to make the מקרא secondary to the מסורה. This is the reason that Tosaphot change the version to read: Just as when man appears before G–d, he expects G–d to look at him with both eyes, so when he goes to see G–d he should look with both eyes when in possession of them. In Erchin 2b, Rashi explains our verse in the same way as he does in Chagigah, "just as G–d comes to see you." We have another place in Sanhedrin where Tosaphot reverse the version offered by Rashi in explanation of our verse. According to the traditional reading of Rashi's commentary, the allusion that we see in Abraham's naming of the site both as Yir-eh and then as Ye-ra-eh is perfectly compatible.
  It appears at first glance, that Tosaphot's interpretation of Rashi is not compatible with our interpretation of this verse. Actually, if you look carefully, you will find that Tosaphot's interpretation here is compatible with our understanding of Abraham's intent here. According to Tosaphot the first word יראה is spelled with the vowel Chirik i.e. the active form "he will see," whereas the second one is read Yero-eh, i.e. passive "He will be seen.” The meaning is that man will be seen by G–d before he has a chance to "see” G–d, i.e. appear in the precincts of the Holy Temple. This agrees with the statement "as man comes to be seen, להראות, (as the שכינה sees him), so he will be seen (by man). 
  Since Abraham was concerned with G–d seeing man or rather Isaac, in a favorable light, it is obvious that the word Yir eh with the vowel chirik had to precede the word Ye-ra-eh with the vowel Tzeyreh.
  We have now explored three ways in which the meal Abraham offered the angels can be tied in with the עקדה, something still almost 40 years in the future. The paragraph dealing with Lot's flight from Sodom also contains allusions to the עקדה, as mentioned in Bereshit Rabbah 50,10 on the verse ואת שתי בנותיו הנמצאות (Genesis 19,15). Rabbi Tuviah says that these two daughters are Ruth the Moabite and Naami the Ammonite. Rabbi Yitzchak says that G–d said "I have found My servant David. Where did I find him? In Sodom."
  The experience of Sarah in Avimelech's household is an allusion to the exile of the Jewish people in the future, showing how, when that exile is over, the Jewish people will emerge with both wealth and prestige – just as Sarah did. 
  This is followed by the paragraph reporting Isaac's birth, which alludes to the future when Israel will say to G–d "You are our Father, etc." as we have mentioned. This in turn is followed by the report of the עקדה, a hint of the distant idyllic future when the verse in Isaiah 52,8 will be fulfilled.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  וירא אליו ה' באלוני ממרא. Since it had been Mamre who had advised Abraham on the matter of his circumcision, he is mentioned here, and G–d appeared to Abraham on his land. Many people ask how it was possible that Abraham should have consulted with this man about such a question. None of the answers that I have seen have satisfied me. I consider it blasphemous for someone to suggest that Abraham made the performance of the commandment subject to Mamre's advice. All Abraham could have done was to consult with Mamre on how to perform this commandment, since he had also been commanded to circumcise Ishmael and all the members of his household. There was always the chance that members of Abraham's household would refuse to undergo the operation. We have proof of this from Ishmael's boast that he had not refused. Abraham therefore consulted how best to convince all parties concerned to comply with G–d's command.
  The moral lesson to be learned from this is that when one is instructed to fulfill a certain מצוה, one should consult with a qualified person how best to fulfill it.
  Abraham already observed all the מצות of the Torah before they were obligatory. He knew that the מצוה of circumcision would be commanded sooner or later. He consulted with Mamre whether he should perform this מצוה prior to being commanded, since unlike other מצות, this one could only be performed once in his lifetime, and, as it turns out, is a commandment which very much hinges on performance on time, i.e. מילה בזמנה. The optimal way of performing this commandment is at the appropriate time.
  ויאמר אדני אם נא מצאתי חן בעיניך אל נא תעבור מעל עבדך  . We learn from here that when one tries to do someone a favor one should describe it in such a way that the recipient feels it is he who is doing the favor by accepting same. When one creates such an atmosphere, the recipient will not decline; he will not think that the donor will boast about having done him a particular favour. This is why Abraham described himself as in those people's debt if they honoured him with their presence.
  ואקחה פת לחם … ואל הבקר רץ אברהם .  Abraham said little but did a lot.
  ויאכלו . Bereshit Rabbah 48,14 quotes Rabbi Tanchum saying in the name of Rabbi Meir that we can learn manners from here. When Moses went to heaven (Mount Sinai and beyond), he mentioned that he had not eaten or drunk for forty days and nights. This was because heavenly beings do not require food and drink, and Moses conducted himself according to local custom. On finding themselves in an earthly environment, the angels behaved accordingly and accepted food and drink. [Bamidbar Rabbah 10,5 explains that the reason why the angel who appeared to Manoach refused to eat whereas the angels that visited Abraham accepted food and drink is simple. The latter had appeared in the guise of humans, whereas the former had never appeared in the guise of a human being. Ed]
  Both this paragraph as well as the paragraph dealing with the destruction of Sodom contain many valuable allusions to the day of judgment, the manner in which the soul leaves the body, all of which are discussed in מדרש נעלם of the Zohar. The author recommends that his reader study that part of the Zohar.
  כי ידעתיו למען אשר יצוה את בניו ואת ביתו אחריו . It is a very important matter for a father to admonish his children and household. A father should do so on an ongoing basis as long as he lives. He should also leave behind him written instructions for every member of his household, each one according to his particular character. Such instructions should remain sealed until after the father departs this earth.
  ארדה נא ואראה . G–d uses this expression both here before finalizing the decree to destroy Sodom and before deciding how to deal with the generation that built the Tower of Babel. Rashi's comment on this is most appropriate.
  ויקומו משם האנשים וישקיפו על פני סדום . The Zohar on this verse is very instructive. Here is what he says: "Rabbi Eliezer said that from here we can see to what extent G–d employs His attribute of Goodness with all His creatures. How much more so does He do so with those of His creatures who walk in His paths. For even at a time when He prepares to execute judgment, He provides an opportunity for those who love Him to acquire some merit before His judgment strikes the world.
  We have learned that at a time when G–d loves man He sends him a gift. What is this gift? A poor person. G–d extends this opportunity to perform a deed of loving kindness with the poor. When such a good deed has been performed by such a person, G–d provides more of a thread of חסד which originates in the 'right' side of the emanations, and He spreads this thread over the head of the person who looked after the poor. He makes a mark on that person's head so that, when judgment engulfs his environment, the executing angel should beware not to touch the individual so marked by G–d. When G–d was about to destroy Sodom, He first provided Abraham with the merit of entertaining the three angels so that through the meeting he would have a chance to save Lot his nephew by using their good services. This is the meaning of 'G–d remembered Abraham and sent Lot away from the destruction' (19,29). The Torah does not say that 'G–d remembered Lot.' He was saved by the merit of Abraham. What was it that G–d remembered? It refers to Abraham's treatment of the angels. G–d remembers the charitable deeds of a person at the time when destructive forces are allowed free reign. All these good deeds performed are recorded in Heaven. This is the meaning of וצדקה תציל ממות, 'and charity saves one from death' (Proverbs 10,2). This is why G–d arranged for Abraham to have the opportunity to perform an act of charity which could serve as an excuse to save Lot." Thus far the Zohar on the subject (Sullam edition Vayera 52).
  ויגש אברהם . The Midrash Ne'elam of the Zohar on this verse (Sullam edition page 60) quotes Rabbi as saying that it is a מצוה for a person to pray that sinners become penitent so that they will not wind up in purgatory. We know this because it says in Psalms 35,13: ואני בחלותם לבושי שק, "Yet when they were sick, my dress was sackcloth." [David prayed when sinners suffered afflictions. Ed.] Rabbi also says that it is forbidden to pray that the sinners should be wiped out, for if G–d had wiped out Terach while he was still an idol-worshiper, our patriarch Abraham would never have seen the light of day, there would have been no Jewish people, neither would there have been a David. Torah would not have been given to mankind, and all the righteous and pious people would never have existed.
  אל תבט אחריך . When G–d does a person a favor to which he is not entitled by personal merit, such a person should feel shame and embarrassment. He most certainly should not feel superior because G–d has chosen to do him such a favor. This is why the angels rushed Lot, as if to say: "Be happy that at least you save your life." On the other hand, when the Jewish people were liberated by G–d from Egypt, and G–d performed many miracles, they had indeed merited those. This is why the Torah says אשר עשה ה' אלוקיך במצרים לעיניך, the miracles G–d performed for you in Egypt in front of your very eyes" (Deut. 4,34). Not only were the Israelites saved from the effects of the plagues, but they were allowed to watch the Egyptians suffer from them.
  Our sages in Baba Kama 38 say that a person should always perform a מצוה at the earliest possible opportunity, because of the single night that Lot's older daughter preceded her younger sister (in sleeping with her father), she merited that the maternal founder of the Davidic dynasty Ruth was born four generations sooner than Na'amah, the future wife of Rechavam son of Solomon. G–d examines the motives of people. Although what the daughters of Lot did appears as brazen, G–d knew that their motivation was pure. It was an עבירה לשמה, a sin performed for the sake of G–d. If prompt performance of such a dubious act brings such reward in its wake, how much more must one hurry to perform those מצות promptly that are clearly means of sanctifying oneself.
  וה' פקד את שרה . Our sages in Baba Kama 92 learn from the sequence of these verses that if someone prays for his fellow-man although he himself is also in need of the favor he asks G–d for someone else, then his own problem will be dealt with by G–d first. Rashi points out that this is proved by the word פקד, instead of .ויפקוד
  והוכיח אברהם את אבימלך .  Rabbi Yossi in the name of Rabbi Chaninah says that admonition eventually produces a feeling of love for the one who admonishes. We know this from Proverbs 9,8: "Admonish the wise and he will love you." Rabbi Yossi firmly believed that any "peace" that does not include admonition is no true peace (Bereshit Rabbah 54,3). 
  If someone hates someone else in his heart believing that person had somehow committed a wrong against him, he should not nurture hatred in his heart but take the matter up with the person concerned so as to restore good relations, by giving the one who did the wrong a chance to apologize. Thus love and harmony will be restored between them.
  The עקדה teaches that a person must put his entire personality at G–d's disposal; certainly so if it is only a question of one of his limbs and even more so if it be a question of one of his shortcomings such as the tendency to get up late for public prayer and Torah study. Whenever one finds that one's personal inclination conflicts with the revealed will of G–d, one must suppress one's own will in favor of doing G–d's will. 
  When one is confronted with the opportunity to either perform a מצוה, or with the chance to sin (in a manner not detected by his fellow-man), he should ask himself if perchance G–d is not testing him just as G–d had tested Abraham. One can never be certain that G–d does not test one and should consider this before arriving at any decision. Hail to the person who constantly reflects on how G–d would wish him to act.
  
  Chayei Sara
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  
   It is a great מצוה to bury the dead and to eulogize them, and to take special pains to eulogize a Torah scholar and to weep for his passing. Abraham taught us this as the Torah reports: ויבא אברהם לספוד לשרה ולבכותה, "Abraham arrived to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her" (Genesis 23,2). Even though this commandment is not enumerated as a separate positive commandment in the 613 commandments, it is included in the general commandment והלכת בדרכיו, "endeavor to emulate G–d's ways; just as He buries the dead, (quoting G–d burying Moses in Deut. 34,6) so you too are enjoined to bury the dead," as we have discussed at the beginning of פרשת וירא.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The whole subject matter of burial is connected with Genesis 3,19: כי עפר אתה ואל עפר אתה תשוב, "For you are dust, and to dust you shall return." Adam's origin was dust from the earth. Our sages describe G–d as having taken earth from the site that is described in Exodus 20,21: מזבח אדמה תעשה לי, "Make for Me an altar of earth" (Talmud Yerushalmi, Nazir 7,2). 
  The sages also describe G–d as having gathered a little dust from every part of the globe so that wherever man would die, the local earth would not reject his remains since he contained part of it (Rashi Genesis 2,7). Both statements are accurate and point us in the same direction. It is well known that Adam incorporated within him all subsequent generations of mankind, for their very existence was through him. Our sages described all subsequent mankind as being related to Adam either through his head, his eyes, his hair, etc. [In present-day parlance this means that all of our genes were at one time part of the genes of Adam.] Even in death man is not totally severed from his connection with original man: the earth Adam was made of was holy soil, from the site of the earth of the altar mentioned. That piece of earth in turn contained earth from all parts of the globe, seeing that this site is the site from which the whole earth receives its sustenance. Had Adam not sinned he would have lived forever. Since he sinned, however, and was expelled from the garden of Eden because G–d did not want him to eat from the tree of life and live forever, he was bound to die sometime. 
  The experience of death when it is the death of one of His pious ones, is something very precious in the eyes of G–d (Psalms 116,15), because it enables man to return to his lofty place in גן עדן and his soul to live forever. Once there, his soul will ascend to ever higher levels. The reason Adam was buried in the cave of Machpelah is that it is the site which has an opening to גן עדן. The Zohar (page 28 Sullam edition) on חיי שרה says that Abraham recognised a secret sign in the cave after he had seen Adam and Eve buried there. How could he have known? After all, had he ever seen Adam and Eve? He had a vision of Adam and a door opened to גן עדן. Adam had lived in גן עדן at one time; it was appropriate therefore that his burial place should adjoin it. The Zohar continues that anyone who has a vision of Adam will die immediately. Abraham, however, saw an apparition of Adam and survived. He beheld the cave light up and one candle remained lit. He now decided that he also wanted to be buried there. From then on his constant longing was to be buried in that cave. Thus far the Zohar.
  Original man, as we have said, was created from earth from all parts of the globe, taken from the site of the altar, whereas when he died he wound up in the cave of Machpelah since from there he could ascend to the Heavenly Regions rising ever higher. Only the Creator knows which site on earth is suitable to create man from, and which is suitable for his burial and transfer to Gan Eden. Adam contained elements of all mankind. When a person dies Adam becomes visible to that person seeing he is a "branch" of him. Everyone's burial site should contain some connection with original man, however physically distant it might be from either the original altar or the cave of Machpelah. Every person will benefit in some way from the example of Adam, the degree of such benefit depending on his individual merit. The point is that just as Adam incorporated part of all mankind when he came into being, so he has something in common with every human being when that human being dies.
  Our sages have said that the souls of the righteous are offered as a sacrifice on the celestial altar. This statement is what is meant when the Talmud describes the time when the daily morning sacrifice was offered in the Temple. Yuma 28 describes how it was determined whether the sky had become sufficiently light to proceed with offering the תמיד של שחר, the daily morning sacrifice. The lookout watched in the direction of Hebron and, when the time was right, called out "Barkai." Mattyah ben Shmuel would then query once more if the entire Eastern sky was already lit up, and the lookout would respond "yes!" The lookout towards Hebron was important because אדם הראשון, who had been taken from the site of his atonement, the earthen altar, was buried there. From there he has to return to the site of the altar in the Heavenly Regions for his soul to be a sacrifice.
  Although we have stated that all generations subsequent to Adam contain some element of his, the link to Adam is only via the patriarchs who serve as the go-between. The only people who are named אבות, patriarchs, are Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The same applies to the matriarchs. Only Sarah, Rebeccah, Rachel and Leah are considered אמהות, matriarchs. We are all considered their children seeing that they are the roots and we are the branches. This whole process commenced ultimately with Adam and Eve, both of whom together are called אדם. How does this process work? Abraham and Sarah are the תיקון, reformation of Adam and Eve ensuring their continuity. Isaac and Rebeccah are the קלסתר פנים, the visible image of Abraham and Sarah, whereas the existence of the universe as we know it is due to Jacob. The "beauty" of Jacob is described as equivalent to the "beauty" of Adam (Baba Metzia 84a). Jacob is considered as attached to the tree of life because Adam had severed this attachment when he ate from the tree of knowledge. The patriarchs are important because it was they who started to repair the damage Adam had caused. Abraham may be considered as the root of the tree of knowledge, Isaac as its trunk, the area whence knowledge of good and evil is gained; Jacob represents the substance or content of "the tree of life in the midst of the garden," seeing that all his children remained loyal to his teachings. G–d Himself said about the Jewish people (Jacob) ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים כלכם היום, "and you who have cleaved to the Lord your G–d are all alive this day" (Deut. 4,4). This means that all of Israel is basically in a position to live eternally [life of the soul after death of the body Ed.].
  I shall now explain all these matters step by step. Regarding the statement that Abraham and Sarah were the תקון for Adam and Eve, the Zohar on this portion (page 34 Sullam edition) writes as follows: Rabbi Shimon said that when Abraham entered the cave of Machpelah to bury Sarah, Adam and Eve arose as they did not want to remain buried in there. They complained that they had suffered sufficient disgrace in the world beyond the grave where they were now having to face G–d, because they had been guilty of bringing sin into the world. Now they should suffer additional shame when constantly having to face a pair of humans so much better than they? Abraham replied that he was prepared to pray to G–d on Adam's behalf so that he would cease to suffer embarassment before G–d in the future and so that G–d would forgive Adam his sin. Immediately after that Abraham buried his wife Sarah. What is the meaning of the words ואחרי כן, "after that.” in 23,19? It means that Abraham proceeded to bury Sarah as soon as the dialogue between him and Adam was over. The Torah writes that אברהם קבר את שרה, instead of אברהם קבר לשרה. This means that he also reburied חוה. After that the minds of Adam and Eve were put at rest. This is the meaning of אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם "and these are the generations of heaven and earth" (Genesis 2,4), meaning that those created as a mixture of heaven and earth endure only by the grace of Abraham (the letters in the word בהבראם). Adam and Eve, of course, were not descendants of man; they were created by G–d. Their continuity was assured through Abraham, their תולדות are through אברהם. We have further proof from Genesis 23,20 which describes the field of Machpelah “ויקם” as a hereditary possession for Abraham. Until that time, as is apparent, Adam and Eve had not had a firm hold on the world beyond the grave. The word ויקם is derived from קיום, a permanent existence. Thus far the Zohar.  Abraham assured Adam's permanent status in the hereafter; Sarah did the same for Eve.
   The fact that Isaac's features reflected those of his father Abraham is pointed out by Rashi on Genesis 25,19. Rebeccah's features were like those of Sarah, as the Zohar points out on Genesis 24,67: ויביאה יצחק האהלה שרה אמו, "Isaac brought her (Rebeccah) into the tent of his mother Sarah." Rabbi Yossi questioned why the Torah did not say לאהל שרה אמו. He explains that the letter ה at the beginning of a word indicates that this was a special tent, the one that contained the Presence of the שכינה. As long as Sarah had been alive, G–d's Presence had never departed from that tent; Sarah had kept a light burning from one Sabbath Eve to the next. This light went out when Sarah died. Now that Rebeccah entered, it began burning again. The reason that the verse mentions Sarah by name, [after all we all know that Isaac's mother was Sarah! Ed.] is to tell us that Rebeccah was like Sarah in all respects. Rabbi Yehudah adds that just as Isaac's features resembled those of his father so much that he was frequently mistaken for Abraham, so Rebeccah's features resembled those of Sarah to such an amazing degree that this had to be emphasized. The Torah points out that Isaac was comforted so as to show us that this was because he had found such a perfect replacement for his mother. The Torah deliberately avoids saying that Isaac was consoled over Sarah's death, but mentions only אחרי אמו, to show that he found continuity. Thus far the Zohar.
  Jacob was the descendant of Isaac and Rebeccah. In the case of Abraham's son Isaac, G–d had promised Abraham only כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע, that part of Isaac would be his worthy seed, not all of Isaac. The Torah reports that Rebeccah loved Jacob (25,28). We have said that then the world was filled with Jacob's "beauty," which was of the kind once possessed by Adam, מטתו שלמה, Jacob's bed was perfect, i.e. all his children were loyal to his teachings which enabled him to become known as ישראל. Since only ישראל is called אדם, the connection between Jacob and Adam is clear. 
  Our sages in Eruvin 53a have said that the reason the cave Abraham and Sarah were buried in is called מערת המכפלה, is from the word כפול, twin, or double, an appropriate name for a grave containing husbands and their wives, i.e. זוגות. What advantage is there in the fact that this cave houses the remains of husband and wife respectively? The meaning of our sages is that these pairs are all united with one another, that they are not separate pairs. Once the last of the four pairs, i.e. Jacob came to burial whose מטתו שלמה, whose "bed" was complete (since Leah had born him six sons and one daughter whose name was דינה),this symbolized the six days of creation and the Sabbath. 
  When Jacob is described as יושב אהלים, "a dweller of tents," this refers to his being the link between two tents, i.e. the tent of Abraham who personified the attribute of חסד, and the tent of Isaac who personified the attribute of דין, Justice, as we have explained repeatedly. Jacob achieved a perfect blend between these two attributes. We have previously described that G–d, when He created the universe, decided to co-opt the attribute of Mercy to the attribute of Justice. Jacob reflected G–d's decision. When our sages always speak of the "love" of Abraham, the "fear" of Isaac, and the "truth" of Jacob this is the combination of Mercy and Justice. Jacob represented the emanation תפארת.
  When we said that Abraham "repaired" the root of the tree of knowledge, the Zohar explains this on Parshat Vayera in these words: Abraham made a point of planting a tree wherever he lived for some time. The trees did not always develop properly if outside the land of Canaan. By means of such a tree he knew who believed in G–d and who practised paganism. When the tree spread out its branches providing shade for the person next to it, this was a sign that the person believed in G–d. When the person underneath the tree was a pagan, the tree would withdraw its branches so as not to provide shade for that person. Abraham would then warn such a person that he should worship the One and Only G–d. He would not desist till he had convinced him. The tree would act similarly to indicate who was ritually pure and who was not. When a person was not ritually pure Abraham would purify him with water. There was a fountain next to the tree. When a person required ritual immersion, the waters of the fountain would rise towards him and the branches would bend upwards. This alerted Abraham to the fact that the person was unclean and that his impurity could be removed by simple immersion and did not require a waiting period of seven days. Should the person need this longer period of purification, the waters in the fountain would seem to dry up. When Abraham told the three angels (men) at the time he invited them to come and rest under the tree, he already wanted to examine them as to their ritual purity. He did not say "rest under a tree," but "rest under THE tree." The tree would act similarly to indicate who was ritually pure and who was not. When a person was not ritually pure Abraham would purify him with water. There was a fountain next to the tree. When a person required ritual immersion, the waters of the fountain would rise towards him and the branches would bend upwards. This alerted Abraham to the fact that the person was unclean and that his impurity could be removed by simple immersion and did not require a waiting period of seven days. Should the person need this longer period of purification, the waters in the fountain would seem to dry up. 
  When Abraham told the three angels (men) at the time he invited them to come and rest under the tree, he already wanted to examine them as to their ritual purity. He did not say "rest under a tree," but "rest under THE tree." When Adam sinned, he sinned with the tree of knowledge. That tree brought death into the world. G–d Himself is on record as evicting Adam from the garden of Eden so that he should not be able to eat from the tree of life and thus live forever (Genesis 3,22).
  Isaac slowed the expansion of the influence of the tree of knowledge by means of the birth of the twins Jacob and Esau. This was an indication that even evil can be rehabilitated. Our sages phrased it thus: Esau's head reposes within the lap of Isaac; such is the mystery of how evil can be rehabilitated. The secret of how this happens was alluded to by our sages' explanation that the reason the pig is called חזיר, (from the root חזר to return) is that in the future it will restore the crown to its Master, as we know from Ovadiah 1,21 ועלו מושיעין בהר ציון … והיתה לה' המלוכה, "For the saviours will march up Mount Zion… and the kingdom will be G–d's." (cf. details in Kohelet Rabbah end section 1). All of these events will occur at the time when G–d will "slaughter" the angel of death. This is the plain meaning of Isaiah 25,8 בלע המות לנצח, "He will destroy death forever." This angel of death will then remain as a regular angel, since all the negative forces we know as קליפות are after all an outgrowth of a holy source. This is what was alluded to in the quote that the head of Esau reposes in Isaac's lap. When the head expands it becomes a symbol of impurity. The very name סמ-אל Samael, (Satan) reflects the dual nature of evil. On the one hand the name א-ל, G–d, is part of that definition, on the other hand the word סם represents the סם המות, lethal poison. In such a future the סם aspect of Satan/ Samael will be abolished. We, the Jewish nation however, are called by the name of G–d. Our sages interpreted Genesis 33,20 ויקרא לו א-ל א-לוהי ישראל, "He (G–d) called him (Jacob) El the G–d of Israel" (Megillah 18a, proving that the word לו could not refer to the altar Jacob had built). We have an allusion to this in Genesis 11,10 אלה תולדת שם, suggesting that we, his descendants, are all a "full name," not half a name such as סמא-ל. 
  The Torah tells of Abraham giving gifts to the sons of his concubines (Genesis 25,6), and Sanhedrin 91a describes these "gifts" as שם טומאה, i.e. Abraham did not want them to refer to Satanic forces by the name of G–d (Torah Temimah on that verse). The reason that the word פלגשם in that verse is spelled defectively, without the letter י to indicate the plural ending, is to allude to the name i.e. שם of the קליפה. Read פלג-שם, the name divided, and you have a hint of the dichotomy of forces, which is what סטרא אחרא and טומאה is all about. In the future this process will be reversed and טומאה will vanish.
  All this is contained in the report of the Creation. The קליפה preceded light since the Torah speaks of Tohu vavohu and darkness as extant before G–d commanded "let there be light." Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 2,4 understand the four words והארץ תהו ובהו חשך in that verse as alluding to the four periods of exile Israel would have to endure before the coming of the Messiah. The words יהי אור are the reference to that period in our history which will unfold at the end of the periods of exile. The true "good," unmixed with evil, is represented by Jacob; he represents the very essence, "kernel" of the tree of life that is described as being in the "center" of the garden. When the Torah says וכל טוב אדוניו בידו, "and all the goodness of his Master in his hand" (Genesis 24,10), this Tuv instead of Tov, refers to absolute good, not something merely relatively good i.e. Tov. The word Tuv means "goodness par excellence." Abraham explained this to Eliezer when he sent him on the mission to get a wife for Isaac and said "the Lord, the G–d of Heaven who has taken me from my father's house and from my birthplace." Rashi says that the words מבית אבי, refer to Charan, whereas the words מארץ מולדתי, refer to Ur Kasdim. Our sages in Sanhedrin 19, commenting on Isaiah 29,22:"Jacob who redeemed Abraham," say that G–d only saved Abraham from Nimrod's furnace on account of Jacob's merit. This whole statement will be explained in detail in פרשת תולדות. Thus it becomes clear that the whole purpose of Isaac's marriage was to enable Jacob to be born from that union. This is why Abraham hinted to Eliezer "you must on no account bring my son there" (24,6). The implication is that "my grandson" may return there. He will have to go back there to retrieve his "lost" part, i.e. Rachel, Leah, Zilpah and Bilhah. This is why Jacob שמר את הצאן, "tended the flock," and our sages understand this term as similar to the Talmudic צאן ברזל, inalienable property. The letters in the word ברזל, correspond to the respective first letters in the names of Jacob's wives רחל-לאה-בלהה-זלפה.
  You will find the respective attributes of the patriarchs alluded to in the story of this journey to secure a wife for Isaac. In 24,11 Eliezer prays that G–d should perform an act of חסד, kindness, i.e. Abraham's cardinal virtue, for Abraham. In 24,19 we read: ותאמר גם לגמליך אשאב, "I shall also draw water for your camels." The letters אגלא are the name of the attribute גבורה, Isaac's special characteristic. The Kabbalists have adopted this name from the words in our daily prayer אתה גבור לעולם א-דני. Kabbalists have used this to explain why we change the order of praise for G–d in the last part of the נשמת prayer on ראש השנה. Seeing that Rosh Hashanah is called יום הדין, Day of Judgment, the words in the paragraph בפי ישרים תתרומם, etc. are arranged so that by reading the words ישרים, צדיקים, חסידים, קדושים placed one on top of the other, we get the name יצחק. When you do the same with the words תתרומם, תתברך, תתקדש, תתהלל, and you place them above each other in the corresponding stanza, the third letters in each of these words together spell רבקה, Isaac's soul mate.
   This is an allusion to דין, i.e. Justice. It is not the function of Justice to uproot or to destroy, rather it is the function of Justice to treat each person on his merits. The very letters of the name רבקה reflect this even-handedness of the attribute of Justice. The two letters רק allude to a person who is Reyk, empty of merits, whereas the two letters בה allude to someone who has content. Together this is what Justice is all about. G–d pays man כדרכו כפרי מעלליו, "according to his way with the fruit of his deeds” (Jeremiah 17,10). Abraham alluded to this when he used the word רק when he forbade Eliezer to take Isaac back there. Eliezer, in recognition of that hint, used the word בה when he described the kind of girl he considered suitable as a marriage partner for Isaac. He also referred to Abraham's attribute of חסד when he said: 24,14) בה אדע כי עשית חסד עם אדוני). 
  Still a little later he refers to Jacob's attribute of אמת, when he thanks G–d for making his mission successful with the words: 24,27) ברוך ה' אלוקי אדוני אברהם אשר לא עזב חסדו ואמתו מעם אדוני). 
  When Eliezer fails to mention G–d's חסד in his review of the events in verse 48, the reason is that he focuses on the future, i.e. on Jacob who is to be born of that forthcoming union between Isaac and Rebeccah. 
  We have another allusion to Jacob in the course of the Torah's report of Eliezer's journey, when the Torah describes Eliezer thanking G–d in that verse with the words: אשר הנחני בדרך אמת, "who has guided me on the path of truth." He referred to the קפיצת הדרך he had experienced i.e. the telescoping of the distance from Kiryat Arba to Charan into a single day's journey. Something similar happened to Jacob on his journey to Charan in Genesis 28,11 (see Rashi). Eliezer told his hosts that if they were prepared to do a חסד and אמת for him all well and good, seeing that Jacob would be destined to "redeem," i.e. justify G–d's having saved Abraham from Nimrod's furnace. This is the deeper meaning of חסד ואמת.  When Jacob, whose children were all loyal to the tradition founded by Abraham and Isaac appeared on the scene of history, the whole universe became rejuvenated. Jacob personified the purpose of Creation which is intended to be fully good and to continue indefinitely as symbolized by the tree of life in the center of the garden of Eden. Ishmael, who represented the קליפה, the husk, preceded Isaac; it is in the nature of things for the husk to appear before the fruit, the kernel.
  Now the way was paved for the great light to shine. When our sages formulated the grace after meals, in the course of which we refer to the respective blessings received by the patriarchs as בכל for Abraham, מכל for Isaac, and כל for Jacob, the latter is perceived as having received greater blessings than either his father or his grandfather. The word כל is synonymous with the essence of something, seeing that the exterior things are nothing of substance. Abraham is described as בכל, meaning that he removed part of the pollutant that had surrounded this כל from both sides. 
  Ephron, or rather the people of his town also hinted at that fact when they said in 23,15 נשיא אלוקים אתה בתוכנו, "you are a prince in our midst." They realized that while Abraham represented the essence of what was good, Ishmael represented the קליפה on the "right," Esau that on the "left." We here view grandchildren as being in the same class as children. Isaac, who is described in the grace after meals as the recipient of the blessing מכל, has only one קליפה, Esau attached to him. Jacob, on the other hand, is totally free of any קליפה sticking to him. He represents the tree of life in the centre of the garden.
  
  Nachmanides deals with the problem at length and is worth reading (cf. 24,1). I shall also make a contribution to these puzzling and conflicting statements. Nachmanides follows his method, whereas I shall follow mine.
  There is a Midrash Chazit on Song of Songs 3, 21 in which Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai asks Rabbi Eliezer son of Rabbi Yossi whether he had heard any comment about the crown his mother had made for him. Rabbi Eliezer replied in the affirmative. When asked what that comment was, he replied that it was a parable describing a king who had only one daughter whom he loved excessively and whom he called בתי, "my daughter." In the course of time he took to calling her אחותי, "my sister." Still later he started calling her אמי, "my mother." This describes the developing relationship of love between G–d and Israel. It is reflected in Psalms 45,11 where G–d is described as addressing Israel as "listen daughter, and incline your ear." In Song of Songs 5,2 Israel is addressed as "open your heart to Me My sister;" in Isaiah 51,4 Israel is addressed as עמי ולאומי, and the latter word is spelled Immi, "my mother." Upon hearing this Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai stood up and kissed Rabbi Eliezer on his head and said: "if I had only come to hear this word from you it would already have been worthwhile."
  The gist of the story is that cause and effect are described as feeding on each other. The effect, i.e. עלול, is "beneath" i.e. the result of the עילה, "the cause." This is why it is described as בת, daughter. The first level of achievement in a developing and deepening relationship is called "daughter." When this relationship develops further, the result at the next level is described as "sister." When the relationship intensifies still more the result is called "my mother." This process can be compared to an infant suckling on the mother's breast. The very suckling increases the mother's supply of milk, i.e. the infant itself is not only the effect but also the cause of the mother being a true mother. Our sages in Moed Katan 16 have G–d ask: מי מושל בי? "Who governs My actions?" and answer: צדיק, שאני גוזר גזרה והוא מבטל אותה, "the righteous, for I make a decree and he annuls it." A statement in a similar vein is found in Taanit 7a where Rabbi Chanina says: "I have learned a great deal from my teachers; I have learned even more from my colleagues; the most I have learned from my students." The students mentioned there are analogous to the "daughter" mentioned in the Midrash Chazit above. The colleagues are analogous to the "sister, and the "mother" mentioned there is analogous to the "teacher," i.e. רב.
  Each category mentioned represents a spiritual advance over the one preceding it. The reason that the examples mentioned are all feminine, i.e. בת, אחות, אם, instead of בן, אח, אב, is because this present world compares to the World To Come as the female of the species compares to the male. The Zohar, commenting on the words ויאמר אלוקים, explains that these words, when used in the story of Creation, are to be regarded as אמא עילאה, "the Mother Superior" from whom the developments of all the seven days of Creation take their cue. [In order to understand this let me say that in the Heavenly Domain that is exclusively G–d's, "building" does not proceed along the lines we are used to on earth. We know three stages:  Planning, or מחשבה. Next comes the articulation of what is planned, אמירה. Last comes the execution, עשיה. When G–d is the "builder," these stages are simultaneous. When the Torah says: ויאמר אלוקים, this is articulation and execution at one and the same time. When G–d plans something, He is considered the אב, "father." His "executive arm" is described as "mother," something the Zohar describes as אמא עילאה. Adam's soul is perceived as having been created in the emanation חכמה, whereas the original light was created in the emanation בינה. When that light will eventually be restored, it will return from the emanation חכמה. This is why it will be more powerful spiritually than originally. Ed] The whole מעשה בראשית is considered the בנין, the structure. When G–d said: "Let there be light,” the light in question is the original light which was hidden pending the arrival of the Messiah. When it will re-emerge, it will shine even more powerfully than before it was concealed from this world. Matters concerning this world reach up to the emanation בינה, the highest emanation of the "left" side of the system. The highest emanation on the "right" side is the emanation חכמה, which is outside the framework of עולם הזה; the light G–d originally created was removed there at the end of the cycle of Creation.
  The message contained in this perception is that even before the sin, when קליפות were not yet a viable part of this world, they did exist as a potentially negative force. One may compare their existence to that of the yeast inside the grapes before distillation. As soon as the light was removed from this world, due to Adam's sin, the קליפות were able to emerge from a hitherto hidden existence and permeate this world. In the future, however, when they will be abolished, they will not even remain as a potential force. Once something that had existed only as a potential, becomes actualized, it disappears utterly when it is neutralized. As a result, the original light whose existence was anchored only in the emanation בינה, i.e. "mother," will then be able to advance to the emanation חכמה, i.e. "father." In that capacity it will illuminate this world with the brightness of the World To Come. At such a time the world will be known as the world of the male. Our sages have alluded to this repeatedly when they distinguish between singing songs of praise to G–d. Sometimes these are called שירה חדשה, other times שיר חדש. In this world, and for salvations experienced thus far, we thank G–d only with the "feminine" שירה חדשה, whereas we look forward to the time when we shall be able to thank G–d by singing a "masculine" שיר חדש. [Compare the end of the first part of the Haggadah shel Pessach and the use of these two expressions by the author of the Haggadah. Ed.] The soul of Adam originated in the emanation חכמה, the region called אב; therefore it is masculine. The soul of Eve, however, originated in the emanation בינה, otherwise known as "mother." I have explained this at length in my introduction to the treatise תולדות אדם.
  When it comes to ridding the world of the קליפות, the spiritually negative pollutants, Abraham is secondary to Sarah. This is so in spite of the fact that Abraham's soul was connected directly to the source of the light that has been hidden, and which contains the power to purify that which is impure when it is once more released into this world. When we speak about Abraham being the first to remove part of the קליפות, it is because of his soul's origin. Seeing that the קליפות were released into this world through Adam and that Abraham was Adam's first תקון, these קליפות when being removed from our world are eliminated via Abraham on their way back to oblivion. Abraham is the מכניס גרים, the chief of the proselytizers, seeing that the חיצונים, those outside the fold are redeemable, will become purified and become פנימיים, "insiders." Sarah's outstanding quality lay in her diminishing the influence of the קליפות at the time when they were rampant in the world known as נקבה, female. She chose the path of פנימיות, She did not produce any קליפה, as opposed to Abraham when the latter sired Ishmael. Isaac's son Esau, by marrying a daughter of Ishmael, established a bond with that קליפה. Sarah, on the other hand, wanted the mother of that קליפה, whom she described as האמה הזאת, "this slave woman," removed together with her son. Even though Esau indirectly also was a descendant of Sarah, for he was her grandson, she was still superior to Abraham in that she recognized the evil influence of the קליפה. If Ishmael had remained alone, not partnered by Esau, his evil influence would have been far more negligible. Even though Ishmael and Esau did not live in the same region, did not even maintain peaceful relations, as is the custom among the קליפות, they still gave each other moral support in their spiritually negative outlook.
  When the view is expressed in Baba Batra 16 that Abraham had a daughter, and that Abraham was secondary to Sarah, this is in contrast to Sarah whom he called "my sister." A daughter represents a lesser degree of intimacy than a sister. Afterwards, as Abraham progressed spiritually (we explained the meaning of “לך לך,” where Abraham is reported as moving from one place to another), he suggests that she should describe him as "my brother" (20,5). Sarah's real relationship with Abraham at that time was of the level "mother." 
  Rabbi Meir, who said that Abraham did not have a daughter, refers to that stage of Abraham's development. Hence there is no conflict between the opinions of Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Meir. The other rabbis who stated that Abraham had a daughter called בכל take their cue from the numerical value of the word 52= בכל, which equals the numerical value of the word בן.
   A careful look at the wording of Rashi's commentary on that verse will show that Rashi repeats himself, something quite uncharacteristic. He says: “בכל עולה בגימטריה בן, ומאחר שהיה לו בן צריך להשיאו אשה. Rashi should either have said: עולה בן, or בגימטריה בן. Rashi may have faced the following difficulty: Had the Torah wanted to emphasize the numerical significance of the word בכל, it should have written וה' ברך את אברהם בבכל. Rashi therefore wants to alert us that we should imagine that extra letter ב as if it was there.  
  There is another aspect to this, one which does not necessitate the second letter ב at all. I therefore propose the following solution: When Abraham had one son who was a קליפה, i.e. Ishmael, this happened to him because of “בכל,” because he was surrounded by קליפות from both sides. His having a son such as Ishmael is therefore described as being in the nature of a בת, a lesser level of intimacy (with G–d in this case) than that of אחות, or אם. When the angel stressed והנה בן לשרה אשתך, "your wife Sarah will have a son," in 18,10, he alluded to this superiority of Sarah over Abraham as regards the offspring and its purity. This is why before she expels Hagar and Ishmael, Sarah stresses לא יירש בן האמה הזאת עם בני, "the son of this maid-servant will not inherit with my son" (21,10). Sarah refers to the קליפה aspect of Ishmael. The Rabbi who claimed that Abraham was blessed by not having a בת, daughter, refers to a period when Abraham had attained a still higher spiritual level, a period when he qualified for the description of אב, (the level of Adam at the time of his creation, seeing his soul was rooted in the emanation חכמה which is known as אבא.) 
  Sarah, whose function was the perpetuation of the species, is therefore "Mother Superior" as per the words of Abraham to Avimelech in Genesis 20,12 אחותי בת אבי היא אך לא בת אמי. "she is my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother." Sarah's distinction was rooted in the spiritual domain called אם. When compared to the spiritual domain known as אב, she is אחות and בת, but not אב. Once you appreciate the foregoing you will understand why the description אם כל חי, which was Adam's description for Eve, can be applied in equal measure to Sarah. 
   I have already hinted that Jacob, who referred to himself as possessing כל, "all," in Genesis 33,11, is similarly described by that term in our grace prayer. What is meant is his remaining totally alive, seeing all his children continued to live according to their father's tenets. Jacob was also called איש, and our sages relate that whereas Jacob did not die, Esau did die (Taanit 8). Esau had said of himself in Genesis 25,32 that he was headed for death. Jacob's ability to remain "alive," חי, began with Sarah, who was not attached to the קליפה, and through whose son, ביצחק, one side of such pollutants was already removed, i.e. מיצחק, hence the description of his blessing as מכל. The terms בכל-מכל-כל, refer to elimination of the pollutants in ever-increasing measure. Abraham therefore is at the bottom of such a chain whereas Jacob is at the top, and thus was called חי. 
  When they see that G–d approves of a person's conduct, even his enemies make peace with him. This is why we find that Samael, the perennial accuser, concurs in blessing Jacob, something described in Talmudic literature as ומלאך רע יענה אמן, "the "evil" angel confirms by saying "Amen" (Shabbat 119); when this occurs, the red string will turn white. [A reference to the killing of the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement and the visible sign that G–d had granted forgiveness to the people. Ed.] An allusion to this is found in the legislation dealing with נגעים, skin diseases, that require quarantine. The Torah in Leviticus 13,13 describes a situation where the entire body is covered with a disease which makes the skin white, as one where the party so afflicted is considered ritually pure, [as distinct from a situation where only part of the body is afflicted]. When a person is so afflicted the Torah describes his skin as כלו הפך לבן. This description, in an allegorical sense, fits Laban the Aramite perfectly. The latter's roots were in the סטרא אחרה, the left side of the emanations. He was thoroughly infected with the serpent's lies. The serpent was the world's first liar, Laban an eager student, the רמאי, swindler. He is spiritually identical with בלעם, whose stock in trade was נחש ינחש, to rely on snake-charming and the like, [in the immediate sense this is a form of sooth saying. Ed.] Chullin 95 stipulates that any נחוש which is not patterned after the נחוש, sign guessing, employed by Eliezer when he wanted to enlist G–d's support in finding a suitable girl for Isaac, is inadmissible, smacks of paganism. Eliezer managed to put Laban's power of employing charms into the service of something approved by G–d. This means that he personally did not employ that method. I shall explain this in due course. This is why he “נתהפך ללבן,” "became totally white," i.e. he remained spiritually pure. Even though Laban was very wicked, he was extremely wise; he realised that Isaac represented the secret of the tree of knowledge, as we have discussed earlier.
  Bereshit Rabbah 60,13 points out that as a result of Laban's blessing in Genesis 24,60: אחותנו את היי לאלפי רבבות, "Our sister! May you grow into thousands and tens of thousands," "thousands" i.e. אלו תימן, אלוף קנז, are descended from her through Esau, and "tens of thousands" i.e. רבבה כצמח השדה נתתיך, through Jacob as per Ezekiel 16,7. Laban eventually conceded the validity of these blessings. Even the part which was negative, i.e. the blessings for Esau, Laban "purified," i.e. he agreed for Esau to embrace true monotheism. This is evident from Laban's words in Genesis 24,50 "This matter was decreed by G–d; we cannot speak to you either bad or good." Laban acknowledges that everything is in the hands of G–d, and he says "here is Rebeccah, take her and go."
   It is puzzling that he seemed to have reversed himself later when he said (24:55) "Let the girl stay with us a year or at least ten months." He also tried to impede Rebeccah's departure by the ruse of asking her (24:57) if she wanted to go "with this man?" Another difficulty is why did Eliezer describe his mission as already having been successful when he thanked G–d (the past tense for הצליח דרכי in 24:56). He should have asserted that "G–d will make my mission successful." Rashi's commentary on Rebeccah saying “אלך,” "I shall go" meaning that she would go even against the wishes of her mother and brother is also difficult. Rashi is certainly correct in his interpretation; for he was bothered by the fact that Rebeccah should have answered כן, "Yes," to the question. The unusual form of the answer revealed more than a mere כן. We need to ask why Rebeccah chose to tell her family that she would go with this man in any event. It was certainly neither good manners, nor appropriate behavior for girls of her station in life.
   While I am on this subject I shall also deal with the unusual fact that in 24,50, Laban pre-empts his father by speaking up before his father. Rashi comments that it was because of Laban's wickedness that he tried to forestall his father Bethuel. Assuming that Rashi is correct, what advantage did the clever Laban hope to gain by answering first? I have already written that the patriarchs and matriarchs represented the whole of mankind, and that they repaired the spiritual and physical damage inflicted on the universe by Adam (Adam and Eve combined). G–d's whole purpose in the creation of the universe had of course been none other than Adam. We have learned in Avot 4:28 that "jealousy, greed and thirst for honor drive man out of this world," i.e. cause his death. Adam's sin involved elements of all these three negative traits. The serpent was jealous of Adam as Eve's husband and wanted to "marry" Eve himself; hence he tried to seduce Adam. It had thought that Adam would be the first to eat, Eve offering him the first bite, and that thus Adam would become the victim of G–d's warning not to eat from the tree on penalty of death. The serpent would then have been free to mate with Eve. The reward that the serpent held out to Eve (Genesis 3,5-6) was gratification of her greed, "the tree was lovely to look at and good as food." The promise of becoming G–d-like was the additional honour that would result from eating of that tree. Regarding the lives of Abraham and Sarah we find that they practised the very opposite traits. It is natural for a woman to be jealous of another woman's ability to have children when she herself is unable to do so, but Sarah offered Hagar to her husband in order that Abraham should be able to have a child with her instead (Genesis 16,2); she was free of that kind of jealousy. Abraham, who was offered material wealth by the King of Sodom, exclaimed that he would not even accept a shoelace from the booty he himself had captured when he defeated Kedor-Leomer and freed Lot (14,23). Not only did Abraham not display traits of greed, his entire life was filled with acts of generosity towards others. He practiבed humility to the point where he – who had been the recipient of several revelations by G–d – even described himself as being merely "dust and ashes " (18,27).
  When Eliezer examined who would be a suitable match for Isaac, he tested Rebeccah for precisely these traits. He did not have to examine Rebeccah concerning jealousy, seeing that Isaac had already been consecrated and could therefore never marry a slave girl, as distinct from Abraham. Rebeccah would therefore never have cause for that kind of jealousy. This is why he only examined whether Rebeccah was generous of heart and whether she was humble and modest. The signs that he determined this by are listed in 24,14. Rebeccah demonstrated generosity of spirit when she not only gave water to Eliezer and his men but also to his camels, and when she immediately volunteered lodging once she had been asked whether there was room in her house. When she responded to the question in 24,23: "is there room in your father's house ללין (to spend one night)," she offered lodging for more than one night, i.e. ללון. Rebeccah demonstrated her modesty when she addressed Eliezer as "my lord," and hastened to comply with his request for personal service. As soon as Eliezer noted this, he said "this girl is suitable for the house of an Abraham," and he viewed her like a lily amongst thorns; Laban was her exact opposite, just as Bileam was the exact opposite of Abraham. All of Laban's fawning on Eliezer was only so as to receive a generous monetary reward.
   Laban was possessed of עין רע, he was ill-willed, begrudging, he was haughty and greedy. His whole concern in approving the match was to secure personal gain. The Torah is careful to document how Laban was motivated by money when we are told: "As soon as Laban saw the nosering and bracelets on the hands of his sister etc.,… he ran towards the man" (24,30). Laban was a swindler to boot. Realising that Eliezer had come to propose a שידוך, a match, he whispered to Eliezer that in consideration of an appropriate amount of money he would side with him and approve the match. Should Eliezer refuse, he, Laban would oppose the match; he was the most influential member of the household. When the Torah reports that "Laban had heard the words of Rebeccah his sister," this is our clue that he knew that a match was going to be discussed. Eliezer had no option but to promise Laban what he had asked. The reason the Torah does not report all this is because it simply never came to this. Eliezer did not keep his promise, as I shall explain. In his dealings with Laban Eliezer applied the principle of עם עקש תתפתל, "with the perverse you have to be wily" (Psalms 18,27). He did this by making a promise he would not keep. Laban was misled, for he believed that Eliezer would keep his part of the bargain.
   This is why he immediately brought Eliezer and his entourage to his home, prepared fodder, etc. He did not do this out of charitable considerations. This is also the reason he preempted his father and asserted that since the match was made in Heaven, they could certainly not object. He was afraid that his father would come up with some scheme to delay this match. He was anxious to earn the fee that Eliezer had promised him. As soon as Eliezer had heard Laban say "here is Rebeccah, take her and be on your way," Eliezer thought that the matter had been finalised; he thanked G–d and brought out all kinds of golden and silver trinkets as well as costly garments, as described in 24,52. He gave all to Rebeccah, whereas he gave Laban and his family only exotic fruit and other delicacies.
  Not having received the silver and gold as promised, Laban considered himself as betrayed. He therefore began to scheme how he could delay Rebeccah's departure. He suggested that Rebeccah should remain in Charan for another year or so. Eliezer, well aware of Laban's game, said: "since G–d has already made my mission successful and you yourselves have admitted that this match has been made in Heaven, do not delay me." Rebeccah, astute enough to have observed her brother's trickery, was afraid that Eliezer might fall for Laban's scheme and feel obligated to pay Laban the bribe he had demanded. This is why she said that she was going with Eliezer. She claimed that all the silver, etc. that Eliezer had brought belonged to her and her future descendants, since Eliezer, a slave could not own anything. What we said earlier (page 142) -that Laban had realised that Isaac and Rebeccah represented the secret of the tree of knowledge,- means that just as the fruit of the tree of knowledge contained both good and evil, so the children of this union of Isaac and Rebeccah would be both good and evil, in this case Jacob and Esau respectively.
  Let us examine a few more details of this story. Why did Eliezer have to describe his seniority in Abraham's household to the point where he said that his master had entrusted all his belonging to him? Why did the Torah keep repeating his status as עבד, "slave?" Why did the Torah later (24,21) describe Eliezer as האיש, an appellation hardly appropriate for an עבד? Still later, the Torah speaks of Laban running towards האיש; Rebeccah tells about what האיש has said to her. When Eliezer enters the house of Bethuel and Laban he is described as האיש, whereas as soon as he sits at the table he introduces himself as Abraham's slave, עבד. This, of course, is no problem seeing that Eliezer is Abraham's slave, and the Torah has repeatedly referred to him as such. The puzzling thing is that even after he handed out all the silver and golden trinkets, he is described as עבד; why would Laban ask Rebeccah if she wanted to go עם האיש הזה, thus elevating his status at the very moment when he harbored ill will against Eliezer? Immediately afterwards, when Rebeccah and Eliezer depart, Eliezer is again described as עבד, although Rebeccah and her handmaids are reported as following האיש. Once Isaac has been sighted Rebeccah is described as addressing the עבד. How could Laban address Eliezer with the words: בוא ברוך ה' "Enter the one blesssed by the Lord," when we know that every עבד is cursed since the time Noach cursed Canaan? This was the reason why Abraham did not want Isaac to marry Eliezer's daughter. He did not want to become involved with a tribe that was accursedץ When we said earlier (page 142) that Laban's blessing had the power to eventually help Esau's descendants to switch from being cursed to becoming blessed, where did Laban get that power from? Another difficulty is the expression in 24,31 where Laban claims to have cleared the house, (of idols, according to Bereshit Rabbah 60). If that were indeed so, Laban displayed a spiritual level that is hard to credit. Whence did he attain that spiritual level? Why did Eliezer reverse the sequence of events when describing his placing the bracelets on Rebeccah before he knew who she was (compare 24,22 with 24,47)? The other problem we have to deal with is the statement in Chullin 95 we have quoted, classifying Eliezer's "test" of Rebeccah as the only such kind of test that is admissible for Jews. Tossaphot, Chullin 95 raise the question that according to a view expressed in Sanhedrin 56 it is not only Jews who are forbidden to practise ניחוש. The answer given is that Eliezer did not rely on ניחוש, and did not give the jewelry to Rebeccah until he had found out that she was from Abraham's family. According to this view we would have to disregard the Torah's first report of that event and accept the version Eliezer told in Bethuel's house. If that is so, why does the Torah seem to mislead us and create the impression that Eliezer relied exclusively on ניחוש? Besides, since Eliezer obviously accepted the word of a stranger, and presumably a minor at that, at face value, how can one claim that he did not rely primarily on ניחוש? Was there any proof that this girl would agree to marry a man she had never seen and who lived a long way from her home and family? Why then did Eliezer give Rebeccah the jewelry except that he believed in ניחוש?
  Kabbalists know that the agent (שר העולם) whom G–d appointed to be in charge of this universe is Mattatron (Chagigah 15 et al). It is said that Psalms 37,25: נער הייתי גם זקנתי, "I have been young; now I am old," must have been said by this angel, that he referred to the length of time he had been in the service of the Lord (Yevamot 16). This angel is reputed to have the keys to Heaven, and Kabbalists see some allusion to the identity of this נער, in Proverbs 22,6: חנוך לנער. They perceive חנוך as being Mattatron. Tosaphot query how this Mattatron could be described as שר הבריאה, in charge of the universe, seeing that חנוך did not live till long after the universe was created, and they therefore solve the problem in a different way. [This problem is discussed in Tosaphot Yevamot 16, and relates to part of the liturgical poetry in the morning prayer of שמחת תורה. Ed.] I do not think that there is really any substance in the query posed by Tossaphot for all those who have been granted some insight. The שר הבריאה certainly existed ever since the בריאה itself, and he is called Mattatron, since it is his function to guard over everything that reflects G–d's expressed will. The word מטרה is the translation of the Hebrew word שומר, guardian. חנוך performed a similar function on earth until G–d decided to remove him from earth while alive (Genesis 5,24). While on earth, he performed what the Kabbalists call the בחינה התחתונה, the "minor" function of Mattatron on earth. This "minor" function is known as מנעל, shoe. The force in charge of such activities is called Sandalphon, from the Hebrew סנדל, a sandal. Solomon sings the praises of such people when he says in Song of Songs 7,2: מה יפו פעמיך בנעלים, "How lovely are your footsteps when shod in pilgrim's sandals." 
  This is the hidden meaning of the Midrash Talpiot which describes Chanoch as a shoemaker. I have explained this elsewhere at length.
  Let us get back to our immediate problem. Mattatron watches over Israel, he acts as G–d's agent. Rabbeynu Bachyah writes in his commentary on Parshat Mishpatim on Exodus 23,20 that Mattatron is so called because his name is comprised of two elements, both relevant to our problem. It suggests both the word אדון, master, as well as the word שליח, messenger. The former is based on our sages who describe the mistress of the house as Matrona. The name שליח, is from the Greek. The Greek for messenger is Mentator. Furthermore, the name contains a reference to the word שומר, guardian, since the Aramaic for משמרת is Mattarat. Inasmuch as Mattatron is the guardian of the world, he is the guardian of Israel. 
  From his name we have come to understand that this angel/messenger wields authority over all the hosts of Heaven and Earth. He may therefore be appropriately described as אדון לביתו, מושל בכל קנינו. Thus far Rabbeynu Bachyah.
  Both the Zohar and Pardes Rimonim describe this angel also as עבד. Seeing that the Torah in Deut 14,1 describes Israel as "Children of the Lord your G–d", we find that Israel appears in a dual role. From the vantage point of the עולם האצילות, the purely spiritual domain, -seeing that our souls are anchored in that domain- our relationship with G–d is like that of children to their father. From the vantage point of the material world, the עולם הבריאה, and anything "below" that, however, our optimal status is that of עבד השם, a servant of the Lord. (This עולם הבריאה is called by Kabbalists the סוד האמה העבריה, "the mystical significance of the portion dealing with the Jewish maid-servant in Exodus chapter 21, whereas Mattatron is the סוד עבד עברי, seeing he represents the עולם האצילות). When Exodus 23,20 speaks about the angel G–d will send ahead of the Jewish people to guard and protect Israel on its journey and that angel is described as embodying G–d's name, Rashi, quoting ancient sources says that this is Mattatron whose name is identical with the name of G–d (Exodus 23,20). The numerical value of the letters in 314= מטטרון-שדי. 
  Our sages also say that He who guarded the patriarchs also will protect their children (Shir Hashirim Rabbah 32,8). Let us now simply view Eliezer's position in Abraham's household as analogous to Mattaron's position in G–d's "household." Eliezer was described both as "the senior member of Abraham's household in charge of all that belonged to Abraham," and as עבד, slave; he performed a dual task. When Abraham dispatched this senior member of his household on a mission down here on earth, G–d despatched someone of similar rank from His own "household" to assist Eliezer. When Abraham had assured Eliezer that "G–d will send His angel ahead of you" (Genesis 24,7), he had referred to Mattatron. We are entitled to view him in this connection as עבד עברי. Although Eliezer was a Caananite, we are entitled to to view him in this connection as an עבד עברי, for he was the physical property of a Jew, an עברי. G–d therefore dispatched an angel who embodied the mystical properties of עבד עברי.
  It is not accidental that when Abraham made Eliezer swear an oath, (24,3) he referred to the G–d of the Heaven and the G–d of the Earth, for Eliezer was on earth and his mission was an earthly one. When Abraham referred a few verses later to the angel from Heaven that he felt G–d would send ahead, he no longer referred to "the G–d of the Heaven and the G–d of the Earth," but merely to the G–d of the Heaven. This is perfectly appropriate since the angel's function was purely spiritual, heavenly. [The angel never assumed human form like the angels Abraham had hosted. Ed.]
  We perceive Eliezer setting out on his mission with Mattaron hovering over him, invisibly. Whenever the Torah employs the word עבד in this narrative, the reference is to Eliezer the earthly עבד. Whenever the Torah mentions the word האיש in the narrative, the reference is to the עבד עברי של מעלה, to Mattatron. We have other examples when such an angel is referred to by the Torah as איש, and our sages have defined such an איש as מלאך, an angel. One such example is Genesis 37,15. Rashi, quoting Midrash Tanchuma, says that this was the angel Gabriel. In 24,17, we find “וירץ העבד לקראתה, followed in verse 21 by והאיש משתאה לה.” Onkelos translates this latter verse as meaning that Eliezer remained standing looking on silently. He was reflecting on whether the Heavenly input indicated that his mission was succesful or not. The word לדעת, to know, in verse 21 is a veiled reference to the tree of knowledge.
  When Eliezer wondered if his mission had indeed succeeded, i.e. הצליח, this is a reference to the two sons Rebeccah would bear, i.e. both Jacob and Esau. The words אם לא, which are not really necessary, refer to Esau, who represented the unsuccessful part of Eliezer's mission. According to Pardes Rimonim Shaar Heychaley Temarim 6, the tree of knowledge of good and evil is underneath the tree of knowledge of "good.". The "good" refers to Mattatron, whereas the "evil" refers to Samael. When the Torah (Genesis 24,10) describes Eliezer as having כל טוב אדוניו בידו, "all the good of his master in his hand," this refers to the angel Mattatron who accompanied him.
   As far as the angel was concerned it was clear already at this point that the mission was successful, that Rebeccah was intended by Heaven to become the wife of Isaac, and that therefore she was entitled to receive the nose-ring, bracelets etc. This is why the Torah reports that "he" (האיש) "took out" these pieces of jewelry on her hands" (24,22). The reason the Torah omits to mention "he placed," is because from Mattatron's point of view, they were as if already on her hands, although in actual fact Eliezer here on earth is not mentioned as having placed them on her hands and on her nose until after he had ascertained who the girl was. This act is reported only in 24,47. 
  After Eliezer received the girl's answer to the question "who are you, etc.," he realized that this whole matter had originated from G–d, and that his mission was indeed successful. This is why he reported that he thanked the Lord in 24,48. Eliezer relied on רוח הקדש, Divine inspiration, not on ניחוש. This is what prompted him to bend his knee and prostrate himself before the Lord, as reported in 24,47. This also explains why the Torah bothered to mention the weight of these various pieces of jewelry, i.e. 24,22) בקע משקלו, עשרה זהב משקלם). When Eliezer told what happened to him, these details are not mentioned. 
  Rashi already mentioned that the word בקע is an allusion to the weight of the שקלים that the Jewish people would later donate each year for the daily public offerings in the Tabernacle and Temple respectively, and that the expression עשרה זהב is an allusion to the Ten Commandments. These allusions are meaningful when their source is Mattatron, i.e. a heavenly messenger. When the terrestrial Eliezer prosaically told what occurred to him at the well, there is no point in the Torah including such elements.
  Rebeccah, intelligent, endowed with a measure of prophetic insight, understood the nature of what happened. She had been aware of the presence of a heavenly messenger; this is why she said: גם לגמליך אשאב. We had stated earlier that this was an allusion to גבורה an attribute of G–d אגלא, Isaac's special virtue (see page 134).
  When Eliezer related the events at the well, he did not refer to Rebeccah as נערה, but as עלמה. We find that the Torah usually spells the word נער as if it were masculine, even where the Torah clearly refers to a נערה, a girl. The former spelling is an allusion to Mattaron who is called נער as we pointed out on page 147. Pardes Rimonim explains the meaning of נער in detail in the chapter dealing with כנוים.
  Rebeccah, who, thanks to her power of prophetic insight knew what was going on, presumably told Laban her brother what she knew. I have already mentioned that Laban, though very wicked, was nonetheless very wise and astute. As a result, he did not ever refer to Eliezer as עבד, but always as איש. This is how Rebeccah's family thought of Eliezer, and that is why they related to him as איש. The Torah merely reflects the feelings of the characters it describes. That is also the reason Rebeccah's family called her נערה and not עלמה.
  In 24,61 we read about Rebeccah and her maidservants: ותרכבנה על הגמלים ותלכנה אחרי האיש, ויקח העבד את רבקה וילך . "They rode on the camels and followed the man; the servant took Rebeccah and went (on his way). Clearly, the reason that we find two descriptions of Eliezer in one verse is that Mattaron the heavenly messenger was present until the mission had been concluded. The mission was not concluded until Eliezer was out of Charan on his way back. This process is indicated by the words in 24,61 ותקם רבקה ונערותיה ותלכנה אחרי האיש. Immediately after that, when Mattatron returned to Heaven, the Torah reverts to describing the man leading Rebeccah as עבד. It is possible that the word וילך, he went on his way, refers to Mattaron who returned to the Celestial Regions he had come from.
  Bereshit Rabbah 59,8 describes Eliezer's features as resembling those of his master Abraham, basing itself on the words זקן ביתו, to mean that he resembled his master. The words המושל בכל אשר לו, are interpreted by that Midrash as a compliment that Eliezer held his evil urge in check. The Midrash goes on to interpret the words ויאמר אליו העבד in 24,5 by quoting Hoseah 12,8: "A trader (כנען) who uses false weights, who loves to overreach." "The trader," i.e. כנען, supposedly refers to Eliezer. Probably the Midrash, too, makes a destinction between the instances where the Torah uses the term עבד for Eliezer, and where another term such as זקן ביתו is employed. Whenever the latter term is used, Eliezer had Mattaron hovering over him.
  We have explained the function of the patriarchs and matriarchs in rehabilitating the damage caused to this world by Adam; we have stated that Abraham represented the אדם הגדול, and that Sarah assumed the role of אם כל חי, that Isaac and Rebeccah continued the work begun by Abraham and Sarah and that to indicate this their features resembled the features of Abraham and Sarah. In addition the "beauty" of Jacob is described by our sages as of the kind possessed by Adam before his sin.
  The symbolisms expressed by the use of בת-אחות-אם "daughter-sister-mother" relationship between G–d and the Jewish people, or the matriarchs and G–d, which we have described on page 137 and later, may be alluded to in the way the Torah divides the number of years Sarah lived into three distinct periods, i.e. "one hundred years, twenty years and seven years" (Genesis 23,1). Bereshit Rabbah 58,1 explains that Sarah was as beautiful at twenty as she had been at seven years of age, whereas she was as free from sin at a hundred years of age as she had been at twenty. The number seven may allegorically be explained as referring to the seven days of Creation (including the Sabbath) before the original light was withdrawn. This association gives Sarah the אם כל חי, "Mother Superior" image. When the Torah was given to the Jewish people and the serpent's pollutant was neutralised, the world was restored to a state when כתנות אור, garments woven of light, could have been worn. The passage dealing with the creation of light in Genesis 1, 3-5, mentions the word אור, light, five times, an allusion to the five Books of Moses, as pointed out in the Midrash. The Zohar sees in the verse commencing with Hashem Hashem in Exodus 34,6 an allusion to the number twenty, i.e. the Ten Commandments and the ten directives by which the universe was created. These complemented each other. When you spell the two letters Yud as words, i.e. יוד, their combined value is also 20. This idea is reflected in the "twenty years" the Torah here speaks of. Although the universe did not actually revert to the condition it had been in prior to withdrawal of the אור בראשית, the original light, the precondition existed, and, but for the sin of the golden calf, Israel would have achieved that status through Torah study and observance, and the original light would have been revealed to them. At the moment the Torah was revealed, the light appeared to them just as it had been during the seven days of Creation. This is the deeper meaning of Proverbs 7,4: אמור לחכמה אחותי את, "Say to wisdom 'you are my sister.'" Israel, due to the Revelation and Torah study, was on the level we have described as אחות. Afterwards, when the people made the golden calf, they ruined even that level of closeness to G–d with the result that the כ in 23,2 became reduced in size. When the Temple, which was one hundred cubits high, was built, this provided some degree of rehabilitation for the opportunity lost through the golden calf. [The Temple the author refers to must be the one of Herod; Solomon's Temple was only thirty cubits high. Ed.] When Bereshit Rabbah 58,1 on our verse next compares Sarah's innocence at one hundred to her innocence at twenty, this is an allusion to the partial rehabilitation during the period of the second Temple. There were public offerings which achieved atonement for the people. Nonetheless, the people were only on the level of בת, (the lowest of the three levels described on pages 137/138). This is why we find Israel referred to as בת ציון, בת ירושלים in Isaiah, Lamentations and elsewhere. The small letter כ in the word ולבכותה is a clear allusion to the aforegoing. When you remove the letter כ completely, you are left with the word לבתה, "to her daughter," i.e. the word בת, daughter. When the Temple was destroyed, the letter ק was also reduced in size, as pointed out by the Baaal Haturim in his commentray on Genesis 27,46 where Rebeccah expressed disdain for her own life if Jacob, too, were to marry a Canaanite girl. The cause of Rebeccah's desperate outcry, according to Baa l Haturim, was that in her mind's eye she saw the destruction of the hundred-cubit high Temple. When the Temple was destroyed the Jewish people forfeited even the status of בת in their relationship with G–d. For some time after that the most they could achieve in the way of direct communication with G–d was the בת קול, an echo of their former relationship. Nowadays, due to our sins, we do not even experience that form of communication with G–d. This situation will not improve until the Messiah will come, hopefully very soon. At such a time, אור חדש will shine over Zion.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  In the part of the Zohar on our portion known as מדרש הנעלם there are numerous references to the relationship between body and soul, the status of the dead and resurrection and the time it will occur. All of this leads to a number of moral lessons which we will try to extract.
  In the Tosephta d'Zohar (page 4 on Chayey Sarah, Sullam edition), we read as follows: "Hail to the person who humbles himself in this world for he will be correspondingly more distinguished and highly regarded in the world to come." He who tries to appear as great in this world, will become insignificant in the world to come. The Torah writes: ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה, beginning with a great number, i.e. 100, and continues by describing this in the singular not שנים, but שנה. This is a hint of how someone should humble oneself. On the other hand, when the Torah refers to the smallest unit of her years, i.e. שבע שנים, we have the word "years" in the plural, i.e. שנים. This is an allusion to the type of person who tries to emphasize his importance in this world.
  Another indication that one must strive to lead a morally upright life is found in the statement of Shabbat 152a which describes Torah scholars as becoming wiser as they get older, whereas secularly oriented people become progressively more senile in their old age. This statement also utilizes the wording in our פרשה, as it associates Sarah's last seven years with the word "years" in the plural, i.e. years filled with additional meaning.
  When we consider the statement of the Zohar we have just quoted that it behooves one to humble oneself, then we see such behaviour exemplified by every בעל תשובה, repentant sinner. I have therefore concluded that we also have a strong allusion to the need to repent in the first word of our פרשה, i.e. ויהיו. Menachot 49 states that this world was created with the letter ה, which is open at the bottom as well as at the side, in order to provide repentant sinners with additional opportunities to return to the fold (cf. Rashi on Genesis 2,4). Our word ויהיו has the letter ה in the middle and the letter י on both its inner flanks, i.e. both "below" and "above." These two letters י symbolise a willingness to humble oneself and accept G–d-sent afflictions with love. Of such people the Psalmist says: אשרי הגבר אשר תיסרנו י-ה, "Hail the man whom G–d disciplines" (Psalms 94,12). This refers to people who are content to keep a low profile in this world. Allegorically speaking, they enter through the opening in the letter ה in which the letter י is at the bottom and they will then become rehabilitated. If they were to "enter" at the top however, they would end up with the letter י [the lower part of the ה is at the bottom behind the letter ו], meaning that they would suffer their afflictions in the world beyond.
  ואברהם זקן בא בימים . The emphasis on the word בימים, which at first glance seems superfluous, teaches us that a person must be concerned every single day of his life to do good and not to sin. When he thinks in this vein only, every single day of his life will assume meaning. His reverence for G–d will result in his being granted more years. The years of the wicked, on the other hand, become shortened; this means that even if they live chronologically speaking for many years, the sum total of their life is short, seeing it was not filled with worthwhile activities. When Abraham is described as "aging," this means that he had made every one of his days count.
  המושל בכל אשר לו . One can explain this as Abraham being the subject, seeing that Eliezer was a slave the "senior member of his household," i.e. of the מושל, the master. The hidden message here is that if G–d has granted someone great wealth, and that person is a miser, does not perform charitable deeds liberally, he will surround himself with קליפות, negative influences, which will eventually prevent him from המושל בכל אשר לו, from exercising control over what he thought was his. When a person is generous such as Abraham, however, he will enjoy being in charge of all that is his.
  When marrying off children, one should look for a bride from an outstanding family, just as Abraham did.
  ותמהר ותער כדה של השוקת ותרץ עוד אל הבאר לשאוב ותשאב לכל גמליו  . Rebeccah displayed remarkably ethical conduct here. She showed respect for fellow human beings. First she let Eliezer drink. When some water was left over in the jug, she did not know what to do. She debated whether to give the left-over water to the camels. In doing this, however, she would place man and beast on the same level by letting both of them drink from the same vessel. If, on the other hand, she would pour out the left-over water, this would also be a lack of respect, since drinking water would be demoted to the status of dirty waste water. What did she do? She "ran" as if to give the camels to drink. While running, she pretended to fall, so that the water spilled from the jug. She then had an excuse to fill the jug anew from the well. In this way Eliezer was not slighted at all.
  We learn from Abraham that if a widower has children of marriageable age, he should marry them off before remarrying himself. Abraham is the role model for this rule, for he married Keturah only after Isaac had married Rebeccah.
  
  Toldot
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named מקור הברכות.
   On Genesis 26,12: ויזרע יצחק בארץ ההיא וימצא בשנה ההיא מאה שערים, ויברכהו ה', Bereshit Rabbah 64,6 comments and Rashi quotes that the meaning of מאה שערים is one hundred times what was reasonably to be expected. Rashi adds: "our sages say that this estimate was necessary in order to determine the amount of tithes to be given from that harvest."
  The patriarchs observed all the commandments as revealed later on in the Torah. We know from Genesis 14,20 that Abraham tithed when he gave the tithes to Malki Tzedek. In our פרשה we have a passage showing that Isaac also gave tithes; we know, of course, that Jacob promised to give tithes from his specific statement וכל אשר תתן לי עשר אעשרנו לך, “And all that You will give me, I will surely tithe to You" (Genesis 28,22). Our sages in Midrash Hagadol on that verse say that Jacob even tithed people. They explain that if we include Ephrayim and Menasseh in the count, there should have been fourteen tribes. Deduct four, seeing that each wife had a first born who was already sanctified from birth, and you remain with ten. From these remaining ten Jacob set aside Levi as a tithe to G–d. You see that all the patriarchs observed the commandment בכל לבבם, בכל נפשם ובכל מאודם, "with all their hearts, their souls and their means." The words בכל מאודם can be understood literally, i.e. "a tithe of everything." The expression בכל נפשם refers to Jacob who even tithed נפשות, people; the expression בכל לבבם, refers to תרומה גדולה, something for which the Torah does not prescribe a fixed amount. The amount to be set aside for the priest is left to the generosity of the individual, i.e. it is something to be decided on by his heart, לבבו. Our sages (Terumah 4,3) describe one fortieth as the תרומה of a generous individual, one fiftieth as the average gift, and one sixtieth as the תרומה of a miser. They derive these details from the verse in Genesis 14,20. It would have sufficed for the Torah to say ויתן מעשר, that Abraham tithed. Why did the Torah have to add the word מכל, from all? They answer that this is an allusion to תרומה מעשר, the tithe that the Levite has to give to the priest from the מעשר ראשון, the regular tithe that he received from the Israelite. I will explain later how this is alluded to in the text. Abraham gave to Malki Tzedek both the regular tithe and the תרומת מעשר. The numerical value of the letters in the word כל, all, is 50 which is an allusion to the 2% the average person sets aside. [In order to appreciate the following calculation, one must assume that Abraham first divided the entire harvest into two equal parts. This is not mentioned by the author. Ed.] Abraham removed one tenth of the total [taking it from one half] as tithe. He also set aside one part in fifty from the same total amount (before having tithed it) to give it separately as תרומה גדולה. When you remove "ten" from fifty, you are left with forty. This means that Abraham gave one part in forty as תרומה גדולה. [The normal procedure is to remove the תרומה גדולה from the harvest before measuring the ten per cent tithe from the remaining 98% of the harvest. Ed] Even though the normal or average amount set aside for תרומה is one in 50= כל, Abraham was more generous than that. All the patriarchs acted in a similar fashion.
  The commentary of Rashi above that the amount of Isaac's harvest is described in order to enable one to "correctly estimate" the tithes, appears to contradict the Halachah. We know that tithing must never be based on an estimate, but must be measured exactly (Maimonides Hilchot Maaser 1,14). Even if the amount tithed exceeds ten percent of the harvest, one did not fulfil the commandment if one has estimated instead of measured the required amount. We must therefore assume that Isaac measured the tithe, but added the תרומה גדולה by estimating the amount, and this is what the Midrash refers to. Similarly, the Mishna Terumot 1,7 says that one does not give תרומה by measure but by estimate from the total amount. The quantity of תרומה to be given as per our sages serves only as a guideline, not as absolute measurement. The scriptural allusion for this procedure is Numbers 18,27: ונחשב לכם תרומתכם, "your gift will be 'considered' for you." This means that the process depends on מחשבה, thought, rather than measure. Although the verse mentioned is written in connection with תרומת מעשר, we have a principle that if a statement is not needed where it appears we may apply it elsewhere, in this case we apply it to תרומה גדולה.
  If you look closely you will find that what Rashi writes about "estimating," applies to all kinds of tithes, and not only to תרומה גדולה. Since Rashi writes that the estimate was based on how much the field was expected to yield, it appears that the method of estimating applied to all kinds of tithes, and not just to the מעשר ראשון. We may therefore conclude that already prior to the harvest Isaac "estimated" how much he would have to set aside as a tithe. Once the harvest was in the barn- at which time the obligation to give a tithe became operative, he measured carefully how much one tenth would amount to. Anything one eats from a crop before it is brought into the house or barn is not subject to tithes. Isaac, as we have shown, was especially careful to measure the grain even before anyone could have eaten from it. Since the verse under discussion deals with the commandment of tithing, it is appropriate for the Torah to add the words: "G–d blessed Him (Isaac)." We have a parallel verse in Malachi (3,10) when the prophet assures us הביאו את כל המעשר אל האוצר … והריקותי לכם ברכה עד בלי די, "Bring to Me all the tithes to the storage house,….and I will pour out for you endless blessings."
  When I wrote that Abraham gave to Malki Tzedek both the מעשר and the תרומה, you may ask that one does not give מעשר to a priest but to a Levite, and that Malki Tzedek was a priest! The Arizal explains that Aaron was a re-incarnation of Malki Tzedek's soul, and that the prophet Samuel was a re-incarnation of Aaron's soul. This is hinted at by G–d when He said to Moses in Exodus 4,14: "Is there not Aaron your brother the Levite?" The prophet Samuel was a Levite, and Malki Tzedek was another name for שם the son of Noach. You will note that the first half of the name of the prophet שמואל is שם. Malki Tzedek, in addition to being a priest, as the Torah describes him in Genesis 14,18, was also a Levite, at least potentially.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The mystical dimension of tithes and the mystical dimension of blessings all lead us to the same source. This is all alluded to in the verse telling us that Isaac found מאה שערים, "one hundred gates." The number one hundred is important both allegorically and halachically: Menachot 43 states that everyone is duty bound to recite one hundred ברכות, benedictions, daily. This number is based on the blessings extended by G–d to Isaac here in our פרשה when he reaped one hundred times as much as expected. Rekanati writes about this as follows: Kabbalists have described the "higher" world as consisting of one hundred "gates." Each "gate" is to be perceived as a fountain of blessings. Isaac ינק, suckled, i.e. absorbed from each one of these "gates." When the Tabernacle had one hundred silver sockets (Exodus 35,27), they symbolized these one hundred sources of blessings. Every single אדן, socket, was a בית קבול, receptacle (for heavenly blessing). Thus far the Rekanati. 
  I plan to explain this matter in greater detail. The mystical dimension of מעשר is the number 10= ,י. There are three aspects to this 1 .י) the letter י itself. 2) The קוצו של י, the point at the top of the letter Yud, this point itself being equivalent to a "small" Yud (i.e. 10). 3). The מלוי של י, the extra letters when you spell the letter as a word, i.e. י-ו-ד. The last two letters (6+4) when combined add up to 10. The עולם האצילות, abstract spiritual world, comprises ten emanations. The number of these emanations is ten because of the functionally highest one, חכמה, which is based on the ineffable, four-lettered name of G–d, י-ה-ו-ה. All this is explained in Pardes Rimonim. Although חכמה is actually the ninth of the emanations [in an ascending order from the lowest, מלכות, Ed.], the addition of an emanation called דעת [which in the diagram of the emanations would appear as immediately below and between the emanations חכמה and בינה Ed.], would complete the number ten.
  As far as the emanation כתר is concerned, (usually perceived as the highest and tenth), this has to be perceived as the "crown" of the structure; the קוצו של י would symbolise that כתר, as explained by the Kabbalists. They view this "point" of the letter Yud as the closest we can come to portray the invisible world of the ten emanations, whereas they view the Yud when spelled fully, as a word as symbolic of our visible world, i.e the emanations after they have become functional in our world. Each emanation is perceived as embodying all three aspects of the letter י. The attribute א-ד-נ-י which is the mystical dimension of the "celestial" ארץ, [parallel to the ארץ of our world, Ed.] "receives" these emanations. [When you spell א-ד-נ-י in words i.e. אלף-דלת-נון-יוד, the numerical value is 671 or the same as the Targum of the word שער, i.e 1+ תרע for the word itself. Ed.] When you consider that תרומת מעשר is actually מעשר מן המעשר, one tenth of a tenth, and that the word מעשר means something like מ-שער "from the gate," you have an inkling of the סוד, mystery, of how the blessings are related to מאה שערים. 
  [I have taken it upon myself to rephrase and condense what the author has to say on this subject. Any reader who will pursue this in the original will appreciate why I felt the need to do so. I am indebted to Rabbi Shemuel Toledano and his book הקדמות ושערים לחכמת הקבלה for his explanation of the relationship of א-ד-נ-י to שער. Ed.]
  
  
  The author, Rabbi Horowitz, mentions a book called שערי אורה, from which he quotes the following passage about the relationship of the sockets in the Tabernacle to the source of heavenly blessings and the need to pronounce one hundred benedictions daily, as well as the negative fallout when one fails to do so. This is what he writes: "These one hundred sockets of the beams in the Tabernacle are symbolic of the one hundred blessings which they are filled with from the great בריכה, reservoir [here undoubtedly a double entendre connected with source of ברכה, blessing, Ed]. This בריכה is called א-ד-נ-י [i.e. the attribute called א-ד-נ-י is that source Ed.]. Hence a person must utter one hundred benedictions daily in order to attract to himself all these one hundred different blessings. Should but a single one of these blessings be missing this would result in him injuring himself and becoming blemished. This mystical dimension is called , 1-10-100= ,אי"ק, בכ"ר, or 2-20-200. It is the relationship between כהן-לוי-ישראל, which in turn symbolizes the relationship between נפש-רוח-נשמה. 
  When we appreciate this relationship, we understand that when David said in Psalms 104,1: ברכי נפשי את ה', "Bless the Lord, O my soul," he indicated that ברכה is connected to נפש. This נפש needs to pronounce one hundred benedictions, which correspond to the level of ישראל. Of these hundred, ten i.e. מעשר, penetrate up to the level of רוח, which corresponds to the levels of the Levites. Of these remaining ten per cent, one, i.e. 1% of the original total penetrates to the level of נשמה, corresponding to the level כהן. As a result, if the ordinary soul, נפש, does not pronounce the one hundred daily benedictions every day, then the higher soul נשמה, will not benefit from even a single blessing, seeing that the next lower level, רוח, did not receive its share of blessings which it should have received as a result of the Israelites pronouncing the one hundred blessings. The Priests and Levites are viewed as recipients of blessings bestowed by the Israelites. This is the deeper meaning of the whole legislation of the respective tithes for the Priests and Levites. Israel and the Levites respectively fulfilling their obligations will trigger G–d's blessings to filter down to the nation from Heaven. The meaning of אי"ק, בכ"ר is now clear. When there is no ק i.e. 100, there cannot be a י i.e. 10; when there is no י i.e. 10, there cannot be an א i.e. 1. The one hundred benedictions are like the one hundred silver sockets in the Tabernacle which serve as receptacles for G–d's bounty. Thus far the Shaarey Orah.
  I shall now proceed to explain the subject of blessing and Priest, Levite and Israelite respectively. It is accepted that the attributes represented by כהן, לוי, ישראל respectively, are the attributes חסד, גבורה, תפארת. These in turn are the mystical dimensions of our patriarchs. Abraham symbolizes חסד; Isaac symbolizes גבורה; Jacob symbolizes אמת, which we have repeatedly explained as corresponding to תפארת. Jacob is described as איש תם, a man of perfection, התם ומתמם, "someone who is perfect and kind to the blameless," a יושב אהלים, "dweller of tents," i.e. the median between the tent of Abraham and the tent of Isaac, embodying within himself the respective outstanding characteristics of both his father and grandfather. I have already explained at length in פרשת חיי שרה how all the patriarchs served as a force furthering G–d's objective to make this world perfect. True, the world had been created by the attribute of חסד, as we know from עולם חסד יבנה, in Psalms 89,3. It had always been G–d's intention to eventually base the world on the attribute of דין, Justice, so that man could experience a system of לתת לאיש כדרכיו וכפרי מעלליו, "to repay each man in accordance with his ways and with the fruit of his deeds" (Jeremiah 32,19). Isaac represented this latter ideal, and he was the first human being to whom G–d could successfully apply that yardstick. Since the world as a whole could not measure up to such a demanding standard, Jacob combined within his person a blend of both attributes to serve as a role model for future generations of mankind. There is a slight tilt towards the attribute of חסד, Justice and Mercy are not evenly balanced. 
  We therefore see that the patriarchs by their very lifestyles reveal the mystical aspects of Creation through their lifestyles as reported in the Torah. Bereshit Rabbah 1,10, commenting on why the Torah commences with the letter ב instead of the letter א, mentions several reasons. The Torah wishes to indicate that there are two worlds, the עולם הזה, and the עולם הבא. The letter ב symbolises ברכה, blessing. The letter א would have been inappropriate, because it is the first letter of the word ארור, cursed. Had the Torah started with א, many would have thought that this was proof that the whole enterprise of Creation was doomed to failure, i.e. cursed. As a result of such considerations, G–d decided to create the universe by using the letter ב first, hoping that the universe would endure. We see that both the Creation and (the lives of) the patriarchs express the concept of ברכה, blessing. It is fitting then that the source of, or better key to, blessings should have been placed in the hands of the patriarchs. G–d first told Abraham about this in Genesis 12,2 when He literally commanded him to become a source of blessing by telling him that he had become the repository of blessings. Isaac inherited this gift from his father as we see from Genesis 25,11 where G–d passed on Abraham's blessing to Isaac after Abraham's death. The competition between Esau and Jacob was about which of the two would be the heir to this power to bless with which G–d had invested Abraham and subsequently Isaac. Jacob became the heir to this power to bless, and he in turn bequeathed it to his children. Abraham did not personally bequeath these blessings to his son Isaac but waited for G–d Himself to do so. The reason for this will be explained when we deal with the blessing that Isaac bestowed on Jacob. We will also quote the comments of Bereshit Rabbah on that subject. 
  At any rate, the patriarchs were those who helped perfect the world which had been created by G–d, invoking ברכה, blessing, which in turn is the mystical dimension of כהן, לוי, ישראל, or מעשר, תרומה, and תרומת מעשר. 
  We have already explained that the mystical dimension of מעשר is expressed by the three dimensions of the letter י, which expanded into three gifts to the Jewish people, i.e. תורה, ארץ ישראל and עולם הבא. The concept Torah can be summed up by the letter י, i.e. the Ten Commandments which contain allusions to all the 613 commandments of the Torah. The total number of letters in the Ten Commandments is 613. The Ten Commandments are sacred; the tenth of the commandments (when counting from the last one backwards) is the statement: אנכי ה' אלוקיך. Being the tenth, it is even more sacred than the others seeing that it is the ראש, the head. It embraces all the others seeing it stipulates the existence of G–d and His relationship to us. The second gift is ארץ ישראל; the Mishnah Keilim 1,6 describes ten successive stages of sanctity of holy areas, explaining that ארץ ישראל as such is at the bottom of the list of these holy areas. The next higher degree of sanctity is found in walled cities (dating back to the time Joshua conquered the land) within ארץ ישראל, followed by sites within the city wall of Jerusalem, followed by the Temple Mount and so forth, until the Holy of Holies within the Sanctuary, the Holy Temple. The third gift to the Jewish people is the gift of עולם הבא, the world to come, which we know was created with the letter י -as distinct from the present world- which was created with the letter ה. The ארץ ישראל in our world is perceived as "opposite" a similar area in the "higher" world referred to by Isaiah 60,21: ועמך כולם צדיקים, לעולם יירשו ארץ, "Your people (Israel) all are righteous; they will inherit an eternal land." This "eternal" land is the mystical dimension of the ten directives with which G–d created the universe. We know that one single directive was the nucleus of all the other directives, just as the first of the Ten Commandments is the nucleus of all the other commandments. It can therefore be described as קדש קדשים, the holiest of the holy. 
  All these three gifts are directly related to the patriarchs. The gift of Torah commenced during the lifetime of Abraham, as we know from Sanhedrin 97, in which the 6000 years designated for the history of man in this world are divided into 2000 years of Tohu, followed by 2000 years of Torah. This latter period began when the Torah reports both Abraham and Sarah as having converted people to belief in monotheism in Genesis 12,5: ואת הנפש אשר עשו בחרן. The gift of ארץ ישראל began to be real when Isaac was forbidden to leave that country even during periods of famine, and G–d explained that this was because this land was given to him and his descendants (Genesis 26,2-3). 
  This explains the whole matter of Isaac digging up the wells which Abraham had dug and which the Philistines had stopped up again after Abraham had left the district. The whole episode is puzzling, as the Torah had previously reported Isaac as experiencing a supernatural amount of blessing (26,12). Why should this be followed by hostility on the part of his neighbors? Another difficulty is why the Torah supplies a reason for the names Isaac gave the wells only for the first and third well, whereas the Torah does not mention why the second well was named <i>Sitnah</i>, harassment (26,21). Another difficulty is the word עתה in 26,22. It would have sufficed for Isaac to name that well רחובות by saying כי הרחיב ה' לנו ופרינו בארץ. 
  The Torah, however, wishes to allude to the ארץ ישראל in the higher regions now that Isaac had been sanctified by permanent attachment to the ארץ ישראל on earth. 
  We deal here with an allusion to the three Temples that will be home to G–d on the soil of this land. Isaac had been an unblemished total offering on the site of the future altar in the Holy Temple. This is why the names of the wells allude to that event. Nachmanides explained it in these words: "The Torah elaborates on this matter of the wells, although, when reading the plain meaning of these verses, they do not appear to be particularly relevant, nor to confer much honor on Isaac. All we are told is that Isaac did the same in his time as his father Abraham had done at the time he had lived in the land of the Philistines. There is, however, a mystical dimension to all this. The Torah reveals here some historic events of the future. The words באר מים חיים in 26,19 refer to the Holy Temple which Isaac's descendants will erect. We know from Jeremiah 17,13 that G–d is described as מקור מים חיים, "the Fount of living waters." Isaac called the first well Essek, an allusion to the first Temple, over which the Gentile nations engaged us in many disputes. They attacked Jerusalem and the Temple repeatedly until eventually it was destroyed. The second well, called Sitnah a name reflecting even greater harassment than the first, refers to the second Temple. During that period that very name שטנה appears in the early years of the reign of Ahasverus. We find Ezra 4,6 describing that period: "They wrote Sitnah against the inhabitants of Yehudah and Jerusalem." This hostility against the Jewish state and the Temple continued throughout practically all the time that it stood. Eventually, our foes destroyed the Temple and we were consigned to a bitter exile. The third well, רחובות, is an allusion to the third Temple which will be built in the future, and which will not be subject to strife and hostility from our neighbors. At that time G–d will expand the borders of our country as He has promised in Deut. 19,8. Concerning this Temple it is written in Ezekiel 41,7: ורחבה ונסבה למעלה למעלה, "and a widening; it will keep winding and encompassing upwards." The last words in Genesis 26,22 will then be fulfilled, ופרינו בארץ, "we shall then be fruitful in the land." This means that all of the nations will serve G–d, as per Tzefaniah 3,9. Thus far Nachmanides on our verses.
  The destruction of the second Temple is a result of the destruction of the first Temple: we are told in Yuma 21, that the second Temple lacked five major manifestations of the שכינה, and that this is the reason why in Chagai 1,8 וארצה ואכבד, "I shall look upon it and be glorified," the word ואכבד is spelled with the last letter ה – that should have been there – missing. Clearly, Israel had never recovered from the hatred of its neighbors, even when a second Temple was built under the patronage of the Persians. The new element of intensified harassment expressed by the word Sitnah did not last very long; during the entire period of the second Temple, however, the hatred of the kind expressed by the word התעקשו, i.e. the level of animosity experienced by Isaac when he dug the first well continued all the time. The Torah does not mention the reason for the name of the well called Sitnah, because it did not represent a new element in our relations with the Gentile nations. The reason the Torah adds the word עתה, is simply to alert us to the fact that the timing of the building of that third Temple is in our hands. This is similar to the answer given to the questioner in Sanhedrin 98 who wanted to know when the Messiah would come. He was told to look at Psalms 95,7 היום, אם בקולו תשמעו, "This very day, if only you heed His voice."
  I shall now explain the meaning of the words: עד כי גדול מאד "until he was very great," in 26,13. Bereshit Rabbah 64,7 on that verse states that when people wanted to describe excessive wealth they used to describe it in terms of the silver and gold possessed by Avimelech. After Isaac had become rich, they described excessive wealth in terms of the dung of Isaac's mules. This seems a curious comparison. How can we assume that Avimelech's wealth did not even amount to the value of the dung of Isaac's mules? Another difficulty is the Midrash's comment on the words מצא את הימים, in Genesis 36,14. These <i>yeymim</i> are described by Bereshit Rabbah 82,15 as half-donkey and half-horse. Anah who crossbred horse and donkey to produce mules is severely criticized for interfering with G–d's plan of maintaining the purity of the species. How can we assume that Isaac a) kept or raised such animals, b) was the first one to crossbreed, seeing that the Torah reports this as something new much later and in Jacob's lifetime?
  The scoffers of that generation maintained that Sarah had been impregnated by Avimelech and that Isaac was the issue. They claimed that, had Abraham been Isaac's father, it would have been impossible for Isaac to have fathered a son such as Esau who pursued married women to commit adultery with them under the noses of their husbands. Isaac's extraordinary success as well as the fact that he was sanctified on Mount Moriah and not allowed to leave the holy soil of ארץ ישראל, all served to show that he was indeed a true son of Abraham. Of Esau the Torah reports in Genesis 36 6: וילך עשו אל ארץ, "Esau went to a land." He had to leave ארץ ישראל because that land "vomits" people who behave in a grossly incestuous manner. Isaac was the model of refinement in every respect. The reason G–d blessed him in such an extraordinary fashion was to demonstrate the fact to one and all that sexually pure conduct unlocks all the bounty of the land of Israel to those who dwell in it.
  How did G–d prove that point? Whereas in the days of Anah a mule had to be the product of crossbreeding, Isaac became the owner of mules which were not the result of crossbreeding but a heavenly gift. Even the scoffers who lived around him became aware of this. This is why Isaac became "great" in their eyes. They realised that if G–d performs such miracles with the livestock of a צדיק, how much greater would be the miracles He would perform with the צדיק himself! When the people said that the dung of Isaac's mules was worth more than the silver and gold of Avimelech, they meant that the fact that Isaac possessed mules which were not the result of crossbreeding proved more about his status as a holy man than the thousand silver pieces Avimelech had given to Sarah to demonstrate that her virtue had not been compromised while she was in Avimelech's palace (Genesis 20,16). Why does the Midrash quote the Philistines as also referring to Avimelech's gold? The Torah does not report Avimelech giving gold to either Sarah or Abraham! We need not understand the word כסף, silver, in the Torah as silver literally, but as an expression of the value of the gift in terms of silver coins. We now have demonstrated how the gift of the land of Israel is specifically connected with Isaac.
  Now to the third gift עולם הבא, the World to Come, acquired only through one's having to suffer afflictions and deprivations. That world is identical with what our sages call the ארץ ישראל של מעלה, concerning which it is said in Jeremiah 17,12: כסא כבוד מרום מראשון מקדשנו, "O Throne of Glory exalted from old, our sacred shrine!" Jacob did not sire any spiritually inferior children and it is therefore his features that are reputedly engraved on the Throne of Glory. He was the immediate source of a whole nation of 600,000 holy souls who formed the mystical dimension of the holy Torah, for these souls are the spiritual dimension of Torah inasmuch as the Torah contains 600,000 letters. I have explained this in detail elsewhere. These souls in turn are "hewn" out of the Throne of Glory and form a cluster around it representing the perfect nation descended from Jacob. [That which happened historically in our world is reflected conceptually and spiritually in the "higher" world Ed] This is why Sanhedrin 90 teaches that every Israelite has a share in that עולם הבא.
  The afflictions which are to be endured by the recipients of these three gifts of G–d are what are known as יסורים של אהבה, afflictions which demonstrate G–d's love for the person who undergoes them. Their purpose is to thoroughly refine such a person spiritually so that when the holy gift is received it will not reject the recipient [much as a transplanted physical organ may be rejected by the body that it has been implanted in. Ed.] This is why we are told in Shabbat 89 that in the future Israel will say concerning Isaac "he is our father!" This seems very strange at first glance, for Isaac personifies strictness, the מדת הדין. I have explained at length in my commentary on פרשת וירא that it was the very fact that Isaac could be judged by this standard that enabled G–d to apply the attribute of Mercy to people of lesser stature. 
  Our sages see allusions in the letters of the name יצחק: The letter י alludes to the ten tests Abraham had passed; the letter צ to Sarah having given birth to Isaac at the age of ninety. In the letter ח they see an allusion to Isaac's circumcision when eight days old, whereas in the letter ק they see a reference to the fact that his father Abraham was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born. If these allusions are to be taken seriously, why was Isaac not called קצח"י seeing that Abraham and Sarah had attained their one hundredth and ninetieth birthdays respectively before Isaac was circumcised? And furthermore, did not Abraham live for another thirty seven years before submitting to the tenth and final test the עקדה?
  The very re-arrangement of the letters to become יצחק are a confirmation of what we have said, that Isaac's being able to be measured by the yardstick of strict justice enabled G–d to apply a more lenient yardstick to lesser individuals. The name יצחק, of course, is a reminder of joy and happiness. The other name which represents the root of מדת הדין is also the reason that an Esau could emerge from someone like Isaac. We have repeatedly explained that the סטרא אחרא, the "left" side of the diagram of emanations, contains the emanation גבורה, the very emanation in which Satan, Samael is rooted. The שרו של עשו, the spiritual representative of Esau in the Celestial Regions, is Samael, the perennial accuser of mankind. When the potential of Samael is converted into an actual, we have the evil urge, Satan or [in its most destructive guise] the angel of death.
  The attribute of Justice is not to be confused with עקא, distress, rather it means that man is to be treated according to his just deserts, be it reward or punishment. The only reason it is a source of distress to be judged by is the fact that we are all unable to measure up to its yardstick. It is thus quite normal that both Jacob and Esau were offspring of Isaac. One of them was destined for oblivion, the other for eternal life. Both are alluded to in the name קצחי. The קץ, "end," part of the name alludes to Esau, the סטרא אחרא to which the Zohar has linked it when commenting on קץ כל בשר בא לפני, "I have decided to put an end to all flesh" (Genesis 6,13). Samael is also referred to as קץ הימים, the end of all days, seeing he puts an end to our "days." The same word is also used to describe חשך, darkness. We read in Job 28,3: קץ שם לחשך, ולכל תכלית הוא חוקר, "He (G–d) sets bounds to darkness, to every limit man probes." Jacob, on the other hand, represents life, i.e. חי as in חי רב פעלים איש, (Samuel II 28,20). The Talmud Taanit 5 makes a point of telling us that יעקב אבינו לא מת, that our patriarch Jacob did not die. We derive all this information from the name קצחי.
  Rebeccah concluded that there was no point in living a life that was measured by the yardstick of the undiluted מדת הדין, seeing that hardly anyone could survive if he were to be measured by that attribute alone. This is why she said: קצ-תי בחיי, i.e. what good is my life under such circumstances! (Genesis 27,46) Unless some relief is found for the rest of the world's population this is the end of meaningful life. She referred to the tribe of חת, a Canaanite tribe whose daughters Esau had married. Seeing that the Canaanites were cursed already and that Esau himself was an outgrowth of the סטרא אחרא, she considered the combination as lethal, bound to lead to the oblivion of their offspring. Because of such considerations, the name that should by rights have been קצחי was changed to יצחק, to introduce the element of joy into their lives. The immediate cause for this was Isaac giving tithes which resulted in G–d blessing his efforts, as related in 26,12. It is strange that when Malachi 3,10 describes the blessing that results from tithing, he uses the expression of ארובות השמים, "the windows of heaven." Since the Torah uses the same expression at the onset of the deluge in Genesis 7,11, we wonder why the prophet would use an expression to symbolize blessing when that same expression had symbolized a curse on mankind in its prior usage in the Bible. 
  We have learned from Rashi on Genesis 18,16 that whenever the expression וישקף, וישקיפו is used, it has a negative connotation, the only exception being the prayer offered by the Jewish farmer in Deut. 26,15 when he pleads for G–d's blessing in recognition of the fact that he has given all his tithes. It seems clear that having given tithes is something which will turn a curse into a blessing. Malachi makes the exact same point; this is why he chose a wording normally associated with negative fall-out. It is a glimpse of the future when the מלאך, the "evil" angel will say Amen, when even the pig will be purified, when the perennial accuser, just as on the Day of Atonement, will be turned into an advocate on behalf of the Jewish people.
  All of these ideas are alluded to in the blessing that Jacob took from Esau. Since Isaac personified the מדת הדין here on earth, he loved Esau who צד ציד, i.e. hunted people, acted as Satan does. Esau's other name אדום alludes to something red, i.e. blood. Isaac, on the other hand, represented the redness of the wine which is still preserved inside the grapes. There was an affinity between Isaac and Esau which is symbolized by wine and blood respectively. Jacob prepared delicacies for his father in Heaven at the advice of his mother who symbolized כנסת ישראל, the concept of the Jewish people. Jacob realized that all of his father's desire was concentrated on the delicacies he had prepared. He therefore prepared them with a mixture of sweet water and rooted himself in holiness in the mystical dimension of the birthright [having acquired this from Esau]. By doing this, he forced the wicked Esau out of occupying a higher spiritual plateau than that of himself, and he caused Esau to separate himself from Jacob and to go to his own country and his own people. He would forthwith not be able to act as accuser, but would be turned into a perennial slave, just as the slave in Exodus 21,6 who has his ear pierced as evidence that he belongs to his master permanently. Isaac explained all this to Esau when he said to him: הן גביר שמתיו לך, "Here I have made him senior to you." At that point, Isaac's former name קצחי was changed to יצחק. 
  He explained to Esau that through the power of the afflictions endured as a result of the attribute of Justice, G–d becomes able to employ the attribute of Mercy. So much on the mystical dimension of the three gifts the Jewish people receive only by means of יסורים. These experiences are already alluded to by Sarah when she exclaimed צחק עשה לי אלוקים, "G–d (in His capacity of the attribute of Justice) has made a joy for me (with the birth of יצחק)" (Genesis 21,6). 
  The reason Sarah did not include the letter י in her exclamation when Isaac was born is simply that she did not live to see, nor was meant to apparently, the binding of her son and the supreme test her husband would have to undergo. Being aware of the other factors alluded to in Isaac's name, she could exclaim “צחק.” When Sarah continued by saying: כל השומע יצחק לי, she prophesied about what was to happen. This is one method of explaining the relevance of the three gifts and the tribulations involved in receiving them.
  As stated, the three letters in צחק allude to the respective ages of Sarah (90) and Abraham (100) when Isaac was born; the letter ח in the middle alludes to the number (8), the day on which Isaac was circumcised. When we write the word in מלואים, i.e. צדיק-חת-קוף, we have an allusion to the three gifts i.e תורה-ארץ ישראל-עולם הבא. Abraham and Sarah were צדיקים. He converted the men, she the women. 
  The fact that her age is alluded to first in the name צחק is to indicate that she was not merely an appendix to her husband. We have a similar situation when the Torah reports that Moses first relayed G–d's words to the women at Mount Sinai. We read in Exodus 19,3: "Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob (women), and tell the children of Israel." The reason that the women were addressed first, and of course expressed their willingness to accept Torah first, was to prevent anyone thinking they had done so only to please their husbands rather than to please G–d. Sarah similarly proselytized independently from her husband. Since Genesis 12,5 is the beginning of the gift of Torah, it is appropriate to mention the part a woman played first. The word צדיק spelled as words, צדיק-דלת-יוד-קוף, contains an allusion to the giving of the Torah as we know from ה' חפץ למען צדקו יגדיל תורה ויאדיר. 
  The letter ח in the name יצחק alludes to Isaac being circumcised on the eighth day of his life. When that letter is spelled as a word, i. e. חת, it alludes to the gift of the land of Israel, the very first piece of land which Abraham purchased from the sons of חת. We have already explained that the mystical dimension of יצחק includes the fact that the gift of the land of Israel is closely connected with the observance of the commandment of circumcision. The Torah specifically linked the gift of the land to the descendants of Abraham and Isaac with the commandment of circumcision in chapter 17, and even spelled out the penalty for all those who failed to observe this commandment. Rabbi Yudan in Bereshit Rabbah 46,9 even emphasized that entry into the Holy Land under Joshua could not have taken place without mass circumcision immediately following the crossing of the river Jordan, as we read in the book of Joshua chapter 5. The allusion to the gift of the land of Israel thus is found both in the regular spelling of the letter ח in the name יצחק, as well as when we spell that letter "fully" i.e. as a word.
  
  The letter ק in the word יצחק is an allusion to the gift of עולם הבא. That gift is perceived as the reward for performing G–d's commandments in this world. Torah observance became a practical consideration only at the time Abraham and Sarah began converting (12,5). Only then did the 2000 year period described by our sages as Tohu, come to an end. Whereas this process of revealing the "Torah" began with Abraham, it was concluded only at the time the Jewish people, the descendants of Jacob who had not sired any פסולת, stood at the bottom of Mount Sinai. Of the Torah's commandments it is said in Eiruvin 22: היום לעשותם ומחר לקבל שכרם, "the commandments are to be performed today, (in this world) and their reward will be received tomorrow" (in the World to Come). The letter, (number) ק alludes to the age of Abraham at the time Isaac was born when he began to contemplate all aspects of the Torah. When that letter is spelled as a word, i.e. קוף, its numerical value equals 186 or מקום. The word מקום is another name of G–d seeing that it is made up of the letters in the Ineffable Name being squared, thus: 10 ,י-ה-ו-ה times 10, +5 times 5, +6 times 6, +five times 5=186. The "upper" earth [in the Celestial Regions] is holy "soil," i.e. the מקום is holy, and when Isaiah 60,21 says: ועמך כלם צדיקים לעולם ירשו ארץ, "your people who are all holy, they will inherit an eternal earth," the reference is to the עולם הבא. That is the region where G–d directs blessings which continue indefinitely. This is the mystical dimension in which the one hundred blessings are rooted, the hundred gates in the spiritual world which we discussed on pages 159-160. When you look at the numerical value of the name יעקב, which equals 182, and add 4 for his four wives with whom he sired all the children who were loyal to Torah precepts, you have the number 186, the same as the letter קוף, or the name for G–d when His celestial dimension מקום is described. The Torah describes יעקב as part of G–d in Deut. 32,9:. כי חלק ה' עמו, יעקב חבל נחלתו.
  I have already mentioned that possession of the land of Israel commenced with the acquisition of the cave of Machpelah from the sons of Chet. So when Rebeccah said: קצתי בחיי מפני בנות חת, we have an allusion to the letter ח also in Rebeccah's words. When you combine the numerical value in the name יעקב with the number 8, you get 190 or the word קץ, end. That word represents Samael – the spiritual representative of Esau – as we have already pointed out. The reason the letter ק is written small is that Esau represents a diminution of the Divine image of G–d, something more קוף – like, ape-like. That part of the human being, – his resemblance to the ape,– is the קליפה, the inferior outer shell. Israel never recaptured its former glory after the destruction of the first Temple; we have mentioned repeatedly that during the time of the second Temple five major manifestations of G–d's Presence remained absent. The first Temple stood for a period of 410 years, the numerical value of the word קצתי. You can also read this as קץ ת"י, that after 410 (years) the spiritual life Rebeccah envisaged would come to an end. The Baal Haturim has a wonderful explanation when he writes that the small letter ק refers to the destruction of the second Temple which stood one hundred cubits tall (a building erected by King Herod). Although Herod built a physically great structure, it was only a "small" ק. I believe that Rebeccah was concerned that Jacob (value 182), who already had received the blessing of his father, should become the recipient of the one hundred blessings we have discussed. If he were to marry a daughter of the sons of Chet (value 8), he would add that number to his own and the result would be 190=קץ. If that were to happen, she said, then קצתי בחיי, "my spiritual life would be at an end." If however, he were to take the (4) daughters of Laban, his marriage bed would be pure, and the numerical value of that union would symbolize 186= קוף = מקום, i.e. the name of G–d.
  When our sages in Menachot 43 state that a person has to pronounce one hundred benedictions daily, they base this on Deut. 10,12: מה ה' אלוקיך שואל ממך "What does the Lord your G–d ask of you?" They suggest that the word מה should be read as מאה. I have already mentioned elsewhere that when the sages suggest an emendation in the written text of the Torah there must be a very compelling reason to do so. In this particular case I do not feel any need for this since the word מה and the word מאה are essentially the same. 
  When you spell the Ineffable four-lettered Name as words, i.e. יוד-הא-ואו-הא, you get a total of 45, or מה. This is the same numerical value as אדם. When you spell the word מאה in a similar fashion, the result – קוף, amounts to the equivalent of the Ineffable Name. The Hebrew equivalent for the words "they are the same" is מה הן, which also equals 100 = מאה.
  
  
  Since the blessing Jacob received from his father had been of a material nature, such as "the dew of the heavens, the fat parts of the earth, etc." [seeing Isaac thought he was blessing Esau], he could not really receive Isaac's spiritual blessings until he had successfully confronted Esau, i.e. had experienced the fear of Esau approaching him with four hundred armed men. Jacob's very desire to belong to the choicest of the בני עליה, the spiritually most refined human beings, necessitated that he undergo a thorough process of refinement. His stay at Laban, i.e. physical and mental hardship for over twenty years were all part of the preparation for receiving the ultimate spiritual blessings. After Jacob had successfully confronted the spiritual power of Esau in his nocturnal encounter in Genesis 32,25 ויאבק איש עמו (compare Bereshit Rabbah 77,3), he finally obtained the consent of his adversary that he was entitled to the blessings he had received from his father. This is why Esau said in 33,9: "you may keep what is yours." Esau's spiritual counterpart had already acknowledged this during the struggle when he had bestowed a blessing on Jacob in 32,30: ויברך אותו שם, "He blessed him there." At that time Jacob was also informed about the forthcoming change of his name to ישראל. The Esau on earth, had previously called him Jacob as a slur when he had felt himself betrayed in 27,36.
  We need to appreciate that the name יעקב is in fact ישראל. The name יעקב alludes to an exalted position on earth, i.e. in this world; it reflects observance of Torah in this world, not expecting to be rewarded in this world, but being content היום, לעשותו, מחל לקבל שכרם, as we have explained earlier. The name ישראל is the direct outcome of יעקב having been what he was here on earth. Our sages have taught us that שכר מצוה מצוה, that the reward of performing a commandment is the מצוה itself (Avot 4,2). This means that the spiritual element of the מצוה one performs on earth becomes the glue with which one attaches oneself to G–d in the Hereafter. When David refers to the great reward in store as a result of observing the commandments, i.e. בשמרם עקב רב (Psalms 19,12), he points to the seemingly insignificant commandments people are in the habit of ignoring. The word Eikev means סוף, end. The word סוף also means תכלית, the ultimate purpose of life as defined by Solomon in Kohelet 12,13 in the words: סוף דבר את האלוקים ירא ואת מצותיו שמור כי זה כל האדם. "To sum up: Fear the Lord, observe His commandments, for this is what man is all about." This סוף which Solomon speaks about in Kohelet is the latter part of Jacob's name עקב, heel, itself the tail-end of a person. This יעקב was alluded to earlier in the Torah when G–d said to Isaacs, “I shall multiply your seed like the stars of the heaven" (26,4). G–d goes on to say that inheritance of the land of Israel will be due to Abraham having listened to G–d's voice and having observed His commandments, עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקולי. The word עקב refers to that part of יעקב's name. 
  The verse (26,5) we have just quoted contains ten words corresponding to the Ten Commandments. When you examine the wording of the Ten Commandments you will find that it contains 172 words, the same as the numerical value of the word עקב, as pointed out by Baal HaTurim. You may ask: If this is so why was יעקב not called עקב? The answer is already alluded to when we read about Jacob's birth, when he is described as holding on to עקב עשו, the heel of Esau (25,26). The last three letters in Jacob's name are an indication that the sanctity, holiness expressed by the letter י in his name will prevail in the world only at the end of history, at the עקב, or סוף. The heel of Esau, however, the one that Jacob held on to, is symbolic of the serpent which hisses: it is the end of life, signifies darkness and death, as we have explained earlier. When the enmity that exists between the serpent and man is described in the Torah in Genesis 3,15: הוא ישופך ראש ואתה תשופנו עקב, "He (man) will strike at your head, and you (the snake) will strike at his heel," the Zohar writes on this verse that the word ראש refers to the first letter in the name יעקב, an allusion to the Ten Commandments. If Jacob observes the Ten Commandments, then he can successfully strike at the ראש, the head of the serpent and all that the serpent represents; but והיה כאשר תריד (Genesis 27,40) "when you will backslide in your service of G–d," then you (the snake) will strike at עקב, the part of the name יעקב when detached from the י and all that this letter stands for." If Jacob had not had the letter י in his name his name would have been associated only with elements derived from the סטרא אחרא, the negative side of the diagram of the emanations. When the Torah reports that וידו אוחזת, that "his hand was holding on to," the letters in the word for "his hand,” i.e. ידו, are the same as the letter יוד. The potential contained in the name יעקב, enabled Jacob to become ישראל, a name that was accorded to Jacob only after his successful refinement through harassment at the hands of Esau. The name ישראל is the pinnacle that the spiritually most refined people can achieve. It indicates that he had been able to contend with Heavenly forces and to prevail (Genesis 32,29). Onkelos translates this verse: "You have fought before G–d with man and have succeeded."
  Let us now explore the mystical dimension of the name יעקב. In Genesis 27,35 Isaac says to Esau: בא אחיך במרמה, "Your brother came with wisdom to take the blessings." This means that Jacob came to outwit Esau. Isaac referred to Jacob having outwitted what Esau stands for, i.e. Satan, the pollutant of the original serpent, seeing Esau is also Edom, the classic symbol of all that is polluted and cursed. This original serpent had been described in the Torah as ערום, sly (Genesis 3,1). This being so, Jacob had to resort to a wily strategy to outwit such an opponent. He had to counter with ערמה, slyness, in order to defeat the serpent or its representative at its own game. We find something similar when Rashi explains (Numbers 31,8) that the reason the Torah stresses that Bileam was killed by the sword was because the sword was his stock-in-trade. He should have stuck to his trade. Isaac had told Esau that he would live by his sword (27,40), whereas the traditional weapon of Israel is the mouth, i.e. prayer. Since Bileam perverted his function by using Israel's weapon, the mouth, Israel used his own traditional weapon against him. In order to best him absolutely, he had to be killed by the weapon that he had once considered himself a champion of. The Zohar goes as far as to say that the only way it was possible to kill Bileam was by the sword. Onkelos explains the meaning of יודע ציד in 25,27 as being "Esau was shrewd." The Tziyoni derives from that word נחשירכן (the word Onkelos uses to explain יודע ציד), that the mystical dimension of the serpent is contained in the ירך, reproductive organ, thigh, and that Esau had the likeness of a serpent tatooed on his thigh. This was the reason that Samael, or the spiritual representative of Esau, tried to injure that organ of Jacob's during the nocturnal confrontation. The reason he did not succeed was that Jacob did not contain any residual pollution of the serpent. Bileam alluded to this when he said in Numbers 23,23: כי לא נחש ביעקב, that Jacob was not infected by the serpent. Esau is rooted in the cursed serpent. Jacob and his descendants ירך יעקב, are of blessed origin. Jacob had to come with עקבה, trickery, the craft of the serpent, and he wrested the blessing from the clutches of the unworthy. We know from Proverbs 8,12 that חכמה and ערמה are used interchangeably, i.e. אני חכמה, שכנתי ערמה, "I, wisdom, am neighbor to ערמה.” Later on, when he had established a hold in the Celestial Regions, the source of all blessings, he is referred to as ישראל, since he had ascended to these "higher" regions. The level of ישראל in those regions is very high, seeing that Israel surpassed the level of the angels during his ascent. He occupies a position there that is not even accessible to the angels. He proceeds to rise higher and higher until he even surpasses the region of the ministering angels, the most highly placed angels. It is this that Onkelos referred to when he described Israel as "you are a great lion before G–d and men." 
  This is alluded to in Numbers 23,23: כי לא נחש ביעקב קסם בישראל, כעת יאמר ליעקב ולישראל מה פעל השם. "For there is no augury in Jacob, no divining in Israel; Jacob is told at once, yea Israel, what G–d has accomplished." [the traditional translation of this verse bears no semblance to the author's interpretation, and is presented only to demonstrate how far the author departs from the plain meaning, פשט. Rashi brings a similar explanation. Ed.] As a first step in his rise to lofty spiritual regions, Jacob got rid of נחש and its powerful influence. Once he had attained the stature of ישראל, not even a vestige of such an influence i.e. קסם remained The word Kessem is the same as קיסם, a sliver, splinter, something very small and insignificant. Israel continues to ascend higher and higher until a time comes when the ministering angels say to Jacob turned Israel who has penetrated and surpassed their ranks: "What did G–d do?"
  The name ישראל is not viewed as something "new," seeing it had been in G–d's mind before He even started creating the universe. The name had only not been revealed on earth. It was revealed on earth in connection with Jacob's spiritual ascension at פניאל. In our Midrashic literature all the patriarchs are now and again described as ישראל. This is a way of describing their spiritual achievements. 
  Having this in mind, we can understand an enigmatic Midrash Rabbah Genesis 63,3 on this פרשה: "These are the descendants of Isaac the son of Abraham, Abraham begat Isaac. Abraham was called Abraham; Isaac was called Abraham for the Torah says "these are the descendants of Abraham, Abraham." Jacob's name was called Israel because the Torah says in Genesis 32,29: "He said to him: 'Your name will no longer be called Jacob but Israel.' Isaac was called Israel, as the Torah says in Exodus 1,1 'And these are the names of the children of Israel who came to Egypt with Jacob.' Abraham is called Israel." Rabbi Natan added that there is a profound meaning in: ומושב בני ישראל אשר ישבו במצרים ובארץ כנען ובארץ גשן שלושים שנה וארבע מאות שנה. "The period that the children of Israel lived in Egypt, Goshen and Canaan respectively prior to the Exodus was 430 years."
  Why did the Midrash have to mention that Abraham's name was Abraham? Why did the Midrash have to mention that Jacob was called Israel? Both of these facts are recorded in the Torah explicitly! Another difficulty is that since the patriarchs are viewed as a group, why are Jacob and Isaac not also called Abraham? Neither, for that matter, do we find Abraham called Isaac? Why does the Midrash quote the verse from the beginning of the book of Exodus instead of quoting from Parshat Vayigash in which the descent of all the family of Jacob to Egypt is recorded? We find the identical wording to that in Exodus in Genesis 46,8. From that verse it is easier to conclude that Isaac was called Israel than from the verse in Exodus 1,1, since the stress in that latter verse is on the words את יעקב באו, they had come with Jacob. Rabbi Natan's statement emphasizing its profound meaning is puzzling. What profundity is there in his statement?
   I have already commented in חיי שרה on the meaning of the different ways the patriarchs' blessings are described in the Torah, i.e. the words בכל-מכל-כל as used with the respective blessings for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I mentioned that one קליפה was removed from around Abraham, i.e. Ishmael. He was still burdened with the קליפה represented by his grandson Esau, however. Another קליפה was removed from around Isaac, i.e. Esau. The whole subject of קליפות as applied to the patriarchs must be viewed as the removal of the husk before the fruit in all its beauty can be revealed and become fully accessible. It is in the nature of things that the husk precedes the kernel. One can hardly perceive of a fruit not surrounded by a husk or peel. It is the early part of the fruit, the flower or blossom. Jacob represented the fully ripened fruit. There is a spiritual dimension to all this, namely that even the husk is originally attached to the same holy source as the eventual fruit itself. The same applies to the parallel situation of their respective counterparts in the Celestial Regions. Despite the expansion of impure negative influences in this world, even the קליפה will eventually return to the source of its holy origin. The catalyst that will bring this about are the צדיקים, the righteous people, who will subdue the evil urge displaying true heroism as described in Avot 4,1: "Who is the true hero? He who can conquer his urges." I have pointed out on several occasions that the evil urge is not to be killed, but to be subjugated, to be channeled into positive constructive activities. One example of such subjugation is if a normally jealous person applies his streak of jealousy to Torah scholars who have mastered more Torah than he has. By using this trait to redouble his efforts to achieve mastery over Torah disciplines, he proves himself to be a hero.
  When the sons of Chet addressed Abraham by saying: "You are a prince of G–d in our midst" (Genesis 23,7), what they meant was that the personality of Abraham had made a deep impression on their תוכיות, internality. They felt that their own spiritual roots had become purified through having an Abraham in their proximity. They were convinced that this augured well for their future and eventual salvation, and they thanked Abraham. When our Bereshit Rabbah 43,5 explains the words עמק שוה in Genesis 14,17, by saying that all the nations agreed (השוו) to crown Abraham there as their king, this describes Abraham as being freed, set apart from the קליפות. Abraham personally represents the spiritual level of ישראל; he achieved a higher level than all the other patriarchs. The statement that his name was ישראל indicates his spiritual level as being on a very high plateau enabling him to penetrate to the most rarefied Celestial Regions. The name אברהם, on the other hand, describes his being the (spiritual) father of a multitude of nations, כי אב המון גוים נתתיך, something that was acknowledged when the sons of Chet said שמענו אדני, נשיא אלוקים אתה in 23,6. He had also been called Abram, for it was still at that time that Ishmael issued from him. We see that the dimension of אב המון already began to take practical form while Abraham was still Abram. This dimension was reinforced with the birth of Isaac, who in turn produced an Esau who incorporates all the קליפות.
  The proof that Esau comprises all the קליפות is evident from the fact that our present exile is called the exile of אדום, one of Esau's names. This is in spite of there being in existence other great kingdoms such as the kingdom of the Arabs [Ottomans at the time of the author], the descendants of Ishmael and still others. All of these kingdoms are subsumed under the heading "EDOM." Nachmanides comments on these matters at length in his commentary on Parshat Balak. This explains the need for the Midrash saying that אברם נקרא אברהם. 
  Isaac was also called אברהם, since Esau, Abraham's grandson and the other half of his קליפה, i.e. all the קליפות extant in the world, are traced to him, as we have explained. We may therefore also regard Isaac as אב המון גוים. That name would not be appropriate for Jacob, however, seeing he was no progenitor of המון גוים, Gentile nations. The reason that neither Abraham nor Jacob were called Isaac is that there would have been no point in it. 
  The reason Jacob had to be called Israel is to teach us that he had a dual task. First he had to remove the influence of evil. We should not think that tricking Esau was unethical; on the contrary, it was part of the process of neutralizing spiritually negative influences. Next, as Israel, his task was to help positive spiritual forces to assert themselves, and for him personally to achieve ever closer affinity to G–d. The name Jacob was never discarded, not even after he was given the name Israel. The reason for this is that even the name ישראל contains elements of the name יעקב. We have demonstrated that the עקב part equals the number 172, the number of words in the Ten Commandments, whereas the letter י before is the link to them. We have also pointed out that Jacob's function as יעקב is the principle of היום לעשותם, whereas the function of ישראל is the מחר לקבל שכרם, receiving the reward for the מצות in the Celestial Spheres as alluded to in the name ישראל. The name יעקב contains numerous allusions to a variety of moral imperatives, some of which we have already mentioned. When Isaac said to Jacob, in his blessing: הוה גביר לאחיך, "be your brother's superior" (27,29), this was a command to subjugate the אדומי, the evil urge represented by Esau. Jacob was to do this in his capacity of יעקב. This is analogous to the Mishnah in Avot 4,1 we quoted earlier. 
  This אדמוני will eventually emerge purified and holy, a reference to the David who is also known as אדמוני. We read in Samuel I 16,12 that David is described as אדמוני עם יפה עינים וטוב ראי, "ruddy cheeked, bright-eyed and handsome." The first person to be described as אדמוני was Esau; it is therefore hardly a compliment to David to be similarly described. The essential difference is that whereas Esau was עין רע, represented all that is negative associated with the eye, David was the reverse, and is therefore described as יפה עינים. In David's case the positive aspects of eyes are meant: the prophet therefore describes him as טוב ראי. Solomon, who says in Kohelet 10,8: פורץ גדר ישכנו נחש, that "he who breaches the fence will be bitten by a snake,” may have referred to David's forbear Peretz, whom the Torah had described as "bursting out" (Genesis 38,29). The נחש referred to is the power of Esau. King Saul repaired the fence partially when he defeated נחש king of Ammon who went to war against Israel as reported in Samuel I 11,1. David also accomplished a great deal in this area during his reign. In the future, as the Messiah, however, he will take revenge on the forces of Esau in the manner of a serpent, as we know from Isaiah 14,29: כי משרש נחש יצא צפע, "For from the root of a snake there sprouts an asp."
  We are told in the Zohar Parshat Vayishlach (Sullam edition page 16), that Jacob and Joseph jointly donated 70 years of their lives to David. The Zohar writes as follows: David, [though extant in concept] had not been allocated any life on earth at all. When Adam saw this he donated 70 years of his life to David. This is why he did not live to be the 1000 years he was entitled to, but died at 930. The first 1000 years of human life may be understood as a combination of the lives of Adam and David. Rabbi Shimon continued to expound on Psalms 21,5: חיים שאל ממך, נתתה לו ארך ימים עולם ועד. "He asked You for life; You granted it; a long life everlasting." The first part of the verse applies to king David who, when his soul was created and placed in גן עדן, saw that no lifespan on earth had been allocated to him. As soon as Adam was created, he concluded that Adam's life was the answer to his prayer. Rabbi Shimon added that each one of the patriarchs also donated a portion of their designated lifespans to David. Abraham contributed, so did Jacob, and so did Joseph. Isaac did not give up any part of his life on earth in favor of David. The reason is because David "was from his side," בא מצדו. 
  Abraham donated five years of his life; he died at 175 instead of at 180 as he was meant to. Jacob, who was meant to live the same number of years as Abraham, i.e. 175, died at 147; he donated 28 years of his designated lifespan to David. This gives us 33 years that Abraham and Jacob contributed to David's lifespan. Joseph was meant to live to the same age as his father, i.e. 147. However, he died at 110. The 37 years missing in his lifespan were given to David. Thus the patriarchs and Joseph together contributed 70 years to the lifespan of David. The reason that Isaac did not contribute was that Isaac was חשך [a term for the left side of the diagram of the emanations containing דין, something discussed by the author on numerous occasions, Ed.], the same side that David stems from. Anyone who originates in that region is not entitled to light, i.e. life, at all. This is the reason that originally no lifespan had been allocated to David's soul. The other patriarchs who had been granted life, provided "light" i.e. life for David's soul.
  You may ask how it is that Joseph is included in the list of patriarchs, and even contributed more than the other patriarchs combined? The answer is that Joseph was the moral equal of all the other patriarchs combined, seeing that all our literature describes him as יוסף הצדיק, Joseph the righteous. In that capacity he "illuminated the moon," the symbol of all that is feminine, more than any of the others. This is why he could contribute more years of life to David than all the others. The allusion to this in our scriptures is found in Genesis 1,17: ויתן אותם אלוקים ברקיע השמים להאיר על הארץ , "G–d positioned them in the sky of the firmament to give light on earth." Thus far the Zohar.
  We see from the above that both Jacob and Joseph repaired damage caused by the אדמוני, since both hated Esau. What our sages said about Adam giving 70 years of his life to David is also true. The whole point of granting life to David was to repair the damage done to G–d's universe by Adam, without which a Messianic age and all its benefits to mankind would not be needed. Adam's צלם אלוקים, divine image, needed to be restored first and foremost through the constructive lives of the patriarchs. We explained all this in our commentary on Parshat Chayey Sarah. The 70 years Adam donated to David were "illuminated," assumed a positive meaning through Jacob and Joseph having donated 70 years of their already meaningful lives. We have explained earlier that the "beauty" of Jacob was of the same quality as the beauty of Adam [before his sin, of course. Ed.]. Genesis 39,6 describes Joseph as: ויהי יוסף יפה תואר, he had handsome features for he evidently inherited these from his father, seeing Joseph is viewed as his father's replica. We have seen from Samuel I 16,12 that David's features are described in similar terms. Once the Messiah will arrive on earth, Adam will be rehabilitated completely, will be אד"ם, the first letters respectively of the incarnations in אדם דוד משיח.
  Our sages (Baba Kama 16) say that if someone fails to bow down when reciting the benediction מודים during the עמידה prayer his spine will turn into a snake at the end of 70 years. [the version in our edition of the Talmud is "7 years." Ed.] The "bowing" referred to is the bending of one's knee; since knee-bending involves the ירך, thigh, pelvis and reproductive organs, (the body's part most vulnerable to Satan, i.e. the snake), we have a clear link between the two. [The Talmud in Sotah describes the snake as maintaining an upright posture, a sign of arrogance. Man and the snake are the only two creatures that were created to walk upright. This is the common denominator between man and the snake. When man abuses this privilege by asserting himself not only vis-a-vis other creatures but even vis-a-vis G–d, he will wind up as a snake, i.e. lose that ability, just as the snake has lost its ability to maintain an upright posture. Ed.] Failure to bow during the prayer of thanksgiving to G–d is the opposite of what David used to do. He used every opportunity to praise and give thanks to G–d. As an expression of his sentiments he composed the book of Psalms. A person who lives for seventy years (average) and fails to express his gratitude to G–d in the proper fashion will have his spine [symbolic of his life] turned into a snake [forfeit resurrection]. Jacob is the mystical dimension of the spinal cord. 
  The significance of the number seventy is the number of Jacob's offspring that went down to Egypt which corresponded to the seventy spiritual representatives of the Gentile nations in the Heavenly Regions. The reason that the seventy souls went to Egypt and into exile was to enable them to be refined there in what our sages have called "the crucible of Egypt." The Kabbalists tell us that of the seventy שרים, representatives at the Celestial Court we have mentioned, thirty five are perceived as lining up on the "right" side of the diagram of the ספירות, emanations, whereas the other thirty five are found on the "left" side. Israel has a סנהדרין, Supreme Court, of seventy judges corresponding to those שרים of the Gentile nations. All of these judges are from the root of קדושה. This is why the Torah warns us not to turn either right or left from what these judges (elders) tell us (Deut. 17,11). Rashi and other commentators interpret this to mean that even if the Sanhedrin tells you that "right" is "left," and that "left" is "right," we must abide by their ruling (Jerusalem Talmud Horayot 1,5). A Jewish Court of Law composed of expert scholars who have received the ordination called סמיכה, is called אלו-הים. It is the nature of this ordination that there is a continuous chain of authority going back all the way to G–d Himself via the scholars in each generation, including Moses who was ordained by G–d Himself. The very word used to describe this ordination, סמוכים, "adjoining, next to one another,” hints at the nature of the ordination, that it is valid only because it represents an unbroken chain of tradition. This idea is expressed in the Torah in Deut. 4,4 ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים כלכם היום, "You who have cleaved to the Lord your G–d, are all alive this day." The 70 שרים of the Gentile nations are called אלהים אחרים, "deities of the others," because they look up to them as their gods. This idea is alluded to when the angel, (Esau's celestial counterpart), justifies Jacob being called Israel by saying כי שרית עם אלה-ים, you have fought with the 70 deities of the Gentile nations.
  These 70 שרים also symbolize the need for the כתנות עור, the leather garments (given to Adam by G–d after the sin) in our world, in exchange for the כתנות אור, the garments woven of "light," that Adam wore before the sin. That letter א in those original garments worn only by the members of the Celestial High Court is symbolised in our world by the 71st member of the Sanhedrin the president, the most renowned expert of his day. The allusion to this in scripture is Song of Songs 5,11: ראשו כתם, His head is finest gold. The Sanhedrin in our world, called אל-הים with the expert (the 71st judge) added, amounts to the same numerical value as 86+1 [87= פז] This is what the angel alluded to when he said to Jacob-Israel: כי שרית עם אלה-ים. The word פז is a combination of the numerical values of two of G–d's names, both of which between them were involved in the how and why of the Creation. We have stated on other occasions that the first 42 letters of the Torah, up to and including the letter ב in the word ובהו, make up the attribute of G–d involved in the creative process. [The Gaon Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna elaborates on this name in his commentary on Isaiah. Ed.] We have also explained that the whole purpose of the Creation was אדם העליון, the concept of man in his most elevated form; we have also demonstrated that only ישראל is described as אדם in the Torah. The numerical value of אדם is 45. 45+42 equals 87= פז. An indication that Israel is this פז, fine gold, is found in the fact that Israel counts according to the lunar calendar. The moon is called לבנה, its numerical value is 87. This means Israel equals 87.
  The name יעקב itself actually contains the elements of the mystique of Israel. In the other patriarchs the qualities represented by the name ישראל remained hidden, but during the lifetime of Jacob they were revealed. This was because he was the first of the patriarchs to transmit his heritage to all his children thereby founding a whole and perfect nation. Consider the following about the name ישראל: All the patriarchs, matriarchs as well as the (12) tribes are alluded to in that name. The first three letters of that name, i.e. ישר, are the first letters respectively of רבקה, יצחק, שרה. They are also the respective first letters of רחל, יעקב, שבטים. The last two letters in the name ישראל are used only once and represent the first letters in the names אברהם and לאה. The reason for this somewhat unusual use of the ראשי תיבות is the verse in Hoseah 14,10: ישרים דרכי ה', that the ways of the Lord are straightforward. Seeing that the word ישר is in the plural, (the ending ים), the letters in the word ישר may be used twice. There is also a reason why the last two letters in the word ישראל were only used once in that allusion. 
  Bileam says in Numbers 23,10: תמות נפשי מות ישרים ותהי אחריתי כמוהו, "May my Hereafter be like that of Israel." Here too we have the plural of ישר, ישרים. The אחרית referred to by Bileam are the last two letter in the word ישראל. Bileam hopes for a future beyond the grave equaling that of the patriarchs, matriarchs, and the 12 tribes of Israel together. Throughout Scripture we find several times the verse: ברוך ה' אל-ה ישראל; the מספר קטן [a system of numerical values in which the digit 0 is ignored Ed.] of the word א-ל-ה-י, i.e. 1+3+5+1 =10. The מספר קטן of the word ישראל, also amounts to ten, i.e. 1+3+2+1+3=10. This is the allusion to the statement of our sages that the Presence of G–d does not come to rest on fewer than ten Jews. 
  We have already shown that the number 10 figures greatly in matters related to tithes. When you combine the respective first letters of the ten emanations, i.e. כחב, גגת, נהימ, the total equals the numerical value of 541= ישראל. [This is based on Luzzato's diagram of the emanations in which חסד and דין are called גדולה and גבורה respectively. Ed.] The spiritual plateau of ישראל can only be attained after thorough refinement of one's personality through afflictions which originate in the power of the קטרוג, accusations represented by our קליפות. These קליפות are destroyed only when said afflictions are welcomed by the persons experiencing same, by the awareness of those people that the afflictions are a positive experience. Anyone who is really a strong character succeeds not only in destroying said קליפות, but in subjugating them in such a way that henceforth they become a constructive force, become totally purified, after which these personalities ascend ever higher spiritually.
  All three patriarchs were refined through the experience of some degree of exile. Jacob together with his sons, of course, descended into exile in Egypt, where they were in real exile, having had to leave their homeland. Jacob actually should have been brought to Egypt in chains, as our sages state in Shabbat 89b. The 400-year exile started with the birth of Isaac, though Isaac did not actually leave the Holy Land. He is however, always referred to as being גר, a stranger, in that land. Even though the patriarchs were not physically enslaved, the status of being sojourners sufficed to consider them as being in exile. Even Abraham, who was looked up to as a prince among the local population, and who had been "crowned" king in the עמק השוה, as we have mentioned earlier, suffered thirty years of mental exile during the years between the ברית בין הבתרים and the birth of Isaac. Jacob was especially pursued by the קליפה, for Samael had managed to injure Jacob's ירך, thigh, hip joint. As a result, Jacob was in need of greater refinement than his father or grandfather, which manifested itself in a more serious form of exile. Although Esau was a son of Isaac, and honored his father, [which indicated Isaac's affinity to that קליפה of his, Ed.], the fact that Esau lived a life designed to lead to physical as well as spiritual death (as we know from his own admission in Genesis 25,32 when he sold the birthright, and again when he wished for his father to die prematurely, Genesis 27,41) meant that Isaac had rid himself of that קליפה and therefore only needed a minimal amount of exile experience. Abraham died before Esau had become wicked, and thus had no affinity to Esau's קליפה. Abraham also expelled Ishmael from his home when G–d commanded him to pay heed to what his wife Sarah had told him, namely to expel the servant woman and her son. As a result of his keeping away from both these קליפות Abraham did not have to experience actual exile. He did not even have to feel as a stranger. All that was needed to refine him was the anxiety experienced between the promise of the birth of an heir and the fulfillment of that promise, which meant the onset of the 400 years of his descendants being regarded as strangers or of their being actual slaves.
   G–d subjected Abraham to this worry in order that he could be cleansed and refined from the influences of the קליפות. Once this was accomplished, Abraham ascended to the spiritual level represented by the term ישראל. According to the Kabbalists, the root of the קליפות in the usual pattern of emanations does not reach higher than the emanation חסד (or גדולה according to Luzzato). This is what Rabbi Natan in the Midrash had in mind when referring to the "profound matter".
  In order to properly understand this one needs to study the third chapter of the treatise מהות והנהגה in Pardes Rimonim. In that chapter the author, Rabbi Moshe Cordovera, explains that every single emanation is comprised of ten emanations. He arrives at the conclusion that, though the root of the קליפות does not extend higher than the emanation חסד, it, i.e. the emanation גבורה-דין may yet exist even as part of the emanation כתר, which is perceived of as completely רחמים. His main point is that the emanation דין is a potential ingredient in that emanation כתר, and is activated only through action by the קליפות. We must therefore suppose that in addition to the concept שורש, root, there is also such a thing as שורש שרשים, the root of roots. [Perhaps we can best illustrate this by the difference between conscious and subconscious thoughts. שורש would equal conscious thought, whereas שורש שרשים would equal subconscious thought. Ed.] The refinement that Abraham lacked was only in the area of שורש שרשים, and that is the "profound matter" Rabbi Natan had in mind. The 30 years of the 430 years that are described in Exodus 12,40 commenced with the "covenant between the pieces," when Abraham began to experience a "mental exile." This is when he qualified for the title ישראל.
  Isaac had to suffer a more intense type of "exile" experience since he needed more refinement from the קליפות than his father Abraham. As a result, when the actual exile in a foreign land began, at the beginning of the book of Exodus, his name had to be included as part of the 400-year experience. Isaac's participation in that experience elevated him to the status of ישראל.
  Jacob and family experienced exile in all its forms and became so refined that a whole nation of 600,000 pure souls emerged. We have stated several times that these 600,000 souls correspond to the letters in the Torah, that Torah essentially represents Israel and that the Torah comprises the 70 "faces" in the Celestial Regions. Since Israel is called אדם, it was created in order to service and preserve the terrestrial part of the universe, to observe the Torah (Targum Yonathan on Genesis 2,16). Israel unfortunately aborted its mission by sinning during the episode of the golden calf. This is reflected in Psalms 82,7: אכן כאדם תמותון, alas, you shall die as man; (instead of living indefinitely just like the angels). David began to repair the damage caused by that aberration, but did not complete the repair. Only when the Messiah comes will the remainder of that damage be repaired. 
  Concerning the attitude of the Romans to these matters, we find an interesting paragraph in Avodah Zarah 11b: Rabbi Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel that there is still another festival that the Romans used to celebrate once in 70 years. They brought a healthy man (Esau's effigy), placed him on top of a lame man (Jacob's effigy), dressed him up in the garments of original man (leather garments), placed the scalp of Rabbi Yishmael on his head, and hung around his neck four pieces of fine gold. They covered the streets around that area with fine gold and proclaimed in front of him: 'The prediction about when the Messiah will come that the brother of our lord the impostor made is false. The "Master" was a fake, charlatan; he thought he would be senior to Esau. He who enjoys himself at this festivity will have real enjoyment. He who does not enjoy himself now will never see joy since this festivity will not occur again for another seventy years. What good did it do the swindler to have swindled, and what good did it do the forger to have forged?' They concluded as follows: Woe to this one once the other one will arise! Rav Ashi added: "These people brought about their fall by their own words. If they had said "the brother of our master has swindled," they might have got away with it; by saying: "the Master swindled," they only described their own master (Esau) as a swindler."
  Rashi explains this paragraph as referring to the prediction by Jacob about the time of the Messiah's arrival, a prediction which did not come true. Rabbeinu Tam challenges this interpretation. He cannot imagine that the Romans should have referred to Jacob as "Master." He therefore concludes that the Romans used the appellation "Master" to mean Isaac, for it was he who handed out the blessing. If we accept the interpretation of Rabbeinu Tam, the word "forger" would apply to Isaac, which is not very satisfactory. Actually, were it not for Rashi's commentary, it would be simple to explain that the Romans considered both Isaac and Jacob swindlers, because Isaac had undertaken to bless Esau, and when he found out that he had been tricked he did not revoke the blessing but confirmed Jacob as its rightful recipient. 
  When the Romans are quoted as saying in the middle of this story "he who sees now has seen, whereas he who has not seen will not see for another seventy years," that part referred to Jacob, for he had eyesight and was therefore guilty of deliberate trickery. Isaac whose eyesight had already failed him, was in a different category, seeing he himself was the victim of trickery. 
  There is another puzzling aspect to this story. Why did the Romans have to repeat "what good was the swindle to the swindler, and 2) what good did the forgery do the forger?"
  I believe this whole story can be interpreted in light of Genesis 25,22 where the as yet unborn twins Esau and Jacob are described as already wrangling inside their mother's womb. Rashi explains this as a struggle for possession of two worlds. This seems very puzzling; who would have thought that Esau was even interested in securing his place in the Hereafter? We must appreciate that the רשעים of earlier times, though wicked, were quite learned, but employed their knowledge to advance evil causes. Their entire purpose was to uproot Israel from its spiritual roots, from its share in the "higher" world. If successful, they themselves would enter the domain of קדושה, sanctity, and they would no longer be merely קליפות. They would find themselves in the sanctuary of the king, i.e. G–d. There is strong scriptural evidence that this is a correct interpretation of Psalms 83,13: 3 נירשה לנו את נאות יעקב, "Let us inherit the meadows of Jacob." [Actually the verse mentions the meadows of אל-הים, which the author seems to equate with the meadows of people that are supposedly G–d's people. Ed.] This verse is the subject of a lengthy commentary in Manot Ha-Levi, whose author explains in his introduction that the quarrel between Jacob and Esau was also about who would inherit the Hereafter. Jacob succeeded in uprooting Esau from the Hereafter but he wanted to receive his share in this world also. Though at first glance this appears unseemly, yet Jacob's interest in this world was not for egotistical reasons, for he was interested in the wealth of this world only so that it would be easier for him to serve G–d without a hindrance such as the need to work for his daily bread. The blessings bestowed upon him by his father Isaac may be interpreted in either of two ways. They may be understood as applying in this world or in the world to come, as I shall explain. Using this approach we can understand the Midrash which I have quoted concerning why the Torah was created with the letter ב, namely to teach us that there are two worlds. Immediately afterwards the Midrash states that the reason the Torah, i.e. Creation, started with the letter ב is, that that letter stands for ברכה, blessing, whereas the letter א symbolizes ארירה, "curse." These two statements are not in conflict with each other. On the contrary, they are complementary. One statement refers to blessings in the Hereafter, the other concerns itself with blessings in this world. 
  The Midrash explains that though the letter א would have been appropriate as a symbol of the creation of the Hereafter, the world in which the unity (אחדות) of G–d is manifest, the fact that the letter also symbolizes ארירה, curse, is the reason why G–d chose to commence with the letter ב which represents blessing. It teaches that in עולם הבא there is no such thing as a curse. It is written in Psalms לא יגורך רע, "Evil cannot dwell with You," that in the Heavens there is no evil or curse. The עולם הבא under discussion is rooted in the emanation בינה, a region higher than that of חסד, which is the uppermost that the קליפות can draw on.
  Secondly, the second version in that Midrash describes the present world, a world which is capable of being infected with impurity, a world in which the קליפות are rampant. It was necessary to exempt the act of Creation from exposure to curses and expose it to blessings instead, so that the heretics would not be able to claim that their actions had all been predetermined by the built-in presence of evil, and that therefore they could not be blamed for their evil thoughts or actions. The truth is that anyone who wants to purify, to repair, the imperfect state of this world, is assured of a Heavenly assist. This is the meaning of ברוך הבא בשם ה' "Blessed be he who comes in the name of the Lord" (Psalms 118,26). To indicate both these guiding principles of Creation, the Torah may have commenced with both the first two words commencing with the letter ב, i.e. בראשית ברא. 
  The patriarchs and David are described as holding the "sanctities" in their hands; this may allude to the 70 years that David lived during which he repaired some of the damage wrought by Adam. He and the Messiah between them will complete that work of rehabilitating the universe. There are many mystical aspects to this number of seventy years. We have discussed the significance of the tithes, i.e מעשר תרומה, as well as תרומת מעשר, and how they are related to the source of blessings. Due to our numerous sins, unfortunately, the scalp of the High Priest Rabbi Yishmael [who was scalped at the request of the daughter of Hadrianus Caesar who wanted to preserve the beauty of his skin, see the liturgical poem אלה אזכרה in the Mussaf prayer on the Day of Atonement. Ed.], is weighted down with gold, and the representative of Esau is paraded on top of Jacob adding insult to our injury. The very fact that this festival was celebrated by the Romans only once in 70 years may symbolize the seventy שרים of the gentile nations and their having achieved ascendancy over Israel (as predicted by Isaac in the event that Jacob/Israel would not live up to its spiritual task). They may have wanted to indicate that it was they who would inherit נאות אל-הים mentioned in Psalms 5,5. 
  When these Romans referred to the "Master," and it seemed to mean Jacob, they referred to him sarcastically, seeing that Isaac had designated him as such in the blessings, i.e. הוה גביר לאחיך. They did not mean to challenge the validity of Isaac's blessing; they felt that Jacob/Israel had already outlived the period during which it was valid. Now that Israel's fortunes had declined, they felt sure that their turn had come. The kingdom of Edom had, after all, undergone a period during which eight Jewish kings reigned and the Edomites themselves did not even have a king. [Edom had lost its independence, as Rashi elaborates on 36,31 at the end of Parshat Vayishlach.] The Romans believed that Isaac's warning had been fulfilled when the first Temple was destroyed and the Jewish people endured 70 years of exile. Even after the rebuilding of the Temple five major manifestations of G–d's Presence in their land were never regained. Because of this the Romans were sure that the star of Israel was in permanent decline. They viewed the 70 years of exile as the reversal of the seventy years that David and Solomon ruled over greater Israel in all its glory.[I do not quite understand that figure. According to our best known sources that period was at least 73 years. Maybe David's reign is counted only after the capture of Jerusalem. Ed.] 
  When the Romans said "who has seen, has seen," they stated that the period of glory Isaac predicted for the Jewish people was definitely at an end. This was not an invitation for people to come and enjoy themselves now because the opportunity would not soon recur. What they were saying was that the reason that this event took place only at every 70 years is that the number 70 and all the spiritual significance had now become theirs and that the prediction made by Jacob concerning the arrival of the Messiah would really see the Edomites/Romans as beneficiaries. 
  When they repeated themselves by referring to both the "swindler and the forger," this was simply a recognition of the fact that Isaac's blessings pertained to both this world and the Hereafter, and that they would inherit both this world and the World to Come. Their opening remarks referred to the World to Come, whereas their closing remarks referred to this present world. They considered Israel like a sheep among seventy wolves, and denied the possibility of Israel regaining physical or spiritual ascendancy because Jacob had been guilty of trickery. 
  When they said: "The brother of the master was a swindler," they deliberately referred to him as "brother" instead of saying "Jacob the swindler." Their intent was to make Jacob's trickery appear to have been greater than it was. They referred, for instance, to the time Jacob introduced himself to Rachel as the brother of her father, (the swindler), something which Rashi justifies as Jacob telling Rachel not to worry, that he, Jacob, would be able to cope with devious Laban (Genesis 29,12). Whereas the Romans could see Jacob's trickery as justified in the case of Laban, since Laban had been the first one to use trickery, this could not be said in the case of their Master Esau, who had never tried to cheat Jacob. Jacob cheated Esau out of his birthright as well as out of his blessing; because of this they emphasized that Jacob was both a swindler and a forger.
  Rabbi Ashi used their exact wording to indicate that the Romans tripped themselves up by admitting that Esau had actually begun the whole cycle of trickery: he was the product of the serpent's pollution, he had inherited the slyness of the serpent; he even had a birthmark on his thigh showing the contours of a snake (as I have already stated). Esau had indulged in tricking his own father already long before Jacob bought the birthright. Our sages report him as having asked Isaac how one tithes salt, straw, etc., all in order to make his father believe that he was extremely pious (cf. Midrash Tanchuma on Genesis 25 27)
  Even when Esau wanted some of Jacob's soup, נזיר, prior to the transaction involving the sale of the birthright, it was Esau who practiced extreme deception as Rashi explains (25,29). Rashi says that the dish consisted of red lentils. How did Rashi know this? Or, at least, who told Rashi this? Rashi was not in the habit of making such a statement without quoting his source! 
  What bothered Rashi was that Esau had been described as "the red one" already at birth (25,25). If that description was justified based on his hair or color of his skin, then why did the Torah have to tell us in 25,30 that the reason that Esau was called "the red one," was because he demanded to be given of the red dish? Besides, if a person asks for bread and he receives it, will anyone henceforth call him "bread?" There must have been something more than meets the eye in why the Torah tells us that this encounter between Jacob and Esau led to Esau being called "the red one." This is why Rashi writes that the dish consisted of red lentils, something eaten as a sign of mourning, i.e. that on that day Abraham died and was buried. Esau, the man of the field, did not mourn, but pursued his usual nefarious activities. Our sages say that he committed no fewer than five transgressions on that very day (Baba Batra 16). Since he was somewhat ashamed, he acted as if he had not been aware that the day was a day of mourning for his grandfather, and he deliberately misrepresented the dish that Jacob had prepared, calling it "this red, red stuff." Since everybody who heard Esau realised that he had shammed ignorance of the precise nature of both the dish and the reason it had been prepared on that day, he was henceforth called "the red one," as a description of his falseness. When Rav Ashi said that the Romans' own mouth "tripped them up," he referred to their statement: "the master is the swindler." 
  Eventually the Romans would have to admit that they falsified history, just as in the case of the מלאך רע יענה אמן, the "evil" angel having had to acknowledge that Jacob was right by blessing him.
  Now to the dual meaning of Isaac's blessings, the spiritual and material aspects contained in them. First we must deal with a number of doubts that must have been entertained by the participants in the drama. When Isaac wanted to bless Esau, he must have asked himself why his own father had never bestowed the blessing on him. He should have concluded that it must have been because Abraham foresaw that Isaac would produce a son such as Esau, and he did not want to be associated with indirectly blessing Esau. How then could Isaac bless Esau directly and thereby deny Jacob the blessing? Surely Isaac could not have been spiritually blind enough not to appreciate the uprightness of his son Jacob, even though he loved Esau better?
  How can we understand the fact that G–d arranged for these sacred blessings to be handed out by means of deceit?
  A third problem is how we are to understand Rebeccah who said to her son Jacob: "May your curse be on my head, my son!" Could she imagine that Jacob would make peace with the idea that his mother would be cursed through something he did?
  Another problem is the statement by Jacob to his father: "I am Esau your first born." This sounds like an outright lie. Although Rashi re-arranges the words as: "I am the one who brings you the food, yet Esau is your firstborn," this makes the statement more difficult. Jacob need not have mentioned the word "Esau" at all. He should simply have said: "I am your firstborn," seeing that he had purchased the birthright from Esau some forty-eight years earlier, even though he had never told Isaac about this. Isaac would have understood that it was Esau who stood before him, and Jacob would not have been guilty of an outright lie. Isaac would simply have deceived himself. Another difficulty is why Jacob had to say (27,19) "as you have told me to," (referring to Isaac's instructions to Esau to hunt venison and prepare delicious food for his father). Rashi again corrects the text suggesting it must be understood as: "I have done several things which you have told me to." If Rashi were correct, Jacob should have said: עשיתי אשר דברת אלי, not כאשר דברת אלי. We must therefore interpret that Jacob referred to the speed with which he had prepared these dishes for his father. He said: "I have done as (if) you had commanded me." (If that had been the case, I would certainly have carried out your command promptly.)
  A further difficulty is the word ויברכהו, "He blessed him," in 27,27. Since the nature of that blessing is not spelled out, we are entitled to speculate about it. 
  What did Isaac mean in 27,33, when, after having found out that he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau, he said גם ברוך יהיה, "he shall also remain blessed?" What is the meaning of the word גם, also? Rashi quotes a Midrash Tanchuma saying that Isaac was concerned about having blessed the younger son before he had blessed the older brother. When he heard that Jacob had taken the birthright from Esau, he said: "he also shall remain blessed." This is very puzzling seeing that the Torah only reports Esau as telling his father about the sale of the birthright three verses after Isaac had said: "he shall also remain blessed." We need to understand the verses in the Torah as being in the nature of כלל ופרט, a general rule followed by specifics. First the Torah describes Isaac's terror about the whole sequence of events, and only afterwards does the Torah go into details. The general reaction of Isaac concludes with the words: "he also shall remain blessed." After that the Torah describes the sequence of events in detail, Isaac telling Esau that he had blessed Jacob before the latter's arrival. When Esau heard this, he reacted, etc. Isaac explained that Jacob had used subterfuge and that he had become terrified as a result of what happened. Esau then exclaimed that this was already the second time Jacob had tricked him, mentioning the incident with the birthright. When Isaac heard about that, he said: "he shall also remain blessed," realising that Jacob had deserved the blessing seeing he was the legal firstborn. After that Esau asked whether his father did not reserve a blessing for him also, and Isaac replied with verses 37-40. 
  Once we interpret the sequence in this manner we can understand why the Torah in verse 37 said twice about Esau ויאמר, "he said." Following each revelation of the sequence of events by Isaac, Esau's reply is prefaced in the Torah by the word: ויאמר. Clearly, between these two times ויאמר, Isaac must have said something such as the text of the blessing he had given Jacob. According to the Midrash Tanchuma Isaac must have communicated his fear to Esau between these words ויאמר. This would also account for the word גם which we questioned. It simply means that just as Jacob has become the owner of the birthright, so he shall also remain the owner of the blessing. If you explained the verses according to their normal sequence (פשוטם) you could not interpret them in this way.
  Another problem is the meaning of the word במרמה, if meant in the sense of חכמה, as Rashi says. If Isaac wanted to use the word in that sense, why did he not say: בא אחיך בחכמה, instead of using the word מרמה? Our sages in Pessachim 3 explained that the Torah distorted eight letters in Genesis 7,8 in order not to have to use gross language such as the word בהמה טמאה. Why do we not find the same here? The Torah could have used the word חכמה in order to avoid the negative connotation of מרמה, deceit? 
  Still another problem concerns the dispute of Esau with his father which seems unresolved.
  A further problem is the relevance of the fragrance that is reported as having entered the house when Jacob arrived (27,27). When Rashi tells us that this was the fragrance of גן עדן, it is not clear why this mattered at this stage. Surely Jacob qualified for גן עדן on the basis of his lifestyle, apart from any other consideration. 
  A further problem is that Isaac, as a result of Esau's complaint, appended a condition to the blessing he had given Jacob. What effect can the condition והיה כאשר תריד וכ' in 27,40 have on a blessing pronounced in 27,28?
  In order to answer all these problems allow me two introductory remarks: 1) The blessings are capable of two interpretations. One interpretation, i.e. the פשט, views all the blessings in terms of material benefits in this world. G–d will grant sufficient dew in the summer to enable the fruit to grow in the fields. He will allow Jacob to feed on the fat part of the earth etc. 2) The other interpretation of the blessings sees in their wording allusions to the real blessings of the Torah which pertain to a "higher" world, i.e. the world in which blessings are of enduring value. The Midrash describes טל השמים as an allusion to the written Torah, משמני הארץ as a reference to Mishnah; דגן alludes to Talmud, whereas תירוש alludes to the Aggadic material in the Talmud. According to this interpretation both the words השמים and הארץ refer to their respective counterparts in the Celestial Regions. It appears that Bereshit Rabbah 67,2 refers to this when quoting Isaac as telling Esau ואוכל מכל, "I ate from it all" (Genesis 27,33). We find there that Rabbi Yehudah understands the word as meaning "all that has been created during the six days of creation," whereas Rabbi Nechemiah understands the expression as meaning "all that is stored up for future consumption in the World to Come." Both these Rabbis have correctly interpreted the blessings, each one emphasizing a different aspect. Even though the delicacies served Isaac were certainly made of foods available here on earth, of items created during the six days of Creation, they exuded a taste of something super-natural, something of the World to Come.
  The second introduction needed to understand the whole issue is the fact that Esau and Jacob were twins inside Rebeccah's womb, and that she was the mother of both of them. This means that she was like the crucible within which Jacob was refined, whereas Esau at the same time absorbed all the residual polluted material of the original serpent that had still cleaved to Rebeccah in her capacity as Laban's sister. Esau inherited all the falseness of Laban. This left Jacob like pure, refined silver. That is what our sages had in mind when they referred to Jacob's beauty as equaling that of Adam (before his sin). The fact that Esau had absorbed all the negative residual elements within Rebeccah had enabled Jacob to become the pious person he was. Rebeccah loved Jacob; Isaac loved Esau more. The deeper reason for this is, as we have already explained, that there was some affinity between Isaac, whose root was the emanation of דין, the same emanation as the one the serpent=Satan=Esau was rooted in. Rebeccah, on the other hand, loved Jacob, seeing that her appearance was just like that of her mother-in-law Sarah, as we have explained. When Sarah is described in Genesis 20,3 as בעולת בעל, the Talmud Ketuvot 61 describes this as meaning that her husband was in a state of ascension at the time. The Torah compliments Sarah by testifying that together with her husband she ascended to higher spiritual regions. Rebeccah experienced something similar. We know that Isaac was described as עולה תמימה, an unblemished total offering [ עולה in the sense of something that ascends Ed.], at the time he was bound on the altar at Moriah. Our Rabbis say that nonetheless Isaac was like a קרבן עולה ויורד, in the matter of the עקדה, meaning that at different times he was at different spiritual levels. While he was bound on the altar, for instance, he was on a higher spiritual level than when he descended from the altar, aware that he was not to be sacrificed after all, seeing that G–d had appointed an alternative offering in his stead, namely the ram that was caught in the thicket by its horns (Genesis 22,13). Jacob was called an איש תם, the word תם referring to his spiritual ascension. Esau, on the other hand, though from a holy source as we explained when we described his head as being cradled by Isaac , was of the caliber that was liable to descend rather than to ascend spiritually. 
  Esau is characterized as "descending;" this is alluded to in Ovadiah 1,4, where the prophet says to Edom: "Even if you place your nest among the stars, I shall bring you down from there." When Rebeccah said; "your curse upon me, my son," she referred to what had already occurred in her womb before the twins were born, i.e. that everything that is accursed was already concentrated in Esau. He, Jacob, did not have to worry, seeing he was already blessed.
  Even though Isaac obviously was unaware of the extent of Esau's wickedness, or else he would not have displayed such love for him, he could not have been unaware of Jacob's spiritual superiority. He realised that Jacob was more qualified for the blessing of the Hereafter, whereas Esau’s blessing would be concentrated on matters pertaining to this world. In order to be able to infuse spirituality into a material blessing, Isaac wanted to participate in a spiritual repast so that he could confer upon Esau some sanctity to be applied in this world. Once Esau would sanctify his life in this world, the portals of the Hereafter would be open to him. The means that Isaac employed were simple. He sanctified חולין, elevated something secular to a level of sanctity. This is what the מעדנים, "delicacies" were all about. Rebeccah, who was well aware of the full extent of Esau's wickedness, wanted that Jacob should "eat at both tables," i.e. enjoy both the blessings of this world and the blessings associated with the world to come.
  Isaac said to Esau: "Take your gear, your quiver and your bow," i.e. tools of this world (27,3). Concerning the world of the future, it is written in Isaiah 2,4: וכתתו חרבותם לאתים, "They will beat their swords into plowshares," that such lethal tools will be eliminated. Isaac instructed Esau to commence his hunt in sanctity (performing a command of his father). He hinted that the delicacies he had in mind were of the kind that would be served to the righteous in the world to come (Baba Batra 75).
  When Rebeccah overheard all this, she said to Jacob: לך נא אל הצאן וקח לי משם שני גדיי עזים, "Please go to the flocks and take for me from there two young goats." Why did she say: קח לי? It would have been more appropriate for her to say: קח לאביך, "take for your father." After all the goats were intended for Isaac! The unusual phrasing of the request prompts Rashi who quotes Bereshit Rabbah, to say that the word לי is equivalent to שלי, mine, that when Rebeccah married Isaac he allocated to her two goats a day as her personal property. She meant that these goats are לשמי, [just as Isaac feels entitled to two goats, so I am entitled to two goats as a prelude to a spiritually inspired blessing; Ed.] seeing that she (Rebeccah) was on the spiritual level of בעל, [husband, i.e. someone of substance Ed.], on a par with Isaac, and "I love you." [Rebeccah loved Jacob] 
  When Rebeccah said that she would make delicacies out of these goats, she referred to a physical meal rooted in a spiritual domain. The words כאשר אהב, "the way he loves," refer to the spiritual element, since a man of Isaac's level certainly did not simply indulge a physical craving. He was too aware of the fact that "man does not live by bread alone but on all that G–d decrees," a reference to the spiritual roots ensuring our existence on earth (Deut. 8,3). When Rebeccah had told Jacob about Isaac's instructions to Esau (27,7), she omitted to mention that Isaac had added the words "the way I love," as a description of the מטעמים. Esau, in 27,31, also does not refer to the fact that his father had described the food to be served him as something he loved.
  When Jacob describes Esau his brother as a hairy man, whereas he himself was smooth-skinned, he referred to the Esau of this world, and he alluded to Esau's power in the "higher" world by mentioning that he was איש שעיר. He referred to Esau as the קטרוג, the perennial accuser of man. Bereshit Rabbah 65,15 understands the word Sa-ir as identical with the one mentioned in Leviticus 17,7: ולא יזבחו עוד לשעירים, "so that they will no longer offer sacrifices to the demons." The word Chalak, is equated by that Midrash with the word Chelek, as in כי חלק ה' עמו, יעקב חלק נחלתו, "G–d's share is His people, Jacob is His inheritance" (Deut. 32,9). We know from Succah 52a that Satan is more prone to attack a Torah scholar than anyone else. 
  Rebeccah told her son that any curse would be on her, that she had already made a clear separation between him and Esau. She had allocated all the serpent's residual pollutant to Esau and all the curses associated with that. Since Jacob therefore did not have to worry about a קטרוג, for his mother had already shouldered this burden he should listen to her and proceed. 
  As to the external mechanics needed to prevent detection, Rebeccah provided the skins of these goats and put them on Jacob's hands and arms. She also had Esau's clothes that she dressed Jacob in. It is interesting that the Torah describes Rebeccah as personally garbing Jacob in those skins, that Jacob did not do so himself (27,15-16). Why did Jacob allow his mother to perform a personal service such as this for him, instead of Jacob performing a personal service for his mother, part of the commandment to honor one's mother?
  There is a mystical element concealed in all this. Jacob and Esau were twins. There were two reasons for this. We have already explained that one purpose was for Esau to be able to absorb the excess pollutant from Jacob, i.e. as if one half of the baby to be born contained all the negative influences. As a result, Jacob would eventually also inherit Esau's share, the present world. Esau in fact absorbed the negative part of Jacob, whereas Jacob became the recipient of the positive part of Esau. The Torah alludes to this mystery in 28,5, where Rebeccah is described as "mother of Jacob and Esau." Rashi comments that he does not understand what new dimension the Torah conveys in the verse. I believe that the Torah teaches us that Rebeccah, in her capacity as mother of both of these twins, allocated to each one certain genes in keeping with her prerogative as a mother. This is why the Torah could describe her earlier as "personally dressing Jacob," though clearly we must understand this merely as a figure of speech, and Jacob no doubt physically dressed himself. Rebeccah had exercised her prerogative to make one twin appear like the other. Once this had been accomplished, Jacob was certainly in line for receiving blessings that were meant to be effective in this world. Jacob's principal garments, of course, were those described as בגדי עשו החמודות, "Esau's valuable clothes," also mentioned in 27,16 as having remained under Rebeccah's care. These were reportedly the skins worn by Adam, a reminder of his having rehabilitated himself after his sin. G–d had made these for him in the terrestrial גן עדן, which is situated "opposite" its celestial counterpart.
  This brings us to the significance of the fragrance that Isaac is said to have smelled in 27,27. The ריח של גן עדן, the fragrance of Paradise that our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 65,22 describe Isaac as having experienced, was exuded by these garments which originated in גן עדן. 
  When Jacob realized that he had already become the beneficiary of being Esau's twin, as we explained earlier, he felt entitled to describe himself as "I am your firstborn Esau, I have done as you have commanded me." We can understand this still better when considering a statement by the Zohar Parshat Vayetze (Sullam edition page 3), which states that after Queen Esther was appointed queen, and ותלבש מלכות, wore the royal robes, she assumed control both of Ahasverus and of his entire kingdom. Though they shared the same bedroom she never had marital relations with the king. She behaved like Joseph of whom the Torah says that he left his בגדו in the hands of Mrs. Potiphar (Genesis 39, 13). The word בגד suggests something that is deceptive like the בוגד, traitor. It is also an outer garment, concealing the true person underneath. Had the Torah used the term לבוש, it would not have a doubtful meaning. The king, who is described as having loved Esther more than any other woman (Esther 2,17), really consorted only with a demon who assumed the guise of Esther's outer garments. Whoever appreciates the mystical significance of התלבשות, will understand what I have in mind.
  The Torah reports Isaac as blessing Jacob immediately after Isaac smelled the fragrance of Paradise, i.e. ויברכהו. He did not investigate further, for in the event that it was indeed the real Esau, he was entitled to the blessings valid in this world, whereas in the event it was Jacob who stood before him, Isaac intended these blessings to apply in the Hereafter. This is in accordance with what I wrote at the beginning, that these blessings must be understood on two different levels. The word ויברכהו was the umbrella term for these blessings. Only afterwards did Isaac want to know who really stood in front of him. When the Torah describes Jacob as bringing wine from which Isaac drank (27,25), this is a reference to the "wine preserved in its grapes since the days of creation,” which will be served to the righteous in the Hereafter, as we have explained on several occasions.
  How are we to understand the verse: ראה ריח בני, "Look! the odor of my son?" Since when is the sense of sight relevant to the sense of smell? 
  We can explain this by means of a statement in Baba Batra 75a, where Rabbi Yonatan says that when Leviathan is hungry his mouth emits so much heat that all the oceans of the world dry up, since we read in Job 41,23: "He makes the depths seethe like a cauldron." If he would not place his head within גן עדן, no creature could stand the stench of Leviathan. This is also proved from Job 41,23: "He makes the sea boil like an ointment pot." When the said Leviathan is thirsty, his wake in the ocean is like a luminous path, and he makes the Deep seem white-haired (Job 41,24). Rabbi Acha said that the Deep does not revert to its former state for seventy years, since we read in Job 41,24: "He makes the Deep seem like a שיבה,” and that word is never used for someone under seventy years of age. Rabbah, quoting Rabbi Yochanan, said that in the World To Come G–d will prepare a feast for the righteous at which the "meat" of Leviathan will be served for it is written in Job 40,30: יכרו עליו חברים, and the word כירה always means a repast, as we read in Kings II 6,23: "He prepared a lavish feast (כרה) for them and they ate and drank." The word חברים refers to Torah scholars as we know from Song of Songs 8,13: "She who sits in the gardens and חברים listen to your voice; let Me hear it." The leftover of that meal will be divided up by traders in the market-places of Jerusalem since it is written (Job 40,30) "he will be divided up among the Canaanites," and Canaanites are merchants as we know from Hosea 12,8: "A Canaanite trader who uses false weights to oppress the one who thinks the trader is his friend." You may also prove this point from Isaiah 23,8: "whose traders are nobles, whose traders (כנעניה) were the most respected ones on earth."
  Rabbah said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that in the future G–d will make a hut for the righteous out of the hide of Leviathan as we know from Job 40,31: התמלא בשכות עורו, ובצלצל דגים ראשו.” [The traditional translation of this verse is too different from this aggadah to be relevant. Ed.] If the person is deserving, G–d will make a סוכה, hut, for him; if not, a shade-giving heave-to without walls. If he is still less deserving, G–d will make him some kind of jewelry as we know from Proverbs 1,9: "and graceful ornaments around your neck." If he is still less deserving, G–d will make him an amulet, seeing that we have a verse in Job 40,29: "And you will tie it around your maidens." G–d will scatter the remainder on the walls of Jerusalem, and its glitter will sparkle from one end of the earth to the other, as we read in Isaiah 60,3: "And nations will walk by your light; kings by your shining radiance." Thus far the Talmud in Baba Batra 75.
   From all the above it is clear that the skin of Leviathan is a very great light indeed. I have found a statement in the commentary of Tziyoni on this portion, based on a Midrash that the skins used to make the כתנות עור for Adam and Eve were taken from the female of the original Leviathan, whom G–d reportedly slew, salting and preserving its "meat" for the righteous in the future (Baba Batra 74). This seems very plausible; G–d surely did not create that skin without assigning a purpose to it. 
  If we accept that Midrash as being factual, we can much better understand the statement that in Rabbi Meir's version of the Torah the word Or in Kotnot Or was spelled with the letter א, light. It would have been difficult to imagine that the spelling in Rabbi Meir's ספר תורה was really so radically different. What Rabbi Meir meant by his statement was that the skin of the Leviathan which formed the clothing of Adam illuminated the earth all over. 
  It is this kind of illumination which Isaac noticed when he smelled the fragrance of Paradise as exuded by these garments. When Isaac began the specifics of the blessing with the words: ויתן לך אלוקים מטל השמים, "May the Lord give you from the dew of the Heaven, etc.," the dual nature of the blessing began. Essentially, Jacob was oriented towards עולם הבא. Now that he was dressed in the garments of Esau that had originated in גן עדן, he was also fit to receive the blessing that was to govern his life on this earth, and to "eat from both tables" as our sages phrase this. We therefore see that this was the attire which Isaac had in mind when he said to Esau: "your brother came in מרמה," wearing deceptive clothing, which gave him access to the blessings of this world.
   This is why Isaac said: "I ate from everything,” meaning all that had been created during the six days of Creation, including all that is envisioned in the distant future, as we explained earlier. Now that Isaac was aware that it was Jacob who had stood before him and been blessed, he confirmed that blessing. The word גם refers to the blessings of עולם הזה. Since such a blessing was not something that Jacob could normally count on, seeing it was not appropriate to his fundamental orientation in life, it is described as something merely additional, i.e. גם. Esau did not understand what his father had meant by the word גם. He thought that Isaac meant that "Jacob shall also be blessed," i.e. shall also receive a blessing in addition to the blessing which he, Esau, would of course receive by his father, now that his father realized that he had made a mistake. He felt that Isaac was going to divide the blessings into one which would apply in this life, the recipient of which would be Esau, and one applicable to life in the future, granted to Jacob. When he realized that he would not receive a blessing that would apply to עולם הבא, Esau cried out bitterly, for he would also be denied the blessing pertaining to עולם הזה. He did not realize that both blessings had already been dispensed to Jacob. 
  Then Isaac explained to Esau that what he had meant by the word גם was that Jacob would enjoy blessings in this world also. Isaac's reply was perfectly reasonable. Rashi, who comments that the word במרמה means בחכמה, means that the fact that Jacob obtained both blessings was an act of חכמה on his part, since in order to secure the blessings of this world he had to dress in Esau's garments.
  At this point (27,36), Esau burst out complaining that this was already the second time Jacob had tricked him, that his very name means that he is a trickster, and he asked whether his father had not reserved a blessing for him exclusively. Esau's first statement is an expression of amazement that Jacob should be allowed to benefit by his trickery! He claimed that his brother's undetected trickery could only have been due to their being twins; this enabled Jacob to misrepresent himself as his twin brother Esau. Esau complained (when he used the word פעמים, twice) that surely Jacob would not be allowed to get away with such a subterfuge a second time. The first time, when Jacob took the birthright, was something that he Esau could not now reverse, and as a result Jacob had established his claim to the blessings in the Hereafter. But surely, Esau said, Jacob should not be allowed to preempt Esau's claim to his share also in this world! Esau had another argument, alluded to by his words: הלא אצלת לי ברכה? He sensed that Isaac had hedged his bets by phrasing the blessing in such a way that whether the son before him was Esau or Jacob, he should receive his specific blessing. Now, that it had become clear that Jacob received the blessing due him for עולם הבא, the blessing for this world should be available for him! How could Isaac not at least give Esau the blessing pertaining to עולם הזה! 
  Isaac explained that the way the blessing had been worded had already made Jacob senior to Esau, and Esau also subservient to him in this world. That part of the blessing could not apply to the world to come, since there everyone is free and there is no such thing as someone being subservient to someone else. Although, originally, when he had not had an idea who was before him, he had phrased the blessing in such a way that it could apply to either son, (the Torah says simply ויברכהו), this had been only before he had drunk from the יין המשומר, the wine preserved in its original grapes; after having drunk from it and when he had smelled the fragrance of Paradise and the source of all blessings had opened up for him, and once Jacob received a blessing from that source, all the secondary blessings automatically were included in the general blessing. We have the same principle in Halachah. When one pronounces a benediction over bread, the major element in the meal to be consumed, all the other components the meal consists of are already included in that first benediction (Berachot 6, Mishnah 7). This is what Isaac meant by emphasizing דגן ותירוש סמכתיו, "I have assured him of grain and wine," i.e. I have granted him all the essentials in this world. Isaac said that though my principal thought had been that Jacob would receive spiritually oriented blessings, the blessings contained in the plain meaning of such words as דגן ותירוש are also included as by-products. 
  Upon hearing all this, Esau said: now that you have told me that this is all part of one single blessing, i.e. ה-ברכה אחת, that the secondary element follows the major element, and I shall be an adjunct to Jacob anyways, why can you not bless me also, i.e. make me part of Jacob's blessing!
  Thereupon Isaac said to Esau: משמני הארץ יהיה מושבך ומטל השמים מעל. "Your dwelling place will be of the earth's most fertile with the dew of the skies above." Isaac confirmed what Esau had requested. This meant that Esau would absorb some of Jacob's spiritual essence. The terms הר ציון and הר עשו respectively, reflect this relationship of Jacob and Esau. Though both are הר, something elevated, the former is mistress of the latter. In verse 40 Isaac told Esau that in the event Jacob did not live up to the assumptions his blessings were based on, there would be a role reversal; Esau would then be able to shake off this yoke of being only an appendix to Jacob. However, once the pollutant of the serpent's residue in Israel would come to an end, Israel would emerge purified, and the vision of the prophet (Ovadiah 1,21) ועלו מושיעים בהר ציון לשפוט את הר עשו והיתה לה' המלוכה "For liberators will march up to Mount Zion and wreak judgment on Mount Esau; and the dominion shall be the Lord's would become fulfilled.." 
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ויהי יצחק בן ארבעים שנה בקחתו את רבקה. Rashi comments on this verse that Abraham on his return from Mount Moriah heard of Rebeccah's birth. Isaac was 37 years old at the time,etc. Why did Rashi have to inform us of these facts? They are spelled out in the Torah! 
  The usual answer given is that Rashi wanted to explain why Isaac had not married earlier. Our sages say that if someone is not married by the time he is twenty years old G–d makes such a person's bones swell up (Kidushin 29). Rashi therefore gives an accounting of all these years to show that Isaac had not been able to marry a suitable wife sooner.
  When the sages in the Talmud speak about the bones of such a bachelor swelling up, they take into consideration that Adam described his wife as עצם מעצמי, "a bone of my bones” (Genesis 2,23), and that man therefore is not complete until he has been paired with the remainder of his bones. Failure to do this causes damage to his bones, leaves him physically incomplete. The reason the time limit is twenty years is that at that age a Jewish man is subject to military duties, and the Torah refers to him as איש, man (Numbers 2,2 et al). The relationship between military duty and fulfillment of the commandment to be fruitful is also alluded to in Genesis 1,28 where G–d links the commandment to "be fruitful and multiply" with the command to "conquer" the earth. 
  ויאהב יצחק את עשו כי ציד בפיו ורבקה אוהבת את יעקב. We have an allusion here to the well-known statement in Avot 5,19 that any love which is based on something material will not endure once the object upon which it is based disappears, whereas love which is not based on something transient will endure. Isaac's love for Esau was founded on the material things Esau provided, and therefore it could not endure. This may well be the reason the Torah describes Isaac's love for Esau in the past tense, i.e. ויאהב, whereas Rebeccah's love for Jacob is described in the present tense, i.e. אוהבת, an ongoing love. 
  This teaches us not to waste our love on material things but to concentrate it on enduring values such as Torah, מצות, etc.
  הלעיטני נא מן האדום.  There is a great moral lesson here. It teaches that man's food intake should be based on considerations of sanctity and modesty. When he eats, he should behave as if in the presence of his king. This is best illustrated in Exodus 23,11 where the אצילי בני ישראל, the elite of the Children of Israel, are portrayed as ויחזו את האלוקים, ויאכלו וישתו, "They had a vision of G–d and they ate and drank." Surely this means that they consecrated their eating and drinking to be such a sacred activity that they were fit to have visions of the Divine even then.
  ויעקב איש תם. The fact that this trait plus the fact that he was a dweller of tents, are the only ones of Jacob's many marvelous character traits that are especially mentioned in the text teaches us to what extent a person has to endeavor not to be devious and not to engage in deceit and trickery.
  גור בארץ הזאת ואהיה. Isaac accepted all his difficulties with the Philistines with great forbearance. Whenever the shepherds picked a quarrel about the wells, Isaac rather moved away than to feud with them. Even when it had become obvious, after he had been expelled, that his wealth had never been obtained at the expense of the Philistines, and the king and his Chief of Staff wanted to make a treaty with him, he not only agreed but prepared a feast for them. This peace-loving trait in Isaac is something that we must use as a model for our own conduct throughout life. We must strive to overcome our natural reactions when peace is at stake.
  
  Vayetzei
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named דרוש שער השמים.
  On Genesis 29,7: הן עוד היום גדול לא עת האסף המקנה, "The day is still long; it is not yet time to bring home the flock," Rashi comments that Jacob hinted that if these shepherds were hired hands they had no right to waste their employers' time, for any hired laborer who does not do a full day's work commits a grave wrong. Not only does he exploit the owner, i.e. rob him, but he also deceives him, seeing that the owner relies on the laborer's honesty. We learn in Baba Metzia 93 that the duties of a paid security guard include such hardship as "excessive heat by day and frostbite by night." This is because the entire population relies on such a security guard to perform his duties faithfully. The Talmud there adds that Jacob was the prime example of someone who imposed an additional burden upon himself, for he applied that yardstick to himself when looking after Laban's flock, a task that did not involve others putting their safety in his hands in contradistinction to the case of the city watchman mentioned in the Talmud.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  If the obligation of a laborer hired for a day's labor is as great as the Talmud described, how much greater must be our obligation to be dedicated in our service to the Lord, who is guaranteed to pay us our reward! Surely we must serve Him both by day and by night, for do we not combine within ourselves the status of day- and night-laborer? The subject matter of wasting time is fraught with profound mystical significance, as every particle of time is a separate unit and none of it must be lost. A particle of time is perceived as an extension of G–d's eternity, or a mini-branch of the branches represented by His Ineffable Name. G–d Himself alludes to this when He says in Parshat Va'eira 6,2 אני י-ה-ו-ה. Rashi explains that this means that G–d can be trusted to pay the reward of those who walk before Him. All aspects of "time" are anchored in a mystical dimension of this name of G–d. 
  Kabbalists are aware that סדר זמנים, the arrangement in the cosmos of times allocated to certain events or activities, represents a combination of the emanations תפארת and מלכות. These are the mystical domains of the "sun and moon" in the Celestial Regions, the domain of the יוצר אור ובורא חושך, the Creator of light and darkness. The emanation תפארת contains the גוף הבנין, the "torso" as it were, of the Ineffable Name, from which His creative activity radiates, much as in a human torso the arms and legs, etc. perform comparable tasks. The six emanations from תפארת "down" to the emanation יסוד, perform these creative activities (We are discussing the creation of a spiritual as opposed to a physical universe). These six emanations or "branches," are analogous to the six days of Creation and, since they each represent a fusion of the attributes of דין and חסד, they are really twelve. They expand, or radiate in 6 different directions. The number twelve is the total number of possible permutations in writing the 4-lettered Ineffable Name of G–d. The "lowest" emanation מלכות, acts as receptacle of all these radiations. This concept can be understood as analogous to the moon which receives radiations from the sun during twelve separate months of the year. The sun and moon respectively are viewed as 2 "faces." בינה, being the 7th emanation involved, must be viewed like the Sabbath, the day on which all the forces abstain from activity. This is a cycle which repeats itself endlessly.
   The secret of these six radiations called the בנין is stored in the "upper regions" i.e. the region known as שבת הגדול, whose domain is in the emanation of בינה, [the 7th emanation counting from מלכות "upwards."] That emanation is also the root of the hexadirectional radiations. Kabbalists know the emanation בינה also as אימא עילאה, "Mother Superior," as opposed to the emanation מלכות, which they describe as the אימא תתאה, "lower mother." The withdrawn "light" of the seven days of Creation is stored within the domain of the emanation בינה, for this is where it originally emanated from. From the emanation בינה the בנין, spiritual structure of the Celestial Region, is formed. This takes the form of an arrangement of different זמנים, units of Time. This "structure" then expands into 7 different sub-categories. 
  Here is the way these matters are explained in Pardes Rimonim, in the chapter entitled שער שערים: Time is divided into seven units. 1) The יובל, a period of 49 years. 2) שמטות, periods of multiples of 6+1 years. 3) years; 4) months; 5) weeks; 6) days; 7) hours. The Yovel consists of a collection of 7 times 7 years, which in turn comprises all the other subcategories of time. שמטה comprises 7 years by assembling 6 years and making a unit of them. A year comprises 12 months. A month comprises 4 weeks. A week comprises 7 days. A day comprises 24 hours, 12 hours of daylight and 12 hours of darkness. The ordinary hour is perceived as part of the emanation מלכות and performs an activity. "Time" changing is the result of something we call סדר זמנים, which exercises its influence on the various sub-categories within the overall concept of Time. 
  Everything connected with Time revolves around one pivotal concept, the mystical aspect of the permutations, or הויות, of the Ineffable name י-ה-ו-ה which amount to the number 12. [The 3 basic letters which appear in the Ineffable Name can be arranged in 12 possible variations. Ed.] These basic elements in "time” are either of a hidden dimension, i.e. everything connected with the number 7, or they are of a revealed dimension, i.e. everything connected with the number 12. The light of the 7 days of Creation falls into the category of what is concealed, i.e. the 6+1 radiations of the emanations מלכות + מלכות of the combined attributes of דין and רחמים. Between them they exert an influence on the root of the number 7, which is part of the seventh emanation בינה [if we count from יסוד upwards]. [To quote from Pardes Rimonim, each of the emanations from the seventh above יסוד, i.e. בינה down activates a time unit i.e. a שמטה. The emanation בינה is viewed as "Tree” of everything connected with "Time." Each of the lower emanations is assigned one of the branches of that tree making a total of seven times such any units. Each of those branches in turn has seven "twigs," i.e. each year is a "twig." These twigs in turn each possess 12 "shoots” each, symbolizing the months of the year, they are viewed like the stems of the roses, six white ones and six red ones. The color white indicates that they are subject to the influence of the attribute רחמים Mercy, whereas the color red signifies the influence of the attribute דין, Justice. Ed.] The concept of the 50 ,חמישים שערי בינה gateways of understanding or insight, which we have referred to frequently, is based on the 7 times 7 years which make up the unit יובל. We have explained that terrestrial man can at best achieve an understanding of the 49th gateway of בינה. The emanation בינה, containing and unifying 7 שמטות, therefore amounts to 49+1=50, symbolizing the 50th year, יובל. The next emanation "underneath," is תפארת, harmony, which comprises אצילות, called שנה, year; the sun circles the moon twelve times, which in turn represents מלכות the mystique of the 12 permutations of the letters in G–d's name. This continuous process of radiations is continual for six thousand years. The seventh millennium is a millennium of שמטה. Looked at in this light, the emanation מלכות is analogous to שמטה, whereas the emanation בינה is analogous to יובל. יובל contains all the mystique of the previous years, which are a collection of שמטה units, whereas מלכות contains the mystique of each of the seven years that constitute a שמטה cycle.
  Let me now explain the mystique of the time unit “year” in its details. The year, according to our description, consists of 12 months. It is one solar revolution. The ''month” consists of one lunar revolution. Many ancient scholars have written a great deal pointing out that the word "year" should not be associated with "12 lunar revolutions," i.e. months. At the same time, when we talk about the sun, the term "month" would not be appropriate in any form, something that lbn Ezra has already pointed out in his commentary on Exodus 12,1. This is why "year" is part of the emanation תפארת, as outlined in Pardes Rimonim in the chapters called ערכי הכנוים, under the heading שנה. However, the root of the concept "year" is anchored in the emanation בינה also, as explained in the tenth chapter in Pardes Rimonim. The main element of the term שנה, year, is the solar year (365 days), the emanation תפארת. What applies to שנה and תפארת respectively, applies to חדש and מלכות which similarly symbolize לבנה, moon.
  The Ineffable 4-lettered Name which forms part of the force that stimulates the activities originating in the emanation called תפארת, consists of 12 permutations of these letters, which were symbolized amongst the Jewish people by the four camps of four different flags, three tribes to a flag. The first flag was inscribed with the permutations of G–d's Name where the first letter י of that name was used at the beginning in the following manner: י-ה-ו-ה, י-ה-ה-ו, י-ו-ו-ה; the second flag was inscribed using these permutations by commencing with the letter ה of the Name in the following manner: ה-ה-י-ו, ה-ה-ו-י, ה-י-ו-ה; the third flag was inscribed using these permutations by commencing with the letter ו of the Name in the following manner: ו-ה-י-ה, ו-ה-ה-י, ו-י-ה-ה -; the fourth flag was inscribed using these permutations by commencing with the (last) letter ה of the Name in the following manner: ה-ו-י-ה-, ה-י-ה-ו, ה-ו-ה-י. [ Pardes Rimonim points out that the respective first letters of each of the הויות described make up the Ineffable Name י-ה-ו-ה. Ed.] The four seasons of the year correspond to the 3 times four months, and the 12 signs of the zodiac are the מזלות represented by the four flags according to four basic principles. Each flag was assigned to three encampments, i.e. three tribes, and had a specific purpose. The Torah (Numbers 2,2) describes this as איש על דגלו לאותות, "Each man was assigned a certain task according to the symbols on the flag he belonged to." The arrangement of the tribes and their respective מזלות, was in the following order: First, the flag of the טלה, האש, sign of the ram, fire. Around this flag were encamped the tribes featuring the zodiac signs אריה, lion and קשת, archer, respectively. This was followed by the flag featuring the שור, עפר, bull, earth, around which were encamped the tribes featuring the zodiac signs virgin and goat, respectively. This was followed by the flag featuring the zodiac sign , אויר, תאומים, twins, air, around which were encamped the tribes featuring the zodiac signs balance and water-carrier. This was followed by the flag featuring the zodiac sign , מים, סרטן, cancer, water, around which were encamped the tribes featuring the zodiac signs scorpion and fishes. There were 4 flags corresponding to the 12 tribes, each flag the focal point of a group of 3 tribes (cf. Pardes Rimonim).
  To get back to our original subject. Every month, a different one of the twelve הויות, permutations, arrangements of the letters in the name of G–d, (which are divided according to the 4 seasons), is active; the three הויות based on the first letter י, is active in a season comprising three months. The same applies to the הויות belonging to the other three variations of arranging the Ineffable Name listed above. One may consequently perceive the four letters of the Ineffable Name of G–d as symbolizing the beginning of the four seasons of the year. At the same time, of course, since each letter is portrayed in three combinations, we now obtain a total of 12 such combinations, or one for each month.
  You can perform the very same pattern by dividing the month into 4 weeks, with each week assigned three of the different הויות. In this way every week will be assigned 3 הויות. These 12 הויות (which comprise 48 letters) are active on 24 days of the month, each letter assigned to either a daylight period or to a night. Since the respective Sabbath days are not days of "activity," no part of these הויות needs to be assigned to them. The Sabbath is considered the מקור or source for the other 6 days, the day that "collects" all the 3 הויות which originated in one of the four "opening" letters of the total of 12 הויות described earlier. On the Sabbath all these הויות, or combinations of letters of the Ineffable Name, are at rest, enabling them to provide the energy needed for their activities during the following six weekdays. 
  The author goes on to show that when taking into consideration the minimum of 4 Sabbath-days per month, 28 days of the month are accounted for by being serviced by a letter in the various הויות. The twenty-ninth day apparently is viewed as ראש חודש, "a collector" day of the month similar to the Sabbath being a "collector" day of the week.
  All the elements of time described above, played a part in the labours which the Torah describes Jacob as performing for Laban, and in the wedding feast described in our פרשה. The "days" we spoke of are the seven days of the wedding feast. Rashi already explained that when Laban asked Jacob: מלא שבוע זאת, "complete the week of this one" (Leah), he referred to the seven-day wedding feast. He bases himself on the half vowel Sheva instead of the full vowel kametz that we would have expected under the letter ש (Genesis 29,27). This is why the Jerusalem Talmud Moed Katan states that this instance is the origin of the custom to entertain the groom and bride for seven days starting with the wedding. You also find the time unit "month" mentioned here, when Jacob stayed with Laban for a month (29,14) before starting to be recompensed for any services performed. The time unit "year" is mentioned in the agreement that Jacob was to serve seven years for Rachel. This unit of seven years is the forerunner of the unit שמטה as a time unit or cycle of seven years (29,18). Just as the release from monies owed takes effect only at the end of the שמטה year, so Rachel was not promised to Jacob till the end of the seven years' service.
  Let us now examine the relationship of the triangle Jacob-Rachel-Leah as it is explained in the Zohar (Sullam edition Vayetzei pages 58-60). Kabbalists see in Leah the mystique of the אימא עילאה, "Mother Superior," rooted in the emanation בינה, whereas Rachel is perceived as אימא תתאה, "mother of the lower regions," anchored in the emanation מלכות. The mystical dimension of זווג in the "higher" emanations is the fusion of חכמה and בינה, whereas the parallel fusion of the "lower" emanations is that between תפארת and מלכות. Jacob is perceived as representative of תפארת, as pointed out when describing him as the merger of the respective attributes of דין, justice and חסד, kindness. He loved Rachel. Leah's belonging to a world of נסתר, the hidden domain, accounts for her being שנואה, hated. Whenever something is by definition not accessible to our logic, it is called שנוא, the reverse of אהבה. The mystique of love is that it is something that is in the open, something joyful.
  Leah, who was anchored in the emanation בינה, the 7th counting from מלכות, bore 7 children, 6 sons and a daughter. The emanation בינה radiates creative activity in 6 directions as we have demonstrated earlier. The single daughter represents the emanation מלכות [we have explained that relationship also], her name was דינה, and our sages have stated that this represents the halachic principle of דינא דמלכות דינא, "that decrees issued by the government are legally binding on us." The letters in that word are a rearrangement of the letters in the name א-דני, one of G–d's names.
  Rachel gave birth to two sons, Joseph and Benjamin, both of whom, were called צדיקים, righteous. Rachel was beautiful as the moon, i.e. לבנה, the mystique of the emanation or attribute מלכות. The Zohar describes Rachel as placed in between two צדיקים, one above her and one below her. The צדיק above her is the mystical dimension of Joseph, whereas the צדיק below her is the mystical dimension of all the צדיקים who constantly strive upwards. These צדיקים symbolize the "lower female waters." [The lower waters and the upper waters must meet in order that the process of fertilization and creation can take place. Rachel is described as the catalyst bringing about this fructification when she is described as being "between" two צדיקים, positive forces. Ed.]
  Jacob symbolizes the emanation תפארת, which acts as חושן for the emanation מלכות. On occasion this emanation "rises" and by incorporating "דעת" contributes to a fusion between the emanations חכמה and בינה. [an "emanation" between תפארת and the two emanations בינה and חכמה, in the diagram by Luzzato, Ed.] This is the mystique of Leah.
   The three upper emanations are considered the root of בנין, the six emanations which are active in "building" the spiritual/intellectual structure that enables a physical universe to be created after the results of all this activity has been collected and filtered through the lowest emanation מלכות. Seven times seven emanations, radiating from seven branches of one שמטה each, make a total of forty nine; the fiftieth is יובל. As we descend in the emanations the figure 49 appears associated with days rather than with years, as we have in the Torah where counting the Omer is done in terms of days. Pardes Rimonim explains all this in chapter 20.
  During the first seven years that Jacob served Laban, he was under the impression that he was serving for Rachel. In truth, his service was actually perceived as in the domain of the hidden, a domain analogous to the mystique of Leah. It was accounted for him as seven שמטות, units of seven years each. Even though these years in the emanation בינה are portrayed as 49 years (not as 7 שמטות) the Zohar explains that when Laban said to Jacob in Genesis 29,27: מלא שבוע זאת, the emphasis on that שבוע was an allusion to Psalms 119,164: שבע ביום הללתיך, "I have praised you seven times on the same day," that during the seven days that the wedding with Leah was being celebrated all the missing years were telescoped into days.
  This is also alluded to when the Torah says that "Jacob served for Rachel for seven years, and they were in his eyes like (seven) days" (29,20). According to the allusion in the Torah, the spiritual effect of Jacob's service penetrated up to the emanation of בינה, the home of Leah's mystique, whereas Jacob had consciously only aimed at the emanation of מלכות, the home of Rachel's mystique, i.e. not 7 times seven years but only 7 times seven days, ימים אחדים.
  To get back to our premise. We have stated that everything connected with the mystery of time is connected with the "radiations" from the letters of the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d. We have explained that Jacob represents the merger of the attributes of דין and רחמים, both of which originate in the "hidden" emanations of בינה and חכמה respectively. Jacob therefore corresponds to the emanation תפארת. That same emanation is the home of the "time" concept "year." תפארת can also be described as the emanation that represents the sun, seeing a year comprises twelve lunar cycles. Something similar applies to the emanation מלכות, where instead of a year we deal with a month. That emanation corresponds to the concept of לבנה, for whereas תפארת represents action, activity, מלכות represents passivity, receptivity.
  Bereshit Rabbah 68,10, quotes Rabbi Pinchas in the name of Rabbi Chanin of Tzipporin as offering a strange comment on 28,11, where the Torah reports Jacob camping overnight in an open field, because the sun had set unexpectedly. He claims that Jacob had overheard the ministering angels saying: "The sun has set, the sun has set." When Joseph told his brothers and his father about the dream in which eleven stars, sun and moon bowed down to him (Genesis 37,9), Jacob proclaimed: "Who has told him that my name is "sun"?! This sounds very strange. Why should the fact that Jacob's name was שמש be considered a secret? Considering what I have written, this Midrash makes sense.
  We have an allusion to this matter in 28,13, where G–d is reported as stationed on top of the ladder (or of Jacob) in Jacob's dream, and he is promised that he will spread out in all the directions of the globe. Since Jacob corresponds spiritually to the emanation תפארת, the domain from which the 12 הויות radiate, it is not surprising that Jacob would become the father of 12 tribes, who would be grouped around four flags, three tribes each, the tribes also symbolising the twelve months of the year, the flags and the four seasons respectively.
  G–d said to Jacob in that dream: אני ה' אלוקי אברהם אביך, ואלוקי יצחק הארץ אשר אתה שוכב עליה לך אתננה ולזרעך. Abraham was Jacob's grandfather whereas Isaac was his real father: why did the Torah not use a different word to describe Abraham? 
  There is also the peculiarly worded statement: "The earth that you are lying on I shall give, etc." Our sages (Chulin 91) already commented that G–d rolled up all of ארץ ישראל under Jacob at that time. This comment was obviously prompted by the consideration that the promise of giving Jacob's descendants the four cubits of earth their ancestor had lain on did not amount to very much. How do we understand the comment in the Talmud? How could the whole of the land of Israel be uprooted, even if only briefly? The Zohar raises this question and answers it by suggesting that the Talmud refers to the ארץ ישראל of the Heavenly Regions which is beneath the level of Jacob, seeing that Jacob corresponds to the spiritual level of תפארת, the mystical domain of the Ineffable Name. The celestial ארץ ישראל, however, corresponds spiritually to the lower emanation מלכות. We know that the emanation תפארת is the merger between the emanations חסד and גבורה which correspond to the attributes of Abraham and Isaac respectively. Even though Jacob had input from both his father and his grandfather, he inclined somewhat more in the direction of חסד than גבורה. G–d alluded to this fact when He described Jacob as first related to Abraham and afterwards to Isaac. 
  This same idea is also reflected in the three different names given to the monument Jacob erected on the site of his dream. He called it בית אלוקים, בית א-ל, and יש י-ה-ו-ה במקום הזה. The reason he called the site בית אלוקים was undoubtedly because in the dream the four-lettered Ineffable Name of G–d appeared to him. The three names reflect the three outstanding characteristics of the three patriarchs. The name א-ל alludes to חסד, the name אלוקים to גבורה, and the four-lettered name corresponds to the attribute תפארת. Whenever G–d is reported as speaking to man, the message emanates in one of the three above-mentioned ספירות. It makes an impact first in the ארץ העליונה, the spiritual equivalent of physical earth, before it reaches the domain of our universe. Only then does this "call" from G–d manifest itself in our world. The very term ויקרא, He called, used by the Torah, means that G–d's message was revealed outside the Heavenly Regions.
  [At this point the author, drawing on comments in Pardes Rimonim, demonstrates that though traditionally we know of four basic elements in our phyical world, namely earth, water, fire and air, the former is never mentioned as such in the ספר יצירה, the most ancient kabbalistic text. He concludes that earth, i.e. עפר, must be considered as given and therefore need not be stressed. Ed.] The other three elements are rooted in the three emanations we have mentioned as corresponding to the three patriarchs. The root of water is the emanation חסד ; the root of fire is the emanation גבורה; the root of air is the emanation תפארת. Earth is viewed as the result of interaction by the other three elements. Rabbi Cordovera, author of the Pardes Rimonim, suggests the following experiment to prove his point: Bring water to boil in a pot over fire; whenever the amount of water in the pot diminishes due to evaporation, add more water. After some considerable number of additions of water, you will find that a certain quantity of solids, earth or dust accumulates at the bottom of the pot in which the water is kept boiling. 
  The fact that these solids are the result of interaction with the air which fans the fire boiling the water, makes the solids that result something in the nature of an alloy, not a true element. This then accounts for the ספר יצירה not listing dust as an independent original element.
  We find something similar in the עולם האצילות, the original spiritual world. It is perceived as made up of three "lines," as we have already pointed out. Air in this world corresponds to the line רחמים. Water corresponds to the line חסד, and fire corresponds to the line “דין;” the function of the emanation מלכות is one which is composed of all three elements. This statement is true of physical activity in the material universe, not of the עלם האצילות.
  Once G–d had revealed to Jacob that he was the one who combined the characteristics of both his "fathers" into the characteristic תפארת, he was able to comprehend matters previously concealed from him, and instead of remaining "below" the spiritual emanations of בינה and חכמה, [the normal result of receiving input from two "higher" sources, Ed.], he was able to intellectually take up a position between – but at the same time above – the two aforementioned emanations בינה and חכמה. The result was the emanation described in Luzzato's diagram of the emanations as (דעת). The author does not see in this a contradiction to the statement in the תקוני זהר that the place of Jacob in the emanations has to be viewed as below the emanation of תפארת, as Jacob being its מרכבה, carrier, whereas Moses' place is to be viewed as above it, as the מרכבה of דעת, the hidden aspect of the emanation. Jacob certainly had some understanding of the mystique of the Ineffable Name as active in the emanation תפארת. As a result of his affinity to that spiritual domain, Leah bore six sons and a daughter, as pointed out earlier. 
  Jacob alluded to this domain when he said in 28,16: אכן יש י-ה-ו-ה במקום הזה ואנכי לא ידעתי, "indeed G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name is active in this location and I had not known this." This was an allusion to the emanations בינה and חכמה. He referred to חכמה with the letter י, and to בינה with the letter ה in the word יש.
  [Although the author quotes from Pardes Rimonim in his definition of the word איש, and supports his view from תקוני הזהר chapter 49, I have decided to omit this. Ed.]
  When we are told in Bereshit Rabbah 63,2 that it was Jacob who saved Abraham from the furnace of Nimrod, based on the verse in Isaiah 29,22: יעקב אשר פדה את אברהם, "Jacob who liberated Abraham," this does not mean that Jacob's merits were greater that those of Abraham. This could not be, since Abraham's spiritual power was certainly greater than that of any other patriarch and we commence our daily עמידה prayers invoking first and foremost the merits of Abraham, and we sign the benediction with the words "G–d the shield of Abraham."
  The issue is the following: Since Abraham meant to demonstrate his dedication to G–d when he refused to recognize Nimrod as a deity and allowed himself to be thrown into the furnace, i.e. to die in order to sanctify the name of G–d, he should have been burned. A צדיק does not perform an act of קידוש השם, expecting to be saved by a miracle. On the contrary, his major merit accrues to him when his intention is carried out. This is why the Ten Martyrs at the time of Hadrianus are extolled by us thousands of years later, [see the liturgical poem אלה אזכרה in the Mussaf prayer of the Day of Atonement. Ed.] On the other hand, there is a reason that G–d saved Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah, who submitted to exactly what Abraham submitted to at the hands of Nimrod, and whom G–d saw fit to save (Daniel 3,21); they are not mentioned there by their Jewish names). At that point in the story it was necessary to refute the scoffers and non-believers seeing that Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah had proclaimed their belief in G–d's ability to save them from the fiery furnace, after Nebuchadnezzar had challenged G–d by saying: "Who is the god who can save you?" Had G–d allowed these three men to die, His name would have been desecrated rather than sanctified. Abraham was good, and under normal circumstances he would have been burned, -as he had expected to be; however, the reason G–d saved him was that Isaac had as yet not been born. Since it was part of G–d's plan that Jacob should be born to Isaac, and that Jacob should found the Jewish nation with his twelve sons, and the purpose of מעשה בראשית (seeing that Israel is called ראשית), was for the Jewish people, the descendants of these twelve tribes, to accept the Torah at Mount Sinai, Jacob had to "save" Abraham from that furnace so that G–d's plan should not be frustrated.
  Vayikra Rabbah 36,4 goes so far as to say that Abraham was only created through the merit of Jacob, also citing the same verse from Isaiah. In the same sequence Rabbi Pinchas in the name of Rabbi Reuven quotes G–d as saying to His universe: "My universe, My universe, who has created you, who has formed you?" G–d answers this rhetorical question by saying: "Jacob created you, Jacob formed you." These statements are easy to understand in the light of what I have written. 
  We can also understand why G–d called Abraham Jacob's father when He introduced Himself to Jacob in the dream of the ladder. Abraham had to be saved in order for Jacob to be born. Isaac was the intermediary who enabled Jacob to sire twelve sons loyal to Abraham's heritage. This had been G–d's intention since before He undertook to create the universe.
  The symbolism in the dream of the ladder conveys that very thought. It describes that there is a direct connection between what goes on in Heaven and what goes on on earth. It hints that the centre of the universe is the Holy Temple, and it alludes to its construction, destruction, and eventual rebuilding in a more perfect world. It is full of hints that all this is the task of the Jewish people, and that the Jewish people will comprise twelve tribes.
  I shall now explain the ladder, i.e. how celestial influences are conveyed to earth, in all its details. We mentioned earlier that the dream related to three separate worlds. When the Torah described the ladder as standing on the ground, this was a reference to our material world. When the Torah went on to say that the ladder extended up to the heavens, this was a reference to the world of the planets (outer space). The words: מלאכי אלוקים are a reference to the spiritual world, the world of the angels. The words: והנה ה' נצב עליו refer to the domain that is exclusively G–d's. Whereas the philosophers of our people think in terms of three worlds, Kabbalists think in terms of four distinct worlds called בריאה, אצילות, יצירה, and עשיה. The four forces mentioned in connection with the ladder may well allude to the concept of the Kabbalists of the four domains that exist. The first two elements the words מוצב ארצה וראשו מגיע השמימה refer to the world of עשיה. The words מלאכי אלוקים עולים ויורדים, refer to the world of בריאה and יצירה, the ascending angels representing the עולם הבריאה, the descending angels representing the עולם היצירה. The words: והנה ה' נצב עליו describe the עולם האצילות, the most rarefied domain of all. We know that the letter י in the Ineffable Name of G–d stands for the emanation חכמה, whereas the letter ה in that name stands for the emanation בינה; the letter ו in that name stands for the emanation תפארת. This emanation radiates Divine energy in all six directions, which in turn are "collected" and transferred to the physical universe through the emanation מלכות. The purpose of all these activities was to enable the Torah to be revealed at Mount Sinai. 
  This is the reason why we also find the revelation at Mount Sinai and the giving of the Torah alluded to in this dream, as mentioned in Bereshit Rabbah 68, 12. We read there that the words "the ladder stood on the ground, its head reaching heavenwards," describe the ladder as at the foot of Mount Sinai, with its top reaching into the fiery mountain top up unto the heart of Heaven, as described in Deut. 4,11. Another version in the same Midrash points out that the numerical value of the letters in the word סלם, ladder, is equal to the numerical value of the letters in the word 130= סיני. The מלאכי אלוקים, heavenly messengers, are perceived as Moses and Aaron. Proof that prophets are called מלאכים is found in Chagai 1,13: ויאמר חגי מלאך ה' במלאכות ה' לעם. "Chagai, the angel of the Lord, fulfilling the Lord's mission, spoke to the people." When the angels are described as עולים, ascending, this refers to Moses of whom the Torah wrote (Exodus 19,3): ומשה עלה אל האלוקים, Moses ascended to G–d." When the Torah describes the angels as descending the ladder, it also refers to Moses, of whom the Torah wrote: וירד משה, Moses descended (Exodus 19,14). Next, G–d is described in the dream as standing above the ladder, and we know that "G–d descended to the top of Mount Sinai" (Exodus 19,20). Thus far the two versions of the Midrash.
  We need to understand the difference between the first and the second version. We must also try and understand why the phenomenon of the ascending and descending angels is ignored in the first version of the Midrash. Since in the first version the ladder is perceived as standing at the bottom of Mount Sinai with its head reaching unto the heavens, this alludes to the angels described, who are perceived as the צדיקים, i.e. G–d's messengers, the ones who observe G–d's word and carry out His commandments. These people are viewed as planted firmly on the ground with their heads in Heaven. Their deeds enable them to be transported to higher spiritual regions. When these צדיקים or their spirits, enter the Heavenly Domain, they experience new insights which they take back to earth with them. This is the meaning of the alternating ascent and descent Jacob saw in the dream. The reason G–d is described as standing on top is to convey to us that all of this is due to G–d's active assistance, though the force motivating the צדיקים is their free will employed constructively. Anyone wishing to, and commencing to do good, receives a Heavenly assist.
   This also explains a very strange statement on this portion in Bereshit Rabba 68,9. Rabbi Hunna in the name of Rabbi Ami is quoted as saying that the reason the name of G–d is מקום, Place, is that He is the "Place" of the world and the world is not His "place." Rabbi Yitzchak comments by citing Deut. 33,27: מעונה אלוקי קדם, "Eternal G–d is a dwelling place." He asks: "Do we not know that G–d is the "place" of the world and not vice versa from the verse in Psalms 90,1: אדנ-י מעון אתה היית לנו, "O Lord You have been our place of refuge?" How then can the Torah describe the world as being His place?" Rabbi Aba son of Yudan answers by comparing G–d to a knight riding a horse. The rider's equipment surrounds him from all sides. In such a situation the horse is incidental to the knight -and not vice versa. This is proved in scripture by Chabakuk 3,8: "When You are riding on Your steed." Thus far the Midrash.
  First of all, the very premise that someone would assume the world to be G–d’s arena , i.e. limiting Him, is totally strange. Why would we need a verse from Scripture to refute such thinking? Secondly, why is there a need for two separate verses proving that the world is not G–d's place but vice versa (a further verse in Exodus 33,21 where G–d says to Moses: "Here, there is a מקום beside Me," in addition to the verse in Psalms 90,1)?
  Actually, all these matters are essentially similar. When the word מקום is used it is understood as something similar to the garments the angels appear in when they appear to humans. These "garments" are merely something to enable man to perceive them. All this has been explained at the beginning of פרשת וירא, when the angels appear to Abraham in the guise of human beings. Both Nachmanides, Rekanati, and the Tziyoni have dealt with the problem there. These commentators explain "garments" when described as the attire of angels as an honour created for the angels, i.e. that what appeared to the human beings to whom they became visible like man-made garments, were in fact non-earthly materials that assumed the appearance of earthly materials. When the angel is "dressed," the world can be described as his place, מקומו. On the other hand, when G–d became "visible" to different prophets according to their intellectual capacity, or to the Jewish people at the time they crossed the sea of Reeds, He appeared like a knight in shining armour. At the time G–d gave Israel the Torah at Mount Sinai, however, He appeared to them in the guise of an aged bearded scholar exuding kindness. We must not confuse these appearances of G–d with the appearance of angels, however. The term אות [perhaps best translated as "visible symbol," Ed.], when applied to G–d's צבא, army, means something that people with prophetic powers are able to perceive or imagine vividly. It is not appropriate to describe or conceive of G–d as having "dressed up" for the occasion. Such "dressing up" is appropriate only for angels for whom the earth becomes a stage while they are so "dressed up." Since G–d is the מקומו של העולם at all times, we cannot compare Him to angels in that respect.
  When we speak about the מעון, the phenomenon discussed in Deut. 33,27, we have to remember that a Divine Presence in our world is a requirement of G–d in His Heavenly Domain, just as the performance of sacrificial service by the Jewish people on the altar in this world is something that adds stature to G–d in His Celestial Regions. We have already explained at length that good deeds performed in this world help to repair the damage caused to the entire universe when Adam sinned. When G–d is "blessed" through such deeds, Israel or mankind in turn will be blessed. 
  From that point of view, one may describe the earth as a residence of G–d, i.e. מעונו. Man's action on earth creates harmony in the heavens. This is why Moses had to say in Psalms 90,1, that though man contributes to the שלום בית in the "higher" regions, all of this is possible only with G–d's direct assistance. Every one of man's good deeds was already accompanied by G–d's input the moment man set out to perform it. We must never think that we, independently, strengthen the position of G–d. We are only like the horse described earlier, which, while performing the duty of being a מרכבה, means of transportation, for its knight, is still only incidental to the knight, seeing that the knight is already fully equipped to deal with all possible dangers. The vision in Jacob's dream of "angels ascending and descending" conveys a similar message.
  According to the first interpretation of the ladder in the Midrash, which views the ladder as an allusion to the Torah, the emphasis is on action, on מצוה performance as the element that makes an impact in the spiritual world. This corresponds to the statement of our sages who say that sacrificial service is a necessary element in enhancing the harmony in the "upper" world. The alternate interpretation cited in the Midrash, sees in study the main element that makes that impact. The example of Moses ascending and descending refers to the intellectual achievement of Moses. The word עליה, ascent, alludes to the first stage of intellectual achievement. We have our sages frequently use the expression: עלה במחשבתו, עלה בדעתו, "it came (rose) to mind." The term ירידה, descent, is frequently used describing depth, such as ירד פלוני לסוף דעתו, someone explored someone else's mind thoroughly, i.e. descended into the hidden recesses of his thinking process. The sequence of angels first ascending and subsequently descending is therefore adequately explained [we would have expected the reverse order seeing that the angels' habitat is in the "higher" world. Ed.].
  The center of the world, the Holy Temple, is also alluded to here: Bereshit Rabbah states that the ladder is hyperbole for the כבש, ramp of the altar, the words מוצב ארצה, being understood as a reference to the "earthen altar" G–d wished the Jewish people to build (Exodus 20,21). The words וראשו מגיע השמימה, its top reaches Heaven, is understood by the same Midrash as referring to the fragrance of the sacrifices offered on the altar. The מלאכים described as ascending and descending are the High Priests ascending and descending the ramp of the altar when performing the service in the Temple. The words: והנה ה' נצב עליו, are compared to: ראיתי את ה' ניצב על המזבח, "I had a vision of seeing G–d standing on top of the altar" (Amos 9,1). Thus far the Midrash. At the end of Jacob's dream we also find an allusion to the building of the Temple, its destruction, and the eventual rebuilding of it, as will be demonstrated later. 
  There is also a hint that all these matters are relevant to Jacob, his sons, and the nation that will develop from that clan, as well as an allusion to the concept that the existence of the people of Israel is the purpose of Creation, that the Torah was given to that nation, etc.
  All the descendants of Jacob will have a share in the world to come. The words (28,11) וישכב במקום ההוא which introduces Jacob's dream, contain most of these allusions. The word וישכב must be divided into two words, i.e. ויש, and כ"ב. The word ויש alludes to the world of the future, as we know from Proverbs 8,21: להנחיל אוהב יש, "in order to make those who love Me inherit something of substance." Our tradition interprets this statement to mean that every צדיק in the future will inherit 310=שי worlds (Uktzin 3,12). This corresponds to the nation ישראל, which is alluded to in the letters כ"ב, (metaphor for the alphabet which makes up the Torah). 
  There is a detailed analysis of all this in the Sefer Yetzirah, which divides this alphabet into three separate groups of letters. The first group consists of the letters אמ"ש, which are called אמות, "mothers," seeing they are the basis of all the different letters. The three "bases" are the elements אויר, מים אש, which I have described earlier as the true elements. Next there are the seven letters which can appear either with a Dagesh, or without it. They are called כפולות. They are: בג"ד כפר"ת. These are followed by twelve letters which always appear in the same form, i.e. פשוטות. They are: ל"ן, ס"ע, צ"ק, ה"ו, ז"ח, ט"י. The world is composed of three "elements" corresponding to these three groups of letters. We have explained earlier how the fourth "element," dust or earth, is formed. The group of seven letters corresponds to the seven major stars or planets, [a system that has become outmoded in the last several hundred years, but was a cornerstone of philosophy for millennia, Ed.]. The remaining twelve letters correspond to the twelve signs of the zodiac. All the aforementioned are the result of developmental activities in the spiritual world that filter down to our world by means of the emanations. "Above" those emanations you find the domain called אצילות, which is the root of roots, consisting of three "lines," the line of חסד, the line of דין, and the line of רחמים. Below these three "lines," we have the seven domains of בנין, such as חסד, גבורה, תפארת, נצח, הוד, יסוד, מלכות. This is followed by twelve "radiations," known to Kabbalists as התפשטות, originating in the emanation תפארת, the "home" of the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d.
  The entire people of Israel are based on three יסודות, foundations. Spiritually speaking, this means the three patriarchs. Their relationship to us is like the relationship of the three elements air, water and fire to physical life on this planet. Next in line of importance are seven categories of people, corresponding to the letters בג"ד כפר"ת, and corresponding to them seven מעלות, virtues or merits, perceived as seven gates. They are in ascending order: An Israelite, a Levite, A priest, the High Priest, the vice-president of the Supreme Court, the President, the King. These seven categories of people of special significance all draw on the merits and accomplishments of the three patriarchs. The twelve tribes, as represented by the twelve constellations, מזלות, guide the seven gates of which we have spoken earlier. The influence of the "seven" levels of the Jewish people is felt amongst the twelve parts of the Jewish people as represented by the twelve letters ה"ו, ז"ח, ט"י, ך"ן, ס"ע צ"ק. We therefore see that every single characteristic of the people of Israel is active in one or the other of the three sections that the alphabet of the Torah is divided into.
  We have said that the ladder also alludes to the Holy Temple; we find the concept of the Holy Temple similarly divided into three levels corresponding to the three divisions of the letters in the alphabet. The first set of donations for the Tabernacle mentioned in the Torah (Exodus 25, 3) comprises זהב, כסף, ונחשת, gold silver and copper. Gold always represents something "above," copper something "below," whereas silver corresponds to the elements bridging the gap between what is above and what is below. The seven arms of the candelabra, which provide spiritual illumination, correspond to the seven major planets which illumine the physical world. The twelve precious stones that the High Priest wore in his breastplate, the אבני זכרון, correspond to the significance of the group of twelve letters, and the 12 מזלות. We see how in the word וישכב, which we divided into the two words יש-כב, all these concepts are represented, and why the Mishnah in Uktzin spoke about 310 = יש reserved for the Jewish people.
  This matter is also alluded to in Numbers 14,17: דרך כו-כב מיעקב, "A star rose from Jacob." The Zohar divides the word כוכב into 26=כו, and 22=כב, an allusion to the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d=26, which can be spelled in twelve different combinations of its letters as we have demonstrated, all of which have their origin in the emanation תפארת, which represents the characteristic of our patriarch Jacob. Afterwards, (since מטתו שלמה, he produced only spiritually loyal offspring), that offspring was given the Torah, i.e. the 22=כב letters that make up the Torah's alphabet. The reason that all this had to be alluded to at this point was that Jacob had set out to pick a bride and found the family that in turn would consist of the founders of the twelve tribes.
  Bereshit Rabbah 68,11, on Genesis 28,11: ויקח מאבני המקום, "He took from the stones of that place," comments that Jacob made an experiment. He took 12 stones and said to himself, that seeing that neither Abraham nor Isaac had founded the twelve tribes, if those stones were to fuse, it would signify that he, Jacob, was slated to do so. When he awoke he found that the stones had fused. The Torah writes: "He took the stone which he had made into his pillow" (28,18). By this he was convinced that he would become the founder of the Jewish nation. The letters of the Torah are alluded to in these stones. We read in Sefer Yetzira chapter 4, section 17: "Two stones build two houses; three stones build six houses; four stones build twenty four houses, etc." The stones are hyperbole for letters.
  Let me now explain how the twelve tribes and the building, destruction of, and rebuilding of the Holy Temple are all alluded to in the dream. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai is quoted in Bereshit Rabbah 69,7 that the Holy Temple in the Celestial Regions is only eighteen miles higher than its counterpart on earth. He bases this on 28,17, where Jacob says: וזה שער השמים, "This is the gateway to Heaven." The numerical value of 18 =וזה. Another version of the meaning of this verse quoted in the same Midrash, says that G–d showed Jacob the Temple built, destroyed and rebuilt. Upon seeing this, Jacob exclaimed: מה נורא המקום הזה, "How awesome is this place!" The expression corresponds to Psalms 68,36 נורא אלוקים ממקדשיך, "G–d You are awesome in Your holy places." The latter expression אין זה, corresponds to Lamentations 5,17: על זה היה דוה לבנו, "Because of this (the destruction of the Temple) our hearts are sick." The words אין זה, are associated only with חרב, destruction. The allusion to the rebuilding of the Temple in the future is based on the use of the word שער in our verse and the corresponding use of that word in Psalms 147,13: כי חזק בריחי שעריך, "For He made the bars of your gates strong." 
  Rabbi Shimon's statement concerning the eighteen miles that the Temple in the Celestial Regions is higher than the Temple on earth is very puzzling. Our traditional view (Chagigah 13) is that the distance between earth and heaven is five hundred years, that the thickness of the רקיע is another five hundred years, and that the distance between one רקיע and the next the one called זבול, is also five hundred years. Another difficulty is why the Midrash said that Jacob was shown the Temple built, destroyed and rebuilt at that moment. One does not convey sad tidings at the very time when glad tidings are announced. In verses 16 and 17, the word זה occurs four times. Why does the Midrash relate to only three of these? The words אכן יש ה' במקום הזה, are ignored by that Midrash.
  When taking into consideration Ephrayim and Menashe the sons of Joseph, there are actually fourteen tribes. The land of Israel was divided up amongst only twelve tribes, however. When you deduct from the fourteen tribes the tribe of Levi, which did not qualify for the land distribution, and Joseph himself, who substituted for his father spiritually, you are left with twelve tribes. The land was divided between Reuben, Shimon, Yehudah, Issachar, Zevulun, Dan, Naftali, Gad, Asher, Benjamin, Ephrayim and Menashe. 
  There are five בתי אבות, family-sources, which have to be viewed as "above" the concept of land distribution. They are the three patriarchs, to whom the land was promised, but who never took possession of it even though they pined for it and were buried in it. Then there is Joseph, who is described as the direct continuation of Jacob in Genesis 37,2: אלה תולדות יעקב, יוסף. [there was no other reason for the Torah to tell us this fact which we all knew. Ed.] Joseph expressed an ardent desire to be buried in the land of Israel, and made his brothers swear an oath that they would take his bones with them at the time of the redemption from Egypt (Genesis 50,24). There is also Levi, whose descendants did not share in the land, for the Torah describes G–d Himself as their inheritance (Deut. 18,1). We must realize that these five people (or groups of people) were on a spiritual level where they did not need their share of land on earth in order to have their share of the land of Israel in the Celestial Domain. That region is the root of the terrestrial ארץ ישראל. The letter ה in the words במקום ה-זה, alludes to these five categories of people who spiritually outranked the other twelve, i.e. 12 =זה. There is also a special significance in the number five when we consider the five manifestations of G–d's Presence that were missing during the time of the second Temple. This means that there was a residual presence of חרב, i.e. חורבן, destruction, during the entire period of the second Temple. Our sages expressed this in terms of the missing letter ה, in the word ואכבד in Chagai 1,8, where the word should have been the same as in Exodus 14,4, ואכבדה בפרעה (cf. Rashi on that verse in חגי). In the future (third Temple) these five manifestations of G–d's שכינה will be restored. Not only will they be restored, but such a future will herald new spiritual heights when the original light that permeated the universe immediately after the Creation will also be restored. It is the time described in Isaiah 25,9 as: זה ה' קוינו לו, "This is the Lord whom we have hoped for." At that time the promise in Leviticus 26,12: והתהלכתי בתוככם, "I will be walking among you," will also be fulfilled. 
  All these matters are alluded to in the word הזה in Genesis 28,17. Bereshit Rabbah 63,8, commenting on Genesis 25,22, where Rebeccah complained about the fetuses within her quarreling, by saying: אם כן למה זה אנכי, quotes Rabbi Nechemiah as saying that Rebeccah had sufficient merit to become the mother of twelve tribes, in accordance with the numerical value of the letters in the word זה; seven corresponding to the letter ז, and five to correspond to the letter ה. Did Rabbi Nechemyah think that we could not count to twelve and had to have this calculation broken down for us? I believe the Midrash wanted to stress why the number twelve here is composed of a combination of 7+5, and not of, say, 8+4 or 9+3. Why did the Midrash have to see in that number a reference to the twelve tribes? The Torah does not mention anything about that number of children! Maybe the number twelve refers to something else? 
  Clearly by dividing the letters of the number twelve in this fashion Rabbi Nechemiah wanted to convey something. We find at least one occasion when the twelve tribes are divided into a group of seven and into a group of five. In Parshat Shoftim (Deut. 18,2), when discussing the word נחלה, inheritance, Rashi quotes a Midrash by a Rabbi Klonimos who understands the words: ונחלה לא יהיה לו, "he will not have an inheritance," as referring to five tribes, whereas the next two words in the verse: בקרב אחיו, "among his brothers," are understood to apply to seven tribes. The "five" tribes are those to whom Moses allocated territory, whereas the seven tribes are those who had their territory allocated by Joshua. 
  This again shows that the letter ה, when heading the word הזה, indicated something of a greater value or importance.
  The letter ו in the word וזה שער השמים, alludes to yet another single higher level, i.e. the time when not only the five missing manifestations of G–d's Presence will be restored, but when the verse in Leviticus will be realized, when G–d personally will "walk" among us. The anniversary of the Temple's destruction, is called מועד, a festival, because, as the catalyst of repentance, the destruction of the Temple is an even more powerful positive force than the original festivals. We have repeatedly explained that the experience of exile, persecution, etc., is what will eventually trigger the nationwide repentance of the Jewish people. When G–d showed this development to Jacob in his dream, He did not give him evil tidings at the same time as He revealed to him glad tidings; on the contrary, He showed him the positive value of exile.
  Bereshit Rabbah 68,13 on this portion quotes the following comment by Rabbi Joshua ben Levi: The opening words of our portion, ויצא יקב describe exile, and can be compared to Jeremiah 15,1, where G–d describes this in the cruellest terms: שלח מעל פני ויצאו, "Dismiss them from My Presence, and let them go forth." The next two words, וילך חרנה, are comparable to the verse in Lamentations 1,12: אשר הוגה ה' ביום חרון אפו, "When G–d afflicted me on the day of His wrath." The words following, i.e. ויפגע במקום, must be understood as analogous to Isaiah 5,8: עד אפס מקום, "until there is no room left" (for the Jews in ארץ ישראל); the words: וילן שם כי בא השמש, "he remained there overnight for the sun had set," should be compared to Jeremiah 15,9: אומללה יולדת השבעה, "The forlorn one who gave birth to seven." The Midrash continues in that vein.
  Nachmanides (Chavell edition page 158), describes the meaning of the dream according to Rabbi Eliezer the Great as follows: This vision is similar to the vision Abraham experienced at the ברית בין הבתרים (Genesis 15), where G–d showed Abraham the four kingdoms who would rule over Israel in exile. The rise and fall of these empires is compared to angels ascending and descending the ladder. The reason they are called "angels of G–d," is similar to Daniel 10,20 where the angel Gabriel describes himself as ready to do battle with the angels described as שר מלכות יון, and as שר מלכות פרס respectively. G–d promised that He would be with Jacob (people of Israel) in all his sojourns with them, would protect and save him from those empires. G–d showed Jacob how these four empires would rise and subsequently fall. He also showed him that the angel representing Babylon would rise to a height of seventy rungs on the ladder before descending, (seventy years' exile), whereas the angel representing the kingdom of the Medes would ascend one hundred and eighty rungs before descending. When shown the angel representing the kingdom of Edom ascending and not descending, Jacob asked G–d to hurl him down into the grave. G–d responded that even if he, Edom, were to climb sky-high, He would bring him down (Ovadiah 1,4).
  The light which has remained hidden since Adam's expulsion from גן עדן, and which will again be revealed at the time we have mentioned, is a description of the innermost secrets of the Torah. The period when this light will be revealed is the one Isaiah 11,9 has described as one when מלאה הארץ דעה את ה', "when the whole earth will be filled with knowledge of G–d." The Ten Commandments of the Torah which (comprise 613 letters), allude to the 613 commandments in the Torah. The measurement of the tablets were 1 cubit high and 1 cubit wide. Each cubit equals 6 טפחים, handbreadths. Torah has preceded the universe by "2000." We know that מיל, a mile, consists of 2000 cubits. The cubit, i.e. אמה is the root of the Torah, the mystical dimension of the "2000" that the Torah was kept concealed. In the future, Torah will be viewed from the aspect וז"ה, i.e. 18, which is an allusion to the Temple yet to be revealed in the Celestial Regions which we described as being 18 miles higher than the Temple in our domain.
  The next part of the Midrash deals with the Holy Temple given to the children of Israel. The words: מה נורא המקום הזה, "How awesome is this place," refer to the first Temple which boasted the additional five manifestations of G–d's Presence. This why we have the word הזה, with the letter ה in front. When Jacob said: אין זה, he referred to the destruction of that Temple. Even though the Temple was rebuilt, the second Temple was not considered as something significant when compared to the first, as five vital elements were never restored.
  Our sages, quoted by Rashi, say that the words: ויצא יעקב, "Jacob departed," tell us that the departure of a צדיק always leaves a noticeable void in the community he departed from. The righteous person is the glory and beauty of any community. I have already mentioned that these words also allude to Jacob going into exile. The departure of the glory that Rashi referred to as occurring when the צדיק leaves, may also refer to the departure of the glory when the Temple is destroyed. The glory Rashi referred to is described by him as זיו, הוד, and as הדר. The month in which Solomon's Temple was begun is also called זיו. (Kings I 6,37). That the loss of this glory is described in terms of "departure" can be seen from Daniel 10,8: והודי נהפך עלי למשחית, "And my glory was turned into something destructive." The departure of such glory is also referred to as the departure of הדר, in Lamentations 1,6: ויצא מן בת ציון הדרה, "The glory departed from the daughter of Zion." The respective first letters of the words הוד, זיו, הדר, are הזה.
  The future Temple is referred to by Jacob here as בית אלוקים וזה שער השמים. Considering this we can understand the Midrash saying that Jacob saw the Temple built, destroyed, and rebuilt. The interval between the destruction of the first Temple and the rebuilding of the third Temple is considered one unbroken period of destruction, the purpose of which is to encourage Israel to wipe out its sins through repentance.
  After having seen the ladder in his dream, Jacob understood a number of things; among them he understood the meaning of the four exiles he had seen in his vision, and he understood the eventual redemption. This is why he said: "Indeed G–d is in this place, אכן יש ה' במקום הזה, but I did not know it." He expressed his new found-understanding that the third Temple would lead to the realization of הזה and יש. He realized that this והתהלכתי בתוככם would be fulfilled במקום הזה. These two realizations all resulted from the וישכב, when he lay down to sleep. Concerning this experience we find an allusion in Jeremiah 31,16: יש שכר לפעולתך, "there is a reward for your labor." An example of the reward for וישכב, is the incident of Leah having traded the mandrakes her son Reuben had found in order to have an extra night with Jacob. Rachel had agreed with the words : לכן ישכב עמך, "therefore he may lie with you." When Leah became pregnant as a result of that night, and Issachar who founded the tribe that excelled in Torah study was born, she stated: נתן אלוקים שכרי, "G–d has given my reward." It was Issachar who would excel in bringing about the period described as ומלאה הארץ דעה, that the earth would become full of knowledge (of G–d).
  When Jacob had said: ואנכי לא ידעתי, this is best explained by the Midrash commenting on Rebeccah's statement before the birth of the twins: למה זה אנכי? We had learned from that comment that Rebeccah actually possessed enough merit to produce twelve tribes. 
  The word אנכי is the mystical dimension of אחד, since when you "square" the letters of the word אחד, the total equals the numerical value of אנכי. The calculation is as follows: you multiply each letter in the word אחד by itself, i.e. 1 by 1=1; +8 by 8=64; +4 by 4=16. This adds up to a total of 81. The word 81=אנכי. The conceptual common denominator between the two words is that just as G–d is unique, i.e. אחד, so Rebeccah as potential founder of the twelve tribes making up the people of Israel is unique. The letters in אחד can also be read as follows: "The nation Israel consisting of 8 tribes born by Jacob's major wives ח, and 4 tribes born by Jacob's minor wives ד, together form one nation, א-אחי. The word אנכי is equivalent to the numerical value of כסא, G–d's throne, where Jacob's likeness is inscribed. After Jacob had received assurances that he would be the founder of twelve tribes, and that these tribes would enjoy G–d's blessings and be the forerunners of the eventual redemption when G–d would be "walking in their midst," he exclaimed that he had absorbed this information and that he had now received the answer to what had troubled his mother when she had questioned the value of her existence, i.e. her אנכי. The Talmud Chulin 91 even describes the ascent and descent of the angels as motivated by their desire to compare the features of Jacob with the image engraved on the throne of G–d. The angels tried to cause Jacob trouble, when G–d intervened. This is the reason why the Torah says: "Here G–d stood on top of him."
  Jacob first prophesied concerning the ultimate redemption: אכן יש ה' במקום הזה, and afterwards he spelled out the stages that would lead up to it. He explained that the first stage that would be fulfilled would be מה נורא המקום הזה, followed by אין זה כי אם בית אלוקים וזה שער השמים.
   The period in the future described is the one of which the prophet says: ביום ההוא יהיה ה' אחד ושמו אחד, "On that day G–d will be One and His name will be One" (Zachariah 14,9). The missing letters in the name of G–d are the letters of the word ההוא. As long as Amalek has not been wiped out, G–d's throne is described as incomplete, i.e. as כס instead of as כסא. The usual name of G–d in our incomplete world is the two-lettered one י-ה, instead of י-ה-ו-ה. The other missing element is the one in ה-זה, instead of זה, which alludes to the missing five manifestations of G–d's Presence since the destruction of the first Temple, as we explained earlier. The numerical value of ההוא equals that of הזה. The שכינה is viewed as having departed from the Jewish people since the end of the period described as הזה, not to return till the advent of the period called ההוא.
  Concerning the letters כב of the word וישכב, these correspond to the letters used in the Torah (alphabet). Bereshit Rabbah 69,7, commenting on Genesis 28,16: וייקץ יעקב משנתו "Jacob awoke from his sleep," re-phrases the word משנתו to read ממשנתו, "from his Torah study."
   The meaning of the Midrash is most likely that during the time Jacob had lain down, ויש-כב, and the time he woke up, he had experienced the expansion of the alphabet of 22 letters into three groups, i.e. 3+7+12, which made up the various elements of Israel, as we have discussed earlier. It was this additional insight which he described after he awoke as something that he had not realized previously.
  The expression שער השמים, refers to the place from where our prayers ascend to heaven, a gate which, alas, is closed to us now; Rabbi Eleazar in Berachot 32, quotes Lamentations 3,8: גם כי אזעק ואשוע שתם תפלתי, "Though I cry out and and plead, He shuts out my prayers," as proof that the gates of prayer have been shut since the destruction of the Temple. He agrees, however, that the gates of tears have remained open. It is to be noted that the word שתם, "He shut out," is not spelled with the customary letter ס, but with the letter ש, which, by its opening to the top side suggests less than a total shut-out. We observe a similar use of the letter ש, when Bileam describes himself as שתם העין "open eyed" in Numbers 24,3 and 24,15. G–d will receive our prayers gladly in the rebuilt Temple. Even though the gate is closed while we are in exile, as long as we are not in Israel, our prayers are "detoured" from wherever they emanate via the land of Israel.
  As long as Israel was in its own land, G–d yearned for our prayers, and that is why the patriarchs were people whose prayers are mentioned and from whom we learn the importance and efficacy of prayer. G–d even withheld basic needs such as children from them in order to "provoke" them into prayer. All this was true only as long as we lived in the land of Israel, a land which is under G–d's constant direct supervision. Since the other countries are supervised by G–d's שרים, angels appointed to look after the needs of the respective Gentile nations, why would G–d be interested in our prayers. Would they not become mixed in with alien elements, i.e. the respective שר supervising the nations that the Jews live in whose prayers are sent heavenwards? This is why the advice to the Jewish people while in exile is to send their prayers via ארץ ישראל, from there to Jerusalem; from there to the site of the former Sanctuary; from there to the site of the former Holy of Holies, the Inner Sanctum. From there the prayers are dispatched to שער השמים, as our sages have described this process. ...
  
  I have explained the whole subject elsewhere in connection with Rachel's accusing Jacob of not having prayed for her to have children as Isaac had done for Rebeccah who had been barren. The Torah describes Jacob as becoming angry at Rachel as a result of her accusations (30,2). Why should Rachel's request have aroused Jacob's ire? How did Jacob understand the Talmud which teaches that the reason that the matriarchs were barren was to provoke them or their husbands into prayer so that G–d would grant them children (Yevamot 64)?
  We have to understand the matter differently. Jacob told Rachel: "G–d has denied you children;" He meant to tell her that the fact that she had no children was not connected with G–d's desire to have her or him pray for children. Rachel's barrenness was a punishment for some sin she had committed. The desire of G–d to be prayed to applies only when the supplicant is in ארץ ישראל, seeing that the land of Israel is part of G–d. Both Rachel and Jacob were in a country under the guidance of one of the שרים: the element of prayer was therefore not relevant to Rachel's situation. When viewed from that angle, we understand the words of Jacob: התחת אלוקים אנכי, "Am I under the direct supervision of G–d (here)?"
  Rachel replied that she would bring a צרה into her home. She referred to her maid-servant Bilhah, whom she elevated to be a potential competitor by having Jacob sleep with her in order that she, Rachel, could by this means become a surrogate mother. Israel's position while in exile is somewhat similar to Rachel's status after she had given Bilhah to Jacob as a wife. When Israel in exile is forced to adopt alien practices, it does so with a pure heart, its motivation is Heaven-oriented. However, due to our sins there is a צרה which intercepts between us and G–d, i.e. the קליפה. This problem is alluded to in the Midrash Rabbah's introduction to Lamentations. Such behavior is tantamount to bringing the picture of an alien deity into the sanctuary. Seeing that Israel in exile is not a free agent, the gates of tears i.e. prayer of distress, are not closed to it and our prayers reach G–d having broken through to Heaven by way of ארץ ישראל. This is what Rachel said to Jacob. Though they were not in ארץ ישראל, the prayer would help by the very fact that she was prepared to bring a צרה into her house. As a result, G–d would look at her affliction and accept her prayer even while she introduced a foreign element into her sanctuary, her house.
  To get back to our main subject. After Jacob experienced the great vision of the ladder, he entertained thoughts of the Ultimate Redemption, the world of the future, etc. 
  This prompted him to make a vow. The Kabbalists explain that נדרים, vows, are of the mystical dimension found in the emanation בינה, something alluded to in the spelling of the word נ"דר, "dwelling in the domain of 50." The letter נ, alludes to the 50 gates of בינה, whereas דר means to dwell. The Kabbalists go on to explain that the Ultimate Redemption will be rooted in the emanation בינה. בינה is viewed as the יובל הגדול, the great Jubilee year, i.e. absolute Redemption.
  Jacob prefaced his vow with the words: אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, If the Lord will be with me, etc." He concluded it by saying that if his request would be granted: והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, "then the Lord will be my G–d." How could Jacob have dared to use the word אם, "if," which suggests that he made his loyalty to G–d dependent on G–d fulfilling his requests? We have a halachic ruling in Baba Metzia 66 that if someone purchases something by prefacing his remarks with the conditional word אם, such a purchase is invalid, seeing he had not truly committed himself. Even though the Maharam rules that in matters of vows and oaths conditional vows are legally binding, why did Jacob use an expression involving him in possibly legally binding vows? ...
  Nachmanides writes that it is possible that when speaking about events in the future, one should do so in a conditional tense. He quotes several examples. It does not mean that Jacob entertained ambivalent thoughts. It simply means that when the time comes when the condition applies the vow will become operative. We still must understand why Jacob used an expression that lends itself to more than one interpretation, especially where such a sacred subject is involved. 
  There are numerous hints in Jacob's vow, and his use of the word אם was most appropriate. He used the word in the same sense as in Numbers 36,4: ואם יהיה היובל, "and even when the Israelites observe the Jubilee." I have already mentioned that the Jubilee year legislation contains allusions to the Great Redemption in the future which may occur sooner than its ultimate date, (אחישנה, G–d says: "I will hasten it,") in the event Israel is worthy, or it may arrive according to a pre-determined timetable set by G–d which is known as בעתה (cf. Isaiah 60,22). The word אם also consists of the respective first letters of אליהו and משיח, both of which symbolize the redemption of the future. When Jacob asks for G–d's protection ושמרני בדרך הזה, he refers to the journey through exile during which protection from Esau/Edom is needed. When he says: אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, this is a reference to the day when the name of G–d will be One.
  Why did Jacob have to mention that the bread that G–d would give him would be לאכול, "to eat," and that the clothing would be "to wear?" What else is one supposed to do with bread and clothing?" If we needed proof that the Torah is not merely turning a phrase, look at Deut. 10,18: "G–d loves the stranger to give him bread and clothes." The Torah does not bother to mention the function of bread and clothing. 
  This enables us to see important allusions to future events in these words. At this time, when Jacob went out to get married, he alluded to the deeper meaning of the union of man and woman, which is extolled as something that, in the future, will even provide joy for G–d Himself. We know this from Isaiah 62,5. In Yevamot 61, Rabbi Yossi is reported to have met Elijah and to have asked him about the meaning of the word כנגדו in Genesis 2,18 which reports G–d as saying: אעשה לו עזר כנגדו, "I shall make for him (Adam) as helpmate kenegdo." Rabbi Yossi wanted to know in what way a woman can help man do something he is not able to do himself. Elijah asked: "When a man brings home wheat, does the wheat grind itself? When a man brings home flax, does the flax convert itself into a garment? Do you not realize that a woman makes a man's eyes light up? Does she not put him on his feet?" Elijah's answer was an appropriate one to point out woman's role in our world. In the future, however, everything will be ready-made for man, as we have learned in Shabbat 30. What is woman's role then? [The Talmud describes hot rolls and other delicacies as being served up for man without any human input being required. The finest garments would also be available without the need for tailors, seamstresses, spinners, etc.] Jacob's references to לחם לאכול, ובגד ללבוש, referred to the time when man would not have to work for a living, when all the tedium associated with our present lives would be removed. He meant that bread would be "ready to eat, clothes ready to wear." I have already outlined that Jacob's marriages, which produced the twelve tribes, are an allusion to the eventual union between G–d and Israel. These considerations explain Jacob's choice of words.
  Jacob's choice of words, when he asked Laban to give him his wife at the end of seven years of service, is truly puzzling. Even the most boorish person would not use such crass language. Genesis 29,21 sounds as if Jacob said: "Hand over my wife for I have completed my years." We must also wonder at Leah's choice of words in 30,16: "To me you must come this night, for I have hired you for the mandrakes of my son." 
  Nachmanides, in his book Igeret Hakodesh, has already written about the significance of the terms ידיעה and חיבור when used to describe sexual unions. Before man sinned and became polluted with the זוהמה, the filth of the evil urge, the act of copulation was considered the fulfillment of a מצוה, similar to all other מצות. Just as one employs one's hands to fulfill the commandment of building a סוכה, hut, or one takes a לולב, palm frond, in one's hands, so one uses a different organ to fulfil the commandment of being fruitful. The genitals were created to enable man to perform this commandment, and there was no feeling of shame or embarrassment attached to the act Only after the serpent had made man aware that he was nude, and that the very condition of nudity was something to be embarrassed about, did the act of sexual union become associated with feelings of shame and embarrassment. In the future, when G–d will remove the evil urge from us, and we shall again be as free from sin as Adam was before his sin, the act of physical union between man and wife will again be the performance of a מצוה like all other מצות. 
  The patriarchs and matriarchs were on a spiritual level approaching that which in the future will exist among ordinary people. This enabled them to express themselves in a totally unrestrained manner. Whereas ordinary people, in order not to appear gross, must describe every reference to sexual activity by something the sages call לשון נקיה, euphemistic language, the patriarchs and matriarchs had no need to resort to this; their holiness was natural, the result of child-like innocence. This also explains why Jacob is reported as kissing Rachel the moment they met, and why such conduct is not considered suggestive. This is why Rashi explains that Jacob's meaning was simply: "When can I begin to sire the twelve tribes?" ...
  Just as sexual union before the sin was an act which did not need to be performed in private, so the provision of food and clothing at that time was also something that did not involve man in preparation or hard labour.
  The benediction we pronounce before eating bread, in which we thank G–d for making bread available, teaches us more than we suspect at first glance. The Talmud Berachot 38 debates whether the formula should be the one that has since been adopted, i.e. המוציא לחם מן הארץ, or whether the definitive article ה, should be omitted. Why does it matter so much which formula is used? Everybody agrees in the Talmud that the word מוציא means "brought forth." Rabbi Nechemiah feels that the word מוציא means that the bread has already been produced, whereas the other Rabbis feel that also the expression המוציא refers to bread that has already been brought forth, and they prove this from Deut. 8,15: המוציא לכם מים מחלמיש צור, "(The G–d) who brought forth water for you from the flinty rock." Rabbi Nechemihaim dalfin satah thinks that the meaning is "He is in the process of bringing forth." He proves this from the use of that word in Exodus 6,7: "who is about to bring you out of the labours of Egypt." [a verse that describes a situation prior to the Exodus. Ed.]
  I believe there is a profound reason why the formula chosen is one that can refer to either the future or the past. We bless the sacred bread of the past which Adam ate before the sin, and which will once again be available in the future. We have a similar discussion between Rabbi Nechemiah and the sages quoted in Shemot Rabbah, 15 where the sages quote Psalms 72,16 to prove that the word המוציא also refers to the future. The Psalmist says: יהי פסת בר בארץ, "Let abundant grain (in the shape of a piece of bread) be on earth."
  Jacob concluded his vow by saying: והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, "the Lord will be my G–d." We must remember that the vowel pattern used in the Ineffable Name of G–d is not uniform. The word appears with the vowel pattern Cholam Kametz, but it also appears with the same vowel pattern as the word Elo-him. When that is the case, though it appears with the latter vowel pattern we read it as if the word were in fact the name Elo-him. [This occurs frequently in the Books of the Prophets. Ed.] When pronounced in such a way, it refers to the name of G–d operative in the emanation בינה, as we have explained frequently. This principle has also been dealt with in Pardes Rimonim in the chapter called מהות והנהגה, sections six and seven. When the Ineffable Name is vocalized in the Cholam Kametz pattern it reflects G–d's activity in the emanation תפארת, the realm of His Sanctuary in the Heavens. The spiritual זווג, marital union between Jacob and Rachel is one that emanated in the emanation תפארת, whereas the זווג between Jacob and Leah originated in the higher emanation בינה. Jacob could not attain a real foothold in the emanation we earlier described as דעת, until Leah joined him in the lower emanation. In the future, Jacob will achieve a greater hold on the emanation בינה and דעת, that is what he alluded to when he said: והיה ה' לי לאלוקים.
  When the Torah reports Jacob proceeding towards ארץ בני קדם, in 29,1-2, it also mentions והנה באר בשדה, "here there was a well in the field." We get the feeling that the well suddenly loomed up out of nowhere. What was so special about that well? Besides, what did our sages wish to teach us when they said that all the זווגים, marriage contracts of the patriarchs, were concluded at a well? [The source I have found in Shemot Rabbah 1,32, speaks about the matches of three people, i.e. Isaac, Jacob and Moses. Ed.] 
  The word באר, well, is used in its spiritual sense, a well of "living" water, the fountain of the Tree of Life hidden since Adam's expulsion from גן עדן. The word באר reversed is רבא, the same word we use in the recitation of the קדיש prayer when we respond to the reader by saying אמן יהא שמיה רבא, "Amen, may the Lord's name be great." The Arizal points out that the numerical value of the word is equal to the combined value of two of the names of G–d. [Since the author did not manage to show the calculation, he concluded that what is meant is that in the future, when the name of G–d will be complete, the calculation of 203 will become true.]
  The Arizal also comments on Genesis 14,12, when the kings with Kedarlaomer are reported as having captured Lot and his possessions. The Torah writes: ויקחו את לוט ואת רכושו בן אחי אברם וילכו. "They took Lot and his possessions, the son of Abram's brother." The grammar is totally confusing, seeing that the possessions were not Abram's. The verse has to be understood thus: רכושו בן אחי, in order to alert us to the respective first letters of these three words which total 203 in numerical value, or the same as the word באר. The message in all this is that all the dangers Abraham took upon himself by pursuing the four kings in order to save Lot were caused by his foreknowledge through the Holy Spirit that Lot would beget the forerunner of the Messiah, the Kingdom of David, and that therefore he must be saved at all costs. In other words, Abraham did all this for the sake of G–d's great name, רבא. No doubt, when the Arizal described the numerical value of the names of G–d being the same as the numerical value of the word באר, this is what he had in mind.
  There is an analogy between the vision of the ladder, which Jacob saw in his dream, and the well, which he encountered while awake. In the nocturnal vision he had merely seen an image; now, as a result of having been granted that vision, he saw something of substance. He became aware that the things he encountered were not only significant in themselves, but alluded to events in the future. Bereshit Rabbah 70, describes the various phenomena such as the three flocks (29,2), as being symbols for the three groups of Jews, i.e. the Priests, the Levites, and the Israelites. 
  When Rachel arrived with the צאן, this alludes to the condition of the Jewish people when in exile. The well itself is compared to Sinai; the words כי מן הבאר ההוא ישקו הצאן, "For they would water the sheep from that well," is a reference to the Ten Commandments which issued forth at Mount Sinai. These and numerous other allusions are seen by the various Rabbis as quoted in the Midrash. When Israel is in exile it is referred to as צאן, flock, or sheep, whereas when it is redeemed it is referred to as אדם. On Ezekiel 34,31: ואתן צאני, צאו מרעיתי אדם אתם, "And you My sheep, sheep of My pasture, you are Adam;" Kimchi comments that nowadays you are merely צאן. In the future when you will be redeemed however, you will qualify for the description אדם.
  The reason Rachel was buried on the wayside and not in the cave of Machpelah was to enable her to assist the Jews who were going into exile under Nebuzaradan. When they walked by her grave, the prophet (Jeremiah 31,14/15) describes her as weeping on behalf of her children, and G–d as promising her a reward for her efforts and assuring her that Israel would return to its land after a while. 
  This is what the Torah alluded to when it described Jacob as kissing Rachel and raising his voice and beginning to cry (29,11). Rashi comments there that the reason Jacob cried was because he foresaw that Rachel would not be buried alongside him. This comment is difficult. The fact that Rachel would not be buried with Jacob hardly seems an adequate reason for him to cry about! No doubt Rashi meant that Jacob had a vision of the reason that Rachel would not be buried alongside him, that his descendants would be exiled and that she needed to intercede with G–d on their behalf. Rashi gave a somewhat similar commentary in Genesis 48,7, where Jacob justified himself to Joseph for asking to be buried in Machpelah, though he had failed to bury Joseph's mother Rachel there. We see that there is a spiritual association between Rachel and צאן, the description used for the Jewish people when the latter are in exile.
  It is this spiritual association which is alluded to in Song of Songs 1,8: אם לא תדעי לך היפה בנשים צאי לך בעקבי הצאן. "if you do not know, O fairest of women, go follow the tracks of the sheep." Solomon describes Israel in exile in the verse, as can be seen from Rashi. The period referred to in our verse in Song of Songs by the words אם לא תדעי לך, "do you not know?" is the period to which Jacob referred after his dream as ואנכי לא ידעתי, "I did not know," both referring to the period of exile due to the destruction of the Temple. While the Temple was standing, however, there was ידיעה, knowledge, - it was the period when prophets abounded. The name יעקב itself alludes to something secondary, heel, something dragged behind, and that is also alluded to when Song of Songs speaks of עקבי הצאן. The letters in the word עקבי are identical to the letters in the word יעקב, they are only re-arranged. The "fairest of women" referred to in our verse in Song of Songs is Rachel who was described in 29,17 as יפת תאר ויפת מראה, "of beautiful form and appearance" 
  When Jacob is described in 20,43 as having many flocks, צאן, this is an allusion to the Jewish people and their numbers. Bereshit Rabbah 73,11 states in the name of Rabbi Levi that Jacob needed 600,000 dogs (to watch the sheep). The other Rabbis claim that the number of dogs was 1,200,00, since he needed two dogs for each flock. The Rabbis do not argue about the size of the flocks, only whether one or two dogs were needed to guard each flock. 
  The Midrash tells us that the number of Israelites would never be fewer than 600,000. Dogs is a hyperbole for קליפה. Our sages in Baba Kama 60 say that it is the dogs that call out: "the angel of death is coming!" When the firstborn of Egypt were slain and the Jews were about to leave Egypt, the Torah described the dogs as having remained silent towards the Israelites (Exodus 11,7). The hyperbole used in the Midrash saw Jacob as appointing the dogs as guards over the sheep i.e. Jewish people in exile, so that they would not become further infested with the pollutants of the original serpent. The opinion cited that he used 1,200,000 dogs is in accordance with the view expressed in Shabbat 88 that when Israel committed the sin of the golden calf, 1,200,000 destructive angels descended in order to remove each man's jewelry from him. This had been bestowed on them at the time Israel volunteered to accept the Torah. Jacob wanted to make these dogs subservient to the flocks, i.e. the Jewish people, in order to fulfil what is written in the verse in Proverbs 16,7: "When a man's ways please G–d, He makes even his enemies be at peace with him." We have stated that צאן is an allusion to the people of Israel. An interesting mnemonic note may be the halachic term צאן ברזל, which is used for inalienable property of the wife which returns to her family regardless of any rights of the husband. The four wives of Jacob produced the twelve tribes. Their names were: בלהה, רחל, זלפה, לאה. The first letters of their respective names spell ברזל, something that will endure under all circumstances.
  We are now able to understand an allusion to the future contained in 30,39 in which a procedure used by Jacob to encourage the sheep to give birth to certain skin patterns is described. Rabbi Oshiyah says in Bereshit Rabbah 73,10 that the water the sheep drank was turned into sperm inside of them. How can we understand the remarks of Rabbi Oshiyah which suggest that G–d created a new instrument of impregnating animals, something that had not been created during the six days of creation!? Did not Solomon in Kohelet 1,9 say that there is nothing new added on this planet?
  We must understand that remark as analogous to what we have learned in Shabbat 30, that in the future a woman will give birth every day. A student asked how this could be as we cannot assume that every husband will have marital relations with every one of his wives daily? Rabbi Gamliel answered the student by referring him to the reproductive system of hens. The hens contain a whole array of ova all of which are impregnated by a rooster at the same time; the eggs are laid, however, only one per day. The sperm injected by the husband into the womb of the wife would act in a similar fashion. Not a single drop of sperm would go to waste. None of it would become evil smelling and become useless. Each drop will eventually fertilize the woman and develop into a child. Every act of marital intercourse will produce many children. Rabbi Gamliel, quoting Kohelet, tried to teach the scoffing student who had challenged the statement that in the future women would give birth daily, by demonstrating that in essence such a mechanism exists in this world. No new creative act is needed to make the prediction about man's future come true. 
  Something similar took place when the ewes Jacob tended retained every drop of semen injected into them by the males and they produced many lambs all of which reflected the genes they had previously been impregnated with. All that G–d did was that He added moisture, i.e. "water" to the semen that had dried up inside those ewes so that they would bear additional young ones from the same mating. What happened to Jacob was an allusion to the future. 
  Laban became aware of this, and this is why he protested in 31,43: הבנות בנותי, והבנים בני והצאן צאני וכל אשר אתה רואה לי הוא. "The daughters are mine, the sons are mine, the flocks are mine; all that you see around is mine!" I have already mentioned that we are called צאן while we are in exile. We also have scriptural proof for this from Psalms 44,23 נחשבנו כצאן טבחה, "We are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered." When we are on a high spiritual level, however, we are referred to as אדם, as we have shown. There is a difference, however, between אדם when referred to as a male, and between אדם when referred to as female. When G–d first created the human species, the Torah says of G–d's work זכר ונקבה בראם, ויקרא את שמם אדם. "He created them male and female, and He named them Adam" (Genesis 5,2). All the redemptions which we have experienced in the past have always been associated with the female element inherent in אדם; this is why our gratitude was always expressed by שירה חדשה, "a new song (feminine term) instead of as שיר חדש. When the redemption of the future materializes, however, we shall give thanks to the Lord with a שיר חדש, acknowledging the additional dimension of that redemption.
  Thus our existence on this planet comprises three levels. We are either comparable to צאן, or to אדם in the female capacity, or eventually to אדם in his male capacity. Laban referred to this future when he spoke (31,43) about all three aspects of the Jewish people, i.e. about צאן, בנות, and בנים. He referred to Jacob as רואה, as "seeing," a Seer, the traditional description of a prophet. He claimed to have been the originator of Israel's future. Though he had set out to uproot Jacob and all that Israel stands for completely, he had a change of heart and became a friend, even while he was forced to acknowledge what G–d had in store for the Jewish people by saying "Amen." 
  The male aspect of the word אדם, which will be prominent in the future, is alluded to by the numerical value of the word זכר, male, which equals the numerical value of ברכה, blessing i.e. 227. So much about the source of blessings. 
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ויירא ויאמר מה נורא המקום הזה. It is appropriate for man to stand in awe and reverence at sites which have been distinguished through historical events and which hosted holy people, or which themselves represent holiness. This is is why idle conversation in houses of study and synagogues is forbidden even when no study or prayer is in progress. Such conversation interferes with one's reverence and thereby aggravates the wrong committed.
  ונתן לי לחם לאכול ובגד ללבוש. We learn from Jacob's vow that we should not ask G–d for more than the necessities of life, just as he only asked for bread to eat and clothes to wear.
  ויאמר להם יעקב אחי מאין אתם. From Jacob's opening remarks to the shepherds we learn that one should always speak pleasantly, for Jacob addressed these shepherds who were total strangers to him as brothers.
  לא עת האסף המקנה. When Jacob admonished the shepherds that they had not done a day's work yet, he demonstrated that it is everyone's concern to remind people of their duties when they are clearly remiss.
  הן עוד היום גדול לא עת האסף המקנה. The Zohar in פרשת ואתחנן (Sullam edition page 62), commenting on Jacob's statement that there was still much daylight left (Genesis 29,7), says that we learn from this verse that, if Israel will do תשובה, its exile will not last longer than a day, and it will return to the Holy Land. This is based on Lamentations 1,13: נתנני שוממה כל היום דוה, "He has placed me in desolation, and left me in misery all day long." If Israel fails to repent, G–d says: עוד היום גדול, לא עת האסף המקנה "the day still has a long time to go, it is not yet time to gather in the cattle" [A day is perceived a day in G–d's time, i.e. one thousand years. Ed.]. This is because Israel has no merits to its credit. There is, however, one remedy for Israel, namely לכו השקו הצאן, "go water the flock," i.e. make the people study Torah, drink the waters of Torah, ולכו רעו, then you can go to the place where you find rest, to the land of Israel, your inheritance. 
  An alternative meaning interprets our verse as referring to the day of upheaval, the day on which the Temple was destroyed and Israel was forced to go into exile. Due to Israel's sins, that day still has a long ways to go, i.e. "the day is still long, it is not yet time to gather in the cattle." Seeing they themselves are to blame for the day being so long, the remedy is to go and study Torah, as per the first version in this Zohar. According to this latter version, Israel responds to this call by paraphrasing the shepherds in Genesis 29,8: לא נוכל עד אשר יאספו כל העדרים וגללו את האבן מעל פי הבאר והשקינו, "We cannot do this until all the emanations (in which these decisions are made) have been gathered together and between them they have removed this heavy stone (decree of exile); on that day the well, i.e. the access to Torah knowledge, will become accessible and we can water the flock."
  [Continuation of the Zohar:] וגללו את האבן. The combined forces of the emanations will roll away the heavy stone, the harsh decree from the mouth of the well, i.e. the lowest of the emanations מלכות, so that the Torah in the באר will be able to sustain us during the remainder of the exile and our flocks (people) will be watered, (sustained by Torah). At the end of this long "day," G–d will lead us back to ארץ ישראל. When Bileam speaks about the אחרית הימים, "the end of days" during which Israel is described as revenging itself on Moab (Numers 24,14), he refers to the period during which Israel has suffered in exile and at the end of which G–d will take revenge on those nations who have mistreated Israel while the latter were in exile. The "day" which Jacob speaks about to the shepherds is an allusion to that אחרים הימים. Thus far the Zohar.
  וישלח יעקב ויקרא לרחל וללאה. We learn from here that when the head of the household wants something from its member, he should not go about this in an autocratic manner even though he has the right to impose his will. He should endeavor to win over the members of his household to the course of action he has decided upon. It is always better to have the willing support of one's family than to have them merely obey one's orders.
  כי דרך נשים. Nachmanides points out that in earlier days menstruating women were quarantined to the point where one did not even talk to them. The experts in those days were aware that the breath emanating from these women was harmful. Nachmanides mentions that he was going to report on scientific experiments conducted which prove such a theory. The Talmud also reports such an isolation of menstruating women. Rabbi Yochanan says that it is forbidden to walk behind such a woman, to step on the dust she walked on, and to make use of what she has handled during her period. This is why Rachel said to her father that actually she ought to be getting up and kiss his hands; she warned him not even to walk about within her tent since the dust that she had walked on might prove harmful to him. Laban remained silent and did not respond because one did not speak to women whom one knew to be menstruating. Thus far Nachmanides. 
  From all this we learn how careful a husband has to be to keep his distance from his wife while she is menstruating, so as not to defile himself additionally.  The impurity associated with a menstruating woman is viewed so gravely by our sages that they compare it to idol worship. We know this from Shabbat 82a, where Rabbi Akiva compares the impurity conferred upon a person who carries some object that has been used for idol worship with the impurity of a menstruating woman, basing himself on Isaiah 30,22: תזרם כמו דוה, "You will cast them away like a menstruous woman." Rachel may well have had this interpretation in mind so as not to be guilty of lying; her father, however, accepted her words at face value, and that is why he did not reply.
  
  Vayishlach
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named עמוד הגולה.
  This portion contains the third of the 613 commandments, the prohibition for the Jewish people to eat the גיד הנשה, the sinew of the thigh-joint.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The following is the way the Zohar and other Kabbalistic books explain the mystical dimension of the prohibition of this commandment. Man's various limbs are perceived as branches of the מרכבה in the higher regions The Torah has given us 248 positive commandments which correspond to each one of the 248 limbs of אדם העליון man's counterpart in the spiritual regions. Kabbalists speak of 248 angels bearing the name of their Master. These angels are perceived as the clothing of the שכינה. There are also 365 branches of דין, Justice, on the "tree" in the "upper regions," corresponding to the 365 days of the year and the 365 sinews of man. There is both a sinew and a negative commandment for every day of the year, and the ninth of Av is the day which corresponds to the prohibition of the גיד הנשה. Our sages saw an allusion in the extra word את in על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל את גיד הנשה (Genesis 32, 33), to include תשעה באב [a day when any food intake is prohibited anyways]. They also included סמאל ויצה"ר Satan and the evil urge. Both the eating of that sinew and profiting from it in some other manner is prohibited. Neither Israel, nor any of its limbs could be defeated on any other calendar date, nor could any other sinew have succumbed to its adversary except the גיד הנשה. Only on that date was the power of דין strong enough to undermine the strength of Israel. On that date G–d abandoned us in exile, until a wind (spirit) will blow from the Heavens. Anyone who eats on the Ninth of Av, is considered as if he had eaten the גיד הנשה.
   That sinew contains five branches that have their origin in the right side of the emanations, and five branches which originate in the left side of the emanations. The combined total of ten corresponds to the ten forces of impurity which surround the מרכבה, the Divine Entourage, as is written (Psalms 12, 9) סביב רשעים יתהלכו, "The wicked walk all the way around it." The location of that sinew in the body is close to the male reproductive organ on which circumcision is performed. The forces of impurity within the body spread from that area. 
  Anyone eating the sinew attracts such impurity to himself, seeing that one limb brings another in its wake. The word <i>Nasheh</i> means continuation. Not eating that sinew insures continuation of service to G–d. The prohibition of eating that sinew is the direct result of Israel's natural allergy to contact with the forces of impurity.
  Jacob's limbs and organs were all healthy; this is why the guardian angel of Esau who represents the forces of impurity could not overpower him. The only place he found in Jacob that was somewhat weak was the גיד הנשה. Kabbalists write that the penalty for people who eat the גיד הנשה and who fail to do תשובה, is that their souls will be resurrected in the body of a harlot, קדשה, who is also known as זונה נשכחה, an immoral woman who causes service to G–d to be forgotten. This is a punishment which fits the nature of their sin, for they had strengthened the forces of impurity, the evil urge. Such people will be hung in purgatory by their male organ. 
  In view of these statements, we need to learn more about how the serpent and its evil influence began. The ability of the serpent to seduce is rooted in the power of Samael who rode it. Samael is the spirit of זנונים, lechery, whose lecherous feelings were aroused by the sight of Adam and Eve copulating. The serpent which used to walk on legs was punished by having its legs cut off. The thigh joint (to which the legs are attached) is within the domain of the sexual organs. Esau had the likeness of a snake as a birthmark on his thigh, as we have mentioned in Parshat Toldot. The Israelites, on the other hand, are holy, abstain from eating the גיד הנשה, and Bileam (Numbers 23, 23) testified already “כי לא נחש ביעקב, Israel is not infected by the serpent."
  The expansion of the גיד הנשה is the “מרכבה,” vehicle, of Samael in our world which touched, i.e. hurt, the thigh joint of Jacob. The Arizal explains Genesis 32, 26: וירא כי לא יוכל לו, ויגע בכף ירכו, "When he saw that he could not overpower him, he touched his thigh joint," as referring to Jacob's descendants. Samael, the guardian angel of Esau, left his mark on all the צדיקים, righteous people, who would stem from Jacob, i.e. any generation in which Jews would abandon their religion, etc. The words ותקע כף ירך יעקב, "Jacob's thigh joint was disjointed" (ibid.), are an allusion to the negative effect of the destruction of the Temple on this earth on the Celestial Regions. G–d swore an oath that He would not take up residence in the Jerusalem of the Heavenly Regions until the Jerusalem on earth had been restored and He would be able to take up residence there. This concept is known to us as "the name of G–d is not complete, neither is His throne complete, until matters on earth are developing to G–d's satisfaction."Put differently: "what happens down here is called גיד הנשה. The Talmud speaks about גזרות קשות כגידים, decrees as tough as sinews." The sinews referred to in such statements are the branches of the גיד הנשה. This גיד is the "evil" sinew of the 365 sinews in our bodies because it strengthens the power of Samael, i.e. the power of Esau. The damage to the Celestial Regions is done in a single "day." The word "day" in those regions is the one thousand years that Bereshit Rabbah 8, 2 describes as the length of G–d's day. [Because of this definition of "day," Adam could live almost one thousand years in terms of our days, though G–d had said he would die on the day he would eat from the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Ed.] The Zohar, commenting on Lamentations 1, 13: נתנני שוממה כל היום דוה, "He has made me desolate, I am in misery a whole day," states that this verse proves that when the destruction of the Temple was decreed, the exile was meant to last at least one thousand years.
  We are taught in Chulin 91a that the choice of that word, i.e. אבק, dust, indicates that the dust stirred up during this struggle rose all the way to the throne of Glory -which is not complete, as we shall set out to show. The meaning of the word "he touched," is similar to the English "he touched a sore point." Samael had found something in Jacob's lifestyle which he thought he could turn into an accusation against him. This was the fact that Jacob had married two sisters while both were alive. He should not have done so, since the patriarchs had accepted for themselves the laws of the Torah which had not yet been officially formulated. Nachmanides writes about this at length in his commentary on Genesis 26, 5 where the Torah credits Abraham with having observed all of G–d's statutes. According to Nachmanides the patriarchs assumed this obligation as valid only while they resided in the land of Israel; the word מפשט used in the verse is by definition legislation that varies from country to country. G–d's משפטים apply only in G–d's country, ארץ ישראל. When Jacob married two sisters he did not live in the land of Israel. Samael's accusation was by necessity based on the yardsticks that Jacob claimed to live by. He argued that a man of Jacob's stature whose features were engraved on G–d's throne should not have taken advantage of the fact that technically he was allowed to marry two sisters, for did he not carry the atmosphere of ארץ ישראל with him wherever he went? We are familiar with such expressions as אבק רבית, something not actually an interest payment but nonetheless giving the impression that someone rendered a service for free which would have been charged for had the recipient of the service not been a lender to the person rendering the service. We have a similar expression when dealing with the laws of לשון הרע, evil gossip. The Tosephta Avodah Zarah 1, 10 describes four areas in which the term אבק is used halachically. All of them are not transgressions that are dealt with by the Courts, but are matters of individual piety. When the Talmud described the "dust" of the struggle between Jacob and the guardian angel of Esau as having risen to the throne of G–d, what is meant is that the issue was such a paralegal impropriety committed by Jacob as marrying two sisters outside the boundaries of ארץ ישראל.
  Since the commission of even such a "shade of an impropriety" can harm the public image of someone perceived as a צדיק, Jacob had to be punished. Dinah was raped, i.e. became someone's sex partner without benefit of the holy state of matrimony. Her brothers described such relations as only being conducted with a harlot, i.e. that only harlots were sexually violated (34, 31). The episode in which Reuben is described as having slept with Bilhah (35, 22) is also perceived as an indirect result of the flaw in Jacob's piety discovered by the guardian angel of Esau.
  To return to our main subject: that imperfections in this world are reflected by disturbances of the harmony in the Celestial Regions. The dislocation experienced by Jacob in his thigh joint had its impact in the "higher" world. If the episode foreshadows the destruction of the terrestrial Temple, it also foreshadows the negative vibes of that event felt in Heaven. Our sages state that the מצוה of ציצית alludes to all 613 commandments visually by means of the blue thread which symbolizes the sea, which in turn symbolizes the sky which in turn symbolizes the throne of G–d (Jerusalem Talmud Berachot 1, 2 on Numbers 15, 39). Our sages also hint that the examples quoted allude to three distinctions Israel acquired as a result of its cleaving to G–d. Jacob achieved these distinctions first and Israel later on.
  Jacob attained the distinction of ים, seeing that he said of himself כי במקלי עברת את הירדן הזה, "Originally I crossed this river Jordan with no more than my walking staff." Bereshit Rabbah 76, 5 states that the crossing of the Sea of Reeds by the Israelites became possible through the merit acquired by Jacob when he crossed the Jordan on his way to Laban, relying only on G–d for he was bereft of material possessions. Jacob merited the horizon of the sun, (רקיע), that the sun set or shone especially for him, as we know from Genesis 32, 32: "The sun shone for him." Jacob also merited a special relation with the "throne" of G–d in that we have a tradition that his features were engraved on it. 
  Jacob's descendants merited the same advantages in due course. They experienced that the sea was split for their sake, and they witnessed the "great hand" of G–d at work (Exodus 14, 31). Israel merited the “רקיע” when G–d descended to Mount Sinai traversing all seven Heavenly Regions each known as a different רקיע at the time He gave them the Torah, commencing His revelation with the words: "I am the Lord your G–d who has taken you out of Egypt" (Midrash Hagadol Exodus 19, 20 – slightly different wording). Israel's relationship with G–d's throne is alluded to in Jeremiah 17, 12: כסא כבוד מרום מראשון מקם מקדשנו, "O Throne of Glory exalted from of old, our sacred Shrine". The "throne" mentioned is the throne of G–d in His Heaven. The same prophet wrote in Lamentations 2, 1: (after the destruction of the Temple) ‘השליך משמים ארץ תפארת ישראל, "He cast down from Heaven to Earth the majesty of Israel." Our sages in Eicha Rabbah 2,2 commented on this verse: G–d said: "The only reason you have the audacity to annoy Me is the fact that Jacob's features are engraved on My throne; Here I fling it down in your faces!" At that point in time, the letter כ in the ירך of Jacob became dislocated. The three letters in the word ירך, thigh, are the respective first letters of the words ים, רקיע, כסא. The dislocation of Jacob's thigh joint is an allusion to the dislocation of G–d's throne. The numerical value of the word כף in the expression כף ירך יעקב, is 100. It is an allusion to the letter ק which is written smaller in Rebeccah's exclamation קצתי בחיי, in Genesis 27, 46. We had explained previously that that was an allusion to the destruction of the Temple as foreseen by Rebeccah. Allegorically speaking, if one removes the letter ק from Jacob's name, one is left only with יעב, meaning a cloud which blocks out the sun and the daylight. This is the deeper meaning of Jeremiah in Lamentations 2, 1: איכה יעיב באפו א-דני את בת ציון, "How has the Lord shamed (brought dark clouds) the daughter of Zion in His wrath." The prophet refers to the former distinction of Israel having been flung to earth. 
  Continuing the allegory, Jacob, "concealed" the letter ע in his name when he crossed the river יבק, (which is יעקב minus the letter ע), as reported in 32, 23: ויעבר את מעבר יבק. The Kabbalists say that the remaining letters of his name, i.e. י-ב-ק stand for יעננו ביום קראנו, "May He respond to us on the day we call upon Him." The letter ע is "swallowed up," concealed in the word יעננו. Since the letter ע, when following the letter י, is practically not heard, it supplements the word יבק as if the former had been spelled יעקב. The expression יעננו ביום קראנו can then be perceived as a call by Jacob. I have elaborated elsewhere on the numerical value of the word ויעבור being equivalent to the Ineffable Four-Lettered Name being spelled in words i.e. 72 + 216, both permutations of the name of G–d.
  Samael's effectiveness in our world is through his nation which dominates Israel in exile due to its sins. He is thus able to cause a פגם, a flaw, in the harmony in the "higher" world. I have explained in פרשת חיי שרה that Samael has roots in the higher emanations. I explained there the dual nature of Samael and how it is reflected in the word פלג-שם, the concubines of Abraham. Samael is at one and the same time an angel, something holy, and also the source of death, evil. 
  Keeping this in mind, we can understand the statements of Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmeini in Chulin 91a who says that Samael appeared to Jacob as a pagan, whereas Rav Shmuel bar Acha thought that Samael appeared to Jacob in the guise of a Torah scholar. These two views need not conflict with one another, Considering the impurity that radiates from Esau, Samael appeared like a pagan; considering the holiness that radiates from the angelic aspect of Samael, he appeared like a Torah scholar. Just as the features of Jacob are engraved on the throne of G–d, so the features of Esau must be perceived as engraved on Samael. More than once in Scripture are Torah scholars equated with angels, to quote only וישלח מלאך ויוציאנו, "G–d sent an angel and he took us out” (Numbers 20,16, the angel being Moses). Rashi, commenting on that verse, also quotes Chronicles 11, 36, 16: ויהיו מלעיבים במלאכי האלהים, "They insulted the "angels" of G–d," as referring to the prophets. At that particular time, Samael decided to don human garments in order to wrestle with Jacob physically. After Jacob had bested him, Samael concealed the evil part of himself and became a "good" angel. In that latter capacity he confirmed that Jacob had deserved Isaac's blessing and then himself blessed him. As soon as that happened, peace between Jacob and Esau was restored in our world. 
  There is another mystical dimension to the love between Esau and Jacob, or to love generally. Under certain conditions the feeling of love for something may transform evil into good and the קליפה, unworthy outer shell, may be transformed into something sacred. This is the very dimension which enables people to convert from paganism to Judaism. Our sages have connected this phenomenon with the גיד הנשה, when they explained Genesis 32, 27 where Samael says: "Let me depart, for dawn has come." Chulin 91a, has Jacob ask the angel: "Are you a thief or a gambler that you shun daylight? Samael responded that he was an angel and that from the day he had been created he had not had an opportunity to sing G–d's praises in the heavenly choir until that very day. Rashi interprets the word <i>kubiestous</i> in the Talmud to mean "soul snatcher." [I have translated it as "gambler." Ed.] There is a profound meaning in Rashi's comment, since souls are viewed as oppressed and held hostage by Samael. The Zohar in Parshat Mishpatim comments on this subject.
  [Before quoting any part of that Zohar, it is necessary to understand that the whole paragraph at the beginning of פרשת משפטים where the Torah describes a father as selling his daughter into service to a Jewish "master,” is treated as being allegorical. The "father" is perceived to be G–d, the "Jewish maid servant,” a Jewish soul. The period of service, 6 years, and the significance of the seventh year is seen as the difference between different kinds of souls, i.e. whether those souls originated in the emanation, or rather super-emanation אצילות or in a lower emanation. A discussion between Rabbi Shimon and the "Saba" takes place, in which the latter differentiates between such nuances as the ordinary priest, the High Priest, etc, and he uses this as proof that souls too, though originating in holy domains, do not all originate in the same domain. The task of such souls on earth, when inhabiting a body, varies accordingly. The interested reader will be well advised to read the entire section of the Zohar from the beginning of the portion Mishpatim until the section quoted. Ed.] Now to the quote from the Zohar: "Here we have the secret of the souls who are 'violated,' forced into various types of reincarnations on earth. In this world all conduct is based on the mystique of the tree of knowledge of 'good' and 'evil,' i.e. the lowest of the emanations מלכות. When people in this world conduct themselves properly, the scales are weighted down on the right side, the 'good' side of the tree. When people do not behave properly, the scales on the left side of the tree, i.e. the 'evil' side, are weighted down. All the souls that at that moment are on the scales of the left side, Samael 'oppresses,’ i.e. acquires. In the discussion portrayed in the section of the Zohar between the "Saba" and other scholars [or scholarly books], the latter seem to hold that the souls that Samael gets hold of are those of righteous Gentiles as well as those of Torah scholars whose parents entered a forbidden marital union and begat such Mamzerim. The souls of such people are assumed to be subject to the power of Lilith or Samael. The other view holds that the souls that are "acquired" by Samael are the ones of people who have died as minors. 
  No doubt both views are correct. Sometimes Samael acquires the souls of the former, on other occasions he acquires the souls of the latter. When Jacob asked Samael whether he was a thief or gambler that he had to shun daylight, he referred to the two situations possible. Lilith is the power that is active and exerts power only at night. When Lilith oppresses the souls at night and hands them over to gentile powers, this is the "soul snatching type of thievery" that is meant by Rashi. The souls that are being abducted are the souls of Jews who have died as minors.
  The premature death of minors is connected with the spiritual preparations a husband undergoes before sexual union with his wife. From every such [successful] union a soul is created, i.e. released from G–d's store of souls. If both father and mother at the time of their union were keenly aware of the sacred nature of the commandment they were performing, then the soul released from such emanation by the parents on earth will retain its original state of holiness and purity, if the parents failed to permeate their act of union with an awareness of the holy task they were performing, then that soul may be assigned to Lilith. This is what is meant by Job 3, 3: והלילה אמר הורה גבר, "And 'night' announced a male has been conceived." Our sages in Nidah 16 say that the angel that has been given domain over conceptions is called Laylah; when the parents have not sanctified themselves, however, Lilith oppresses, for the conception originated in the domain of זנונים, gratuitous self-gratification of the flesh. This brings us back to the weak spot in man, i.e. the גיד הנשה. 
  Samael replied to Jacob that he was an angel and that the time had come for him to say שירה, i.e. praise G–d as part of the Heavenly Choir. He revealed to Jacob that at that time in his career as opposed to other times, he was performing the part that is considered the "good" part. Hence he could now join the choir.
  Jacob's two demands on the angel, 1) to bless him, and 2) to reveal his name, were based on the dual nature of Esau or Edom respectively in this world and of Samael in the parallel regions in the Heavens. When keeping this factor in mind, all the apparent linguistic problems, duplications in the text, etc. resolve themselves.
  On (32, 4): וישלח יעקב מלאכים לפניו אל עשו אחיו ארצה שעיר שדה אדום,"Jacob sent angels (resp. human messengers) ahead of him to his brother Esau to the land of Se'ir," Rashi comments that these were "real" angels. If that were so, it is difficult to understand Jacob making use of holy beings for a secular, totally private mission. He could just as well have sent human messengers! We have an explicit ruling that even nowadays, when the כהן cannot perform sacred duties due to the absence of the Temple, one must not employ a כהן to perform mundane tasks. How then could Jacob employ angels for such a purpose? (gloss of the Mordechai on Gittin).
  Why did the Torah offer two definitions of the land of Se-ir, i.e. "the land of Se'ir, the field of Edom?" Some commentators feel that by the reference to the land of Se'ir [seeing it alludes to hairiness] the Torah wanted to convey that Jacob had reason to fear Esau because of the hairy skins of the goats he had used to cover his smooth skinned arms when he misrepresented himself before his father in order to obtain Esau's blessing (cf.27, 16). With the reference to the "field of Edom" [the red one] on the other hand, the Torah alluded to the red dish Jacob had cooked at the time Esau sold the birthright (25, 30). Jacob now wanted to pacify Esau concerning both incidents. However, this is merely a homiletic approach to the repetitions we find here.
  The Torah continues its report with: ויצו אותם לאמור "כה תאמרון לאדני, לעשו, עם לבן גרתי".” Here we again encounter duplication such as לאמור, כה תאמרון. "He commanded them to say: Thus you shall say: 'I have sojourned with Laban.’" Why do we need twice "to say?" Why does Jacob suddenly omit Esau's title saying instead of לאדני לעשו, לאדני עשו? Previously he was reported as sending the angels to "my lord Esau;" now the Torah merely reports Jacob as telling the angels to address "Esau." Why the change in wording?
  Rashi offers two explanations of the meaning of the words: עם לבן גרתי. The two explanations of Rashi are almost direct opposites of one another. First Rashi understands the word גרתי as derived from the root גר, stranger, and Jacob stressed that he had not achieved a socially important position during all these years away from home. In his second explanation Rashi tells us that the word גרתי has a numerical value of 613, and that Jacob hinted that despite his prolonged stay in the house of a sinner such as Laban, he had maintained his religious tradition to the fullest, and observed all the commandments of the Torah. Rashi provides a dual meaning for Jacob's words even where the Torah had not bothered to make Jacob appear as if he were repeating himself.
  
  Next we read in 32, 8: ויירא יעקב מאד, ויצר לו “Jacob was very much afraid, he was distressed;" Rashi comments on this by taking a different approach from us. 
  In verse 10 of the same chapter, Jacob spoke first about "the G–d of my father Abraham and the G–d of my father Isaac;" previously in 31, 53, however, he had spoken about פחד יצחק, as Isaac's G–d.
  Rashi gives two explanations for Jacob's statement: כי במקלי עברתי את הירדן הזה "For I have crossed this river Jordan with nothing but my walking staff." The two comments by Rashi again seem to contradict each other. First Rashi says that "I had no silver and gold with me, only my staff." Then Rashi quotes a homiletic commentary in which that very staff is described as possessing miraculous power to split the river so that Jacob might cross it. In the first explanation Jacob emphasized his inferior material condition, whereas in Rashi's second explanation the emphasis is on Jacob's spiritual powers and superiority.
  In 32, 12, Jacob asks G–d: 1) "Save me from my brother, 2) from Esau." Again an apparent repetition. 
  Next he says that he is afraid that "he will smite me, mother and children." Why is the word "mother" in the singular? The Torah should have written: "mothers with their children." Bereshit Rabbah 76, 6 understands Jacob's words as an appeal to G–d who has written in His Torah "you must not take the mother bird (singular) together with the fledglings" (Deut. 22, 6). This too must be viewed as a strictly homiletic approach. 
  Next we find a similar duplication when Jacob instructs the shepherds leading the flocks of gifts Jacob sent to Esau how to respond to the queries he expects Esau to pose. He expects Esau to ask: למי אתה, ואנה תלך, ולמי אלה לפניך? "Whose are you and where are you headed, and whose are the flocks that are ahead of you" (32, 18)? Why all this cumbersome language? 
  Another duplication is found in the answer these shepherds are instructed to give Esau, i.e: לעבדך, ליעקב "to your servant, to Jacob." Had the reply been לעבדך יעקב, "to your servant Jacob," we would not see in this any form of duplication. 
  The same kind of language recurs in verse 21, when the gift is described as לאדוני, לעשו, "for my lord, for Esau." 
  Another peculiarity is found when the angel tells Jacob that in the future (at Bet El in 35, 9) he will be known as "Israel," suggesting that at this time he was still only "Jacob" (32, 29). We find, however, that in 33, 20 and 34,7 Jacob is already described as ישראל. Rashi comments on the former, that the name ישראל did not refer to the altar he had built, but that he employed this name as being his own. He built the altar to the G–d א-ל who had named him ישראל. This is strange since the Torah did not yet report G–d as having changed Jacob's name. This commentary does not take into consideration that the Torah reports the change of Jacob's name to be effective only after chapter 35, 10. If we accept the interpretation of the Talmud in Megillah 18, that we learn from this verse that G–d i.e. אל-הי ישראל, called Jacob “א-ל,” we have no problem: Jacob had already been renamed at the time the Torah was recorded in writing. We have to solve the difficulty in Rashi's commentary by saying that when the Torah reported Jacob as arriving שגם, "whole" in body, spirit and economic strength in 33, 18, that his thigh joint had healed, that he was free from both Esau and Laban, which were the troubles that Samael had referred to when he acknowledged that Jacob had fought man and G–d and prevailed When Jacob assumed the title "Israel" for himself, this was not an act of arrogance on his part, but on the contrary, it was an acknowledgment to G–d that his achievements were not due to his righteousness and physical prowess but to the blessing he had received from the angel (who represented Samael and who at one time had been the agent of forces called קליפה). Having said all this, this still leaves us with the problem why Jacob was referred to as ישראל, in connection with the rape of Dinah in 34, 7 where the foul deed was described as something that must not be perpetrated "in Israel."
  Let me now pursue my own path in explaining all the unusual phrasings in the text as listed earlier. According to the author of Bereshit Rabbah 74,4 the מלאכים sent ahead by Jacob were of the flesh and blood variety; unnamed other scholars claim that they were angels. Remember that the struggle between Jacob and his adversary occurred on two levels, the physical and the spiritual, with Esau in this world and with Samael in the Celestial Regions. The latter had an excuse to challenge Jacob's moral integrity for Jacob had married two sisters, as explained. We have mentioned that though Jacob had a legal excuse for what he did, it was not considered appropriate for a man of his stature, whose features were engraved on G–d's throne, to avail himself of such an excuse. Jacob's name on G–d's throne made a profound impression in the Celestial Regions. We know from the description in Chulin 91 that in Jacob's dream the two angels ascending and the two angels descending compared the features engraved on the throne of G–d with the features of Jacob on earth. They threatened Jacob's life because they found discrepancies between the respective features. As a result, G–d quickly intervened and placed Himself on top of the ladder in order to protect Jacob.
  Those Rabbis who declared that the emissaries Jacob dispatched were angels, and those who claimed that they were human beings, were all correct. The messengers dispatched on earth to report to Jacob on Esau's plans and attitude were human, whereas the messengers sent out to see how Samael felt were angels of the Celestial Regions. Jacob sent out angels to confront those angels who were jealous of his image being engraved on G–d's throne. Jacob's purpose in dispatching human messengers down here on earth was to humble himself before Esau with words and to show Esau that he accepted him as master. This is why every utterance addressed to Esau was one of submission. The purpose of dispatching angels to the Celestial Regions, on the other hand, was the reverse. There Jacob pointed to his moral and ethical merits, his moral superiority over his accuser, Samael. Jacob spoke very confidently and self-assuredly in his confrontation with his celestial accuser (Example: "I have stayed these many years with the wicked Laban and have maintained my spiritual integrity").
  It is even possible to understand the word מלאכים as the very merits which Jacob had accumulated. He "sent" these ahead of him to impress any would-be accuser in the Heavenly Regions. We have a tradition that every good deed in this world creates an angel, whereas every sin creates a destructive force. This idea is expressed in Isaiah 58,8: והלך לפניך צדקך, "Your righteousness will walk ahead of you." The word "in front of him" in 32, 4, may well allude to this, seeing that the word is apparently redundant. It would have been enough for the Torah to write: "Jacob sent messengers to Esau."
  The words ארצה שעיר, שדה אדום, allude to both the physical and the spiritual domain. ארצה שעיר is an allusion to Samael, whose share in the world is the שעיר, the goat or scape-goat, which is offered to him "as a bribe" on the Day of Atonement, as will be explained in due course. Another reason he is called Se'ir is that Samael is identical with Satan, or the evil urge; to his people [those who are held in his sway, Ed.] he appears like a שער, as thin and insignificant as a hair. The message is that for צדיקים Mount Se-ir, i.e. the threat of the evil urge, looms large as a mountain, whereas for the sinners it appears as insignificant as a hair. To carry this hyperbole a little further: When the Torah described Esau-Edom-Se'ir as completely covered with hair, (25,25) this is an allusion to his being as full of sins as a fur coat is full of hair. When the Torah also described the destination of Jacob's emissaries as שדה אדום, it merely described Esau=Edom their destination on earth.
  These words introduce a single speech directed both at terrestrial Esau and at his celestial representative. To make this plain, the Torah employed the letter ל "to" twice; the word לאדוני refers to the celestial representative of Esau, the word לעשו, to Esau here on earth. We must not be surprised that Jacob addressed Samael as אדון, although he represented an alien deity. The address אדון was aimed at the holy part of Samael, for he originated in holy regions. The residue of that holiness still hovers over Samael. I have already indicated that this paragraph and the gifts to Esau described in it are to be viewed as similar to the scapegoat offered by the Jewish people to Azazel on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16,10). During that procedure, there similarly were two approaches. One goat was offered on the altar in the Temple, the other was consigned to a barren region and was killed by having its neck broken. The decision which goat was to serve as the scapegoat was determined by means of a lot. The very fact that the lot could have fallen on either animal means that each could have been chosen as the one to be offered on the altar. This proves that the impression was created that the servant (Samael) was treated on a par with his Master, with G–d. Jacob did something similar when he sent out gifts to terrestrial Esau. Esau assumed that the gifts were in his personal honor, and that he had been elevated, as it were, to eat at the King's (G–d's) table. I will elaborate on this later.
  עם לבן גרתי . Both the explanations we have quoted from Rashi are correct. The human messengers that went to meet Esau spoke humbly, submissively. They told Esau that in all those long years Jacob had not risen to a position of social or political eminence; he had remained an alien, and it was therefore not worth Esau's while to be envious of or antagonistic to a nobody such as Jacob had remained. The message that Jacob conveyed to Samael in the Celestial Regions via his מלאכים ממש, "real angels," however, was quite different. To Samael he stressed that in all the years with the wicked Laban he had not slackened in his observance of the 613 (numerical value of גרתי) commandments. By emphasizing that he had sojourned with Laban, he also hinted that any suggestion of impropriety committed on his part when he married two sisters was not valid, since this had occurred outside ארץ ישראל.
  ויהי לי שור וחמור . This statement has to be understood at face value when it was addressed to Esau in line with Rashi's explanation that, whereas in Isaac's blessing Jacob was promised "dew from the heavens and the fat parts of the earth," i.e. success as a farmer, he had in fact only acquired herds. Esau had no reason to be jealous, since that part of Isaac's blessing had not been fulfilled. The same words put in the mouth of Jacob's spiritual emissaries convey a different meaning, however. These words allude to a number of merits Jacob had acquired and that would accrue to him in the future. They correspond very much to Bereshit Rabbah 75,6 which explains that the word שור refers to the כהן משוח מלחמה, the priest who accompanied the troops into battle (Deut. 20,2). The Midrash bases this on Moses' blessing to the tribe of Joseph in Deut. 33, 17: בכור שורו הדר לו, "His firstling bullock, majesty is his." The word חמור is understood as a reference to the Messiah who traditionally is perceived as riding on a donkey, based on Zachariah 9, 9: עני ורוכב על החמור. The צאן, flock, that Jacob also mentions refers to the people of Israel who are repeatedly called צאני"My flock," by G–d in Ezekiel 34. The words עבד ושפחה also refer to Israel as the latter are alluded to in that manner in Psalms 123, 2.
  Other Rabbis in that Midrash add that the "ox" is a reference to Joseph, that the "donkey" is a reference to Issachar who is described in terms of a patient and hard working donkey in Jacob's blessings in Genesis 49,14. Joshua, a direct descendant of Joseph, would defeat Amalek in battle. The sons of Issachar, steeped in Torah study, know how G–d rules His universe. This is why the emissaries they sent to attend the crowning of King David are referred to as יודעי בינה לעתים, (Chronicles I 12, 33) "who know how to interpret the signs of the times." At that point in history they knew what was required from the people of Israel. The עבד and שפחה may allude to David and Abigail. A Biblical allusion is also cited for this. Thus far the Midrash.
  Jacob mentioned the merits of Israel as such, singling out a few individuals as examples of the outstanding people who would be part of his offspring. The reason he singled out David rather than Moses, although the latter too has been described as עבד ה' a true servant of the Lord, is because David or his namesake the Messiah is the ultimate purpose of G–d's creation, signalling a time when the whole function of Samael to act as an accuser would become defunct.
  There is a special reason why the Midrash chose Abigail to serve as an example of the merits that would be acquired by Jacob's descendants. I have found something on the subject in the writings of the Arizal The latter comments on Hoseah 12, 13: ויעבוד ישראל באשה, ובאשה שמר. "There Israel served for a wife; for a wife he had to guard (sheep). I have mentioned elsewhere that Abgail was the mystique or re-incarnation of Leah. I have explained that during the first union of man and wife, the male deposits a spiritual essence -רוח- within the womb of his wife, something which does not leave the body of his wife even at her death. The implications of this idea are elaborated on by the "Saba" in the Zohar on Parshat Mishpatim (Sullam edition page 34). We can see that in the case of Jacob, who deposited this spiritual essence in Rachel, he did experience the emergence of a Benjamin, whose birth the Torah described in the following words: ויהי בצאת נפשה כי מתה ותקרא שמו בנימין. "It happened when her soul left her, for she was about to die…she called his name Benjamin." [This is the version in the author's quote of the Arizal; I am aware of the true reading in the Torah. Ed.] The spiritual essence which Jacob had deposited within Rachel was called “נפשה,” and became Benjamin. The spirit Jacob had deposited within Leah during his first union with her, however, remained within her, and eventually became Abigail. [This is an explanation of the theory that nothing is ever lost in this world, and that semen that does not fertilize will eventually perform its allocated task. When you pursue this idea in the Zohar you will find that the levirate marriage is based on the brother of the deceased being able to access this residue of his deceased brother's spirit in the womb of the widow of his brother's wife. Ed.] The child emerging from this spiritual essence was expected to be a male. Since however, "Israel had served for a wife," he found afterwards that he had indeed guarded sheep for "a woman."
  There is another explanation, basically along the same lines. We have already explained that Jacob represented the "beauty of Adam," i.e. a human being at its highest spiritual level. He guarded the flocks of Laban for twenty-two years. All this was in order to extract the two good "drops" (of semen) Laban had ever emitted, i.e the ones from which Leah and Rachel were born. These two drops of semen were the ones that were emitted by Adam and had become mixed with the semen which the serpent had injected into Eve when he had mated with her in גן עדן. [The serpent's part of the semen produced the likes of Laban. Ed.] Similarly, David, who was the re-incarnation of Adam, had to become a shepherd of the flocks belonging to Naval (Abigail's first husband) in order to extract from Naval another drop of semen which had not yet been fertilised, and was latent within Abigail's womb. This is the mystical dimension of Abigail. The original serpent, represented in David's time by Naval, who in turn was the re-incarnation of Laban, possessed the spiritual power to retrieve the spiritual essence Jacob had deposited within Leah. When David appeared on the scene of history, he took Abigail from Naval, [she became David's wife after Naval's death.] David had to guard the sheep of Naval, just as Jacob had to guard the sheep of Laban. This is the hidden meaning of Samuel I 25, 16: חומה היו עלינו גם לילה גם יומם כל ימי היותנו רעים הצאן. "They were a wall about us both by night and by day, all the time we were with them tending the flocks." Thus far the Arizal.
  "The emissaries returned to Jacob." This refers to the human as well as to the spiritual emissaries. The spiritual emissaries told Jacob: באנו אל אחיך, "We have come to your brother, whereas the human emissaries told him: אל עשו, "To Esau." He is also coming to meet you;" this was said by the emissaries sent to the Celestial Regions who reported about Samael. וגם ארבע מאות איש עמו; "and he also has four hundred men with him." This was reported by the human messengers who had been despatched to Esau.
  "He was afraid and distressed;" the former was due to Jacob's fear that the accuser in the Celestial Regions might have come across sins committed by Jacob that he had not been aware of. He was also afraid that Esau's merit in having performed the commandment of honouring father and mother during all the years Jacob had not performed it might now support him. We find that Moses too was afraid before engaging Og, King of Bashan, in battle, fearing that the merit of Abraham might assist Og, as explained by Rashi on Numbers 21,34. [The merit of Og referred to must be that he became instrumental in Abraham saving Lot, by having told him that the latter had been taken prisoner, even though that had hardly been Og's motive, as Rashi himself explains on Genesis 14, 13. Ed.] Bereshit Rabbah 76, 1, quoting Rabbi Pinchas, understands our verse in a similar vein. "There were two people who had received specific assurances from G–d, and still they were reported as being afraid. One is the choicest of the patriarchs, Jacob, to whom G–d had said: "I shall be with you;" in the end we nonetheless find him afraid of his upcoming encounter with Esau, seeing the Torah says: ויירא יעקב. The other person was the choicest of the prophets, Moses. G–d had told him "for I shall be with you" (Exodus 3,12). Still, we find G–d had to tell him in Numbers 21: "Do not be afraid of him (Og)." G–d certainly would not have bothered to reassure Moses had he not been afraid, (though the Torah did not report this as a fact). Thus far the Midrash. 
  From the above we have to learn an important lesson. If such outstanding people as Jacob and Moses had reason to fear success in a dangerous encounter due to some sin they might have been guilty of, how much more do we ordinary mortals have reason to be concerned about sins we may be unaware of. This "fear" of Jacob concerned the perennial accuser Samael. "He was distressed," was the emotion that governed him vis-a-vis Esau. 
  Afterwards (32, 10) Jacob prayed to the "G–d of my father Abraham and the G–d of my father Isaac who has said to me: 'return to your country and birthplace, etc.'" Rashi mentions that G–d had given Jacob two assurances, one at the time he had left his father's home at Beer Sheva, and the second when He told Jacob to return home and that He would be with him. On the latter occasion, G–d appeared to him using only the four-lettered ineffable name י-ה-ו-ה. The first assurance was clearly meant to reassure Jacob concerning his dealings with Laban and Esau, whereas the latter was to fortify Jacob against the fear of Samael. The very use of this name by G–d meant that Jacob had access to a dimension of G–d not available to the Gentile nations whose fate is guided by the attribute אל-הים, meaning agents or deputies of G–d such as the שרים. Jacob pointedly referred to both these assurances in his prayer.
  My merit has been depleted by all the favors and the fulfillment of Your promises." According to Rabbi Aba in Bereshit Rabbah 76,5 the word קטונתי, means that Jacob felt unworthy of all the favors he had experienced at the hands of G–d. Rabbi Levi, however, feels that Jacob had felt entitled to receive favors, but had exhausted his merits by so doing. Both Rabbis are quite correct. Jacob's remarks expressed both his feelings vis-a-vis Esau and his feelings vis-a-vis Samael. Concerning his standing vis-a-vis Esau, Jacob expressed concern that the very favors he had experienced up to now might place him in a disadvantageous position, for Esau had not been recompensed for his merits. We know from Shabbat 32a that a miracle performed for someone draws on his accumulated merits. The Talmud derives this principle from our verse. Rashi understands the verse in the latter sense. We must conclude that Jacob appealed to G–d at this point to perform a miracle for him now too, in order to save him from Esau. When he invoked the four-lettered Name of G–d, we see a similarity to Psalms 20, 8: ’אלה ברכב ואלה בסוסים ואחנו בשם ה' אלוקינו נזכיר, "They (call) on chariots, they (call) on horses, but we call on the name of the LORD our G–d," for true salvation is G–d's domain. Not feeling morally entitled, Jacob pleaded with G–d to perform the miracle for the sake of His Name. Regarding his imminent confrontation with Samael, however, he said: קטונתי מכל האמת, he invoked his own specific attribute of “אמת,” as we have explained repeatedly in connection with Michah 7,20: תתן אמת ליעקב, "You will keep faith with Jacob." This attribute is a reference to the Torah which is known as תורת אמת, in other words the Torah was given to the people of Israel through this attribute of Jacob. According to the Kabbalists the Torah originates in the upper regions of Heaven, a region where the attribute of Jacob is at home. Jacob is described in the Torah as being איש תם, "a perfect individual residing in the 'tents' of Torah” (Genesis 25,27). The expression קטונתי, "I am too insignificant, too unworthy," may be understood better when we compare it to the last Mishnah in tractate Sotah 49, where we are told that after the death of Rabbi Yossi the “קטנותא,” there were no longer any men deserving the title "the pious one." If Rabbi Yossi was so pious, why does the Mishnah refer to him as "the little one?" According to Rashi the meaning is that Rabbi Yossi was the least pious of all the pious men preceding him. According to Maimonides it means that Rabbi Yossi was the "root" of all the pious men, and the root is by nature something that has small beginnings. Jacob then alluded to the process of attaining significance as being one that commences by one's being small, קטן. This is also why Jacob is popularly known as יעקב הקטן, "little Jacob." In his entreaty to G–d to save him from Samael, Jacob referred to this when he said: קטונתי. When Rabbi Levi said in the Midrash that Jacob meant: "I was deserving, he meant "but now I have become 'small' seeing that my merits may have been used up."
  כי במקלי עברתי את הירדן . Rashi understands this to be a reference to the fact that Jacob did not have either silver or gold with him. He used these words vis-a-vis Esau in order to convince him that he, Jacob, had not seen his father's blessing fulfilled, just as Rashi explained earlier when Jacob had acknowledged to be the owner of flocks, herds, men servants and maid servants. ועתה הייתי לשני מחנות, "now I have become two camps," was meant to also show that none of this wealth was related to the blessings bestowed on him by Isaac. Rashi adds a homiletic explanation, that the "staff" that Jacob had crossed the Jordan with was endowed with the power to split the waters of that river for him, and enable him to cross. This indicates that Jacob certainly had great merits. He wanted G–d to remind Samael of this so that the latter should not even entertain the thought of successfully challenging Jacob on moral grounds.
  We have a tradition that in this prayer Jacob invoked a number of G–d's Holy Names. The words כי במקלי, when split into כ-י-ב-מ, are an allusion to the name מכבי which amounts to 72, or the same number as the Ineffable Name spelled as words (יוד-הי-ויו-הי) That name of G–d is derived from the respective first letters in the verse: מי כמוך בא-לים י-ה-ו-ה, Next we have the letters קלי, which are the respective first letters of the verse: לישועתך קויתי י-ה-ו-ה.
  הצילנו נא מיד אחי, מיד עשו . The first half of this verse is addressed to G–d concerning the threat from Samael, whereas in the second half Jacob implores G–d to save him from Esau.
  כי ירא אנכי אותו פן יבא והכני אם על בנים . I have already mentioned earlier that ירא refers to concern over a sin or sins committed, i.e. the accusation that would be leveled against him by Samael. The specific sin Jacob had in mind was that of marrying two sisters. This sin in turn might lead to Esau being allowed to kill a mother with her children. Jacob alluded to Rachel as the mother who might be killed; this is why he did not speak about אמהות, "mothers." Jacob's sin, if any, was in marrying Rachel at the time he was already married to her sister Leah. Jacob's having married Leah was certainly no sin – 
  – neither could he be faulted for marrying Zilpah and Bilhah, though the latter were sisters of Leah and Rachel respectively. Since they were both only half-sisters, i.e. shared the same father with Leah and Rachel but not the same mother, and, according to Jewish law, we can never be certain of the paternity of pagans, they could not legally be considered "sisters" (cf. Rashi on Genesis 20,12 where Abraham explained to Avimelech that Sarah was his sister from his father's side). Should you want to know what relevance the question of Jacob marrying two sisters has, seeing that when a person converts to Judaism such a person has legally severed all former relationships, and the convert is considered as being a newly born person, we would have to answer that as long as the Torah had not been given, the Jewish people were part of the general human society and could not claim to be a nation totally distinct from all others. Leah and Rachel then were sisters from their mothers' side. Jacob did have reason to be concerned. G–d did not only accept Jacob's prayer, but it was Rachel's son יוסף הצדיק who became the antidote to Esau. The "mother" that Jacob had worried about as a potential victim of Samael, produced Samael's nemesis.
  You have said: "I will do good good with you." The word הטיב refers to the good G–d would do with Jacob on earth, whereas the word אטיב referred to the good G–d would do for Jacob in the "higher" world.
  "I shall make your descendants to be like the sand (on the beaches) of the sea, which cannot be counted because there is so much of it." The reference to the sand of the sea is to the increase of Jacob's seed in this world, whereas the words: אשר לא יספר, is a reference to the stars in heaven which cannot be counted, and to which G–d had compared the descendants of Abraham at the ברית בין הבתרים in Genesis 15, 5. This was an allusion to the stars and their power.
  Once the Torah has completed giving us details of Jacob's prayer, we next hear details about the gifts Jacob despatched to Esau. These gifts too were intended to placate Esau here on earth and Samael in heaven respectively. As far as the gift to Esau is concerned, the text is to be understood exactly as it meets the eye. As far as a gift to Samael is concerned, we must remember that when the Temple was standing the children of Israel would placate Satan each Day of Atonement by presenting him with the שעיר לעזאזל. What Jacob did was similar. These words too are simple and straightforward as far as the gift to Esau was concerned. As to their meaning vis-a-vis Samael and the forces Samael represents, we view Samael as roving the world looking to entrap man into sin in three ways. Rabbi Akavyah ben Mahallalel has warned us in Avot 3,1 to consider three things in order to avoid being trapped into sinning. When he said: "consider where you come from," this corresponds to the query Jacob assumed that Samael would ask: “למי אתה,” the second question posed by Samael, i.e. “ואנה תלך,” corresponds to Akavyah's "where are you going to?" The third question posed by Samael, “ולמי אלה,” corresponds to Akavyah's third question: "Before whom will you have to give an accounting?" The various מחנות, camps, that are encountered by Samael are collections of "sins," i.e. each sin has created a negative force, whereas each good deed has created a positive force, or "good angel." Jacob faces judgment for the מחנות מלאכי חבלה, groups of destructive angels, which his sins created, if any. Akavyah expressed this by saying: "consider before whom you will have to give an accounting." Any person who does not remember these three questions posed by Akavyah is undoubtedly a sinner. Samael searches out such people.
  When Jacob instructed the men accompanying the gifts to reply: לעבדך ליעקב, "they belong to your servant, to Jacob," the word “ליעקב,” was the reply intended for terrestrial Esau; the word “לעבדך,” was the answer intended to Samael's enquiry for whom the gift was intended. Samael is meant to accept our sins when we send them to him as a gift. This is the whole secret of the שעיר המשתלח, the scapegoat that is dispatched to the desert and has its neck broken on the Day of Atonement.
   The author of Tolaat Yaakov explains the matter in the following words: "G–d has already let us know that He demonstrated His pity for His people by suggesting to us that we perform a number of commandments whose task it is to help save us from our "cousins" the sons of Esau who dwell in the land of Se'ir. One of these מצות is the urgent advice to dispatch the שעיר לעזאזל. We must first understand what happened to Jacob in his fateful encounter with his brother Esau. Such happenings are symbolic of what happened to Jacob's descendants later. Jacob was able to marshal both prayer and gifts as a defense against his accusers; we, his descendants, bereft of the Temple, can only offer prayer, since the venue of sacrifices as well as of the scapegoat has been closed since the destruction of the Temple. Nowadays we compensate by prayer only, i.e. ונשלמה פרים שפתנו, "instead of bulls, we will pay with the offering of our lips" (Hosea 14,3). Jacob engaged in prayer first; only subsequently did he ready the gifts. Prayer symbolizes Jacob in exile, whereas the bringing of gifts symbolizes Jacob after the rebuilding of the Temple.
  When the High Priest performed the service in the Temple on the Day of Atonement, he first confessed the sins of the Jewish people over the scapegoat. We read in Leviticus 16,22: "The scapegoat carries upon it all their iniquities unto a land which is cut off;" in the case of Jacob, the Torah writes: "He took from what had come into his hand, a gift for Esau" (Genesis 32,14). This corresponds symbolically to the sins with which the Jews had dirtied themselves throughout the year, and which were now presented as a gift to our "cousin" Esau, as will be explained. The Torah continues by listing the gifts in detail, commencing with עזים מאתים, two hundred goats, etc. 
  Now we shall understand that what the Torah wrote later in Leviticus concerning the scapegoat was already foreshadowed in the days of the patriarchs. The first appearance of a male goat is on New Year's Day. There is a good reason why that animal was a he-goat, שעיר, and not a she-goat, עז. Kabbalists are quite familiar with the significance of this detail. Matters that originate in the spiritual emanation, (domain) of Samael, the domain in which impurity has its root, develop "downwards" (in the direction of our physical world) in a manner which constantly intensifies their degree of impurity. If the male goat was so named because it is covered with hair, and hair is symbolic of impurity, the female goat has correspondingly longer hair to indiate that it represents a more intense degree of impurity. Conversely, it is symbolic of the anger aroused in Heaven and of the vigour with which judgment of those guilty of such impurity will be pursued. The שר, agent appointed by G–d, is "king" over all these phenomena, his own impurity being of an entirely different nature. His position is closer to the Celestial Sanctuary than that of the forces of impurity further removed from their original holy source. Parts of that שעיר, i.e. Samael, must be perceived as smooth, other parts as hairy. He is not totally smooth-skinned because he contains elements of impurity; he is not covered with hair all over either, because his degree of impurity is not nearly as intense as that of his Satanic underlings in "lower" emanations of the left side. This is why Kabbalists have assigned a positive side to Samael himself, something which is not true of any of the forces that Samael controls.
  There is another mystical aspect to this which is used by בעלי כשוף, those that cast spells and practice sorcery. Their activities do not involve females and perversions involving females. In consideration of this we present Samael with a male goat, acknowledging the fact that he is king in a certain domain and has not wasted his strength on self-gratification of a sexual nature. We treat Samael as if he were still a "son" eating at his father's (G–d's) table. We present two he-goats on the Day of Atonement. Samael does not realize that this very gift serves to remove him from the Sanctuary, the Holy Regions. Samael's experience may be compared to that of Haman whom Esther invited to share the meal she tendered for the king. Haman believed that he received a great distinction, little realizing that he was being set up for a fall. Our gift to Samael on the Day of Atonement is designed to produce a similar effect on him. Just as Haman left the meal with Esther and the king on the first occasion full of joy and self-esteem, so Samael reacts to our gift as if we had acknowledged his authority and the need to placate him. As a result, he does not feel that he could present accusations against people who had shown him that much honor (cf. Esther 5,9). G–d accepts Samael's testimony concerning the overall conduct of the Jewish people, and immediately grants them atonement. G–d "dumps" all of Israel's sins on to the head of Samael, who in turn distributes them among his underlings as described in Micah 7,19: "You will hurl all their (meaning "our") sins into the depths of the sea." Samael is viewed as the ruler of these "depths of the sea." Thus far the Tolaat Yaakov. Jacob's gift to Samael is to be understood in a similar way.
  At this point, the Torah describes how Samael revealed himself when we read ויאבק איש עמו, "a man wrestled with him." The whole paragraph up to and including the blessing that Jacob received from Samael in which he says that Jacob's name will no longer be Jacob but Israel, deals only with the past; Samael was capable of acknowledging that the accusations leveled against Jacob when he took the blessing intended for Esau were unfounded. He called Jacob "Israel," i.e. someone who had gained the upper hand in past encounters. We must certainly not imagine that someone like Samael would grant Jacob blanket recognition for the future. Jacob's right to be called "Israel" was conferred upon him only at Bet El in 35, 9. G–d gave Jacob a blessing at that time which was rooted in the source of all blessings, as I shall explain later.
  וישקהו ויבכו . Rashi quotes different opinions regarding the significance of the dots on the word וישקהו. Some sages in the Sifri believed that these dots are to alert us to the insincerity of the kiss by Esau, whereas Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said (despite the fact that we have an ironclad rule that Esau hated and continues to hate Jacob), in this instance Esau's human emotions were stirred, and he kissed his brother Jacob wholeheartedly. I believe that both views are completely compatible with one another. We must view Esau here on earth as merely the counterpart of Samael in the Heavenly Regions.
  Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 46, describes graphically how the perennial accuser turns advocate for the defence of the Jewish people on the Day of Atonement. He extols the virtues of the Jewish people by comparing them to the ministering angels. The author relates an explanation by his own father who asked how Samael could compare the Jewish people to angels, seeing the latter are not composed of a variety of raw-materials as are humans. Not only that, but whoever has been appointed to be in charge of "good," should stick to his assignment, as Samael's task was to concern himself with "evil," why did he not stick to his allotted task? The answer is that any "good" that comes from Samael is ultimately "evil," whereas any "evil" that appears to originate from a "good" source will ultimately be perceived as "good." The advocacy by someone like Samael is nothing but a hidden accusation. The praises Samael is reported as heaping on Israel in front of G–d on the Day of Atonement, are designed to underline that if Israel but tries to, it can be as holy or holier than the ministering angels. Any failure to live up to such standards is proof of their delinquency. We see that Samael actually remained true to his colours, but he uses a more than usually sophisticated technique on the Day of Atonement.
  I have explained the word סם-אל as being composed of סם, poison, something harmful and of א-ל, something godly, i.e. good and wholesome. We can divide the expression מלאך המות, angel of death, similarly. The מות, i.e. death part of the expression is something negative, whereas the מלאך, i.e. angel part of the word is something good, positive. The good is mixed in with the bad. This is the mystical dimension of Esau's offer in 33, 15: אציגה נא עמך מן העם אשר אתי, "Let me assign you some of the people who are with me." There is a hidden reference in this to the proselytes and their influence on the Jewish people. Esau made this suggestion after Jacob had said to him in verse 14: עד אשר אבא אל אדוני שעירה, "until I come to my lord in Se'ir." Jacob's comment was a reference to Messianic times described in Ovadiah 1, 21, where Israel is described as ascending the mountain of Se'ir, home of Esau, preparing to execute final judgment on Esau. When we look at the respective last letters in the words אבא אל אדוני שעירה, we have the word אליה, as pointed out by Baal Haturim. This was Jacob's reply to Esau's suggestion for his people to convert to Judaism at the time the Messiah would arrive. Jacob hinted that we have a rule that we do not accept converts when there is reason to suspect that these converts only want to reap the benefit of a period of good fortune of the Jewish people (Yevamot 24). Jacob answered at the end of verse 15: למה זה אמצא חן בעיני אדוני The word חן is an allusion to the potential convert's motivation for becoming a גר, proselyte.
  "Jacob journeyed towards Sukkot;" this is a hint that after the offering of the two he-goats (on the day of Atonement), Israel will observe the מצוה, i.e. holiday of tabernacles, which is symbolic of the סכת שלם, "the hut of completion, peace, fulfillment. This is also the meaning of 33, 18: ויבא יעקב שלם, "Jacob arrived intact."
  "There he praised the Almighty G–d of Israel." According to the view of Rabbi Eleazar in Megillah 18, this verse tells us that G–d called Jacob “א-ל”; his reasoning is as follows: – If this were an appellation Jacob had given, then the Torah should have written ויקרא לו יעקב א-ל אלוקי ישראל. The Torah wanted to go on record that Jacob represents only the “א-ל” part of “סמאל” . When we view the struggle between יעקב, who was all א-ל, and Samael, who was only partially א-ל, it is natural that Jacob should have prevailed, i.e. כי שרית עם אלוקים ועם אנשים ותוכל, "You have contended with G–d and with men and have prevailed." This description of a dual encounter refers to the struggle with the terrestrial force of Esau on the one hand, and with the Celestial forces of Esau, i.e. Samael, on the other. The name ישראל fittingly reflects this dual struggle. It is a name conferred upon Jacob by Samael himself, an acknowledgment that Jacob was the bearer of Isaac's blessings. 
  At Bet El, however, G–d Himself named Jacob Israel. Since that time the name Israel assumed an additional dimension, not just a justification of Jacob's conduct in the past. G–d changed Jacob's name to be exclusively Israel in the Celestial Regions in a distant future to signify that then he would triumph over other forces. In the meantime, however, he would bear both names, i.e. the meaning of the name implied by Samael. This is the difference between לא יאמר עוד שמך used by the angel (32, 29) and לא יקרא שמך עוד, used by G–d (35, 10).
  Now we see that Rashi too is correct when he said that Jacob called G–d "You are א-ל," i.e. You are my G–d, because my name is ישראל. The same applies when it is used in connection with the rape of Dinah. At that time Jacob already, relied on the angel's promise that G–d Himself would change his name to ישראל. As ישראל. 
  As long as the angel's prediction about G–d changing Jacob's name had not been fulfilled, Jacob still bore the marks of his nocturnal encounter with Samael on his body. Dinah's rape was the visible effect of the contact with impurity during the encounter in which Jacob's thigh joint was injured. One of his offspring, Dinah, became infected with טומאת מגע, impurity contracted due to contact with something impure, as a direct consequence of her father's physical contact with something impure. The Torah (34,2) describes the rapist as שכם בן חמור החוי. The word החוי is an allusion to the original serpent which is called חויא in Aramaic. We have explained earlier that this נחש, i.e. its power, is active within the ירך, reproductive organs of man, and that this is the connection with the prohibition of the גיד הנשה. Through Dinah's experience, and the incident with Reuben in Bilhah's tent described later in 35,22 (although our sages view Reuben's deed as symbolical rather than actual, Shabbat 55b), any lingering vestige of the serpent's pollution was drained from Jacob, and after that his "bed" could be described as totally pure, or שלימה, in the parlance of our sages. It was at this point that G–d Himself bestowed the name ישראל on Jacob and blessed him.
  If we follow Rashi -who understands the words אלון בכות in 35,8, immediately before the report of G–d changing Jacob's name and blessing him, as a veiled hint that Rebeccah had died- it seems strange that Jacob would experience a Divine vision at a time when he was in mourning for his mother. We have a tradition that one does not experience prophetic visions except when in a state of joy (Midrash Hagadol Vayigash 45, 27). 
  There is an excellent reason that Jacob should have experienced this revelation at the moment he mourned the death of his mother. I first have to explain something about the exalted meaning of the name ישראל, and also something about the name יעקב. On 32,29, Bereshit Rabbah "Your name shall no longer be Jacob but Israel," comments as follows: "This does not mean that the name Jacob was eliminated (as in the case of the name Abram), but it means that the name Jacob would henceforth be only subordinate to the name Israel” Rabbi Zecharyah in the name of Rabbi Chama adds that the name Jacob would continue to exist in any event, but the name Israel would lend it an additional dimension. Both these opinions are compatible with one another.
  Let me first relate an explanation I have heard about the well known statement attributed to Rabbi Yochanan, in Taanit 5b that "our patriarch Jacob did not die." The explanation I heard understands this statement not as something homiletic, but as the פשט. This in spite of the Torah having testified that Jacob's body was embalmed (Genesis 50,2-3). How do we reconcile the statement with the report in the Torah? Jacob had two names, Jacob and Israel. A person having more than one name implies that he commands additional spiritual powers. When Jacob mourned the loss of Joseph, part of his spiritual powers, i.e. the part associated with the name Jacob, departed from him because of the anguish he experienced. As a result all the spiritual powers that he remained with were the ones associated with the name ישראל. He experienced the loss of the spiritual powers associated with the name Jacob when the brothers took Benjamin to Egypt, an action which Jacob described with the words: "You have bereaved me already; Joseph is gone, Shimon is gone, and you would take Benjamin!" (42,36) At that moment Jacob's soul departed. If you will examine the text in the Torah, you will find that the name Jacob is not mentioned any more until he received the message that Joseph was alive. At that time the Torah writes: ותחי רוח יעקב אביהם, "The spirit of their father Jacob was revived" (45,27). In view of what we have just said, how can we account for the Torah's reference to the name Jacob in 45,25 where the brothers are reported as returning to their father Jacob? We may assume that when Joseph revealed himself to his brothers and they all experienced joy, the soul of Jacob began to revive. 
  We see already then that Jacob experienced תחיית המתים, a form of resurrection, and therefore was not slated to die once more. The Jacob part of the Israel-Jacob personality remained alive forever. The body that was embalmed in Egypt and buried belonged to the "Israel" part of that combined personality. This is why the Torah reports in 47, 29: ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות, "The time of Israel's death approached." Jacob, however, remained alive thanks to the life-force נפש that hovered within his earthly shell. Nachmanides alludes to this in his commentary at the end of Parshat Vayechi.
  The Tziyoni elaborates on the theme further. Here is part of his commentary: When our sages are on record that our patriarch Jacob did not die, they understood that his צורה form, body, was clothed in a manner similar to original Adam before his sin. Jacob spends his time roving around in this world trying to be helpful to his people. The meaning of this whole aggadic statement is that the souls of the other righteous people are bundled up in a domain of eternal life without donning any kind of "garment" which would make them perceivable in our world, except on rare occasions, some of which are mentioned in the Talmud. When the spirits of such departed צדיקים make their occasional appearance in this world, having donned some kind of "clothing" to make them visible, this is in order that they may perform certain tasks assigned to them. One such example is reported in Shabbat 152b. Some people were digging in the soil belonging to Rabbi Nachman. In the course of their digging they disturbed the grave of Rabbi Achai bar Yoshiah who expressed his anger vociferously. The diggers reported this to Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Nachman went to the spot and inquired who it was that had expressed this complaint. When he was told by Rabbai Achai that it was he himself, Rabbi Nachman quoted a statement by Rabbi Mori that the righteous return to dust in their graves, so how was it that Rabbi Achai was able to protest from the grave? Rabbi Achai answered: "who is this Mori whom I have never heard of? Rabbi Nachman then quoted a verse from Kohelet 12,7 stating that just as the body returns to dust, the spirit of the righteous returns to G–d. Rabbi Achai countered that whoever had taught Rabbi Nachman Kohelet had evidently failed to teach him Proverbs 14,30: ורקב עצמות קנאה, "only those who have jealousy in their hearts are subject to their flesh rotting away." The Talmud reports other strange phenomena of this kind upon which we will not elaborate. Jacob was able to don "garments" at will just as the prophet Elijah of whom hundreds of appearances in our world have been reported. Whenever the Jewish people are in dire straits Jacob "dons” garments and prays for them. This is what Rabbi Yochanan had in mind when he said in Taanit 5b that he bases himself on scripture (Jeremiah 30,10) "and you My servant Jacob, do not fear Israel; I will deliver you from afar, and your descendants from their land of captivity, and Jacob shall again have calm, etc." In this verse Jacob and his descendants are clearly both referred to as being alive.
  This is the key to the meaning of 32, 29: "Your name will not be said to be Jacob any longer but Israel." We must remember that at birth Jacob was named Jacob because his hand gripped the heel of Esau. Esau interpreted this as referring to עקבה, deception. He exclaimed in Genesis 27, 36: "Is he not rightly called Jacob since he has deceived me already twice?" There is a conceptual relation between what happened at the birth of these twins, what happened when Jacob bought the birthright, and again at the time he secured the blessing. At birth, Jacob did not want Esau to leave the womb first, for he, Jacob, considered himself the בכור, the firstborn. He claimed that distinction because Isaac's first drop of semen resulted in fertilization of the ovum that would produce him (cf. Rashi on 25, 26). Jacob was thus within his rights then when he tried to retrieve what he had been deprived of by resorting to עקבה וערמה, devious ways and trickery. It was Esau who used deviousness already at birth, by forcing his way out of his mother's womb first. What he experienced later at the hands of Jacob was no more than מדה כנגד מדה, tit for tat. Jacob took a leaf out of Esau's book and "donned" Esau's kind of garments. After Jacob died and was resurrected his name "Jacob" assumed a different meaning. Jacob, i.e. "heel," or result, consequence, is an allusion to the eventual permanent world which follows on the heels of the transient world in which the Esaus and their kind feel at home. 
  This is hinted at by Rashi in his comment on "He called his name Jacob," in Genesis 25,26. Rashi states there that the subject in the verse: "He called his name," is G–d Himself. At that point (33,20), G–d's own name applied to Jacob, seeing that after Jacob's "resurrection," what remained of him would be permanent, enduring. 
  We can now understand these verses on two levels. 1) Part of Jacob would die first, and only the Israel part of Jacob would survive. This condition would exist until the news that Joseph was still alive. This is why G–d hinted to Jacob at the time when he mourned the death of his mother that he would experience a punishment for not observing the commandment of honoring father and mother during the twenty-two years he had remained at Laban's. As a matter of fact, Joseph's separation from his father, during which time his father continued mourning for him, lasted twenty-two years (as explained by Rashi on Genesis 37,34, where he refers to Jacob's statement to Laban in 31,41: זה לי עשרים שנה בביתך, "these twenty years I have spent in your house, etc."). Jacob explained to Laban that in the end he would be punished for not having left Laban's house much sooner. According to Rashi the words זה לי, mean that "this is my sin."
  The sin of not honoring his mother was greater than the sin of not honoring his father, since people would curse the belly of a woman such as Rebeccah who had produced an Esau. Nachmanides already pointed out that the Torah does mention the death of Deborah, Rebeccah's nursemaid, whereas it does not mention the death of Rebeccah herself; this was to prevent people from cursing the mother who had given birth to an Esau. Nachmanides believes that to report Rebeccah's death might have been in bad taste, seeing that her favorite son could not attend her funeral whereas her other son Esau hated her. Rebeccah's husband Isaac was blind at the time of her death and could not perform the last rites on her. It would have been insulting to Rebeccah's memory to have the Torah mention that she had to be buried by the local Hittites. Nachmanides claims to have found something along these lines in Devarim Rabbah on Parshat Ki Tetze. Rebeccah was buried at night in order to save her embarrassment because her next of kin did not bury her. This is why Jacob named the tree אלון בכות, (plural instead of בכיה, which would have suggested weeping only for the death of Deborah). [I have not found this Midrash where it is supposed to be. Rabbi Chavell attributes this statement to a Tanchuma. Ed.] In view of these commentaries, we must understand the vision Jacob had at that time as a visit by G–d to Jacob in his capacity as a mourner; G–d simply visited him to console him over the loss of his mother Rebeccah. Knowledge of the fact that Esau was the only one who attended Rebeccah's funeral would cause people to consider Rebeccah as a source of curses. The Torah's main purpose was certainly not to confer honour on Deborah. This is what the allusions in our verse are all about. Thus far Nachmanides. [Actually there is more in Nachmanides. Ed.]We thus find that though G–d's blessing of Jacob-Israel in 35,11 includes a very important prophecy, and accords Israel a hitherto unattainable level of spiritual achievement; conversely it also alludes to a penalty that he will incur as a result of the circumstances surrounding the death of his mother.
  When the Torah, i.e. in the words of Samael, refers to the name Jacob as something that will no longer apply to him but that he will be called Israel (32,29), the reference is to the period after that mentioned in 45,27. Once Jacob's "spirit had been revived,” his name Jacob, when mentioned, had a different connotation. It was his father who had called him by that name originally, because he had held on to Esau's heel. His father had, of course, not entertained the thought that עקב meant something derogatory, such as deviousness. Isaac, when naming Jacob, had looked forward to the time when the Messiah would be king of mankind, a time when Israel would be in its spiritual glory.
  The meaning of the name "Israel" in the future envisioned would not only denote the fact that he had prevailed in a struggle between the forces of evil and of good. At that time, Israel would not compete with evil but with the most highly placed angels. The position of Israel then would be so exalted that angels would address halachic enquiries to Israel. Rashi has mentioned this in connection with Numbers 23,23: כעת יאמר ליעקב ולישראל מה פעל השם, "At such a time Jacob and Israel will be spoken to about what G–d's works are." [my translation reflects the commentary mentioned. Ed.] The name "Israel" also denotes something of eternal value. We have already explained that the first two letters 310-יש, refer to the 310 worlds that every צדיק and צדקת will inherit in the Hereafter, [based on להנחיל אוהבי יש, Proverbs 8,21 Ed.] The remaining letters רלא, are an allusion to the superiority of Israel over the angels, seeing that Israel possesses the merit of having observed the Torah which is based on 22 letters, (alphabet) These 22 letters are 231 gateways, i.e. the permutations constructed from the alphabet as explained in the Sefer Yetzirah. [The second Mishnah in the fifth chapter of the book explains how these permutations are worked; you combine the first letter א, for instance, with all the other 21 letters. The second letter ב, is combined with the remaining 20 letters. The third letter ג, is combined with the remaining 19 letters, etc. By continuing in this fashion you will arrive at a total of 231. Ed.] The name ישראל is a composite of יש+ראל. Jacob had seen an allusion to this already in his dream of the ladder, during the course of which he glimpsed the highest domain of holiness, a dimension of the World to Come. When he lay down, i.e. וישכב, the letters in that word are a composite of יש+כ"ב, the 22 letters of the Aleph Bet. We have elaborated on that theme in its place. When Samael named Jacob ישראל, however, that was not what he had in mind, and that is why Jacob had still suffered from the "touch" (ויגע) during the struggle with Samael even after he had obtained his blessing. This effect also expressed itself in the word וישכב, with which Shechem's rape of Dinah is introduced in 34,2 [It would have been sufficient to merely mention ויענה, "he violated her against her will," the word following וישכב. Ed.]. The same word וישכב is repeated in the Torah's description of Reuben's relations with Bilhah, his father's concubine, in 35,22. Subsequently, however, there was no longer any Nachash (in the sense of serpent) attached to Jacob [play on words of Numbers 23,23 כי לא נחש ביעקב where Bileam describes the virtues of the Jewish people], seeing the name Jacob referred to the World to Come ever since Jacob's spirit was resurrected. This in turn represented an additional spiritual level over and above the one where G–d called Jacob "El," in 33,20. When G–d called Jacob "Isra-el," we must view the "Isra" as an additional dimension to the title "El" that He had already bestowed on him. The numerical value of the word א-ל, is 10% (מעשר) of the numerical value of the word 310) יש). 
  It is well known that the emanation חכמה, wisdom, is the one in which the concept of יש מאין, originates. The emanation חסד, on the other hand, is analogous to א-ל, and Jacob is the common line (common ground) between these two emanations. We have explained on previous occasions that Jacob is not to be perceived of as exactly in the middle between these two emanations, but that he inclines slightly in the direction of חסד. In the future, however, Jacob will elevate himself somewhat further until he can come close to the root of the emanation חסד, i.e. the emanation חכמה, also known as יש. When he reaches that domain, the angels will query: מה פעל א-ל? "What business does Jacob have in our domain?" [alternate interpretation of Numbers 23, Ed.] The angels ask this since they themselves cannot attain a presence in a still higher domain.
  This brings us to an understanding of the Midrash in Bereshit Rabbah 78,3, in which one sage said that the name Israel is the important one, whereas the name Jacob is merely auxiliary, whereas Rabbi Zecharyah said exactly the reverse. As long as the name Jacob was the name that portrayed Isaac's hopes when he called his son by that name, before it was changed by the angel, the name Israel became the name of foremost importance. All this was before Jacob "died" from the effects of Joseph's disappearance and the fear of what might befall Benjamin.
  Rabbi Zecharyah on the other hand, refers to the period after the name Jacob had been revived because Jacob was revived. After that development, the name Jacob, representing also a life of infinite duration, became more important than the name Israel. A careful look at the wording in that Midrash reveals that whereas the first sage described the name Israel as the principal name and Jacob as merely "auxiliary," Rabbi Zecharyah did not speak of something "auxiliary." He defined the name Israel as "additional." This choice of adjective is appropriate, seeing it alludes to the additional dimension of spiritual content the letters 231=ראל added to the letters א-ל, as described. When the Torah spoke about the "days when Israel would die approaching," this was phrased so as to alert us to the fact that only Israel, but not Jacob was to die. When the Torah -through the mouth of Bileam- speaks about both Jacob and Israel in Numbers 23,23, this is because both names are used in their spiritual, eternal dimension.
  Having appreciated all the foregoing, we can now understand a statement in the Talmud Chulin 92a, commenting on Hosea 12,5: וישר אל מלאך ויוכל, בכה ויתחנן לו, "He contended with an angel and prevailed; the other had to weep and to implore him." The Talmud says that it is not clear who became “שר” over whom. When the angel implored Jacob to release him, it seemed that he implored Jacob, weeping. Evidently Israel then became שר over the angel. How then can the Talmud assume that the "Master" had implored the servant and wept?
  We are dealing here with the dimension of "Jacob" as well as with the dimension of "Israel." First, Jacob assumed the position of שר, Master, vis-a-vis the angel. This is what Samael meant when he said: "You have fought with G–d and man and prevailed;" That aspect of the name "Israel" made him superior to the angel. However, from that development alone I would not have known that even the part of him that was still called "Jacob" could attain the spiritual level of the angels. This is why Hoseah said: "The angel wept and implored Jacob." [Hoseah speaks two verses earlier about Jacob as being punished by G–d, whereas he worked his way up on the spiritual ladder. Ed.] The lesson we learn from this is that even in his capacity as "merely" Jacob, the angel had to implore him, weeping. This was a preview of how things were going to be in the future. Both the names "Jacob" and "Israel" will reflect the highest spiritual achievements, higher even than those of the ministering angels, as we pointed out in connection with Numbers 23,23. Jacob's "victory" over an angel of the type of Samael will then be matched by his "victory" over angels which represent only positive spiritual values.
  We have now explained this פרשה inasmuch as it refers to Jacob personally. We must remember that Jacob is also a symbol of his descendants. All the experiences of the patriarchs are viewed as forerunners of the experiences of the Jewish people as a whole. Nachmanides has demonstrated this in great detail. Bereshit Rabbah 75,3, describing the gifts Jacob sent to Esau, quotes Proverbs 26, 17: "He who passes by and meddles in a quarrel not his own is like someone who takes a dog by his ears." G–d is quoted as saying to Jacob: "Esau was pursuing his own personal designs and you had to send him gifts describing yourself as his servant!" During the second Temple the rulers of the Jewish people voluntarily entered into a political alliance with Rome, only to eventually be devoured by the Romans. This alliance was the beginning of the decline of Jewish independence. All the struggles between Jacob and Esau mirror what was going to happen later on a national scale. Bereshit Rabbah goes on to comment on 32, 9: "If Esau comes to the one camp and smites it, then the remaining camp will escape." It is our experience in exile that when Jews are persecuted in the South, that they find relief in another part of the globe. The "thigh joint" of Jacob that the angel "touched," is also understood as referring to Jacob's descendants. 
  Just as Jacob prepared by sending gifts to Esau, he also prepared himself for that encounter through prayer and active preparations for war. Jews in our day and age behave in a similar fashion when confronting the descendants of Esau. Alas, our strength nowadays is confined to the power of prayer. In our situation fighting the Romans is not appropriate. Instead, our spokesmen must exhaust every other means to achieve better conditions for the Jewish people even if they are rebuffed by these rulers time and again. Thus our spokesmen fulfill Jacob's example which teaches us how to behave in exile. We have to conduct ourselves in this fashion until the arrival of the Messiah. Bereshit Rabbah relates that whenever Rabbi Yannai had occasion to deal with the Roman Government, he would first study our פרשה. 
  In order to survive in our lengthy exile we must employ the weapons of repentance, prayer and charity so as to mobilize the support of G–d on our behalf. The equivalent of "war" is repentance, which reflects the battle with our evil urge. He who can conquer his baser urges has proved himself to be a mighty warrior. This condition will prevail until the prophecy that we will conquer Mount Se'ir will be fulfilled. The redemption will come as a result of repentance, as we know from: ובא לציון גואל ולשבי פשע ביעקב "The redeemer will come to Zion and to those in Jacob who have repented their iniquities" (Isaiah 59, 20). 
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  הצילני נא מיד אחי מיד עשו . The Zohar comments on this verse (Sullam edition page 21) that when someone prepares a prayer it is important that he chooses his words carefully. At first glance we would think that an appeal to G–d such as "save me!" would be sufficient; Jacob added the words "from my brother” so that he would not be misunderstood as requesting to be saved from Laban. In the event that G–d could use the term "brother" in a wider sense, [as Jacob himself had done in Genesis 29,4 for instance, Ed.] he added the word "from Esau," to make certain G–d knew whom he had in mind. He added what it was exactly that he needed to be saved from, i.e. an onslaught against his family. One must not rely on the fact that G–d is well aware of our unspoken thoughts. I believe that since the very letters used in prayer are holy, they are able to penetrate the outer shell of Heaven and penetrate to G–d's throne.
  קטנתי מכל החסדים . Jacob was afraid that his merits had decreased due to the many favors G–d had already showered upon him. If even our patriarch Jacob felt that way, what shall we sinners say, who are so much inferior to our patriarchs? A person must therefore live very frugally so that he does not squander the few merits he has accumulated, even if he performed a lot of charitable deeds, etc.
  והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה . Bereshit Rabbah advises, based on this verse, that one should never put all one's wealth into a single type of investment.
  ויותר יעקב לבדו . Rabbi Eliezer in Chulin 91a learned from here that Jacob crossed the river in order to retrieve small insignificant utensils, and that righteous people are wont to endanger their lives over minor possessions. They do not do so out of excessive greed; because they are so careful not to acquire something that rightfully belonged to someone else, all the things they do acquire assume significance for them. 
  ויאבק איש עמו עד עלות השחר . Rabbi Yitzchak learns from here that a Torah scholar must not go out at night unaccompanied.
  ויחן את פני העיר . Two scholars, Rav and Shemuel, opine in Shabbat 33a, that Jacob introduced coinage in the district. The other scholar, Shmuel, holds that Jacob introduced the concept of "markets," (concentrated shopping opportunities). Rabbi Yochanan said that Jacob established public baths. The difference in the opinions expressed stems from the meaning of the word Vayichan. One sage related that word to the root Cheyn, grace, something aesthetically appealing. As a result, he believed that public baths are what Jacob instituted. The other Rabbi concentrated on the expression Peney. The Midrash Hagadol on Genesis 41,56 in which the Torah describes the famine as: והרעב היה על פני כל הארץ, "The famine was on the face of the whole land," comments that the extra word פני teaches that the famine began with the rich who are called פנים. This is the reason that Rav interpreted that Jacob introduced coinage as a sign of his appreciation of being able to settle in the land. Shmuel, who explained that Jacob introduced a new marketing technique by arranging fairs, took his cue from the word העיר. What we learn from the above is that if someone claims to be a G–d-fearing individual, he needs to demonstrate this in three different areas of life, just as Jacob did. 
  The Torah testified that Jacob arrived in the city of Shechem “שלם,” whole in body, i.e. the result of using baths, but also, and more importantly, whole in body since he had not committed any transgression involving his body. 
  "Whole" in his financial resources, i.e. in his financial dealings with others. 
  Finally, he was "whole" in his Torah, i.e. a reference to a wholesome soul, character. Having perfected his own character, Jacob was able to make contributions to the improved well-being of the society within which he resided.
  ותצא דינה בת לאה . The lesson we learn from this incident is how careful women have to be to conduct their affairs as far as possible within the privacy of the home. This rule does not only apply to married women but also to unmarried girls. If Dinah, a daughter of such illustrious parents as Jacob and Leah, was not safe from an attack on her virginity, daughters of less illustrious parents certainly need to be guarded carefully. 
  We must not spend time wondering how such a misfortune could have happened and what errors if any her parents had committed. We must remember that Dinah's nature was like that of a male who is in the habit of going out into the field; this is how she conducted herself. Our sages have explained that as a fetus Dinah grew in her mother's womb as a male child, and that it was Leah's prayer which led to her being born as a female (Berachot 60).
  ותדבק נפשו בדינה  . We find a statement in Bereshit Rabbah 80,7, that three expressions are used to describe G–d's love or attachment for Israel. The expressions are: דביקה, חשיקה, and חפיצה. The first expression is used in Deut. 4,4; the second expression is used in Deut. 7,7; the last expression is used in Malachi 3,12. The Midrash continues that we learn this lesson from this wicked person Shechem, of whom all these three kinds of feelings for Dinah are reported in 34,3-19 [actually the expression ויאהב is also used for his feelings.] Shechem's attachment to Dinah was of a terrestrial nature, designed to gratify his cravings in this world, and he wanted to achieve realization by means of these three kinds of "love." 
  What kinds of feelings does one need to develop to realize one's craving for the sublime state of the World to Come? Surely one needs to deepen these feelings many times over in order to express appreciation of one's desire for that ultimate communion with G–d adequately! The author mentions that he has written about this subject elsewhere.
  הסירו את אלהי הנכר . Man must make an effort to return to G–d wholeheartedly at all times, and to remove from his home all alien and forbidden objects, foods, etc. Anything that is displeasing in the eyes of G–d is called Avodah Zarah, a form of alien deity. We must keep our homes pure so as to conform with the Torah's command to the Jewish soldier: והיה מחניך קדוש, "ensure that your camp is holy" (Deut. 23, 15).
  
  Vayeshev, Miketz, Vayigash
  
  Introduction
  
  This section is named צאן יוסף.
  The common denominator of these three portions is their preoccupation with the relationship between Joseph and his brothers. In view of the fact that the holiday of Chanukah occurs during the weeks we read these portions, and in view of the well known rule by King Solomon in Kohelet that there is a time and place for everything, we will find in the timing of the various holidays ordained by the Rabbis or even the fast-days decreed by them, allusions to the subject matters dealt with in the portions of the Torah read during that respective week of the year.
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  When people pronounce a ban, חרם, on someone or something, they have to be most circumspect even when the ban is in itself of a forbidden nature. One needs to be even more careful when one places someone in a ban in consequence of a permissible legal proceeding. We can examine and learn from the extreme caution practised by Joseph's brothers who entered into a conspiracy of silence not to reveal what had happened to Joseph. The secret was therefore kept. Even G–d Himself did not reveal the secret; the brothers had included Him in those upon whom the vow of silence was imposed. It was only shortly before Jacob's death, when the latter reproved his sons and blessed them, that The Holy Spirit revealed to Jacob what had transpired, so that Jacob might be able to admonish his sons prior to his death. During these blessings, Jacob referred pointedly to Shimon and Levi's part in the maltreatment of Joseph (Genesis 49,6 "they tried to uproot the ox"). When a person is close to death, it is time for him to dispense admonitions as well as blessings. Joseph never told his father that his brothers had sold him.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  We always proceed from the premise that all of Israel is considered נפש אחת, a single soul, life-force. Israel as a whole is called by the title אדם. As a reminder of this fact the family members of Jacob, 66 in number, who moved from the land of Canaan to Egypt in Genesis 46,26 are referred to as נפש, soul, or person, in the singular. Just as a body possesses 248 limbs, so the Jewish national body, known as אדם, comprises a great number of parts. The Zohar refers to these parts as שייפא דגופא, shavings or splinters of a body There are, of course, different levels of importance among the various parts of a regular body. The same is true when we describe the parts of the body which make up the Jewish nation. There is a head, a heart, an eye, a hand, etc. However, just as all the parts of the body combine to make a whole human being, so all the parts of the Jewish nation combine to make it one unit. The unit created by these many parts in turn combines to form the chariot, מרכבה, of the spiritual counterpart of terrestrial man in the Celestial Regions. This celestial אדם is perceived as sitting on the throne which is one of the 248 spiritual limbs that form the root of the 248 positive commandments, which, if performed by terrestrial man, are his true source of life (אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם Leviticus 18, 5).
  As a result, a person who separates himself from the community, pursuing a lifestyle not acceptable to it, divorces himself from life. As a limb detached from its body he will die. This is the meaning of the imposition of חרם, a ban, or excommunication. Such a person is on the way to <i>Chormah</i>, annihilation, (cf. Deut. 1, 44). This is why the numerical value of the word 248=חרם. Israel's essential advantage over the other nations is that it is a composite unit. Our sages have underlined this when they formulated the Shabbat Minchah prayer in which they emphasized that just as G–d is unique in being One, so Israel is unique in being one single unit as a people.
  Just as it is said of the Ineffable Name "G–d is One and His Name is One," so Jacob and the twelve tribes are the parallel of the 12 permutations with which the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d can be written. The relationship between Jacob and the twelve tribes and Joseph and the twelve tribes respectively is analogous to the relationship between ה' אחד, on the one hand, and ושמו אחד, on the other. The Zohar has explained this on Parshat Vayetzei. We explained there the relationship between Jacob and Joseph, and the meaning of the emanation תפארת. On Genesis 37, 2, the Zohar goes on to explain that anyone who looked at the face of Joseph remarked on his uncanny resemblance to Jacob. The Torah purposely did not describe Reuben or any other brother as the תולדות of Jacob.
  The missing letter ו in the name of Jacob, (which is usually written defective), was added to the name ו-יוסף, on occasions such as in Exodus 1,5 (or altogether, since that name too could have been spelled defective). The "small" ו in the word שלום, Numbers 25,12, alludes to another verse in Zachariah 8, 19: והאמת והשלום אהבו "and the truth and the peace they loved." The attribute which distinguishes Jacob is אמת, truth, whereas the attribute הברית השלום is the one that distinguishes Joseph. The Zohar has already explained how the terms ברית and גוף overlap (cf. Sullam edition Lech Lecha page 134-135). We name something or somebody because we desire the name to reveal their nature. Joseph was the "revelation" of the mystical dimension of Jacob, the secret of how the covenant between G–d and man influences the ability of determining the nature of him who is about to be born.
  Bereshit Rabbah goes as far as to say that G–d told Jacob: "Just as I am G–d in the Heavenly Regions, so you are "god" in the "lower" world. The meaning of this statement is that because Jacob's "bed" was שלימה, pure, his descendants could serve as the מרכבה, chariot, or carrier of G–d's Presence in this world. Just as G–d is One and His name is One, i.e. reflects His Essential qualities, so Jacob and Joseph are one, i.e. their essential qualities are the same. How does this work in practice? Jacob fathered twelve tribes, and he is the only one "above" them. They are considered like branches of Jacob. Eight of these tribes were from his regular wives Leah and Rachel, the other four from his concubines Zilpah and Bilhah. When you look at the letters in the word אחד, Jacob corresponds to the letter א, the sons of Leah and Rachel correspond to the letter ח, and the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah correspond to the letter ד in that word. 
  Something similar is true of Joseph. Although Joseph himself is a branch of Jacob, he did father two of the regular tribes, i.e. Ephrayim and Menasseh, whom Jacob compared in status to Reuben and Shimon (Genesis 48, 5). When we look once more at the word אחד, we will find that Joseph was unique in having a close connection with both the letter ח i.e. the brothers of Jacob's major wives, seeing he himself was one of those. He was also closely attached to the sons of Jacob's concubines, since the Torah describes Joseph as being raised primarily among the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah (37, 2). Considering the expression והוא נער, also stressed in that verse, we find in it an allusion to something I have previously mentioned, namely that יעקב contains an allusion to the letter ו in the four-lettered Ineffable Name. The name יוסף must then be viewed as a miniature edition of that same letter in G–d's name. The scriptural allusion to this concept is found in Isaiah 10, 19 ונער יכתבם, "and a lad will write them down." [This is probably an error, and should have been a quote from Isaiah 11, 6 ונער קטן נוהג בם. Ed.]
  The Torah reports Joseph as being 17 years old. This number was not reported without good reason. We have explained how Jacob in his capacity of representing the emanation תפארת, which is the "home" of the four-lettered Ineffable Name embodies that name, and how in particular the letter ו in that four-lettered-Name alludes to Jacob. We have also described Joseph as a miniature dimension of that letter ו, and how Joseph too serves as a kind of מרכבה, for G–d's Name in a "miniature" way. That "miniature" is the mystical dimension of what we call “מספר קטן,” i.e. numerical values arrived at by omission all digits "0." The מספר קטן of the four-lettered Name amounts to 17 (5=ה+;6=ו+;5=ה+;1='י total 17). A way of remembering this is the verse: הודו לה' כי טוב; the numerical value of טוב is 17. This is why the Torah reports Joseph's age when he was 17. The Torah adds that he was still a נער, a boy. 
  The Pardes Rimonim mentions that the "miniature" number is a reference to Chanoch (otherwise known as the angel Mattatron) who is also called נער, and whose function is alluded to in Solomon's Proverbs 22, 6: חנוך לנער על פי דרכו, "educate the lad in the manner appropriate for him. [In his chapter on the definitions of certain words, the author of Pardes Rimonim defines the reason that Mattatron is called נער as being that he performs the duties of a נער. These duties are comprehensive just as the duties of Joshua, who is described as a נער, a senior servant of Moses, or Eliezer, who is described in that fashion although he was the senior servant of Abraham. According to Kabbalists, Mattatron provides the "food" not only for our world but also for the world of the angels. Ed.] When the souls of Jacob and Joseph respectively expanded from the world of אצילות, their origin, the features of Jacob remained engraved on the throne of G–d. This throne is immediately below the region we have called אצילות. Joseph is immediately below his father in the domain of Mattatron whose activities emanate from beneath that "throne." The significance of the throne is the mystery of בריאה, whereas the significance of Mattatron in the same scheme is the mystery surrounding יצירה, [a more advanced state of the creation of matter. Ed]. Concerning this latter aspect of Mattatron's activities, the Torah describes Joseph here as 17 years old, i.e. a "junior." Kabbalists also refer to Mattatron as עבד. The Zohar points that out on Genesis 24, 2 where Abraham instructs עבדו זקן ביתו, "his servant the senior member of his household," to get a wife for Isaac. I have explained this at length in my commentary on חיי שרה. The expression עבד also occurs in Joseph's life when the latter is sold by his brothers. G–d sent His angel along to protect Joseph on his various journeys. This guidance was of a similar nature as that described in Exodus 23, 20: הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך לשמרך בדרך, "Here I am sending an angel ahead of you to protect you on the journey." Our sages identified that angel with the angel Mattatron, as mentioned by Rashi on that verse. [The fact that Rashi mentions that the numerical value of 314=מטטרון=שדי, clearly establishes that Mattatron is active in matters of יצירה, an activity requring the attribute of שדי. Ed.]
  Let us return to the statement “ה' אחד ושמו אחד.” The mystery of G–d's Unity, and the Oneness of His name, is compared in the Sefer Yetzirah and all other Kabbalistic texts to the relationship between a flame and a glowing ember. The same relationship exists between Jacob and Joseph; Jacob is the glowing ember, the fire attached to the coal, whereas Joseph is the (disembodied) flame. Scriptural proof for this idea is found in Ovadiah 1,18 where the prophet describes בית יעקב אש ובית יוסף להבה, "the house of Jacob as fire and the house of Joseph as flame." The letters of the word אש, are also the respective first letters of אמת and שלום, which are the attributes of Jacob and Joseph respectively.
  Esau was the exact opposite. He represented קנאה, jealousy, and שנאה, hatred. Jealousy is the exact opposite of truth. The attribute of truth is defined as a preparedness to admit that something is objectively so, without one denying it or misrepresenting it (even if one puts oneself in a bad light thereby). When the prophet Ovadiah in the verse quoted describes the house of Esau as becoming straw, קש, the letters in that word are the respective first letters of קנאה and שנאה. Now that the brothers had become guilty of being jealous of Joseph and hating him, as we know from 37,4 and 37,11, they became victims of Esau in this world. Since ten of the brothers were guilty of such feelings, the Romans tortured ten outstanding Jewish scholars to death, the ones commonly known as עשרה הרוגי מלכות, whom Jewish liturgy eulogized in the poem אלה אזכרה recited on the Day of Atonement. The ten scholars involved were re-incarnations of the ten brothers of Joseph who had taken part in selling him. This is stated in the book Heychalot. Rabbi Yishmael said: "The day the instructions came to torture Jewish sages to death was on a Thursday. Originally, four sages were to be arrested, Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel, Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha the High Priest, Rabbi Yehudah ben Bava and Rabbi Yehudah ben Damah. Eight thousand scholars in Jerusalem were prepared to offer themselves in lieu of these four leaders. When Rabbi Nechunyah ben Hakanah realised that the decree would not be revoked, he "lowered me" to the מרכבה, and I interceded with the שר הפנים in the Celestial Regions. The שר הפנים told me that the Supreme Court in Heaven had decreed that ten eminent scholars were to be handed over to Samael, the Celestial representative of Rome. The reason for the decree was to carry out on the bodies of leaders of Israel the penalty imposed on kidnappers as per Exodus 21,16: "If someone kidnaps a person, sells him and is found out, he shall be executed." [According to Sanhedrin 85, the words "found out" mean that there were witnesses to the deed already before the sale. Ed.]
  According to the Kabbalists the Heavenly objective was to wipe out the residual guilt of the brothers which had not been atoned for when they sold Joseph. We can find numerous allusions in our פרשה, which relate to the manner in which these Ten Martyrs were killed. According to tradition, Rabbi Yehudah ben Bava had three hundred לונכיות, lances, stuck into his body. The word ויתנכלו להמיתו, in 37, 18 is an allusion to this; the letters are simply a re-arrangement of the word לונכיות.
  In Genesis 44,17, Joseph said to his brothers: ואתם עלו לשלום אל אביכם, "As for you, go up in peace to your father." The word אתם, in that connection was used advisedly. Joseph meant that the brothers themselves could come to their Father in Heaven safely, i.e. they would not in this world suffer the execution as kidnappers who sell their prey. On a future occasion, however, their re-incarnates would have to pay for the crime with their lives. The Ten Martyrs mentioned were the ones who had to pay with their lives for that sin which had gone unpunished for so long. The allusion in the verse just quoted serves some Kabbalists as the reason why Reuben, who had not been a party to the sale of Joseph, was included among those who were executed for the crime. His sin had been of a different nature, namely the incident described in Genesis 35, 22, involving Bilhah. Reuben's own words provide us with a hint of this when he said after discovering that Joseph had been removed from the pit (37, 30): ואני, אנה אני בא, "Where can I go to?" Rabbi Abraham Saba in his Tzror Hamor comments on this that the letters in the words and אני and אנה are the respective first letters of א-ל נקמות י-ה-ו-ה נקמות הופיע, "G–d of retribution, Lord, G–d of retribution, appear!" (Psalms 94, 1) The reincarnations of Joseph and Benjamin were not among the Ten Martyrs described.
  There is a group of Kabbalists who do not include Reuben among the Ten Martyrs, but substitute Joseph as the tenth. Their reasoning is that after all Joseph was the root cause of the crime committed against him. It was Joseph's tale-bearing which triggered the brothers' sin.
  I have also heard that some Kabbalists consider that Rabbi Akiva was the re-incarnation of Joseph. This is the reason he is known as Akiva ben Joseph. When we consider that Joseph represents "One," as explained earlier, this is all alluded to in the report in the Talmud that Rabbi Akiva ended his life pronouncing the word אחד, One, in the "Hear O Israel" prayer. The soul that departed from him at the time would be the soul of Joseph who was "One." In this connection I have heard a mystical explanation that in reality only nine of the Martyrs were re-incarnations of people who had lived in a previous period. This was so since neither Reuben, nor Joseph nor Benjamin had committed that kind of a sin. When the brothers included the שכינה at the time they entered into the conspiracy, חרם, never to reveal what had really happened to Joseph, the שכינה became an accessory to their conspiracy. Rabbi Akiva's torture was due to the fact that he represented the שכינה. According to this view the tradition that he ended his life with the word אחד, is that he ended his life "because of the אחד." The reason that of all the people it had to be Rabbi Akiva who was singled out to suffer the punishment on behalf of the שכינה, was that in the course of his studies he, more than any other scholar, had penetrated into the hidden aspects of G–d. In other words, he had experienced the "wings" of the שכינה as being immediately above him.
  In my humble opinion this latter tradition need not contradict the statement that Rabbi Akiva was the re-incarnation of Joseph. Inclusion of the שכינה in the brothers' conspiracy of silence is equivalent to including Joseph, whom we have described as a junior מרכבה, carrier of the שכינה. Rabbi Akiva was the reincarnation of Joseph, and this is demonstrated by the former's close association with the שכינה. Joseph was the carrier of the שכינה when he descended to Egypt, which was the beginning of Jewish exile according to the Zohar. We also have the tradition that when the Jewish people descended into Egypt the שכינה accompanied them (Mechilta Beshalach on Genesis 46, 4). Something similar occurred before every other exile; in this particular instance, G–d inspired Joseph before the rest of his father's family came to Egypt. We see that Joseph's essence was a Divinely inspired one, which made him a partner of the שכינה for he was the מרכבה. If Rabbi Akiva ben Joseph breathed his last by saying “אחד,” this means that his soul departed while it was immediately "below" the שכינה.
  We can now better understand Jacob mourning for his son Joseph, and his refusal to be comforted (37, 35). Tractate Sofrim 21 teaches that one does not accept תנחומים, condolences, for the living. It is a Heavenly decree that twelve months after his death, a person is apt to recede in one's memory to the point where one forgets him. In view of this people ask how could Jacob fail to have remained aware that Joseph was alive, since he, Jacob could not be reconciled to his loss? [In a gloss the author mentions something he has heard about this problem in the name of the famous פוסק Rabbi Moses Isserlis. He explained the matter על פי הפשט, according to the plain meaning of the text. During the first year of Joseph's absence, Jacob mourned him in the manner one mourns a deceased person for he was convinced that Joseph was dead. When the year had passed and he found himself unable to be consoled, he realized in retrospect that the news of Joseph's disappearance had never meant that Joseph was dead. Since Joseph had failed to return after all this time, Jacob had to assume that he had died in the interval. He kept thinking along that line for many years. The whole matter of "forgetting" the deceased has to do with the tradition that the soul of the deceased "commutes" between Heaven and earth during the first twelve months after the body's death. After that, seeing that the soul has severed contact with earth, the deceased recedes into the remoter regions of the memory of his next-of-kin. To sum up: Jacob had accepted comfort regarding the terrestrial dimension of Joseph's death. He had not, however, accepted condolences regarding the demise of the spiritual dimension of Joseph.]
  There is a mystical dimension to all this. Inasmuch as the patriarchs and the tribes are an extension on earth of a group of emanations called collectively בנין, it is possible that the disappearance of one of these extensions, in this case Joseph, would negatively affect the parallel components of that בנין in the spiritual regions. Jacob therefore could not allow himself to make peace with Joseph's death or disappearance from the scene. [I have paraphrased the way the author explains this both in his own words and in the words of the Rekanati whom he quotes verbatim. Ed.]
  To get back to the meaning of “אחד” in the prayer known as קריאת שמע. The first letter א in that word symbolizes both Jacob and Joseph, each of whom were unique. That letter is not just the first letter of the alphabet, but it symbolizes the Aleph= Eleph of the first man, who commenced human history. Adam's uniqueness is joined by Jacob's uniqueness, seeing Jacob's beauty has been described as similar to Adam's. In turn, Joseph, the בן זקונים, was the זיו איקונין, the spitting image of his father. Moreover, the א of Adam is an allusion to the garments of אור, light, that Adam wore before his sin and which were exchanged for garments of עור, skin or leather, after he had sinned. G–d Himself had made these garments for Adam and his wife as recorded in Genesis 3, 21. When we read in Job 10, 11 “עור ובשר תלבישני,” You have clothed me with skin and flesh, this is an admission that Adam's, i.e. man's "Oneness" the fusion of body and soul, was torn asunder as a result of his sin. Ever since that time man became a dichotomy of גוף ונפש, body and soul. The ascent of the one meant the automatic descent of the other. Before the sin, whenever the soul shone, the body lit up also. Body and soul worked in tandem. At that time the soul radiated a major amount of light, the body a smaller amount; the important thing was that both radiated light. We have elaborated on these concepts repeatedly.
  If man and his wife had been able to maintain their state of innocence, the drop of semen from which a fetus develops would not be called a טפה סרוחה, an evil smelling drop. Instead, it would be called זרע קודש, holy seed. The subject of copulation and sex would not then be a subject surrounded by shame and embarrassment. It would be an act of מצוה performance no different from that of putting on phylacteries, and would be performed publicly without shame or embarrassment. An act which is not inspired, at least partially, by the evil urge is not something associated with shame or embarrassment. Now that Adam and Eve had sinned, the act became associated with shame. Jacob, who is described as the "beauty," i.e. the spiritual level of an Adam before sin, began to repair the damage caused through Adam's sin. This is the significance of the oft repeated slogan that "his bed was pure." It means that Jacob only sprouted זרע קודש, "holy seed." Jacob never experienced impurity through the emission of semen for any purpose other than procreation. He was able to say of Reuben his first born, who was conceived when Jacob was at least 84 years old, ראובן בכורי אתה כחי וראשית אוני, "Reuben you are my firstborn, my strength and the first of my vigor" (Genesis 49, 2). Jacob's principal firstborn was Joseph, however, since when he cohabited with Leah, he was under the impression that it was Rachel, the wife he worked for for seven years. This is the reason he could deprive Reuben of his rights as a firstborn and transfer that birthright to Joseph. As a result, it was no more than fair that Joseph's children would receive a double share in the land of Israel, that Menasseh and Ephraim were each considered a tribe. The spiritual identity of Jacob and Joseph is even more evident when we consider Joseph's experience with the wife of Potiphar. Joseph maintained the purity displayed by his father in all matters sexual when he resisted the seduction of Mrs. Potiphar. [He cited as the only reason that it would be a sin against G–d and against her husband. Ed.] It is a well known fact that the צדיק, the righteous individual, is the foundation, יסוד of the world. The emanation ברית העליון, is the source of the תפארת, the covenant emanating in the "highest" regions, a term familiar to students of the Kabbalah. It is a direct continuation of the forces activated in the emanation, תפארת, the emanation which mirrors the attribute of Jacob. 
  Considering all the foregoing, the verse: אלה תולדות יעקב-יוסף, that the true descendants of Jacob are Joseph, makes perfect sense. Just as the holy body of Jacob was transported to the holy soil of the land of Israel and buried there, so the holy remains of his son Joseph also were eventually interred there. Both their respective bodies had become thoroughly refined, cleansed from impurities, prior to that. Even though their respective bodies did not recapture the state of innocence of Adam before his sin, and could not therefore be clothed in the כתנות של אור, the garments woven out of light, yet their bodies recaptured a large measure of the purity that had been lost in גן עדן.
  The expression used by the Torah for Joseph, i.e. בן זקונים, also contains an allusion to Adam and Eve, who were the "oldest" people in the world -the first human beings. The Torah wanted to hint that Joseph was a branch of that first pair of human beings in terms of their purity. Just as Adam and Eve had not been the products of the טפה סרוחה, the "evil smelling drop of semen" described by Akavyah in Avot 3,1, so similarly Joseph's origin was pure. The next pair of human beings to whom the Torah applies the term “זקנים,” were Abraham and Sarah in Genesis 18,11, for they took the place of Adam and Eve. We have discussed all this at length in our commentary on חיי שרה. The process of refinement, the road to regaining the innocence and purity lost by Adam, continued through Jacob called Israel because he had successfully contended with heavenly forces. In our classic literature this Israel is referred to as ישראל סבא, grandfather Jacob, whereas Joseph is simply referred to as the son, בן.
  When the gifts Joseph sent to his father are described in 45, 23, and the Torah says: ולאביו שלח, the word לאביו is mentioned twice. The first time it probably teaches us the above described unique relationship between Jacob and his son Joseph. Our sages in Megillah 16b elaborate on the significance of the various gifts listed in that verse. They find an allusion to יין ישן, aged wine, in the words מטוב מצרים. We must realize that there were two categories of wine. One category is called by our sages יין המשומר. This wine has a mystical dimension to it, it is made from grapes saved since the six days of Creation, and it will be served to the צדיקים in the World to Come. It's potency is associated with the emanation בינה, the root of the auxiliary emanation דעת. When this kind of wine is drunk in our world it has a beneficial effect on the clarity of mind of the זקנים, and it puts their minds at ease concerning the Hereafter; it enables the one drinking it to penetrate with his mind up to the כתר, the root of roots of all the emanations. This root is called עתיק יומין, עתיקא קדישא, "The venerable One, the Holy One of antiquity."
  The second category of wine causes drunkenness, is the cause of evil in our world. It certainly does not contain or confer דעת, knowledge. We have a tradition that דעתן של נשים קלות, "the minds of women are fickle" (Shabbat 33 et al.). The "woman" who serves as the role model for this statement in the Talmud is Eve. She had squeezed the cluster of grapes [according to the opinion that the tree of knowledge was a grape vine. Ed.], converted it into wine, and by spoiling it (spiritually) made יין נסך, forbidden wine out of it. The halachic status of such wine is that it is considered as originating in a polluted environment, and the touch of a Gentile makes it unfit for Jews to drink. Women's minds are treated as suspect because the first woman was guilty of creating this category of wine. The Hebrew expression קל, for women's state of mind, is alluded to in the 130 years, i.e. the numerical value of קל, that Adam did not have marital relations with Eve after their expulsion from גן עדן (Rashi on Genesis 5, 3, quoting Bereshit Rabbah). During the 130 years that Adam lived apart from Eve, he emitted קרי, semen which did not fertilize an ovum. This was frivolous and demanded rectification as we shall explain later. The Jewish people suffered 130 years of enslavement in Egypt to make up for those years that Adam separated from his wife. These 130 years were the ones before their redeemer Moses was born. Yocheved, Moses' mother, had been born when Jacob and his clan arrived in Egypt; she was 130 years old at the time she gave birth to Moses (cf. Rashi on 46, 26). Exile itself was a solution chosen by Abraham whom G–d had shown Torah, Gehinnom, sacrifices and exile as possible venues for atonement. Abraham chose exile for his descendants as preferable to purgatory, as explained in Shemot Rabbah 51, 7. The same subject is treated in the Midrash in Parshat Lech Lecha. The main reason Abraham chose exile over purgatory was to prevent his descendants from being within the domain which is full of the spiritual pollution resulting from Adam's sin. The exile experience would serve as a refining process, after which the Jews would merit the proximity of the Divine. They would then merit this יין ישן, the aged wine, which would benefit their spiritual and intellectual development instead of the wine that represented דעת ק"ל.
  In 45, 23 Joseph hinted to his father that he should come down to Egypt to him to be exiled, seeing that the previous זקן, Abraham had chosen this path, and that this path had been approved since the six days of Creation, i.e. since the time of the יין ישן. It is interesting to note that the numerical value of the words יין ישן, equals the total number of years that the Jews experienced exile both in Egypt and other countries. This is described in Exodus 12, 40. The immediate cause for this was Joseph, because he was the בן זקונים, etc.
  To come back to the similarity between Jacob and Joseph. We mentioned the כתנות אור, the garments woven of light, worn by Adam and Eve prior to their sin. When Jacob made a כתונת פסים, "a striped coat" for Joseph (37, 3), this was the kind of luxurious garment worn by princesses, i.e. the souls in the Celestial Regions who are compared to "daughters of the King of Kings." The נשמה is frequently referred to as בת, daughter, as we know from the Zohar (Sullam edition page 17) on Exodus 21,7: "When a man sells his daughter, etc." Once the serpent had caused the letter א, the luminary quality of אדם, to be removed from אדם, rebellious man, all he was left with were the letters דם. 
  We explained that those letters signified death, i.e. the spilling of man's blood. The removal of the letter א caused the substitution of the letter ע. This meant that עור ובשר, skin and flesh, replaced the entity previously called אדם, and death in the form of blood entered the world. Expressed differently, Adam's כתונת was removed. When Jacob provided Joseph with a כתונת, this symbolized the reversal of that negative development. When the brothers dipped that כתונת, coat, in blood, they symbolically nullified Jacob's intention. As a result of this, the Holy Spirit departed from Jacob; he remained in mourning, and until he received the news that Joseph was alive the Presence of the שכינה did not return to him. Only then does the Torah state: ותחי רוח יעקב אביהם, "Jacob's (holy) spirit revived" (45,27). Onkelos translates those words as: "The prophetic spirit again came to rest on their father Jacob." It is reasonable to assume that the Holy Spirit departed from Joseph at the time it departed from Jacob. No doubt Joseph experienced emotional distress, if only because he felt the distress his father must have experienced by not knowing his favorite son's whereabouts. Besides, how could Joseph, who was the spiritual extension of Jacob, not be sensitive to his father's anguish? Jacob's descent to Egypt must also be seen from this angle, i.e. two parts becoming re-united. [It was politically impossible for Joseph to return to the land of Canaan while alive, since we know that he could not even be buried in Canaan after he died. Ed.]
  The Torah describes the impending re-union between Joseph and his father in 46,29 as follows: ויאסר יוסף מרכבתו ויעל לקראת ישראל אביו גשנה. "Joseph harnessed his chariot and ascended to meet his father Jacob in the direction of Goshen." In this verse we have an allusion to the Celestial מרכבה. When we earlier described Joseph as the junior מרכבה, this meant that he was the extension of the מרכבה represented by his father. The verse in question alludes to this when it describes the movement of Joseph's מרכבה as being in the direction of his father. Since his father was the "senior," the word ויעל the Torah employs for Joseph's journey is most appropriate. Joseph had originally been sold as a slave. I have already explained that the mystical dimension of עבד is the angel Mattatron, as has been dealt with at length in our commentary of חיי שרה. Joseph's mystical dimension is one of ברית, the secret of the holy זיווג, union with the holy domain. Pardes Rimonim discusses this in the chapter called אצילות, בריאה, יצירה, עשיה, and explains that as long as we are in exile, union can only be achieved with the holy domain of the emanation of Mattatron. Once the redeemer comes, however, union can be achieved with holy forces in the higher regions of אצילות.
  Since Joseph was elevated to the position of king and rode in the מרכבת המשנה, this is a reference to the שר מצרים, the celestial representative of Egypt, who is the most highly placed of all the celestial representatives of the seventy gentile nations. Our sages in Ketuvot 112 have said that Egypt is second only to ארץ ישראל, hence "the second best chariot" is the vehicle suited for the angel representing Egypt in the Heavens. Even though Joseph rose greatly after having been elevated from the status of a slave to that of a temporal king, he did not rise sufficiently for his מרכבה to equal the level of that of his father until the Holy Spirit returned to Jacob. This is alluded to in אלה תולדות יעקב יוסף, that when Jacob was re-united with Joseph, the cherubs representing the male and female (in all their innocence) (cf. Kings I 7,36) were able to unite through the covenant of circumcision in the emanation of יסוד. Although Jacob and family resided in Egypt, they did not feel themselves in exile as long as Joseph ruled. Once a new King arose, as per Exodus 1,8, who reportedly "did not know Joseph," the situation changed. The mystical dimension of Jacob as "one" and of Joseph as "one," means that all twelve tribes are inextricably linked to both Jacob and Joseph. The letter א contains the secret of this unity. 
  The brothers had described themselves as כלנו בני איש אחד, "We are all the sons of one man" (42, 11). The word אחד, which is not really necessary, is the reference to Joseph. It is significant that the brothers did not say 13 ,42) ,אנחנו) for "we are," but only נחנו. The letter א is missing in the word "we." Later on, however, they acknowledged the significance of Joseph as also being a substitute for the "one" represented by their father Jacob, when they described themselves as שנים עשר עבדיך אחים אנחנו בני איש אחד. In elaborating on the word אחד later on in the same verse, the brothers refer to Joseph as האחד איננו, the "disappearance of the one." Rashi already comments that the brothers explained the fact they had dispersed throughout the country, -an uncharacteristic behaviour if indeed they were brothers,- was all because of the "one" whom they tried to locate. Rashi also says that the inclusion of the "one" in their statement :"we are all (including you) the sons of one man," was said with "Holy Spirit," though they were not aware of it at the time.
  The word אחד, one, again figures prominently when Joseph interpreted Pharaoh's dream in 41,25. Joseph's rise to power was due to his interpreting Pharaoh's dream as "one." In the dream of the seven ears of corn the Torah emphasized that they all grew on "one" stalk (41, 22). Even the dream of the seven cows alluded to the number "one," since the cows all rose from "one" river. Considering the above factors, we can now understand the comment of Pharaoh that there was no one as נבון וחכם, wise and clever as Joseph. Pharaoh said to Joseph: "After G–d has made known to you, i.e. הודיע, all this, etc.," you clearly command all three elements of wisdom, namely חכמה, בינה, דעת.
  Pharaoh's dreams contain very significant allusions. Let me first quote what the Zohar (Sullam edition page 6) has to say on the subject. Commenting on "here there arose seven healthy and good-looking cows from the river and they grazed in the meadow" (41, 18), the words "from the river" are understood as referring to the source of all blessing in this world, the emanation יסוד. The word היאור is equated with the river emanating from גן עדן described in Genesis 2, 10. This "river" originates from the emanation בינה, and "irrigates" (spiritually) the emanation יסוד, the spiritual domain in which Joseph is at home. The message in the dream is that all of Egypt receives its blessings because of Joseph. The Zohar continues saying that that "river" dispenses its blessings in seven different directions, i.e the seven cows represent the seven recipients of the river's blessings. The seven recipients of the river's largesse all co-exist peacefully. This is an unusual phenomenon. We may compare the meaning of the number seven in the Book of Esther, where Esther is attended by "seven maid-servants, the ones she was entitled to have allocated to her by the palace" (Esther 2, 9). On the other hand, we find that the king had "seven men-servants (castrated), who attended to his personal needs" (Esther 1, 10).
  Rabbi Yitzchak says that the seven "good" cows represent seven spiritual levels in the "upper" regions, each one higher than the other, whereas the seven "bad" cows represent seven levels of successively lower degrees. The former refer to regions of purity, holiness, the latter to regions of impurity, pollution. Concerning the seven ears of corn, Rabbi Yehudah says the first seven ears were from the right side of the scheme because they were described as "good", whereas the latter seven bad ears of corn were below the former ones. Pharaoh saw all of them in his dream.
  Rabbi Yossi asked: "Why did G–d show this wicked Pharaoh all these exalted visions?" Rabbi Yehudah answered him that Pharaoh did not actually see such exalted visions, he only saw seven levels on top of seven levels, but they were all levels of the nether regions. We have a tradition that what a man sees in his dreams reflects his moral level. His soul rises to receive the kind of information that corresponds to his spiritual level. Pharaoh was not shown anything that did not correspond to his spiritual level. Thus far the Zohar.
  We view the number 7 as corresponding to the 7 days that are called by the Kabbalists the seven days of בנין, the days of Creation. Jacob, whose attribute is represented by the emanation תפארת, embodies within himself all seven stages of that בנין. Joseph, who was the direct continuation of Jacob, i.e. תפארת, also embodied all seven stages of the בנין. This is why there were in Pharaoh's dream twice seven cows and twice seven ears of corn. Together that makes 14 cows, corresponding to the 14 tribes. The ones that rose "on one stalk," symbolise the בנין in the "upper" regions above the emanation of תפארת, the region made up of the emanations חכמה, בינה. Here we come to the mystical dimension of the word אז whenever it is used in the Torah. The letters ז are perceived figuratively as "entering” the main stem of the letter א. This is possible because that letter is rooted in the emanation בינה. That emanation forms part of the three highest emanations which are one unit (in certain respects). When Solomon advises in Proverbs 4, 5: קנה חכמה קנה בינה, "acquire wisdom, acquire discernment,” the repetition of the word קנה, alludes to its dual meaning, i.e. its meaning is also Kaneh, stem, shaft. There is a single shaft to which the emanations חכמה, בינה, דעת are attached, and we may view this as similar to the shape of the letter א. The number "seven” as represented by the letter ז, is attached to that main shaft of the א from either side, hence we have the number 14.
  Pharaoh told Joseph that he saw G–d had revealed to him, Joseph, the secret of how חכמה and בינה can be joined by דעת, and that there was no one else who had been so endowed. Although Pharaoh personally was quite unaware of these "secrets," he expressed profound truths through his mouth. He was able to do so because his representative in the Celestial Regions had an understanding of these matters and put these words in his mouth.
  We have explained that in the emanation מלכות the letters of the Ineffable Name are active in radiating energy in all six possible directions, which is the mystical dimension of how the concept of מעשה בראשית was translated into the creation and development of matter. By combining the emanation מלכות itself with these six forms of energy we have actually seven forms of energy. The point is that we encounter the combination of twice 6=12, as well as the combination of twice 7=14. We explained earlier that just as there are 6 stages of בנין which originate on the left side of the pattern of the system of emanations, the side of דין, so there are 6 stages of בנין which originate on the right side of that pattern, the side governed by חסד. The number 14 is arrived at by adding the two respective "ones”, i.e. Jacob and Joseph as the central קנה that form the letter א. Symbolically speaking, Jacob's "beauty" and that of his "look alike” son Joseph, are the means by which the lost א of the כתנות אור of Adam can be recaptured. Whatever Jacob and Joseph did not accomplish in their attempt to repair the damage wrought on the world by Adam's sin will be repaired in Messianic times.
  In Parshat Vayetzei I have demonstrated how such mundane matters as לחם לאכול ובגד ללבוש which Jacob requested must be understood (page 234). What this means is that parallel to the repair of man's "clothing" i.e. the garments of leather being exchanged for garments of light, man's food supply too will undergo a dramatic change in the World to Come. Our Rabbis describe how ארץ ישראל will produce ready-to-eat cakes and the like in Shabbat 30.
  In his capacity as provider for the land of Egypt, Joseph acted as a forerunner of those idyllic times. He not only provided food for all his father's family, but also clothes to wear as per Genesis 45, 22. The reason the Torah describes that clothing as חליפות, something subject to exchange, is that in the future these garments will indeed be exchanged for the type of garments woven of light that Adam and Eve used to wear prior to their sin.
  Since the Temple was going to be built on territory belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, Joseph alluded to the five important manifestations of the שכינה, the Divine Presence, that were missing during the period of the second Temple, and which will be restored when the third Temple will be built. All the details that the Torah reports here about Joseph and his brothers allude to matters of the future, to Messianic times. Joseph's fate, i.e. the גלגולים, wanderings, upheavals he experienced during his lifetime, foreshadowed the גלגולים of the Jewish nation in the future. He set in motion the descent of his family into the first exile, and thus became instrumental in the refining process which this experience proved to be for the Jewish people. Every subsequent exile had as its purpose the further refinement of the character of the Jewish people. Prior to the eventual redemption, Joseph will once again appear in the flesh as the משיח בן יוסף. Permanent rule will be reserved for Yehudah, however. The missing letter א from אדם that we have discussed, and which left only the word דם with its negative connotation, was restored when the Jewish people underwent mass circumcision at the hands of Joshua before conquering the land of Canaan. At that time the prediction of Pharaoh's horoscope which indicated a bloody end to the Jewish people was reversed (cf. Rashi on Exodus 10, 10). The דם, blood, which had had negative connotations up to that time, was converted into a positive, lifegiving experience through the act of circumcision. The mystical dimension of the letters ד"ם in the name אדם, is also an allusion to דוד in his capacity as the משיח. We have explained more than once that the mystical dimension of אדם is “אדם-דוד-משיח.” The seventy years that David lived were a gift of אדם who wanted to be rehabilitated through David, and thereby ultimately complete his life in the glory in which it had begun.
  When we consider the death of the first two sons of Yehudah, Er and Onan, who were eventually replaced by two sons born by Tamar, i.e. Peretz and Zerach, and we reflect on the fact that the Torah reports those events immediately after the גלגולים that happened to Joseph, we must seek a reason for this. Bereshit Rabbah 12,6 draws our attention to the fact that the word תולדות, descendants, is always spelled without the letter ו after the ת, except when the Torah describes תולדות השמים והארץ in Genesis 2, 4, and when the descendants of Peretz are described in Ruth 4, 18. The reason is that when the Messiah arrives the world will be renewed. Progress was deficient in some way during all the years between Genesis 2, 4 and the arrival of the Messiah, a direct descendant of Peretz. The reason the Torah appends the report about Yehudah, his sons, etc to the sale of Joseph is to underline that both Joseph and Yehudah played a part in the resumption of the trend towards a more perfect world, towards realizing the Creator's objective in creating the universe.
  Bereshit Rabbah 85, 1, commenting on Genesis 38, 1, the episode introducing Yehudah's marriage, etc., quotes Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman who interprets Jeremiah 29,11 in which G–d is on record that all His intentions are for the good of the Jewish people, even though it may not always appear thus to us. G–d also stresses that He is fully aware of our thoughts. The sale of Joseph is an example of how what appear to be plans and actions contrary to G–d's intentions are nonetheless furthering His plans. The brothers were concerned only with ridding themselves of Joseph and the danger they thought he represented to them. Joseph and Reuben, as well as Jacob, were each mourning their part in the fate that had befallen the other; Yehudah was busy choosing a wife. G–d, on the other hand, was busy paving the way for the eventual arrival of the Messiah.
  The message of the Midrash is clear. While our activities may appear as hurling the world towards destruction, G–d may utilise these very activities to further His plans. Even Jacob, who mourned Joseph and was inconsolable, and who prophesied that he would descend to the grave still mourning for his son (37, 35), did not realise that Joseph's fate was the catalyst that triggered positive historic developments. The same was true for Reuben who mourned Joseph's disappearance from the pit and his share of the responsibility. Jeremiah teaches us in the above quoted passage that we cannot evaluate the true significance of step by step historical developments until the whole cycle has been completed.
  In view of this, some people may be tempted to ask why were the brothers not rewarded for advancing G–d's plans instead of the ten Torah scholars becoming martyrs for a crime that had gone unpunished for so long? Neither the brothers, nor any other players on the stage of history were under compulsion to advance G–d's plans in that manner. Positive developments accrued from sinful actions, but the perpetrators can certainly not be given credit for these developments. Our sages have long formulated a principle: מגלגלין זכות על ידי זכאי וחובה על ידי חייב (Shabbat 32a). Loosely translated this means that innocent people are employed as instruments for (recognizable) positive developments, whereas guilty people are employed as the instruments for (apparently) negative developments. This whole principle needs to be elaborated on, but here is not the place for such a discussion.
  Before I shall explain how the sale of Joseph and his experiences were a step in establishing the kingdom of David and that of the Messiah, I must first deal with the many questions surrounding the whole treatment accorded Joseph by his brothers. The overriding difficulty is how the brothers, founders of the nation, morally outstanding people, men who in our traditional sources are put on a par with the angels, could conspire to commit such a grave sin as selling Joseph. How could they even have considered murdering him? Even a confirmed sinner who is regularly guilty of many transgressions would not be guilty of an offence of this kind!
  Bereshit Rabbah 93, 9 commenting on Genesis 45,1 "Joseph could not control himself," has Rabbi Chama bar Chaninah say that Joseph acted carelessly by instructing everybody to leave the room when he wanted to reveal himself to his brothers; had one of them kicked him he would have died. Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman says that Joseph acted prudently. He was well aware of the righteousness of his brothers and did not suspect them of being or becoming guilty of bloodshed. He was certain that the brothers would not even kill an Egyptian who had framed them (they considered him an Egyptian). He certainly did not suspect them of wanting to kill their own brother who was a צדיק, a pillar of the elitist society of the world! 
  Moreover, Joseph had already heard the brothers express remorse over the way they had treated Joseph (42, 21) We have found another Midrash according to which the brothers tried to kill Joseph when he revealed himself, but that an angel intervened and scattered them. The assumption underlying that statement seems to be that the brothers felt so ashamed that their very shame prompted them to do away with its cause. Psychologically, this seems strange indeed! Remorse and repentance are traditionally feelings triggered by shame. Why, in this case, should these feelings of shame have triggered the opposite reaction? We have ample proof from scripture that shame leads to repentance and forgiveness of one's sins, viz. Ezra 9,6: "O my G–d, I am too ashamed and mortified to lift my face to You, O my G–d, etc." We are told in Berachot 12b, that whoever commits a sin and is ashamed of that sin will have his sins forgiven. How then could feelings of shame have triggered the brothers' desire to kill Joseph?
  Another difficulty is that we have mentioned earlier is that the brothers had included the שכינה in their conspiracy not to reveal the sale of Joseph to anyone. If Jacob, who was flesh and blood, refused to be associated with the conspiracy of Shimon and Levi, as he said on his deathbed (Genesis 49,6), how could the שכינה have become a party to such a conspiracy?
  The next difficulty is: How could a righteous son loved by his father not inform his father that he was alive and save him an untold amount of anguish? Even if Joseph had found himself at the end of the world, instead of in a country bordering on the land of Canaan, was he not duty bound to let his father know that he was alive instead of letting him suffer pain for twenty-two years?
  Another problem in the whole episode is the argument between Yehudah and Joseph with Benjamin as its focus. This argument appears to have been provoked by the planting of Joseph's silver cup in Benjamin's sack.
  We also need to understand Joseph's accusing the brothers of being spies. The brothers's denial: "Your servants have not been spies" (42, 11), phrased in the past tense, is also peculiar. They should have said: "We are not spies."
  Still another problem is why Joseph jailed Shimon instead of Levi; after all they had planned and acted in unison as we know from Jacob in 49, 5: "Shimon and Levi are brothers."
  Why did Joseph pretend to use the silver goblet as an instrument of magic, an activity so totally unworthy of a man of Joseph's stature to engage in? Usually the Torah goes to great lengths to avoid calling a forbidden thing by its proper name. Why not here also? What could be more revolting than any association with the original serpent, i.e. the expression “5 ,44) ”נחש ינחש אדם אשר כמוני)?
  There is also the justified question by Nachmanides how the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah, with whom Joseph is described in the Torah (37, 2) as especially friendly, could have been a party to the conspiracy against him?
  When Joseph revealed himself to his brothers in Parshat Vayigash (commencing in 45,1), there are a number of points which merit our close attention. Joseph said in 45,5: "And now do not grieve, etc." What did Joseph mean by "and now?" 
  Why did Joseph repeat three times in verses 5, 7, and 8 that it was G–d who had sent him to Egypt? 
  What did Joseph mean when he said in 45, 8: "G–d has made me father of Pharaoh?" How was Joseph "father" of Pharaoh? On the contrary, it was Pharaoh who had treated Joseph like a father treats his son! The very fact that Pharaoh emphasized that he would be greater than Joseph only by dint of the throne he occupied (41, 40) certainly made Joseph appear as junior to him!
  On the verse: "He fell around the neck of Benjamin his brother and wept," in 45, 14, Rashi comments that Joseph envisioned the destruction of the tabernacle in Shiloh as well as the destruction of the Temple. Why would a sour note be introduced into this moment of joy?
  I have already mentioned that just as G–d is unique, so is Israel unique, and that this is a reason why there is such a close relationship between G–d and Israel. It is the reason why כי לא יטוש ה' את עמו בעבור שמו הגדול, "that G–d will not abandon His people for the sake of His great Name" (Samuel I 12,22). The numerical value of G–d's Ineffable Name amounts to 26, twice the numerical value of אחד, "one", or 13. Israel's uniqueness added to G–d's uniqueness makes 26. If G–d were to abandon Israel, He would impair His "great Name." The means of the close relationship between G–d and Israel is the holy Torah, all of which is composed of letters in the name of G–d. Torah may be viewed as the revelation of G–d. By its observance of Torah, Israel "awakens" the spiritual dimensions of Torah, i.e. the mystique surrounding the various names of G–d. The result produced is that Israel literally "cleaves" to G–d. When we view the uniqueness of Jacob and the uniqueness of Joseph, we may also view each of them as בעלה של תורה, the master of Torah. Jacob is the proverbial איש תם יושב אהלים, whereas Joseph is the בן זקונים. Whatever Jacob had learned in the academy of Shem and Ever (after he left home and before he arrived at Laban's), he transmitted to his son Joseph.
  Ideally, the "crown" of Torah should be paired with two other "crowns," namely the "crown" of מלכות, Royalty, and the "crown" of כהונה, the "crown" of Priesthood. Torah was given in order to be studied, to be observed (negative commandments), and to be performed (positive commandments). The most important aspect of the "performance" is the sacrificial service performed by the priests. This is why that aspect of Torah performance is called עבודה, Service, [without any adjective defining the nature of the Service. Ed.] This then is the meaning of the כתר כהונה. The priests who perform their tasks in the Temple are perceived as wearing that "crown." There is also a need for the כתר מלכות, the "crown" of Royalty, in order to infuse the people with due respect for G–d's law. They must be encouraged to be diligent in observing Torah statutes. The function of Torah scholars has traditionally been to supervise, to exhort the people to perform their duties, just as it was the task of the prophets when we were still blessed with their presence among us. Moses, the greatest of the prophets, was described by our sages as "King," because he had the authority of a crowned king. 
  For practical purposes these three "crowns" serve a single objective. We can now appreciate why the Jewish people's task at the revelation at Mount Sinai was described as becoming a "kingdom of Priests, and a holy nation" (Exodus 19, 6). Here we have a clear allusion to the "crown" of kingdom and the "crown" of Priesthood Both "crowns" serve to promote Torah observance. 
  Joseph acquired the "crown" of Torah which was handed over to him by his father Jacob. The "crown" of Priesthood was acquired by Levi; as soon as he was born G–d dispatched the angel Gabriel and brought him before His Presence, and equipped him with 24 gifts and called his name לוי, as has been explained on the relevant verse in Parshat Vayetze. [According to Midrash Hagadol the absence of a subject such as "his father," or "his mother," when Levi was named, suggests that he was named in Heaven. Ed.] Yehudah acquired the "crown" of Royalty. This crown was especially appropriate for Yehudah as it corresponds to the "kingdom of Heaven," the "fourth leg". The three patriarchs formed the first three legs of a three-legged "throne." They had contributed their three respective attributes to form those three legs, i.e. חסד גבורה, and תפארת. Those three attributes are perceived as radiating the three "lines" known as קו החסד, קו הדין, and קו הרחמים. 
  King David held on to the קו המלכות, i.e. the fourth "line." This is what is commonly known as מגן דוד, the shield of David. [קוים is an expression used in Kabbalah to describe the conversion of concepts into a practical effect in our lives. The concept חסד becomes רחמים, i.e. applied חסד, by means of such a קו, line. Ed.] The Zohar (Sullam edition page 70), commenting on Genesis 29,35 "she stopped bearing children," explains that the word ותעמד is a reference to the establishment of this fourth leg of G–d's throne, and that anyone who challenges the kingdom of David is considered as challenging the שכינה, the reason being that the fourth leg of the throne is supplied by the kingdom of David on earth. David is the מרכבה, carrier of G–d's Glory down here in our domain. Once that fourth leg has been contributed to G–d's Throne, His name י-ה-ו-ה will be complete. The root of the line חסד is the letter יוד. The root of the line דין is the first ה"א in that Name, whereas the line רחמים is the letter ו"או. These three lines together, formed through the attributes of the patriarchs, form a מרכבה. By adding the last letter ה"א of the Ineffable Name, G–d's name is made complete, whole. Once the Kingdom of David will flourish as that of the Messiah, once the prediction: והיתה לה' המלוכה (Ovadiah 1, 21) will be realized, the other half of that prophecy ביום ההוא יהיה ה' אחד ושמו אחד will be fulfilled also (Zachariah 14,9). The final letter in each of the last three words of that latter prophecy together spell דוד. A close look at the name יהודה will reveal some remarkable allusions. Firstly, it contains the letters of the Ineffable Name plus the letter ד. That letter, or rather the number 4 that it represents, is an allusion to the fourth leg of G–d's Throne. 
  I have already explained how all the attachment to G–d is achieved by means of Torah, and how all the "crowns" have as their purpose to further that attachment. The "crown" of Royalty may therefore be viewed as conferred due to the Torah. The tribe of Levi, which represents the "crown" of Priesthood, is described in Deuteronomy 33,10 as performing the function: יורו משפטיך ליעקב ותורתך לישראל, "They will instruct Jacob in Your laws and Israel in Your Torah." Clearly, this "crown" too is conferred thanks to the Torah. Concerning the Kingdom of the house of David, we find that our sages comment on the verse in Samuel I 16, 18: וה' עמו "G–d was with him," by remarking that the שכינה accompanied David wherever he went. The "crown" of Royalty is part of the "crown" of the Priesthood since the Kingdom of the seed of Yehudah was rooted in Tamar the daughter of Shem, who had been a High Priest already in the days of Abraham (an alternate name for Malki Tzedek mentioned in Genesis 14,18, as per Nedarim 32). When Israel later on sent spies to the land of Canaan prior to conquering it under the leadership of Joshua, the latter sent out Pinchas and Caleb. Caleb was from the tribe of Yehudah who represented Royalty, whereas Pinchas represented the Priesthood. (Cf. Bamidbar Rabbah 16, 4 commenting on Joshua 2, 1) Something of a similar nature will occur in the future when the prophet Elijah will represent the Priesthood before the arrival of the Messiah, and the Messiah will be Royalty incarnate. Pinchas is identified with the prophet Elijah. 
  The Hasmoneans during the period of the second Temple erred when they claimed the crown of Royalty in addition to the crown of Priesthood. They could not have been unaware that the crown of Royalty is reserved for descendants of David. Their error consisted in thinking that the crown of Royalty is merely a derivative of the crown of priesthood. They considered the maternal descent (genealogy) as halachically important. This is why they provided a throne for the mother of the king.
  We find there are three (wearers of) "crowns,” i.e. Joseph, Levi Yehudah. The "crown" of a good name, which is described in Avot 4,13 as surpassing all other crowns, is Jacob, who is the root of all the other "crowns. Joseph is the highest ranking of the other three "crowns," because the other two exist only for the sake of the "crown" of Torah. 
  The allusion to the study (למוד) of Torah is found in the letter ל. There are four letters in the alphabet which contain the letter ל when spelled out: אל"ף, גימ"ל, דלי"ת, למ"ד. The ל in the letter אל"ף alludes to Jacob, who is the "big" א of Adam, as we have pointed out earlier. He is the שר ואלוף ושורש העולם, the Prince, the Champion, the root of the whole world. The letter ל in the גימ"ל alludes to Levi, who was the third son born to Leah. This tribe may be considered as associating Torah study already with its formation within the mother's womb. Moses, who represents Torah more than anyone else, was also the third child of his mother. He handed us the Torah in the third month, a Torah intended for a people divided into the three groups of כהן-לוי-ישראל, viz. Shabbat 88a. [This allusion is expanded even further in the Talmud. Ed.] The letter ל in the דלי"ת alludes to Yehudah who was the fourth son of Leah. He provided the fourth leg of G–d's Throne. When the letter ל is spelled as a word, we have the word למוד, study, the essence of Torah. This is an allusion to Joseph who represents the "crown" of Torah. Another way of viewing the letter ל is to focus on its numerical value, i.e. 30 ,שלושים. When Joseph attained his position of power the Torah describes him as בן שלושים שנה בעמדו לפני פרעה, "Thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh (41,46). Thus the mystical dimension of the letter ל is the "crown" of Torah. The Torah reports (Exodus 13, 19) that Moses took the bones of Joseph, (when the Jews left Egypt. He fulfilled a promise given to Joseph on oath by his surviving brothers.) the word for "bones" in Hebrew being the same as the word for "essence," i.e. עצם. The Torah's report then has a dual meaning, i.e. Moses took Joseph's essence with the Jewish people when they left Egypt. Having acquired Joseph's essence, Moses was later able to give the Jewish people the Torah. To come back to the roots. 
  Jacob was the root of all these "crowns." His "crown," that of the "good name," surpasses all the others in value, it is an essential ingredient in making all the other "crowns" truly meaningful. When Jacob was already sick and his son Joseph visited him, Jacob bowed down to his son because he wore the most important "crown" of all, the crown of Torah. (cf. Genesis 47,31 according to Rashi, who stresses Joseph's righteousness under trying circumstances) [Rashi on 48,2, does not specifically refer to a crown of spiritual significance; the impression Rashi gives is that anyone wearing a temporal crown deserves respect. Ed.] Levi wears the crown of the Priesthood, Yehudah that of Royalty. The specific "power" associated with the "crown" of Priesthood is tied to the confines of the Holy Temple. We find that only kings of the Davidic dynasty were allowed to be seated within the confines of the Temple (Yuma 25a). This is due to David being considered a מרכבה carrier of G–d's שכינה. The Temple on earth is, after all, a מרכבה, for its counterpart in Heaven. We have scriptural proof for this in Habakuk 2, 20: וה' בהיכל קדשו, הס מפניו כל הארץ "And G–d resides in His holy Abode; be silent before Him all on the earth!" The sanctuary is the attribute of Royalty as expressed in the name א-ד-נ-י, whose numerical value -65- equals that of the word היכל. It is also the numerical value of the word הס; the sanctuary is perceived as the foundation of the equivalent of earth in the Celestial Regions.
  The Holy Temple within the territory of Benjamin is an enduring one and will be of infinite duration in the future. The temporal crown worn by the tribe, the kingdom of Saul (who was also from the tribe of Benjamin), was of only limited duration. The very name שאול, contains an allusion to this temporary nature. His "crown" was "borrowed."
  Let me proceed to explain the nature of Benjamin's sanctity. Benjamin was on a loftier spiritual plane than his other brothers because he never bowed down to Esau who represented the סטרא דשמאלא, the left side of the diagram of emanations, the home of Samael. (At the time of the fateful encounter between Jacob and Esau he had not yet been born). The fact that his father Jacob bowed down to Esau cannot be held against Benjamin. The Zohar, commenting on the relevant verse in Genesis 33,3 (Sullam edition page 35), in which Jacob is described as prostrating himself before Esau seven times, writes as follows: "Rabbi Eliezer asked how Jacob, the choicest of the patriarchs, could contravene the injunction of the Torah in Exodus 34,14: 'do not prostrate yourself before any other deity for the Lord is a jealous G–d?' The answer given is that far from bowing down to the anti-G–d part that Esau represented, Jacob in fact prostrated himself before the שכינה, for we find at the beginning of the same verse: והוא עבר לפניהם, "It proceeded ahead of them." This excuse can be used only for Jacob, but not for his sons. The "11 stars," i.e. the other tribes bowed to Esau, not to the שכינה. The knees which bent to Esau, representative of Samael, were the cause that Samael succeeded in inflicting an injury on Jacob's thigh joint. That injury represented judgment מדה כנגד מדה, tit for tat, because Esau's thigh joint bore the imprint of the original serpent. We have pointed out that the Targum of יודע ציד, hunter, (Esau's profession) is נחשירכן. The Tziyoni reads this as two words נחש ירכן, seeing that the serpent's image [snake shaped birthmark? Ed.] was tattooed on Esau's thigh joint. We dealt with this in our commentary on Toldot. Because of this additional dimension of sanctity possessed by Benjamin even before his birth, G–d had prophesied to Jacob in 35, 11, ומלכים מחלציך יצאו, "Kings will emerge from your loins." People bending their knees to the kings from the tribe of Benjamin, will be the fitting contrast to the other tribes who had bent their knees to Esau instead. This stands out particularly in view of the list of kings descended from Esau that are listed in פרשת וישלח. I have mentioned that righteous Jewish kings represent the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth. 
  The prophet Samuel alluded to this mystical dimension of Benjamin not having bent his knee to some alien deity when he commanded that the cook bring the portion which he had told him to set aside. Thereupon the cook lifted up the thigh and what was on it, and set it before Saul. Samuel then said: "What has been reserved has been set before you" (Samuel I 9,23-25.) Rav Galanti, in his book Kol Bochim (on Lamentations), elaborates on this when he discusses the verse in Lamentations 4, 18: צדו צעדנו מלכת, "Our steps were checked; we could not walk, etc." I myself have dealt with this verse elsewhere.
  Samuel hinted to Saul about these mysteries when he said to him: "Even if you deem yourself "small" in your own eyes, you are nonetheless the head of the tribes of Israel. The Lord anointed you king over Israel" (Samuel I 15,17). Samuel meant that the reason Saul became king was that he belonged to the youngest tribe of Israel. Had he not belonged to the tribe of Benjamin, his forefather would have been one of those who bowed to Esau. As it is, he was saved from this ignominy by the fact that Benjamin had not yet been born at the time. As a result, Saul, the king from the tribe of Benjamin, was entrusted with the task of destroying Amalek, the descendant of Esau. The thigh presented to Saul symbolized a thigh that was free from the "tattoo" of Esau, the residue of the original serpent.
  When Israel had sinned, it was attacked by נחש the king of Ammon (Samuel 1,11,1). At that time, immediately after his appointment, Saul defeated the Ammonites. When Saul failed to carry out his task against Amalek completely, the נחש "serpent" (in the guise of the Philistines) raised its head; eventually Saul himself in desperation consulted with the witch of Endor, -an example of מעשה נחשים.- In the end, (Samuel I chapter 28) Saul was killed, and the kingdom reverted back to its permanent designates, to the house of Yehudah-David. David is described as אדמוני וטוב רואי, "ruddy, good looking," in Samuel I 16,12, the counterpart to Esau, who was called אדום, because he had absorbed all the pollutants of the original serpent which had made blood (red) the symbol of death. Esau had absorbed all this pollutant in order that Jacob might be free of it. We have shown that this was what Bileam alluded to when he proclaimed: כי לא נחש ביעקב, "that Jacob does not contain a vestige of the original serpent" (Numbers 23,23). The colour אדום, then can originate either in the קליפה, representing the blood of impurity, or in a sacred domain. When it originates in the sacred domain it is described, as in Samuel, as טוב רואי, "beautiful to behold." David is descended from Peretz, who was פורץ גדר, "achieved a break-through" against the forces of the נחש. David was an outstanding Torah scholar; when the honor of G–d was at stake he knew how to take revenge in the manner of a serpent. It is said of him: כי משורש נחש יצא צפע, "for from the stock of a snake there sprouts an asp" (Isaiah 14,29). The allusion is to David's father Yishai (cf. Targum) who is the נחש in our verse. These terms are used by the prophets as forces that are able to parry and subdue the original serpent, root of impurity. 
  To sum up: The Holy Temple will be built on the territory of Benjamin who had never bowed nor prostrated himself before Esau. Midot (2, 6) mentions thirteen occasions when one had to prostrate onself before G–d in the Holy Temple. That number corresponded to the numerical value in the word אחד, "One." When, in exile, after the destruction of the Holy Temple, Mordechai, scion of the tribe of Benjamin, refused to bow down to an alien deity, he, Esther's godfather, became the instrument through whom the Temple was rebuilt with the help of the Persian king Cyrus, a son of Esther. Although the kingdom did not remain in the hands of the tribe of Benjamin, the Holy Temple remained and will remain in that territory. In retrospect, all this was alluded to by the manner in which Samuel anointed Saul. He used only a cruse of oil; he anointed David by pouring the oil from a קרן, horn. The significance of this will be explained later.
   David ruled for forty years. This figure is alluded to in the name Samuel which is comprised of the letters in the name Saul, שאול, with the letter 40=מ added. The first four letters allude to Royalty, the last to the 40 years David reigned. Samuel was from the tribe of Levi which wore the "crown" of Torah. Samuel himself was considered as equal to Moses and Aaron combined. Although he was known as a Levite, being a member of that tribe, he combined within himself elements of the priesthood, being traditionally considered the re-incarnation of the High Priest Aaron. When G–d told Moses in Exodus 4, 14: הלא אהרון אחיך הלוי וכו', "Is there not your brother Aaron the Levite?" He implied that there would be a Levite who at the same time was Moses' brother Aaron, i.e. Aaron's re-incarnate, the prophet Samuel. This secret has been revealed by the Arizal, and I have quoted his words on a previous occasion.
  We therefore find the "crown" of Torah and the "crown" of Priesthood combined within one person, Samuel, all for the sake of the "crown" of Torah. Joseph represented the "crown" of Torah as we have pointed out on page 306. The pillar the world rests on is called צדיק; Joseph, universally renowned as יוסף הצדיק is that pillar. The righteous person is the emanation יסוד which leads directly to the emanation מלכות. All the forces, the influences found within the various emanations are channeled to the emanation מלכות only after having passed through the emanation יסוד. All this has been described in Pardes Rimonim in the chapter called צינורות. The emanation מלכות has to be perceived as the מנהיג, guide of the physical universe, acting on behalf of the various other emanations in the name of the אין סוף, G–d Himself. This is the reason it is called מלכות עולם, kingdom of the universe. The pillar which keeps this world going is the צדיק, i.e. the צינור, pipe, which leads from יסוד to מלכות. We derive the "crown" of מלכות, Royalty, from the attribute of מלכות as well as the Holy Temple, the היכל השם, the site of the "crown" of Priesthood. Joseph was the ruler who repaired many of the shortcomings in the world.
  When discussing such repairs, תקונים, we must appreciate that the first step in such repairs is the element of סור מרע, "abandon evil," followed by the element of עשה טוב, "do good." The סור מרע element consists of the removal of the pollutants residual within us through the serpent's influence. This infection is one which spread further and further throughout all generations. Because of this, all the people born nowadays originate in what Rabbi Akavyah has called the טפה סרוחה, the smelly drop of semen. When the residue of that smelly drop is removed, Torah can be received in its entirety. Torah represents the element עשה טוב, do good. Torah is the very reverse of pollution. This is the reason the Talmud Sukkah 52b advises that "if the מנוול, i.e. the evil urge, attacks you, drag him to the house of Torah study." After you have done this, G–d's Torah can also be called תורת האדם, the Torah of man. The name אדם for man, the species, stems from the word אדמה in the sense of something very superior; [such as Genesis 2, 7, where man is described as having been formed out of אדמה, which Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai understood as the emanation בינה. Ed.] Man was entitled to that appellation as long as he had not sinned. Man will again be entitled to that name when the Messiah has come and the repair to the world caused by Adam's sin has been completed. The entire process of repair occurs in stages. The four people that have been called by the name אדם, are Adam, David, the Messiah and the people of Israel. [we have mentioned that Israel is a collective term for a single composite concept comprised of many units. Ed.]
  Adam and Eve, who were the cause of the drop of semen becoming smelly, were also instrumental in Adam ejaculating semen for one hundred and thirty years without that semen impregnating his wife. Instead, that semen turned into a variety of evil spirits, thus necessitating additional refinement צירוף, and תקונים. The exile in Egypt was the first step designed to remove impurity from the holy seed of the descendants of Jacob who resembled the spiritual beauty of Adam before he had sinned. Jacob's first drop of semen was intended to impregnate Rachel, whom he thought he had married under the wedding canopy. It was Joseph who kept alive the covenant with G–d, and therefore the descent to Egypt of Jacob's entire family was orchestrated through Joseph. The area in which this refinement was to take place was one called ערות הארץ, a part of the earth in which shame resides. The earth is perceived as being similar to a human being in that it has a head, eyes, arms, legs, as well as parts corresponding to the private parts of a human being, מקום ערוה. Our sages deduce this from such verses as Proverbs 8, 26: ראש עפרות תבל, "the head of the clumps of dust in the world;" earth is also described as רחבת ידים "possessed of generous hands" (Genesis 34,21). Scripture speaks of the earth's טבור, "navel." There are many similar metaphors which describe parts of the earth. This means that though earth is one continuous mass, entity, it possesses many parts just as a human being, who is a unit, has many parts. Just as various organs in the human body perform different functions and possess different degrees of importance, so earth has many parts, each of which performs a different function.
  The land of Egypt is to earth what the מקום ערוה, seat of the reproductive organs, is to man. This is why Ezekiel 23, 20 describes Egyptians as ejaculating seminal discharge that resembles that of horses, and generally describing them as debauched. [The theme is that it is the nature of the earth itself which contributes to the debauchery of its inhabitants. Ed.] Jacob's descendants were exiled to Egypt because in that country it was easiest to transfer their share of the serpent's pollution to their surroundings. Once they had disposed of those pollutants they could emerge purified. Joseph was especially suited to start such a process because he had demonstrated by his previous behavior how to maintain the Holy Covenant with G–d entered into by Abraham when he circumcised himself. The evil influence of the serpent's pollution remained only in the descendants of Esau. The reason the Torah presents us with such a long list of Esau's descendants at the end of פרשת וישלח, is to inform us that they were all ממזרים, bastards. Rashi already comments in this manner on Genesis 36, 2. Esau went to the land of Se-ir because he did not want to undergo the exile experience in either Egypt or the land of Canaan (where he would not have been sovereign, seeing that Israel owned that land). Had he been prepared to undergo that experience, he, too, could have rid himself of the negative influence of the original serpent.
  Having concluded with the development of Esau's descendants, the Torah turns to Jacob's settling in ארץ ישראל. The Torah next tells us that the true descendant of Jacob was Joseph. Since the word Toldot also means the further development, even through re-incarnation, we are told that it was Joseph who set in motion these developments, i.e. the refinement of the Jewish people in the "iron crucible," the bondage experience in Egypt. Having concluded the process of refinement, Israel was ready to receive the "crown" of Torah. Even Jacob personally had to reside in Egypt for a while in order to rid himself of the sin of not having performed the commandment of honoring father and mother during the twenty years he was at Laban's and the two years (on the journey to Laban and back). Although G–d had told Abraham that his descendants would be part of Isaac's seed (Genesis 21,12 expounded on in the Talmud Nedarim 31), and the Torah meant this to exclude Esau as the carrier of the Abrahamitic tradition, the fact remains that during the years of Jacob's absence from his father's home, the people in the land of Canaan perceived Esau as the true heir, for it was he who ministered to the needs of his father and mother in spectacular fashion. As a result, Jacob had to suffer pain at the hands of his most precious seed, his son Joseph. He observed mourning for Joseph for twenty-two years during which Joseph was in Egypt, the land described as the pubes of the Earth. During those years Joseph atoned for the fact that only part of Isaac's seed developed in the manner hoped for.
  Joseph's failure to inform his father of his existence during all these years shows G–d's hand in this in one of two ways. Joseph may have received a message from the Holy Spirit not to reveal his whereabouts to his father. Naturally, he would have had to obey such a message, seeing that both he and his father were duty bound to obey G–d's commands. Alternately, G–d may have denied Joseph free choice in this particular matter. In either case Joseph could not be faulted for not revealing his fate to Jacob. G–d's reason for interfering with Joseph's free choice could have been to ensure that Jacob would atone for being remiss in the performance of כבוד אב ואם, honoring father and mother. We find that something of a similar nature occurred in the life of Yehudah and Tamar. Yehudah had not meant to consort with a harlot; however, G–d sent an angel, the one appointed over sexual desire, so that Yehudah acted under some sort of compulsion when he slept with Tamar whom he thought to be a harlot. The fact that the result of such union (with a woman who was actually the daughter of the High Priest of G–d), became the forerunner of the Messiah King David suggests that this outcome was brought about through Divine intervention.
  To get back to the subject of the תיקונים. Joseph, in his capacity as the sacred seed of his father, who in turn represented the spiritual beauty of Adam prior to his sin, was truly created בצלם אלוקים, in the image of G–d, because he was not the result of a smelly drop of semen. He wore the striped coat, a metaphor for the garments woven of light worn by Adam and Eve before they sinned, as we have outlined on pages 290,294. He was therefore the natural enemy of Esau who represented the opposite attributes, the pollution by the serpent, the smelly drop of semen, and the start of a long line of bastards. He demonstrated his loyalty to the Holy Covenant by resisting the lures of Potiphar's wife, by remaining in control of his baser urges. He merited to be elevated to kingdom because his self-control exercised in a country which symbolized sexual promiscuity and perversion, was that much more remarkable. The "crown" of Royalty worn by Joseph was first and foremost his mastery over the guardian angel of Egypt; we have already explained on page 295 that Egypt, (and hence its guardian angel), was second only to ארץ ישראל itself. The שר של מצרים is second only to Israel in the ranks of carriers of G–d's chariots. When the Torah describes Joseph as "riding" in the מרכבת המשנה, this is a hyperbole for Joseph having replaced the guardian angel of Egypt in that role. This augured well for Israel, who, though they would become enslaved in Egypt, would achieve their spiritual refinement in that environment. After that period of refinement, Israel would עלה יעלה, ascend from Egypt spiritually, having witnessed G–d's miracles and judgments on the Egyptians. They would see the guardian angel of Egypt humbled, as described in Numbers 33, 4: “ובאלוהיהם עשה שפטים, The Lord executed judgments on their gods."
  Joseph is correctly described as "father of Pharaoh," meaning Pharaoh's guardian angel; Joseph also gave spiritual impetus to Israel. Had it not been for Joseph, the Jewish people might still be enslaved. Joseph "opened the door" thanks to his moral spiritual greatness; thus we observe how G–d sent the cure even before the injury had been sustained, i.e. He sent Joseph into Egypt long before the bondage of the Jewish people in Egypt began. When the children of Israel, after many years of bondage, marched out of Egypt with heads held high, they had been wielded into a single nation whom G–d chose as His people. They eventually matured to the point of having a real flesh and blood king, King David of the tribe of Yehudah. Had Joseph not reigned as king in Egypt, no royalty would have emanated from the tribe of Yehudah and Israel might never have been forged into a single nation.
  Just as the kingdom of Joseph had to precede the kingdom of Yehudah, so the Tabernacle in Shiloh, in Joseph's territory, had to precede the Temple in Jerusalem. Even though the Tabernacle in Shiloh was destroyed, its very existence had paved the way for the permanent Temple. It had been the צינור, "pipeline," that led to the permanent Temple. Once the sanctity of the Tabernacle of Shiloh had been transferred to the Temple in Jerusalem, it remained there permanently. Joseph in his capacity of the צדיק who is the pillar of the world, had still been the pipeline that had made possible the Presence of the sanctity on earth as manifest in the holy Temple. We find a parallel example of the influence of a single individual in the Talmud which quotes G–d as saying that the livelihood enjoyed by the entire world is due to the merit of one man, namely "My son Chaninah who is content with a small measure of carobs for himself from Sunday to Friday" (Taanit 10a). The Talmud employs the word בשביל, normally translated for the sake of, or on account of; here the author understands that word to mean: through the שביל, the path, analogous to צינור, pipeline.
  As soon as Israel left Egypt, the Psalmist tells us: בצאת ישראל ממצרים … היתה יהודה לקדשו, ישראל ממשלותיו. "When Israel went forth from Egypt,…. Yehudah became His holy one, Israel His dominion" (Psalms 114,1-2). Later in Numbers 10, 14, when the people were divided into four camps, Yehudah again was the first army to break camp and march ahead of the people. Yehudah was also the first of the twelve princes to offer his offering in honor of the dedication of the Holy Tabernacle (Numbers 7,12). This pre-eminence of the tribe of Yehudah also continued after the people inherited the land of Israel, until the days of Samuel, when the people demanded to be led by a king, and the choice fell on Saul from the tribe of Benjamin. As already explained, the position of king was only on loan to the tribe of Benjamin, as apparent from the very name שאול, "something borrowed." Within less than a generation, a scion of the tribe of Yehudah, David, became the king of Israel. Ever since, Jacob's blessing in Genesis 49, 10 that "the scepter of Royalty will not depart from members of the tribe of Yehudah" has been fulfilled.
  When the people sinned, the sin resulted in the splitting of the kingdom between the tribe of Yehudah (Rechavam) and the tribe of Joseph (Ephrayim). Joseph, the pipeline from the emanation יסוד which is the pillar on which the world is founded, then demonstrated that his influence was not limited to what goes on in Jerusalem, the source of the kingdom of David, but that he had sufficient influence to ensure that the kingdom of the Ten Tribes who had denied allegiance to Rechavam son of Solomon was given to a descendant from his tribe, Yerovam ben Nevat (Kings I chapter 12). This development caused untold grief; it divided the hearts of the Jewish people. Hosea 10, 2 already stated: חלק לבם עתה יאשמו, "once their hearts are divided (in their attitude to G–d) they will become guilty" (in a number of areas). Yerovam himself began by erecting two golden calves to prevent the people from making the pilgrimage to the Temple in Jerusalem, leading the people to worship those calves. Even the tribe of Yehudah copied the example of the Northern Kingdom and practiced all manner of abominations, many of which are described in Ezekiel chapter 16 et al. This kind of conduct by the Jewish people continued right up to the destruction of the Temple and the subsequent Babylonian exile. Even the return to Zion with Zerubavel and the building of the second Temple did not lead to a repair of the spiritual damage the Jewish people had caused during the reign of Yerovam and others. Proof of this is the fact that the five most prominent manifestations of the Divine Presence were never restored to us. [The holy ark, the tablets with the Ten Commandments, the breastplate with the Urim Vetumim, to name but some.] During the entire period of the second Temple the dynasty of David did not exist, and the only period that the Jewish people had a king at all was after the successful rebellion of the Hasmoneans against the Syrians who had introduced anti religious legislation and who had demanded that the Jewish people adopt Hellenism. This rebellion culminated in the festival of Chanukah. The Hasmoneans committed a grave error when, in addition to claiming the "crown" of the Priesthood, they also claimed the crown of Royalty in defiance of G–d's command. They were severely punished by G–d, and did not only lose the crown after four successive Hasmonean kings died a violent death, but Herod, son of a Gentile slave, became the next king after he had murdered nearly all the Hasmoneans still alive. All this is part of Nachmanides' commentary on Genesis 49, 10: לא יסור שבט מיהודה. The Talmud Baba Batra 50 goes so far as to say that anyone claiming to be descended from the Hasmoneans is bound to be a slave, i.e. have Herod's blood in him (Herod had married Miriam, a sister of the Hasmoneans). The failure to re-instate the house of David when there was a chance to do so will not be repaired until the coming of the Messiah. At that time, reinstatement of the dynasty of David will be preceded by the Kingdom of Joseph, since the משיח בן יוסף will precede the arrival of the משיח בן דוד. After the arrival of the משיח בן דוד the damage caused by the house of Joseph ever since the splitting of the Kingdom of David (Rechavam) under Yerovam will be repaired. The משיח בן יוסף, when he comes, does not come in order to establish his own dynasty, rather he comes to help re-establish the Davidic dynasty. He will even sacrifice his life in order to accomplish this. His blood will atone for the sins of the Jewish people. This atonement will take the form of the Davidic dynasty being restored to the Jewish people as an everlasting kingdom. When that stage in history will have been reached, both of Joseph's dreams will have been fulfilled. His two dreams foreshadowed his reign in Egypt, and his reign in the future as the משיח בן יוסף respectively. In both instances his reign preceded or will precede that of the reign of David or the in משיח בן דוד respectively. Both periods of the reign of the kingdom of Joseph were or will be beneficial for the whole Jewish people because in both instances they were or will be designed to pave the way for the permanent kingdom of David.
  When that time comes, the תיקון, "repair work" will have been completed and the world will be as good as at the time it was created when both body and soul were on an equally elevated level. It was said of Adam in Psalms 49, 13: אדם ביקר בל ילין; נמשל כבהמות נדמו, "Man does not even spend a single night on his pedestal; he is like the beasts that perish." This was the Psalmist's description of Adam's spiritual descent to the level of the ox. Our sages have said that the ox that Adam sacrificed had his horns protruding in front of his legs (Avodah Zarah 8). Had Adam not sinned, he could have lived up to the ideal described in Leviticus 1, 2: אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לשם, "when you Adam will offer yourself as an offering to G–d." Adam, endowed with everlasting life, would then have cleaved to G–d in the same manner as the righteous nowadays are described as doing after their death. We are told that the angel Michael, in his capacity as the High Priest in the Celestial Sanctuary, "sacrifices" the souls of the צדיקים. The repair-work was begun by the "ox" as an extension of Joseph whom the Torah describes as בכור שור, firstling ox (Deut. 33,19). The repair will be completed by the "lion," i.e. Yehudah. When that has been accomplished, Israel will be transported "on wings of eagles," in contrast to the time of the destruction, when the prophecy of Deut. 28,49: "G–d will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, etc.," was fulfilled. In the future the blessing of Deut. 32,11 in which G–d is described as taking Israel under His wing like an eagle, will come true. We observe that the different גלגולים, wanderings of the Jewish people, follow the pattern of the animals Ezekiel saw in his vision of the מעשה מרכבה, in Ezekiel 1, where the Chashmal is described as equipped with the features of man, ox, lion and eagle. At that time Israel will achieve an unparalleled degree of unity and not only the Lord will be One, but His name will be One. The last letters in the words אחד ושמו אחד combine to make the name דוד. When that has come to pass all the participants will have achieved ever-lasting life as had been intended by the Creator from the beginning.
  There is a disagreement between Maimonides and Nachmanides regarding the nature of the eventual perfection of the world. Maimonides feels that this period will not include physical life and all that is entailed by it. Nachmanides understands all the prophecies concerning that distant future as applying both to the soul and to the body. Since we believe that Nachmanides is correct, let us quote some comments by the Midrash Rabbah on 2 ,90 פרשת מקץ on that subject. Pharaoh said to Joseph: "I will be greater than you only by the throne" (Genesis 41, 40). Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said that Moses recorded two paragraphs in the Torah in which we have to learn a lesson from the wicked Pharaoh. One paragraph (Deut. 28,13) tells us that as long as we observe the Torah והיה רק למעלה, "You will always be on top." This could have led one to believe that we would equal G–d; therefore the Torah adds the word רק, only, to drive home the point that "My holiness is superior to your holiness." The same applies to Leviticus 19, 2 where the Torah enjoins us to be holy because G–d is holy. The very words "because I am holy," alert us to the fact that G–d's holiness surpasses any holiness we can attain. We have learned these inferences from Pharaoh. Pharaoh said "I am Pharaoh." This could have led Joseph to believe that his greatness would be similar to that of Pharaoh, אתמהא. To make sure that Joseph did not misunderstand, Pharaoh added the word רק, "only" (41, 40). 
  These words of the Midrash are quite difficult: First of all, we must understand whether the word קדש, holy, implies something greater than the word גדול, great; if גדולה is a higher status than קדושה, then the restrictive word רק should have been written in Leviticus 19, 2 and we would have arrived at the logical conclusion that if we cannot attain G–d's level of sanctity we could certainly not attain G–d's level of greatness as set out in Deut. 28,13. On the other hand, if קדושה is the higher status, the question can be reversed. If both קדושה and גדולה rank equally, the word רק needed to be written only in one of the three instances where גדולה and קדושה are mentioned.
  Another difficulty is why Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish stresses that "Moses recorded it for us." Did not Moses record every single word in the Torah and not just these few lines? Another difficulty is that the position of the word רק in Genesis is before the word אני, whereas in Leviticus the word קדש precedes the word כי. In Deuteronomy, the word רק also precedes the reference to G–d. The word אתמהא, "strange," with which Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish describes this whole comment is also peculiar. Why did he not simply say יכול כמוני, I could have thought: "just like Me!" What need was there for the word אתמהא? Rabbi Shimon does not add that word when referring to the erroneous assumption we could have made when reading the commandment to become holy in Leviticus! Another difficulty is that the Midrash did not bother to spell out what exactly we were to learn from the wicked Pharaoh concerning דברים גדולים וקדושים, great and holy matters!
  We have already explained that we never could have achieved greatness or holiness as a people had we not undergone the experience of enslavement to Pharaoh in Egypt. The pollutants of the serpent would have prevented us from achieving the spiritual level required. It was only in Egypt that we were spiritually cleansed and refined in body. It was due to Joseph's גלגול that we had a chance to purify the smelly drop of semen that was the origin of our existence, and to experience metamorphosis until eventually even our body would be pure enough to be garbed in the garments woven of light worn by the first pair of human beings. All this will be achieved with the help of Torah, by studying it and practicing it. Study of Torah is the intellectual and emotional achievement of the soul, whereas the physical carrying out of Torah commandments achieves something similar for our body. 
  I have also pointed out earlier that the letters א-ג-ד-ל, are the ones that each contain the letter ל when you spell them as words. I have also mentioned that the letter א in that word אגדל refers to Jacob who is unique and whose name is engraved under the Throne of G–d. Any kind of אגדל, greatness, is derived from that "Throne." The Talmud in Shabbat 88b, portrays G–d as saying to Moses when he ascended to Heaven to receive the Torah and was challenged by the angels: "Hold on to My "Throne." When Pharaoh said to Joseph: "I shall be greater than you only by the throne," this was merely a hint which Joseph understood fully, i.e. למד. Although Pharaoh, of course, did not appreciate Heavenly forces and the manner in which they operate, he did know that the people of Joseph were destined to play a vital role in the future of mankind. By saying: רק הכסא אגדל ממך, Pharaoh hinted that when it came to the throne and the greatness of Joseph, he wanted Joseph to remember that it was he, Pharaoh, who had enabled Joseph to rise to that splendor. Pharaoh wanted that the Jewish people (read Joseph's people) therefore associate his (Pharaoh's) name with their glorious future. Little did he realize that the real reason Pharaoh contributed to the refinement and elevation of the Jewish people was because they were enslaved and tortured by a subsequent Pharaoh. It is this that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish wanted to tell us when he referred to the paragraphs in which Moses taught us a lesson to be learned from "the wicked Pharaoh."
  The reason the Midrash picked these two examples was that they represent the two aspects of our ascent, that of the soul and that of the body, i.e. תלמוד ומעשה, theory and practice. When he descended from Mount Sinai Moses himself encountered the experience both of wearing garments woven of light and of the skin of his face radiating light; both his body and his soul had undergone similar refinement (Exodus 34, 29). When Moses prophesied he never had to prepare himself by first negating the importance of his body since his body was on a level permitting free communication with the Divine. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish mentioned Moses in the Midrash quoted in order to show us how Moses achieved the blending of body and soul in holiness.
  To get back to the two items mentioned in this Midrash, גדולה וקדושה. The term גדולה is applied to achievements by the soul, whereas the term קדושה is used to refer to achievements by the body. A terrestrial kingdom such as that of Pharaoh is in a manner of speaking an allusion to a Celestial Kingdom. Just as a human being consists of two different levels, his body and his soul, the visible and the invisible, so G–d is basically invisible by His very nature; however, G–d has assumed a degree of "visibility" by dint of His פעולות, actions. G–d's גדולה, greatness, is due to His Essence. His קדושה, holiness, becomes manifest to us through the guidance He exercises in our world. As far as G–d is concerned, His גדולה takes precedence over His קדושה, holiness. In our world, the priorities are reversed, because all our actions are a ladder which enables us to ascend intellectually, spiritually. In our world one proceeds from the נגלה, the visible, to the invisible, the concealed. This is why when we speak of a terrestrial kingdom which alludes to a Celestial Kingdom, the references to גדולה precede those to קדושה. In the absence of such considerations, however, קדושה precedes גדולה. When Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish describes גדולה, a spiritual quality, referring to the verse in Deuteronomy 28,13 he adds the word אתמהא to emphasize that it would be very strange even to suggest that the Jewish people could compare themselves in their thoughts to being on a level with G–d. To preclude such a strange idea we did not need the word רק in that verse as an exclusion. However, the word רק is meant to emphasize that the only spiritual level we cannot attain is that of G–d Himself. When it comes to other celestial forces that operate למעלה, in Celestial Regions, we can attain their spiritual level. In fact we will even be able to surpass the spiritual level of the angels in Heaven, as we have explained on repeated occasions. Had the Torah not written the word רק, and had it only written והיית למעלה, we would have assumed that the גדולה, greatness, that Israel could achieve would be short of that of the angels. As it is, we are told that the only spiritual height we cannot attain is that of G–d Himself.
  In Leviticus, where G–d exhorts us to become holy, such an achievement is in our power because it is the result of our actions, the result of free choice given to man. Rabbi Shimon says: "Did you think כמוני that you could be like Me?" Here Rabbi Shimon does not think that the thought of becoming equal to G–d is so strange; this is why he does not add the word אתמהא. Man might have compared his own freedom of choice to G–d's freedom of choice; in that respect he might have considered himself as on a par with G–d, who has no one who interferes with His freedom to carry out His designs. After all our Rabbis have assured us that הכל בידי שמים חוץ מיראת שמים, "Everything is within the domain of Heaven except the fear of Heaven" (Berachot 33b). We are told in Shabbat 31b, in the name of Rabbi Yochanan, that "the only thing G–d has in His world is the fear of Heaven." Rabbi Yochanan bases himself on Deuteronomy 10,12: "And now, what does the Lord G–d ask of you? Only to fear the Lord your G–d, to walk in His ways." We also have a verse in Job 28, 28: ויאמר לאדם הן יראת ה' חכמה, וסור מרע בינה. He said to man,: "Fear of the Lord is wisdom; to shun evil is understanding." The word הן in Greek means "one." 
  This is why Rabbi Yochanan understood G–d to speak about "His" world. This is along the lines of the commentary by Rabbeinu Bachyah on: יראת השם היא אוצרו, "Fear of the Lord is His treasure" (Isaiah 33, 6). He says that it is in the nature of kings to include things which are rare in their treasures. G–d is on record as saying in Chagai 2,8: "Gold and silver belong to Me." In view of this, what new treasure can G–d keep stored up? The only thing which is not already the property of G–d is the fear of G–d. It is something extraordinary – because it is up to man to acquire it – using his free will. It has never been under Divine control. This is the reason Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish used the word כמוני, "just like Me," as a supposition that could be entertained by Jewish people attempting to become holy. They had to be told that G–d's freedom of choice and man's freedom of choice do not lead to exactly the same level of holiness. We have a principle that הבא לטהר מסייעין לו, "He who sets out to purify himself receives a Heavenly assist" (Yuma 38b). We have another tradition which says that "he who sanctifies himself a little in this world will experience that he is sanctified a great deal more in the Celestial Regions." When man sets out to choose good, G–d assists him and adds sanctity. The addition supplied by G–d is greater than the initial amount of sanctity attained by man's own efforts. When Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish described G–d as saying "My holiness is superior to your holiness," what he meant was that G–d's contribution to our holiness is greater than our own, which is due to our freedom of choice.
  To return to the subject of the kingdom of Joseph. Its only purpose was to enable the Jewish people to be forged into a single nation, and the kingdom of Yehudah (David) to be established. The brothers did not understand this. They believed that Joseph wanted Royalty for its own sake, for both himself and his descendants. This is why they went to Dotan לבקש נחלי דתות, to devise legal schemes, to judge him according to Torah law. They all came to the conclusion that he was guilty of death. Even the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah, who were Joseph's closest friends, agreed that from the point of view of justice Joseph was guilty. He had disputed the authority of the kingdom of David; anyone doing so is guilty of death. Insubordination against the kingdom of David is equated with insubordination against the שכינה itself.
  This is why his brothers wanted to kill Joseph when he revealed himself and they saw that he had become king. The fact that he had realised (what they believed to have been) his ambition made him only more guilty in their eyes. G–d had to despatch an angel to disperse the brothers so as to prevent them from destroying Egypt. Joseph having received such a Heavenly assist, asked his brothers to approach him in order to explain to them the true nature of his being king. He explained to them that G–d had sent him ahead in order to facilitate their becoming a nation, and Yehudah's kingdom becoming established.
  Joseph said three separate times "G–d has sent me before you." The first time he referred to the literal meaning of כי למחיה שלחני אלוקים לפניכם, "G–d has sent me ahead to provide sustenance" (45,5). When Joseph mentioned a second time that G–d had sent him ahead in 45,7, he phrased it thus: לשום לכם שארית בארץ ולהחיות לכם לפלטה גדולה, "To provide refuge for you in the land, and to keep you alive for a great rescue." At first glance these words seem totally superfluous; שארית refers to something insignificant, whereas פלטה גדולה alludes to something major. Actually, Joseph alluded to two separate missions which he had been entrusted with in order to establish the kingdom of Yehudah. The first, a minor mission, was to establish a base for a kingdom of Yehudah in this world, i.e. the Exodus from Egypt, whereas the more important mission was that he would prepare the ground for the Messianic kingdom of David, i.e. play the role of the משיח בן יוסף. He explained that the Messiah ben Joseph would be slain as a martyr on behalf of the people of Israel, and that following his death the enduring kingdom of David-Messiah would arise. When that would occur, Joseph's blood would be avenged.
  Reuben had already hinted at this development when he told his brothers (42,22) that Joseph's blood was being demanded from them. True, they did not at the time understand the deeper meaning of what was happening and what was being said, but the words were inspired by G–d even though He had not revealed their full meaning to the brothers. The mystical dimension of Joseph's historical mission was that he acted in the capacity of forerunner – not only in the story related in our פרשה – but also in the distant future when he will be killed performing a similar mission and his blood will be avenged. This is what he told his brothers when he said: "Now not you have sent me here but G–d, who has placed me in the position of father to Pharaoh."
  Let us now concentrate on the meaning of the last words in that verse. We will then understand how Joseph's mission resulted in the development of Jacob as a clan into a nation. Joseph meant that G–d had appointed him to be Pharaoh's "father" in the sense of being his שר, spiritual representative. This is the significance of Joseph riding in the מרכבת המשנה, the "second chariot." We have described Egypt as the "naked area" of the earth. Since Joseph was loyal to the Holy Covenant with G–d because he should have been the issue of his father's first ever drop of semen, he was meant to be the ruler there and he was supposed to take the place of the שרו של מצרים. Joseph was first sold as a slave to the Egyptians, this in turn made an imprint on the Jewish people's future, and they too became slaves in Egypt. Later on they left Egypt as free men. G–d executed judgments on the gods of Egypt, i.e. their spiritual representative in Heaven, their שר. Israel saw their שר dead on the beaches of the sea (Exodus 14,30). Had this not occurred, we might still be enslaved to the Egyptians. 
  The reason why Joseph has to be dispatched in the future before the arrival of the משיח בן דוד is because he is the natural enemy of Esau inasmuch as he is his exact opposite. Esau is full of the pollutants of the serpent, Joseph, on the other hand, was singularly free of that pollution, as we have explained.
  
  As soon as the kingdom of the Messiah will be established, the remarkable feature will be that his former enemies will make peace with him, i.e. the קליפה will then be purified, and all the Gentile nations will acknowledge the truth. That is the day when G–d and His name will be One. Even the erstwhile נחש will be turned into חשן, (breastplate of the High Priest). The color red, which typified Esau, will turn white, completely pure. 
  This is the deeper significance of the kingdom of David, which at first glance does not appear to have been rooted in holiness. Simply consider Yehudah's involvement with Tamar whom he thought to be a harlot; or, if you will, think about Ruth, a descendant of an incestuous union between Lot and his daughter. Even Ruth's joining Boaz at night was not exactly the act of a model of chastity that we would have expected. If all these precedents did not disqualify David from becoming the role model of the eventual Messiah, we need not marvel at the eventual purification of those descendants of Esau who will still exist when the Messiah will be crowned king. All these apparently accidental happenings were part of G–d's plan. The tortuous developments which led to the emergence of David and eventually to the Messiah are an example of how eventually all the חצוניות, people and forces outside the realm of holiness, will be turned "outside in," and be restored to their original sacred root. 
  One of the most prominent allusions to such a development can be seen in the relationship between Yehudah and Tamar. When Yehudah sent his partner to pay Tamar the promised kid and to retrieve his signet ring, etc., the Adulamite is reported as asking the men of her place איה הקדשה, "where is the harlot that had been at the roadside?" This can also be read as Ayeh haKedushah "where is the holiness?" He received the reply that there had not been a harlot in that place (Genesis 38,21-22). This is an allusion to the angels who are constantly asking each other for the site of G–d's holiness, and who, in the future, are going to address this question to Israel. Israel's spiritual level in those days will be so far superior to that of the angels that even those who had been considered as חצונים, will have become sanctified outsiders, from a spiritual point of view. At that time the name of G–d will be as we say in the קדיש prayer: י"הא שמיה רבא, His name will be great. The letters י"הא are an allusion to the three ways in which the Ineffable Name can be spelled as words, using either the method with the א, the method with the ה, or the method with the letter י. [Example: the letter ה can be spelled ה"א, or ה"ה, or ה"י. ] When all three methods are used G–d's name is "great." We have pointed out on another occasion that the question the angels ask Israel is: מה פעל א-ל I have elaborated on this when discussing the meaning of the קדושה. 
  In our portion the word איה in verse 21 is the allusion to such an event in the future. When the Torah discusses the ערכין and תמורה legislation in Leviticus 27,10 we are told: והיה הוא ותמורתו קודש, (if one did substitute one animal for another) "both the one originally vowed and its substitute will be deemed holy." The word תמורתו can be perceived as symbolizing תמר and ורות whose letters make up the word תמורתו. Both Tamar and Ruth may certainly be viewed as "substitutes," seeing they had not been deliberately chosen for the role they were destined to play. Our sages also say that when Yishai (David's father) slept with David's mother and David was conceived, this was due to an error on Yishai's part. He had thought that he was sleeping with a maid or concubine (Psalms 51,7 Metzudat David). [The verse reads –David speaking – "Indeed I was born with iniquity; with sin my mother conceived me." Ed.] David himself then was also a substitute as far as his mother was concerned. All of these extraordinary circumstances were designed by G–d to demonstrate that the impure is capable of being redeemed and becoming pure. The sperm that impregnated the various mothers mentioned originated in purity, could be called זרע קודש, holy seed. [In a gloss the author draws our attention to Ruth 4,7 where we find the expression על הגאולה ועל התמורה, placing the words "redemption and substitution" side by side. He finds a deep significance in this and speculates that it alerts us to the lesson that through the process of תמורה, substitution, the impure can achieve purity.] Er and Onan died because they defiled such sacred seed. Eventually Yehudah himself had to impregnate Tamar in order to enable the dynasty of David to have its beginnings. When, later on in 38,26, Yehudah acknowledged that he was the father of the infant Tamar was carrying, the Torah adds the word ממני, which our sages in Targum Yerushalmi interpret as a Heavenly voice calling out that the outcome conformed with a Heavenly plan and that neither Yehudah nor Tamar were guilty of misconduct.
  When the people began to sleep with the daughters of Moab as reported in Numbers 25,1, and even Zimri the prince of the tribe of Shimon cohabited brazenly with Kosbi, a Midianite princess, it became necessary for Pinchas, who was a descendant of the tribe of Joseph on his mother's side – בנות פוטיאל – to repair the damage inflicted by this immoral act by means of killing the chief perpetrators, Zimri and Kosbi. When the Holy Covenant with G–d had been breached by the Israelites, it took a descendant of Joseph, who had starred by maintaining that Holy Covenant, to restore the harmonious relationship between Israel and G–d. [The word Putiel which appears in Exodus 6,25 as a father-in-law of Elazar, Pinchas' father, is a play on words, i.e. <i>pitpet</i> – someone who can overcome his passions. Eleazar clearly had been interested first and foremost to marry into a family with such a background, the name of his wife and Pinchas' mother being a secondary consideration. Ed.] In Numbers 38, 6 Moses and the leaders of the community are described as והמה בוכים, "they were crying." I have found a comment in a book called עשרה מאמרות, that the letters in the word בכים are the initials of the words ברוך כבוד ה' ממקומו. The relevance of this comment escapes most commentators. When considering my approach, however, the words of Rabbi Menachem Azaryah (author of עשרה מאמרות) make good sense. We have said that due to the holiness of the seed of Yehudah impregnating Tamar and in line with the allusion found in the word אי"ה, the Jewish people would ultimately attain the level of holiness which makes it necessary for the angels to inquire from them where G–d's holiness is to be found. In our days the angels can chant only ברוך כבוד ה' ממקומו, "Blessed be the Lord from His place" (wherever that may be). Rabbi Menachem Azaryah told us in a cryptic manner that Moses and the elders cried because -through an act by Zimri and his brethren- Israel would be placed in the position of not knowing where the site of G–d's holiness was to be found. It required a Pinchas, i.e. Elijah the prophet who will announce the arrival of the Messiah until Israel would once again be able to supply the angels with the correct answer as to the whereabouts of the site of G–d's holiness.
  Before this will occur, the משיח בן יוסף the natural enemy of Esau will come forth and will complete his task of liberating Israel from the serpent's pollutants just as he had begun to do when he had been given the mission to be "a father to Pharaoh" in the land that is known as ערות הארץ, "the naked part of the earth." Then the Messiah, who has his roots in the נחש (Yishai) can come forth as a צפע (as described on page 309 based on Isaiah 14,29. When Joseph's butler told the brothers that his master had said נחש ינחש איש אשר כמוני in 44,5, he alluded to the process of defeating the serpent at its own game; his master would be able to parry and subdue the negative forces from where they had emanated. 
  We thus see that both the beginning and the end of Joseph's missions were all for the benefit of the Jewish people as whole. Joseph's middle mission, however, – his part in the split-up of the kingdom and the break-up of the cohesion of the twelve tribes, as caused by king Jerovam of the tribe of Joseph – resulted from the commission of a sin. 
  We can now better understand why Joseph said to his brothers ועתה אל תעצבו, "Now do not be distressed" (45,5). He indicated that his present role did not give any rise to distress, though there might be a part he would play in the future which would cause distress to the dynasty of (Yehudah) David. Eventually even the regrettable part that he would play in the interval would be repaired by his role as the משיח בן יוסףAuthor's comment<i class="footnote">The word עתה, "now," may also be a hint that whereas no one would be punished for selling Joseph at this time, there would come a time (when the Romans tortured the ten scholars to death) when this sin would be visited upon the brothers' descendants.</i>.
  What I have explained so far may also help to answer a very serious question concerning Joseph's conduct when he interpreted Pharaoh's dream. Having explained the meaning of the dream, Joseph next volunteered a piece of advice to Pharaoh (41,33) which he introduced with the words: ועתה ירא פרעה איש נבון וחכם, "Now let Pharaoh appoint a wise and understanding man, etc." What business did Joseph – a slave and a prisoner to boot – have to offer gratuitous advice to Pharaoh? Clearly Joseph had aspirations to attain a position of authority in order to be able to further Divine plans and to replace the position of the שרו של מצרים, the regular spiritual patron of Egypt.
  Let us get back to the brothers who had originally suspected Joseph of harboring personal motives in his quest to become Royalty. Their suspicion is alluded to in פרשת ויגש, and expressed in Psalms 48,5: כי הנה המלכים נועדו עברו יחדו, המה ראו כן תמהו נבהלו נחפזו, רעדה אחזתם שם חיל כיולדה. The part about "See the kings," refers to Joseph and Yehudah; עברה יחדו describes their hatred of each other (from the word <i>evrah</i> for anger); המה ראו כן תמהו is an allusion to Genesis 43, 33 where the brothers ויתמהו, express their amazement to one another at the seating arrangements made by Joseph which placed them in the order of age. The reference to the brothers' terror and fright, נבהלו, etc., is to the moment when Joseph revealed himself and the brothers were frightened (45,3). The words רעדה אחזתם, "Panic seized them", refers to the other brothers who said: "kings are arguing with one another" (the debate between Joseph and Yehudah), "let the kings fight it out among themselves." 
  It is clear that the author of this interpretation understood Yehudah as accusing Joseph of having personal designs in his ambition to be king. This is the reason why he was angry at him. Joseph, on the other hand, was angry because he felt he had been accused unjustly of harboring personal motives, while his real motive had been to help bring about the kingdom of David based on the house of Yehudah. All of this transpired even though Joseph had not yet revealed himself to the brothers. There were sparks of Holy Spirit which were uttered by both parties to this verbal battle, though both may not have been fully aware of their historical meanings at the time. I believe that the brothers not only doubted Joseph's spiritual eminence, but that they even had doubts about whether the man claiming to be their brother was indeed Joseph. They were afraid to openly express these doubts, and this is the reason why they uttered words that could be interpreted in more than one way.
  As far as the approach of Yehudah to Joseph was concerned, the argument centered around Benjamin. The whole advantage of the kingdom of Israel over other kingdoms is the land of Israel which is the site of the Holy Temple. Benjamin merited to host the Temple on his territory even though Royalty was denied him. However, he had merited the beginnings of Jewish Royalty, a period when, under King Saul, every knee bowed to Benjamin (vicariously). The reason that every Jewish knee bowed to a representative of Benjamin was that Benjamin himself had never bowed his knee to Esau. He retained the site on which the enduring Temple will be rebuilt, the ירך המזבח, the site where the altar feeds from. The High Priest, a member of the tribe of Levi, however, performed the major functions of the Temple Service. This is the reason why Joseph did not touch Levi (when he put Shimon in jail). He had reason to jail both Shimon and Levi because they both had been ringleaders in the plot against him.
  Joseph considered the plot as inspired by the desire to ensure the rise of Yehudah to Royalty. Since the spark of Holy Spirit, maybe subconsciously, made the sanctity of the kingdom a corollary to the sanctity of the land of Israel, which in turn contains the holy city Jerusalem and the holy Temple, Joseph was angry at the brothers, accused them of being מרגלים, spies, an allusion to the spies Moses sent out and who came back slandering the holy Land. Joseph, on the contrary, loved ארץ ישראל unreservedly, as became clear when the daughters of Tzelofchod, of the tribe of Joseph, fought a legal battle with Moses over their share in the holy Land in Numbers 27. Joseph's tribe also produced Joshua who led the Jewish people in its conquest of the land of Canaan. Even though the tribe of Menashe also sent out a spy who proved disloyal, this was of minor significance compared to the selfless heroism displayed by Joshua from the tribe of Ephrayim. 
  When Joseph claimed that the brothers had come to view ערות הארץ, "the land in its nakedness" (42,9), he chose words which reflected the attitude of the spies hundreds of years later when they wanted to appoint a leader to bring them back to Egypt (Numbers 14,4). Yehudah answered Joseph that he was the spokesman of the brothers, and that Levi was second in line to him because he wore (or would wear) the "crown" of the Priesthood. He added: "Your servants have never been spies," pointing out that Caleb of the tribe of Yehudah who had been sent out as a spy, had played a faultless role in that episode. Since Moses had not seen fit to send a member of the tribe of Levi on that mission, Levi too could not be faulted for lack of love for the land of Canaan. When Yehudah stated "your servants, [meaning myself as the wearer of the "crown" of Royalty and Levi as the wearer of the "crown" of Priesthood Ed.] have not been spies" (in the past tense), he alluded to the fact that at a later date when Joshua would send out spies a member of the tribe of Levi would be included, namely Pinchas. 
  Having thus refuted Joseph's arguments concerning the time when both Yehudah and Levi would prove their loyalty to their respective missions, Joseph now demanded to have Benjamin sent down to him, seeing it was in his territory that the Holy Temple would be built, and that this was after all the whole point of the process of creating a Jewish people, different "crowns," etc. Because – still inspired by the Holy Spirit – Joseph foresaw two destructions of the holy Temple, he wept on Benjamin's neck after he had revealed his true identity (45, 14). All the weeping was induced by his visions of the future in his mind's eye. He consoled himself and expressed his emotions by giving חליפות שמלות, changes of clothes, to all his brothers. The word חליפה is similar in meaning to the word תמורה, the significance of which we discussed earlier. Also the word שמלה, garment, is an allusion to the time when Adam had to exchange garments woven of light for garments made of skin. At the same time however, it is also an allusion to the distant future when this process would be reversed. Joseph was able to console himself by looking ahead to that future.
  There is a comment by the Midrash Hagadol on the words וישמע ראובן, in 37,21 which illustrates that the brothers did not understand Joseph's true motives. We are told there that the objective of the Torah in telling us of the purity of Reuben's motive, though he dared not express it at the time, was to tell us how highly G–d rates the performance of a good deed when such deed is performed without ulterior motives. Had Reuben known that his deed would be recorded by the Torah and be read in public for millennia, he would have carried Joseph back to his father on his shoulder without delay. Another example of the same idea is Aaron's meeting Moses when the latter returned from Midian to assume the leadership of the Jewish people. Aaron's joy and lack of envy of his younger brother is extolled by the Torah in Exodus 4,14. The Midrash adds that if Aaron had known that the Torah would compliment him on his deed, he would have organised a musical band to welcome Moses home to Egypt instead of merely going to meet him all by himself. The Midrash goes on with a similar comment about the way Boaz treated Ruth amongst the gleaners (Ruth 2,14). Boaz is reported there as inviting Ruth to dip her morsel in vinegar. Had he known that this gesture would have been recorded in Scripture for all to know, he would have offered her all kinds of delicacies.
  This Midrash poses a serious problem. In the first half we are told that Reuben had no ulterior motive in performing the מצוה of saving Joseph, whereas in the second half we are told that he would have done so even more enthusiastically had he known of the reward in store for the performance of such a מצוה. How would the fact that he would have carried Joseph on his shoulders have enhanced his מצוה -performance? Would it not have resulted from the acknowledgment he expected to receive? Besides, why does the Midrash choose the example of Reuben carrying Joseph on his shoulder? Was Joseph not perfectly able to walk? It would have sufficed if he had held him by his hand! The same question can be asked about Aaron and the manner in which he would have welcomed Moses. Were either Moses or Aaron so fond of dancing that the presence of a band would have added to their joy at meeting one another?
  What the Midrash tries to point out is that when a person performs a מצוה from pure motives it is in his nature to delve into its meaning in order to perform it to the best of his ability. Once he discovers the full extent of the meaning of that מצוה, he will perform it with even more zeal than before. Had either Reuben, Aaron or Boaz known beforehand how great the particular מצוה they had performed was considered in the eyes of G–d, they would each have performed it with even greater pomp and ceremony. But they did not, and that is why none of them examined the superior way of fulfilling the respective מצוה they were being credited with, believing as they did that they had already exceeded what was required of them. 
  Reuben, for instance, believed that from a strictly legal point of view Joseph deserved to be executed because he rebelled against the concept that Royalty was reserved for the house of David, i.e. the tribe of Yehudah. On the other hand, he considered the legislation in Numbers 35,24 and 25, according to which one must try and find every possible extenuating circumstance before subjecting the accused to the ultimate penalty. In actual fact, however, Joseph was not guilty at all, since he neither coveted Royalty for himself nor tried to deny Yehudah's claim to Royalty. Quite the contrary, he tried to advance Yehudah's cause so that the kingdom of David would come about sooner. We have explained earlier that there were three "crowns" to be acquired, the "crown" of Torah being primary. Since Joseph symbolized the "crown" of Torah, the other two "crowns" could be acquired only by means of Joseph paving the way for such a development. Joseph's being the antithesis of Esau enabled the Jewish people to develop, and in due course helped the other two "crowns" to become meaningful. Perhaps this is the reason why the Jewish people carried two arks with them during their trek through the desert to the land of Canaan. One ark contained the tablets with the Ten Commandments as well as the original Torah scroll, the other contained the remains of Joseph. The people paid Joseph a tremendous compliment by carrying both arks side by side, since this conveyed the idea that "this one (Joseph) observed what is recorded in the other one (Torah)." The ark was carried on the shoulders (בכתף ישאו, Numbers 7,9). Because of this little detail, the Midrash phrased the enthusiasm imputed to Reuben, had he been aware of the Torah's compliment to him, in the words: "He would have carried Joseph back to his father on his shoulders."
  Aaron also thought that the elevation of Moses to a position of redeemer was not necessary, but only an act of kindness on the part of G–d who imparts some of His own honour to those who fear and revere Him. He did not think that there was any practical significance in this, seeing redemption would be brought about by G–d Himself. Moses himself had thought along similar lines when he declined the mission to become the official leader of the Jewish people. His query: מי אנכי אשר אלך, "Who am I that I should go,” reflected his thinking (Exodus 3,11). The Midrash already re-phrases Moses' question as מי אני, "who am I, seeing that the one called אנכי is going to redeem the Jewish people!" Whereas Moses was correct in his basic assumption, G–d wanted to lend glamour to Moses, as He said later: ראה נתתיך אלהים לפרעה, "See here, I have made you a deity as far as Pharaoh is concerned." The greatness of Moses' honour can be measured by the fact that it was he who was chosen by G–d to hand the Torah to the Jewish people; he was told at the time that his mission would be considered a success when the Jewish people would accept the Torah at Mount Sinai (Chorev) (cf. Exodus 3,12). Aaron was unaware of these details at the time; this is why he thought that he had behaved in an exemplary fashion by not begrudging Moses his new status. The Midrash then was quite correct when it said that had Aaron been aware that he was to receive credit for his attitude, and that it was only Moses who could be the intermediary in accelerating redemption, he would have gone to meet his brother with drums and dances of joy just as we found Miriam doing after the miraculous rescue of the Jewish people (Exodus 15, 20).
  Boaz also erred. He thought that the arrival of a human redeemer in the guise of the משיח בן דוד was quite superfluous, and that G–d Himself would orchestrate the ultimate redemption as indicated by the prophecy: והיה ה' למלך, "G–d Himself will become king" (Zachariah 14,9). We know that Boaz was not the only person who thought in those terms; the prophet Samuel severely criticized the Jewish people for demanding to be led by a human king instead of by G–d Himself. (Samuel I ch. 8). Neither Samuel nor Boaz had realized that: a) G–d has a desire to have a residence on earth, b) that a kingdom headed by a king of flesh and blood may, under the right conditions, be truly representative of G–d's Kingdom in Heaven. In fact, only when such a kingdom exists on earth can all the channels of G–d's goodness be open to us. If Boaz had been aware of the complimentary view the Torah took of his treatment of Ruth, he would have fed her fattened calves in order to fulfill the מצוה in the best possible fashion. The reason that the paragraphs dealing with the sale of Joseph and the union of Yehudah and Tamar are recorded in the Torah side by side is to teach us that both events served the same purpose (in G–d's plan), and that the sale of Joseph laid the groundwork for the eventual eminence of the kingdom of Yehudah. 
  This is why the Midrash said that while the brothers were busy selling Joseph, G–d was busy preparing the ground for the Messiah. The Torah afterwards tells us about how Joseph excelled in controlling his carnal desires; this morally fitted him to become the ruler of Egypt, a country whose people excelled in giving in to such urges, (seeing the country is known as ערות הארץ, the most naked (immoral) place on earth. After that we are told of the immediate cause of Joseph's rise to power, i.e. his ability to interpret Pharaoh's dream. We have explained the respective uniqueness of Jacob and of Joseph and how the spiritual beauty of Jacob resembled the spiritual beauty of Adam before he sinned. Thus each one can be viewed as the purpose of Creation; we have repeatedly explained that the purpose of Creation was the emergence of an individual deserving of the name אדם.
  When at the beginning of פרשת וישב, we are told that Jacob made an attempt to settle in the land of Canaan to live a quiet undisturbed life, G–d objected to Jacob at that stage wanting to enjoy both the present world and the Hereafter. This world is not slated to recover from the original sin, the time when the serpent polluted Adam and Eve, until the arrival of the Messiah. Ever since that sin our world operates on the principle that the קליפה, peel, precedes the פרי, fruit. It is this principle which forms the background of Bereshit Rabbah 2,4. We are told there by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish that the reason that the Torah begins the story of Creation with the statement that there was Tohu Vavohu, in other words imperfection similar to the imperfection of the world experienced by the Jewish people in exile, was that imperfection has to precede perfection. The Midrash describes several such exiles as being alluded to in that verse. The word Tohu refers to the exile in Babylon; the prophet Jeremiah (4,23) describes the country thus. The word Bohu supposedly refers to the exile under the Medes, since we have a verse in Esther 6,14 where the king's messengers are described as ויבהלו להביא את המן, the word ויבהלו containing the letters of the word ובהו. The word חשך, which follows in Genesis 1,2, refers to the exile under the Greeks who blackened the eyes of Israel by demanding that the Israelites inscribe on the horns of their oxen that they had no further share in the G–d of Israel. Finally, the words על פני תהום, refer to the exile under the Romans, Edom, which seems bottomless like the תהום, Deep. When the Torah continues ורוח אלוקים מרחפת על פני המים, "The spirit of the Lord hovered over the expanse of the water," Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish views this statement as an allusion to the spirit of the Messiah of whom it was said in Isaiah 11,2 that: "the spirit of the Lord rested on him." How does one merit that the spirit of the Lord comes to rest on one? By the merit of repentance which is compared to water, as we know from Lamentations 2,18: "Fair Zion, shed tears like water day and night!"
  The subject matter this Midrash concentrated on is the קליפה, peel, that was created by Adam's sin, which caused the brilliant light prevailing at the time of Creation to be withdrawn, and which can only be regained through efforts to refine oneself and to repair the damage done by Adam. The means to achieve such refinement is the series of exiles. Once having lived through these exiles, Israel's sins will be expiated, the Messiah will arrive and the world will once again be bathed in the brilliant light that prevailed when Adam and Eve wore clothes woven of light. The experience of the Jewish people in Egypt was of a similar nature. Israel, which still suffered from a degree of pollutants absorbed through the serpent, was cleansed and left Egypt with its head held high. All the judgments visited upon the Egyptians were in the nature of what our sages call חידוש העולם, a renewal of universal dimensions. The phenomena displayed testified to the fact that it was G–d who had created the universe and who could work His will upon it. We have explained all this in its appropriate place. G–d had already alluded to the other exiles at the time he concluded the original covenant with Abraham reported in לך לך chapter 15. The operative words at the time were: אימה, חשיכה גדולה נופלת עליו.
  By the time the Israelites arrived at Mount Sinai, the process of refinement had advanced so far that the world was ready to revert to its original state. This is indeed what would have happened had it not been for the sin of the golden calf. The reason that Jacob merited to receive allusions to the four exiles was because he, like Adam before his sin, represented the spiritual beauty of the world.
  Rabbi Oshiyah in Bereshit Rabbah 92, 3 comments that when Jacob said to his sons in Genesis 43,14 prior to their second descent to Egypt: "May the Lord Shaddai grant you mercy when you appear before the man, etc.," he alluded to the 4 exiles. The word "the man," i.e. האיש, in that verse referred to G–d who is described as איש מלחמה in the song the Israelites sang after crossing the sea of reeds (Exodus 15,3). When Jacob continued "and he will send to you your brother," [the Midrash presumably reads the word Achichem, "your brother," singular as Acheychem, "your brothers," Ed.] this refers to the Ten Tribes; the words: "the other one and Benjamin," refer to Benjamin and Yehudah. When Jacob (in his capacity of the nation's founding father) continued: "as for me, if I am to be bereaved, I am to be bereaved," refers to the two destructions of the first and second Temple respectively. Jacob implies that there will not be a third destruction.
  One of the things that provoked the Midrash into seeing these allusions in Jacob's words – which to most of us seem far-fetched – is that Rabbi Oshiyah found it difficult to assume that Jacob, engaged in encouraging the brothers on their mission to Egypt, would end on such a pessimistic note as ואני כאשר שכולתי שכולתי. We have a tradition that whereas righteous people frequently experience trials and tribulations in the first half of their lives, they find that their lives eventually become blessed with tranquility. It would therefore have been out of character for Jacob to even consider further bereavements. This is why Rabbi Oshiyah saw an optimistic note in Jacob's remarks, a conviction that the worst was behind him, that the bereavements experienced had achieved their purpose and brought about the necessary תקון to secure a happy future. 
  Jacob, when he said these words, may possibly have experienced a moment of divine inspiration about the need for the kingdom of Joseph to precede that of Yehudah. What plagued Jacob was 1) that he simultaneously foresaw that the kingdom of David would be split when Jerovam of the tribe of Joseph would command the allegiance of ten of the twelve tribes. At that time Yehudah and Benjamin alone would remain loyal to the house of David. This was one factor which led to the destruction of the first Temple; 2) because Jerovam erected the golden calves which the Ten Tribes worshiped. Later on, Israel committed many other grievous sins. Even the tribes of Yehudah and Benjamin were infected eventually, until this brought about their exile. During the second Temple the Hasmoneans appropriated the "crown" of Royalty which should have been Yehudah's. We have already quoted Nachmanides who explains how the ascent of the slave Herod to the throne in Jerusalem was a punishment for that error of the Hasmoneans, and became the beginning of the end of the second Temple which was eventually destroyed by the Romans.
  Let us get back to Jacob's desire to settle in the land of Israel and lead a tranquil life, as indicated by the opening words of our פרשה. Bereshit Rabbah 84,3 quotes Job 3,26: לא שלותי ולא שקטתי ולא נחתי ויבא רוגז, "I had no repose--no quiet-- no rest and trouble came," as paralleling what Jacob said that he had not experienced repose from his trouble with Esau, nor quiet from Laban, nor rest from the rape of Dinah. Now, without respite, he was faced with the trouble involving Joseph. Some of our Kabbalists see all these four troubles Jacob experienced alluded to in the single word וישב. The letters in that word are the respective second letters in the words יוסף, דינה, עשו and לבן.
  We have seen again and again how all the experiences the patriarchs had in their private lives foreshadowed experiences the Jews would have in their communal lives. This is why I believe that the four problems mentioned in the Midrash based on the verse in Job or on the letters in the word וישב also allude to the four exiles the Jewish people experienced. The troubles with Joseph parallel the Babylonian exile which, as we explained above, was the result of the tribe of Joseph splitting the kingdom of David which eventually led to the destruction of the Temple. The trouble Jacob experienced with Laban was that the latter tried to uproot the entire concept of an eventual Jewish people, something like the attempt by Haman under the Medes to uproot the Jewish nation male and female including infants. The problem Jacob experienced with Dinah paralleled the Jewish experience during the exile under the Greeks, who, <i>inter alia</i>, decreed that no Jewish virgin could marry until she had been violated by a Greek Priest. This is why Hannah the Hasmonean became a martyr for her religion and became instrumental in bringing about the redemption from that exile. The problems Jacob experienced with Esau are the same problems we experience until this very day with the descendants of Esau in this the longest of all exiles. After having concluded the first verse of our פרשה, the Torah alludes to the final redemption when it mentions Jacob's תולדות. The Torah alludes to the time when those descendants will have achieved spiritual maturity, will enjoy the light under the kingdom of the Messiah. 
  When Jacob, in sending the brothers on their way to Egypt, referred to G–d as the G–d whose name is שד"י, i.e. the G–d who said די, "enough," at the end of the process of Creation, he used that name of G–d to indicate that there would now be an end to the troubles of his family, i.e. the Jewish people, to the extent that his family's experiences mirrored the future experiences of the Jewish people. The name שד"י also alludes to the respective first letters of the names שלמה-דוד-ישי which spell שד"י. when combined. We have already shown that Yishai symbolised נחש, that David, who emerged from Yishai, symbolized צפע, a snake whose poison is more potent than that of a regular נחש, but that out of these both came Solomon who built the Temple. This all confirms the theory of תמורה, that something perceived as evil is subject to metamorphosis.
  From all that I have written the significance of Yehudah, Joseph and Benjamin is quite apparent. The Temple, which was built on tribal property belonging to Benjamin, was the site on which the feet of the שכינה rested, as we know from Isaiah 60,13: "To adorn the site of My Sanctuary, to glorify the place where My feet rest." We also have Exodus 3,5 in which Moses is told at the burning bush: "Take off your sandals from your feet for the ground you are standing on is holy ground. It is also significant that the price received by the brothers for the sale of Joseph is described by the prophet Amos 2,6 as the price of a pair of sandals, whereas in 8,6 the prophet described that G–d will not forgive those who buy the needy for the price of a pair of sandals. [In all these examples the sandals symbolize the foundation, basis. Ed.]
  Joseph is the pillar the world rests on because the צדיק righteous person, is the יסוד, foundation of the universe, the pillar which supports the universe. The feet are the support of the rest of the "body." It follows that between them they form the "feet" of the שכינה. We view Joseph as the "pillar" of the world, Yehudah as the fourth leg of G–d's throne, enabling it to "stand." When the Torah reports the birth of Yehudah, we find that it continues with the words ותעמוד מלדת, "She, (Leah) stood from giving birth." The message that the Torah wishes to convey is that it was this birth that enabled the throne of G–d to stand firmly. Finally, Benjamin is perceived as the ירך, the thigh or reproductive organ of the body. He had not bowed to Esau because he had not been born when Jacob met his brother. He was therefore fit to serve as the site of the altar, from which G–d's blessings are received.
  Some mystical elements pertaining to the Chanukah lights: We shall now proceed to explain part of the deeper meaning of the חנוכה lights which issue forth from the ירך המנורה, the stem of the candelabra (the equivalent of ירך, thigh, in a human body). The expression רגל, foot, is also found in connection with נר, light, when the Psalmist describes הר לרגלי דברך, "Your word is a lamp to my feet" (Psalms 119,105). According to Halachah, the period during which the Chanukah lights have to burn concludes when תכלה רגל מן השוק, when the foot (pedestrian) leaves the market-place, when the streets empty out. Let us get back to the meaning of the word ירך. The Torah reported that Samael succeeded in dislocating Jacob's כף ירך, thigh joint. The immediate cause for this had been Jacob's having remained alone while he had gone to retrieve some trinkets of minor value (Rashi on 32,25). No doubt these פכים קטנים, "insignificant trinkets," are of great symbolical significance. We are reminded of the פך קטן, "small cruse" of oil which the Hasmoneans found when they entered the Temple precincts after their victory over the Greeks.
  Before going into the symbolics of that cruse of pure, uncontaminated olive oil, let me review a statement by our sages in Megillah 14a dealing with Samuel I 2,1: רמה קרני, "He raised my horn." The Talmud points out that when Chanah gave thanks to G–d for having raised her קרן (granted her a son, Samuel), she deliberately did not use the expression פכי, my cruse, [another word for a container for oil for anointing]. Her reason for this was that whereas the dynasty of all the Jewish kings who were anointed from a קרן, horn, endured, all those who were anointed from a פך, found that their dynasty did not continue for long. King Saul and King Yehu are examples of kings who were anointed from a פך. David and Solomon, were anointed from a קרן, horn, containing the שמן המשחה, special oil for anointing the Priests or kings. Another important statement by our sages which contributes much to our understanding of the mystique of the Chanukah lights is the statement that the ox offered as a sacrifice by Adam had only one קרן, horn, on its forehead (Shabbat 28b). 
  The meaning behind this is that Adam was on a spiritual level that made him fit to wear garments of light, and even his heel radiated a light more brilliant than the sun. Had he not sinned, his facial skin would have radiated a blinding light. Light is also called קרן, as we know from Chabakuk 3,4: ונגה כאור תהיה, קרנים מידו לו, "It is a brilliant light which gives off rays on every side". When we look at the sun we observe that many lines emanate from it. These are what are called קרני החמה, the "horns," or rays, of the sun. Once Adam sinned and had to switch to leather garments, i.e. garments whose raw material came from the dust of the earth, he became clay, just like the clay in the hands of the potter. Adam's new status is best described in Lamentations 4,2, where the prophet Jeremiah speaks of המסולאים בפז, איכה נחשבו לנהבלי חרש מעשה ידי יוצר, "Those who used to be valued as fine gold are now accounted as earthen pots fashioned by a potter." Adam's decline is compared to the decline from being קרן-like, to becoming פך-like. The name אדם originally related to a superior kind of אדמה. Subsequently it related to the inferior material we know as אדמה, dust from the earth. From that latter material one constructs the cruses, clay פכים. As long as Adam was on his original spiritual level, he himself was the offering to G–d, as hinted in Leviticus 1,2, that in the first instance one should make an offering of oneself to G–d. At that time man was like the souls of the righteous; these are described as being offered to G–d by the angel Michael after they have departed this earth. When the Psalmist tells us that man did not even spend one single night in his original innocence and now has become likened to the beasts (Psalms 49,14), he thereby hints that man descended to the level of the ox. The deeper meaning of the Midrash which tells us that the ox sacrificed by Adam had only one קרן, horn, is proof that he retains a small vestige of the image of קרן, though on a much lower plane than before.
  When the Torah discusses legislation involving damages caused by an animal's horn (Exodus 21,35), it is a rule of thumb that an animal which had a blameless record, was never aggressive, is held responsible (its owner) for half the damage it has caused. If, however, the animal had a record of causing damage, its owner is assessed the full value of any damage it has caused. When a human being causes damage he is always considered as having a record of aggressiveness and is therefore always held responsible for the total damage he causes. This all dates back to original man who had caused severe damage to this world, so that all human beings who came after him must consider themselves as having been forewarned. G–d had warned him that "on the day you eat from it you will become mortal." Adam had been fully awake at the time the serpent seduced him; this is why he could not plead extenuating circumstances. He also sinned while asleep, since, during the one hundred and thirty years that he did not cohabit with his wife he emitted semen nocturnally, which in turn was converted into all kinds of destructive spirits, as we have explained elsewhere. This was all due to his having absorbed pollutants emitted by the serpent. As a result, man is held fully responsible for damage caused by him both while awake and while asleep. When we speak about man as being מועד לעולם, forewarned concerning any sin he commits, and therefore fully responsible for his actions, this means that he pays the full penalty, mortality, for his transgressions. This mortality is passed on from generation to generation.
  The patriarch Jacob, who is described in the Torah as איש תם, as opposed to אדם מועד לעולם, was the first person since Adam who did not fit that mould. He was extremely careful not to waste even a single drop of his semen so that he was able to describe Reuben, who was born to him when he was 84 or 85 years old, as ראשית אוני, the product of his first drop of semen (49,3). As a result [of not being guilty of sins committed while asleep. Ed.] he had to pay only half the damage for any sins he committed, i.e. his death was not total, he did not die as Jacob, only as Israel, as we have explained at length in פרשת וישלח. Significantly, Jacob was 130 years old when he arrived in Egypt. Both he and his descendants made up for the 130 years that Adam had emitted semen nocturnally without sleeping with his wife. The redeemer (Moses), whose skin later on radiated light like a קרן, (Exodus 34,29) was born when his mother Yocheved was 130 years old (Sotah 12 on Exodus 2,2).
  The effect of the serpent's pollutants had continued unabated until the birth of the twin brothers Jacob and Esau. At that point, most of the pollutants absorbed by Esau, remained tattooed on the thigh of Esau, so that it could be said of Jacob (as did Bileam) that he was not infected by the serpent. Samael, the spiritual patron of Esau, touched and injured the thigh joint of Jacob, causing a degree of impurity conferred through bodily contact; this was transferred to the ירך of the tribes because they bowed before Esau who represented an alien deity. Ever since then the tribes were in need of spiritual refinement. Benjamin, on the other hand, was above the need for such refinement; this is why one of his descendants, Saul, was first able to wear the "crown" of kingdom. Thus it came about that every Jew bowed before Saul the representative of Benjamin. Such a situation, however, could not endure for long because Saul was not anointed by means of a קרן. Only David and his descendants could be anointed by oil poured from the קרן. The kingdom of שאול was only a "borrowed" kingdom, as the name שאול implies. שאול was anointed from a cruse because the time was not yet ripe for אדם to be rehabilitated, a task that was reserved for David, who was Adam's reincarnation. The mystique of פכים קטנים is alluded to in Samuel I 16,17 where Samuel says to Saul: הלא אם קטון אתה בעינך, "Even though you regard yourself as small (insignificant), etc." The reference to Saul's "smallness" was to the fact that Benjamin was the youngest of the brothers. Samuel told Saul that the reason he had been chosen to become king was precisely because he was a member of the youngest (smallest) tribe, since his ancestor had not bowed to Esau because he had not had a chance to, not having been born yet.
  When Rashi refers to Jacob as staying behind to retrieve פכים קטנים, he meant that Jacob was solitary as long as Benjamin had not been born. When G–d had told Jacob at Bet El in 35,11: "Be fruitful and multiply…and kings will come forth from your loins," He used the plural to indicate that He referred to King Saul and his son Ish Boshet who were both anointed from a cruse. David and Solomon were anointed from a horn. Due to our various and numerous sins, G–d גדע, "dehorned Israel in a display of burning anger" (Lamentations 2,3), until in the future the horn of G–d's anointed Messiah will again be raised.
  The exile under the Greeks who were known as קרן, horn, was also called similarly, as we know from Daniel 8,5: והצפיר קרן חזות בעיניו, "And the he-goat had a conspicuous horn between its eyes." This was an allusion to the victories of Alexander the Great. The Greeks darkened the eyes of Israel and wanted to deprive it of any vestige of holiness, even of the reduced level of holiness Israel still possessed and symbolized by the ox's single horn as described on page 340. The Greeks demanded that the Jews inscribe on the horn of their oxen that they had dissociated themselves from the G–d of Israel. It was therefore appropriate that when the Hasmoneans defeated the Greeks they should find a cruse of uncontaminated oil. Since they did not institute the rule of the dynasty of David, however, they found a פך, cruse, which was sealed by the seal of the High Priest instead of a קרן, horn.
  I have pointed out earlier how Nachmanides has severely faulted the Hasmoneans for grabbing the "crown" of Royalty in addition to the "crown" of Priesthood. The Hasmoneans believed that they personified both the "crown" of Royalty and that of the Priesthood, remembering that Tamar, who was not descended from Yehudah but from Shem, became the maternal matriarch of the Davidic Kingdom. Her ancestor Shem (in his capacity of Malki Tzedek), had also combined the "crowns" of both Royalty and Priesthood in his person. The Hasmoneans used this example as their precedent. When they proclaimed Hallel and sang songs and at the same time kindled the oil that bore the stamp of the High Priest they felt that they symbolised the combined virtues of David and that of the High Priest.
  What all this has to do with Samael injuring the כף ירך יעקב, the thigh joint of Jacob, is simple. Our sages say on 32,26: וירא כי לא יוכל לו, ויגע בכף ירכו ותקע כך ירך יעקב, that the thigh joint of Jacob refers to the later descendants who experienced the harsh decrees by the various nations who were their hosts in exile. When the Hasmoneans overcame the Greeks, they reversed this injury, i.e. the כף became a פך a cruse of oil. What had been a vulnerable part of Jacob's ירך now became the solid basis of the candelabra, ירך מנורה.
  There is a deep significance in the fact that the two words כף and פך consist of the same letters. The only difference between them is that the letter כ in the word כף is כפופה, bent over, closed, whereas the same latter in the word פך is open. The former shape is an inferior one, as it alludes to a closed palm, someone who is tight-fisted. The letter פ alludes to the mouth above. When the letter ך is open, it reminds us of open-handed charity, i.e. פתח את ידך, "open your hand." Having opened one's hand, it is important to keep one's mouth closed as indicated by the shape of the letter פ, when it is כפופה, closed. There is no greater virtue than silence (Avot 1,17). Thus the combination of an open ך, and a closed פ, is an excellent one. Both Joseph and the brothers committed an error. Joseph talked too much by bringing evil gossip about his brothers to his father (37,2). The brothers erred by being greedy for money and stooped low enough to sell their brother Joseph for twenty pieces of silver.
  In the account of the Hasmoneans’ victory portrayed by Josephus ben Gurion we find that the Hasmoneans distributed much of the loot to the poor and needy. In other words, they displayed open-handedness. They afterwards executed Jewish informers who had betrayed their countrymen to the Greek authorities. According to Josephus Yehudah Ha-makkabi executed such informers personally. In this way the Hasmoneans made up for the errors committed by a mouth that had been too open; they closed it. This is the mystique of the word פך which is the very reverse of the word כף. 
  Perhaps this is also alluded to in the Halachah that one may not eulogize someone during the Chanukah festival. The Rabbis described an adequate eulogy as one in which one smites the palm on the thigh as a symbolic infliction of pain upon oneself in commemoration of what Samael did to Jacob [based on Jeremiah 31,18 Ed.]. In the future the פך, cruse, will be exchanged for a קרן, horn; the body will once more be fit to wear garments made of light, and both soul and body will radiate light. This is the mystery behind the words in Genesis 1, 16 where we hear about the "great light and the little light." The great light is the light emitted from the soul. The Torah instructs both body and soul to function as מאורות, sources of enlightenment. The body is the receptacle of the soul; under the proper conditions the body enables the soul to shine forth brightly. The cruse in our parable is the body which, when filled with oil, spreads light. The light of the candelabra illuminates upwards. It is in the nature of light to strive upwards. This is why the soul is called "the great light."
  The Talmud Shabbat 21b quotes a Baraitha according to which it is obligatory to kindle one Chanukah light per household, whereas if one wishes to perform the מצוה in the best possible way every member of the household kindles a light in commemoration of the great miracle that occurred at the time. Those who wish to excel still further in their מצוה performance light an additional light every evening of the eight evenings in question according to the school of Hillel, or, according to the school of Shammai, they light eight lights the first evening and one light less every subsequent evening. Ullah says that two scholars (Rabbi Yossi bar Avin and Rabbi Yossi bar Zevida) disagreed as to why the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai in turn disagreed on the proper course to follow. One Rabbi said that the reason that the school of Shammai holds that one kindles one light less each evening is that the number of lights indicates how many days of the holiday are still to come, (the literal quote is ימים הנכנסים, we adopt Rashi's translation of this, however), whereas the school of Hillel is concerned with the number of days of the holiday that have already passed. The other Rabbi holds that the difference between the two schools of thought is due to the school of Hillel holding that in matters of sanctity one progresses "upwards," i.e. מעלין בקודש ואין מורידין. The reason that the school of Shammai holds that one kindles one less light each night, however, is that we follow the pattern established by the Torah on Sukkot, when successively fewer bulls were offered on each of the seven days of the holiday (Numbers 29,12-34). Rabbi Bar Chanah reported in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that the two Rabbis Yossi quoted were flanked by two elders, one of whom followed the directive of the school of Shammai, whereas the other followed the directive of the school of Hillel. Each of those two elders justified his practice by citing the last two reasons mentioned. Thus far the Talmud on the subject.
  In all matters of disputes between the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai we rule according to the view expressed by the school of Hillel, except in six instances. This means that the views of the school of Shammai are ignored when it comes to practice. Why, in this instance, does the Talmud appear to give one the choice as to how to conduct oneself?
  The true reason is that the Talmud, when giving the views of the two Rabbis Yossi, stated: "One said this and the other said that." The fact that the Talmud did not identify who said what means that the two Rabbis did not disagree. Each only cited one possible reason for the different opinions. The lights allude to the souls, as we know from Proverbs 20,27: נר ה' נשמת אדם, "The soul of man is the light of the Lord." We know that nowadays most of the souls inhabiting bodies are re-incarnations of people who have lived in earlier times. The best of such kind of re-incarnation one can experience is if the soul is allotted to someone who is related to the former incarnation, as has been explained by the Rekanati in connection with the legislation of the levirate marriage. When Yehudah said to his son Onan that he should marry the widow of his brother Er (38,8), he meant that the first child to be produced from such union would become the re-incarnation of Er. Later on his intention of having Er re-incarnated became fulfilled through his own union with Tamar. When Peretz and Zerach were born by Tamar, they were the respective reincarnations of both Er and Onan (Onan also having died in the meantime). The Rekanati explains this at length. When the Talmud said that the essence of the Chanukah light is that a person should light one light for his house- read: "family"- this is an allusion to the duty of ensuring re-incarnation by means of the levirate marriage.
  The Talmud continued by saying that the מהדרין, the people who wish to fulfill the מצוה in a better fashion, should each light a light in honor of the miracle. This is an advice to each of us not to rely on our eventual rehabilitation by means of re-incarnation, but to strive to light sufficient spiritual light during our first round of life on this earth so that there will not be a need for our souls to become "recycled" by means of גלגול נשמות.
  As to the מהדרין מן המהדרין, the group of people who increase or decrease the number of Chanukah lights they kindle each evening, each of their methods corresponds to valid Torah principles, i.e. אלו ואלו דברי אלוקים חיים. Both groups are convinced that in the future both body and soul will achieve hitherto unheard-of perfection. Both are convinced that both body and soul will enjoy an infinite lifespan upon arrival of that time in history. The vessels that allude to this infinity are the oil receptacles, an allusion to man's body, which is the vessel. The lights dispensed by those receptacles allude to the soul.
  The school of Shammai speaks primarily about the perfection to be achieved by the body and how brightly it will shine, whereas the school of Hillel is more concerned with the perfection of the soul. The school of Shammai holds that since, in essence, anything connected with the soul is invisible, and becomes noticeable only by means of its vessel, the body, the fact that in the future even that vessel, i.e. the body itself will progressively emit light, eliminates the difference between body and soul. It is therefore appropriate to symbolise this by a constantly decreasing difference between that which stands for the body and that which stands for the soul. If one follows the school of Shammai, the method of lighting Chanukah lights parallels the progress of the body towards Utopia; progressively fewer and fewer vessels will be needed to achieve this lofty aim. This is the deeper meaning of the expression that "we mark the days that are still to come," quoted by the Talmud as a reason for the practice suggested by the Shammaites. i.e. the days to our achieving our objective. The Talmud deliberately speaks about "days" instead of "nights or evenings" [as would appear more appropriate for the time when lights are burning. Ed.]. This concept is also present in the celebrations on the Sukkot festival when fewer and fewer bulls are offered up with every passing day of the holiday, since we have come closer to our spiritual goal with every passing day. Finally, on the eighth day, the day that symbolizes the World to Come, only a single bull is offered on the altar, because the influence of the 70 Gentile nations has previously been neutralized by the seventy bulls we have offered during the preceding days. The eighth day of Chanukah is to be viewed as paralleling the spiritual achievement symbolized by Shmini Ha-Atzeret.
  The school of Hillel, however, was concerned with the days that have passed, according to the principle היום לעשותם, that the time to perform the commandments is "today." What this means is that with each passing day, due to the cumulative effect of מצוה performance, we advance higher and higher spiritually, מעלין בקודש. Torah scholars deepen their understanding and knowledge of Torah as they advance in age, whereas ordinary individuals are liable to become progressively more forgetful and senile. The reason for this is that the scholar's נפש, basic spiritual soul, attaches itself progressively more to his רוח, a higher level of soul, and eventually to his נשמה, the highest level of soul. The נשמה in turn establishes direct contact with G–d. We observe a constantly upward-striving motion.
  To get back to the subject of the cruse made of earthenware to be eventually exchanged for the קרן, horn. Not only will the פך be traded for a קרן in the future, but even the כף will undergo תיקון, metamorphosis, and instead of representing כף חובה, the side of the scale containing our debits, will become כף זכות, the side of the scale containing our merits. When the princes each brought their offerings on the occasion of the dedication of the Holy Tabernacle recorded in Numbers chapter 7, each one of them brought כף אחת מלאה קטורת, one spoonful of incense. The princes alluded to the תיקון, rehabilitation of original man, by each one including in their offering a bowl of silver weighing 130 (unspecified units of silver) thus alluding to the 130 years that Adam had failed to perform the commandment to be fruitful and to multiply. Rashi elaborates on this theme in Numbers 7,19. In Psalms 139,5: ותשת עלי כפכה, "You have laid Your hands upon me," we find an allusion to the diminution of man to the numerical equivalent of one hundred=כף, something caused by the serpent, as we know from Exodus 4,4 when G–d showed Moses that his staff turned into a serpent while in his כף. In the future we will witness fulfillment of Kings II 11,12: ויכו כף, ויאמרו יחי המלך, "They clapped their hands and shouted "long live the king!" (The subject dealt with is the crowning of Yoash, last surviving member of the Davidic dynasty after Athaliah had murdered all the others. Yoash's reign ushered in a rejuvenation of the kingdom of Yehudah under a king loyal to G–d and tutored by a pious High priest Yeho-yadah.) The כף in the verse quoted symbolizes the positive aspect of the word, and is an allusion to a similar event of far greater dimensions in the future. The כף full of incense, would be offered by Aaron (or his sons if suitable) in the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement. The כף will be כפופה, closed, because when we are worthy we will experience the blessing of Deuteronomy 15,4 that there will not be anyone who is destitute (in need of a כף פתוחה, a handout from an open hand). The פ in that word which is open, will reflect the emotions expressed in Psalms 126,2 which deals with the return of G–d to Zion, and which describes our mouths as filled with laughter and joy. 
  The common denominator between these allusions to Chanukah and our פרשיות, is that the whole purpose of exile is to achieve the physical and spiritual refinement which leads to ultimate redemption. All vestiges of the influence of the original serpent and subsequent Samael must be eliminated before "the house of Jacob will become fire and the house of Joseph a flame, whereas the house of Esau will become straw." (Ovadiah 1,18).
  There is an interesting parable in Bereshit Rabbah (84,5) about a smith who had an open shop in the middle of the public square, and whose son, a jeweller, opened his shop opposite that of his father. [Obviously, the son had to melt down metal at great heat and therefore, just like his father, needed a bellows to fan the flames under the crucible. Ed]. The father noticed that many bundles of thorns [metaphor for irritants Ed.] were being brought into the neighborhood and became concerned about their purpose. An intelligent bystander told the father that he had no reason to be concerned about these thorns since a single spark of his and his son's establishment would start a fire that would consume all the bundles in no time at all. Jacob became very concerned when he witnessed the development of Esau into a mighty clan, as reported by the Torah at length. G–d ridiculed his concern and told him that a single spark of Jacob's or Joseph's would be enough to destroy all of Esau by fire. This is the meaning of the verse from Ovadiah which we quoted earlier. 
  The Midrash Tanchuma on our פרשה quotes the same parable with a slightly different text. Instead of thorns, the hazardous material there is described as flax. The son, i.e. Joseph, is not described as a jeweler but also as a smith, just like his father. Whereas in the Tanchuma a single spark is deemed sufficient to destroy Esau by fire, the version in Bereshit Rabbah speaks about one spark each from the father and the son respectively.
  We find a similar discussion in Bava Kamma (62b), in conjunction with rules about where to place the Chanukah lights. First we are told that any damage due to sparks emitted from the anvil is the smith's responsibility. We are also taught there that if a camel laden with flax walks in the public domain near which Chanukah lights are burning, the owner of those lights is not responsible for damage sustained by the flax (at least according to Rabbi Yehudah). If the lights causing the damage did not serve a מצוה purpose, everybody agrees that the owner is responsible. The discussion about possible damage caused by the Chanukah lights is also mentioned in Shabbat 21b, where most of the details about Chanukah observances may be found.
  When the serpent cohabited with Eve it infected her with its pollutant which in turn became mixed with the sperm from which Cain was born; according to the Zohar this pollutant has remained an integral part of man ever since. This pollutant is known as קינא דמסאבותא. Abel, on the other hand, was of holy seed, and in due course his soul entered the body of his younger brother Sheth. Sheth's soul in turn became the soul of Moses, whose skin (body) became so holy that it went on to shine forth, as we have seen from Exodus chapter 34. Moses achieved the status symbolised by קרן. While it is true that the pollutant of the serpent spread throughout the generations, the greatest concentration was found in Cain and his descendants. Later on this pollutant was concentrated in Esau [and therefore, because Noach had married a descendant of Cain, the deluge did not destroy that accumulation of pollutants entirely when all the other descendants of Cain perished. Ed. ]. Jacob remained untainted by the pollutant until his encounter with Samael. This necessitated the exile in Egypt, the land in which his descendants experienced physical and spiritual refinement. Just as that process commenced with Joseph then, so it will be in the future when the משיח בן יוסף will play the role that the original Joseph played in Egypt. He will eradicate all traces of the serpent's pollutants. 
  The flax and camels in the story in the Tanchuma that we quoted are metaphors. The example of the camels laden with flax refers to Cain, whose sacrifice (the one G–d rejected) consisted of flax (Tanchuma Bereshit 9). The example of the camel is a metaphor for Esau who had said to Jacob: הלעיטני נא מן האדום האדום הזה (Genesis 25,30). The expression הלעיטני is reminiscent of camels as we know from Shabbat 155, that whereas one must not stuff a lot of food down a camel's throat (on the Sabbath), one may feed it by a method called מלעיטין. The reason that Rabbi Levi in Bereshit Rabbah used the metaphor of קוצים, thorns, is because G–d told Adam after he had eaten from the tree of knowledge that the earth would respond to his efforts by bringing forth קוץ ודרדר, thorn and thistle (Genesis 3,17).
  Concerning the example of the פטיש, hammer, used in the Tanchuma, the author of that story views the Torah like a hammer which when applied to a rock splits it and releases the kernel while the sparks produced burn the קליפות. This is why the author of the Tanchuma speaks about the son also being a smith. A smith is always busy applying the hammer to the anvil. Rabbi Levi chose the metaphor of the jeweler, goldsmith, since this is also a metaphor for Torah which described "gold as being found in a land called good" (Genesis 2,12). The land referred to is ארץ ישראל, and in no other country can Torah be studied as effectively as in ארץ ישראל (Bereshit Rabbah 16,4). The smith and the goldsmith therefore are metaphors describing the same thing. The forces of Esau will be burned by Jacob whose house will be a fire, as well as by the house of Joseph which will be like a flame. 
  These metaphors of the prophet Ovadiah are described as sparks (pl), or a spark(s) by Rabbi Levi in Bereshit Rabbah and the author of the Tanchuma respectively. There is no real difference between the authors of these two parables. When the Talmud distinguishes between different circumstances when an owner of a store who has light burning outside on the side of the public domain is liable for damages caused by his lights, the criteria which determine liability are the following: While it is agreed that it is the function of the Jewish people to destroy the descendants of Esau, and the flax carried by the camels, and sparks originating from either Jacob's smithy or Joseph's smithy (to use the metaphors of the Midrash) are the means to accomplish this, there is a question of timing involved. 
  In G–d's Master Plan the timetable for such developments has been recorded. If the Jewish people proceed irrespective of G–d's timetable, then they are liable for any damage which their sparks cause. If they act in accordance with G–d's timetable, they are not liable for damage inflicted on Esau. When the storekeeper placed his Chanukah lights at the side of the road on Chanukah, he had complied with G–d's timetable for the emission of such "sparks," hence Rabbi Yehudah holds that he is not liable for any damage inflicted on the flax. Jewish history has known periods when some people tried to hasten the arrival of the Messiah. The first time this occurred was when members of the tribe of Ephrayim (misreading G–d's timetable 30 years before the Exodus) rebelled, left Egypt and attacked the Philistines in d,. According to our tradition this resulted in the death of 200,000 of their number. (cf. Chronicles I 7,21. Zavad and his brother Shutelach are assumed to have been the leaders of that ill fated expedition. More about this in Sanhedrin 92). The metaphor of the camel laden with flax passing the "merchant's store" with a light lit before it, is an allusion to Esau passing G–d's Temple endangering it with hazardous material. G–d is the "merchant" in the Midrash. [He is perceived as extending credit to man and recording the amount of credit extended. Man repays by performing the מצות in the Torah. Ed] The store is a metaphor for the ארבע אמות של הלכה, the four cubits of Halachah that G–d claims on earth in our days. According to Berachot 8, this is all that G–d "owns" in our world since the day the Temple was destroyed. The site of these four cubits is where the Temple used to stand, seeing G–d loves the gates of Zion as we know from Psalms 87,2 and Berachot 8a. The Temple has been referred to as בירה, the same word used for the conflagration caused by the fire described in Talmud Baba Kama 62, when the burning flax sets fire to the building of the merchant i.e. G–d's Temple (in an example where the animal was so overloaded that part of the flax crossed the threshold of the store). In that example, the owner of the camel is liable. 
  Although this parable describes the descendants of Esau as burning the Holy Temple, we must remember that no human being can burn G–d's building unless G–d wants it burned. To remind us of this, Jeremiah, in Lamentations 1,13, describes the Temple as being burned ממרום, "By Heavenly decree. This appears to make G–d guilty of the burning of the Holy Temple, in line with the example quoted in Baba Kama. Exodus 22,5 describes a situation where a fire is lit within one's private domain, the fire crosses that domains's boundary, ומצא קוצים, and "encounters stray thorns," as a result of which the neighbor's corn-stacks are burned. The Torah clearly holds the party that started the fire as liable for any damages arising from his action. Allegorically speaking, G–d assumes the blame for the destruction of the Temple, saying: "I have lit the fire." This is the meaning of Lamentions 4,11: ויצת אש בציון ותאכל יסודותיה, "G–d set fire to Zion and it consumed its foundations." G–d will also personally rebuild it, as we know from Zachariah 2,9: ואני אהיה לה נאום ה' חומת אש מסביב ולכבוד אהיה בתוכה "I, says the Lord, shall be a wall of fire surrounding it, and I shall be glory in her midst." When the Torah had said in Exodus 22,5 שלם ישלם המבעיר את הבערה, that the one who started the fire shalll surely pay for the damage, G–d says that it is He who has to pay for the damage caused by the fire. 
  This is why Rabbi Yehudah in the Talmud Baba Kama declared that the storekeeper who placed his Chanukah lights besides his store straddling the public domain was free from making restitution to the owner of the flax that was burned. It is based on the concept that the Gentile nations never controlled the Temple, it always remained under the control of G–d. However, we must not assume that the same considerations apply to other matters that have been sanctified [in most instances by man himself. Ed]. The Chanukah lights symbolize an exceptional event; we light those lights to commemorate victory over a terrible decree. Eichah Rabbati describes the following occurrence. A certain Roman governor, cursed be his name and memory, had a baby born to him on the 9th of Av, a day when the Jews observed mourning for the destruction of the Temple (which had occurred on that date). The baby in question died on Chanukah, a date when Jews celebrate. The governor misinterpreted both reactions by the Jews as directed against himself and, as an act of revenge, he had many of them killed. This decree passed by our enemies is an illustration of what the prophet Zachariah 1,15 speaks about when he says (in the name of G–d): אני קצפתי מעט והמה עזרו לרעה "I was only angry a little, but they overdid the punishment. This very exaggerated maltreatment of the Jewish people by their hosts in exile was a blessing in disguise. It led to the Jewish people's refinement and to the cancellation of their guilt. The torment the Jewish people experienced prior to their victory resulting in their lighting the Chanukah lights also enabled them to experience the spiritual uplift which is part of that experience, and which is mystically bound up with the seven arms of the candelabra whose lights are shining towards the centre shaft of its counterpart in Heaven. This idea was alluded to in Pharaoh's dream when the seven ears of good corn all grew on one stalk (41,5). The Psalmist, aware that the evil done to us by our enemies will be exchanged for good, composed Psalm 30 which we are in the habit of reciting each day during Chanukah.
  The opening words of Psalm 30, מזמור שיר, require analysis. The word שיר, definitely refers to good one has experienced and for which one offers thanks. The word מזמור, however, can have more than one meaning. It may come from the word Zamar, cut off, as in Leviticus 25,4: לא תזמור כרמך, "Do not prune your vineyard." It may also come from the word Zemer melody, tune. The word דליתני in the second verse of the Psalm may also be understood in either of two ways. It may be connected to the root דל, poor, or it may be similar in meaning to the preceding word ארוממך, "I will exalt You," being derived from Dalah, to draw water, i.e. to raise water. In the former case the meaning would be negative, in the latter case it would be positive. The reason that David expressed himself so ambivalently is that he wanted to teach us that experiences such as exile which are first perceived by those who suffer it as negative, may actually be most positive in view of the developments to which they may lead. Even the destruction of the Holy Temple is viewed by the Psalmist as a harbinger of a better future. Because the Temple was destroyed, the Temple that will eventually take its place will spread a far greater spiritual light than its predecessor. The line: "I will extol you O Lord, You have lifted me up," (verse 2) means "even though I was poor, You have not let my enemies rejoice over me." These words may allude to what is reported in Eycha Rabbati that when the Jews exiled with Tzidkiyahu came to Babylon, the Jews who had been exiled earlier under king Yechonyah were forced by their captors to welcome the newcomers and to take an active part in the joy of their conquerors. The meaning of: "You have not let my enemies rejoice over me" is that David was spared what his descendants had to experience. Such was the worst kind of (דלות) דליתני that one can experience. Israel experienced this extreme manifestation of the attribute of Justice at work against itself. The trauma of the destruction of the Temple was an exception, however, since even the angels מלאכי שלום shed bitter tears when that occurred.
  The principle that all negative experiences will be recognized eventually as positive developments has applied ever since in our history. This is what the Psalmist had in mind in verse 3. When he said: "Lord my G–d, when I cried out to You, and You healed me" David meant that he realized (as per Psalms 41,5: "Heal me for I have sinned against You"), that the matters which caused him to cry out were in reality only experienced in order to serve as a cure or remedy for his soul. When he went on: "Lord, You have brought me up from She-ol," our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 44,21 comment on פרשת לך לך that Abraham chose exile for his descendants in order to spare them the experience of Gehinom otherwise known as "She'ol."
  We find a clear allusion to the fact that we will be spared that ultimate degradation in Leviticus 26,44 where the Torah discusses all the punishments that will be inflicted on the Jewish nation for rebellion against the laws of the Torah: "Yet, even then when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or spurn them so as to destroy them, annulling My covenant with them; for I the Lord am their G–d." The destruction G–d speaks of is the descent into the pit called "Gehinom." David refers to it by saying חייתני מיורדי בור, "You have preserved me from going down into the Pit" (verse 4). There is a further allusion here to Lamentations 3,53: צמתו בבור חיי, "They have ended my life in a pit." When David continues in verse 5: זמרו לה' חסידיו, "O you faithful sing to Him," he refers to the Ineffable Name by means of which many miracles have been performed, a "hidden" name, as G–d already told Moses when He said to him in Exodus 3,15: זה שמי לעלם וזה זכרי לדור דור, "This is My Name, the hidden one, (forever) and My appellation for all eternity." The reason that the word לעולם is spelled defective there is to alert us to the hidden aspects of G–d's name. The two references to זה, are: one to the Ineffable four-lettered Name, the other to the name א-ד-נ-י, which equals the numerical value of the word היכל, Sanctuary, i.e. 65. The mystique of G–d's name is its association with the Sanctuary.
  David goes on to say: הודו, "give praise," an allusion to Lamentations 1,13: כל היום דוה, "in misery all day long" (constantly). The Zohar, in understanding the "day" as the day of G–d's timetable, i.e. 1000 years in our reckoning – as we have explained on several occasions – feels that the present exile was decreed for a minimum of 1000 years. This period could prove fatal for the Jewish people as alluded to when you reverse the letters in the word הוד i.e. דוה. When the Psalmist states in Psalms 96,6: הוד והדר לפניו עוז וחדוה במקומו, according to our sages, the word הדר is derived from the word הדרן, "review or reversal. If our actions are "good," then the result is הוד; if they are "evil," the result would be דוה, ongoing misery. Either way, all this happens in His Presence, i.e. G–d arranges that even the "evil" will eventually turn into good, i.e. the result of דוה will eventually be הוד, praise of G–d. I have explained this in greater detail elsewhere. The idea that הוד is reversible is expressed very clearly in Daniel 10,8: והודי נהפך עלי למשחית "My splendor turned into a destructive force."
  David continues in verse 6: כי רגע באפו חיים ברצונו, "For He is angry but a moment, when He is pleased there is life." The life referred to is Eternal Life, whereas G–d's anger – its purpose everlasting good – is very brief.
  David goes on: "One may lie down weeping at nightfall; but in the morning there are shouts of joy." Why did David not contrast "weeping" with שחוק, "laughter?" After all Solomon in Kohelet 3,4 describes the opposite of weeping as laughter. When David mentions that by morning there will be "joy," he thereby tells us something that goes beyond the antithesis of weeping. Rabbi Moshe Alshich has explained this in his commentary on Psalms 126,2, where he says that the joy referred to at the time under discussion in that Psalm will spill over from the mouth (lips) to the tongue. It is only by a miracle that the tongue can rejoice at a time when the mouth is full of laughter. When the Gentile nations observe this, (126,3) they will comment that G–d has indeed done great things for the Jewish people. At any rate, the trials do not last longer than from evening to morning.
  David continues in verses 7 and 8 of Psalm 30 that whereas at one time he had thought himself unshakably firmly enthroned, he had a rude awakening. In due course, he found himself terrified by G–d's "hiding His face" from him. The great lesson to be learned from G–d's guidance is not to become over confident when things are going well and not to despair when fate seems to have turned against one. When one finds oneself in trouble, one is to call upon G–d as did David, הייתי נבהל אליך ה' אקרא. 
  When David says in verse 9: ואל ה' אתחנן, this means that he pleaded on behalf of G–d, or the שכינה, Divine Presence, which is forced into exile alongside the Jewish people. When the time for salvation arrives, the שיכנה also experiences salvation, i.e. לה' הישועה על עמך (Psalms 3,9) and Israel experiences חנינה, compassion and favor. Berachot 7a, expresses this idea graphically when we are told that Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha (a High Priest) once entered the Holy of Holies in order to offer the incense offering. While inside, he had a vision of Akatriel (one of the names of G–d) sitting on a throne asking him: "Yishmael My son, bless Me!" The High Priest responded by saying: "May it be Your will to suppress Your anger etc…. and to treat Your children with the attribute of Mercy."
  In verse 10 David continues: "What is to be gained from my death, from my descent into the Pit?" Scripture is replete with similar statements as well as requests to G–d to avenge Jewish blood. What good are all these requests unless there was another future in store for us? This is why David stresses the reversal of lament, מספד, into מחול, dancing in verse 12. In verse 11 David appeals for the redemption, the gathering in of the exiles; this is similar to our prayer , והוא ישמיענו ברחמיו שנית לעיני כל חי "He will let us know a second time in His mercy in the presence of all things living" (Kedushah prayer of Mussaf). 
  When David says in verse 12 הפכת מספדי למחול לי, "You have turned my lament into dancing," he refers to the רגע באפו, "G–d's brief moment of anger" (verse 6). The curse is now to become a blessing instead. Berachot 7a discusses the brief span of G–d's anger based on Bileam's comment in Numbers 23,8 that he, the expert at timing G–d's "moods," had been unable (because of G–d's anger at the time) to find the opening to make a curse effective. Tosafot ask what good it would have done Bileam to pinpoint that anger, seeing it only lasts a רגע, moment (the length of time it takes to utter the word רגע); they answer that all Bileam had to say was "כלם," "destroy them!" By reversing that word כלם into מלך, king, the curse was converted into a blessing. This is the secret of the expression ותרועת מלך בו (Numbers 23,21), of which Bileam speaks. David also alludes to the repentance which we will perform when we experience persecution. According to the Arizal, the letters in the word תשובה, repentance, are the first letters of the words: תענית, שק, ואפר, בכיה, הספד. One can recognize a person's penitence by observing these five manifestations of remorse. In our Psalm the same idea is alluded to by the words: היודך עפר, הפכת מספדי, פתחת שקי, בערב ילין בכי. The תענית is alluded to by the words: ותאזרני שמחה, "You girded me with joy," parallel to Kohelet 9,7: אכול בשמחה לחמך, "Eat your bread [reversal of fasting. Ed.] joyfully."
  Finally, in verse 13, when David says: למען יזמרך כבוד ולא ידום, “So that my whole being might sing hymns to You and not remain silent," we may understand this when we consider that when Aaron's two sons died, Aaron mourned them by remaining silent, i.e. וידום אהרון (Leviticus 10,3). In the future, when death will have been banished, there will no longer be a reason to observe such a silence; at that time ה' אלוקי לעולם אודך, "O Lord my G–d, I will praise You forever." 
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  Vayeshev
  
  וישב . Jacob wished to dwell in tranquility. G–d reacted to this wish by saying: "Are the righteous not satisfied with their portion in the Hereafter that they also demand tranquility in this world?" If this is the way G–d reacted when a man of Jacob's caliber wished for tranquility, what can an ordinary mortal whose life is full of transgressions look forward to? How can anyone of us expect to become the beneficiary of the good G–d pours out into this world? When the likes of us experience all this goodness of G–d in our daily lives, must we not be afraid that this is ultimately to our detriment? Are we not consuming our few merits already in this world? In order to make certain that this will not be so, we must practice charity in a generous manner and return to G–d with all our hearts. We must be mindful of the Zohar's comment on the words 37,1) ,מגורי אביו) that Jacob was afraid all his days of having offended G–d, just as his fathers had been so concerned all of their lives.
  והוא נער את בני בלהה ואת בני זלפה . We can learn from here how humble Joseph was. Although he was a son of one of Jacob's proper wives, Leah and Rachel, and was very dear to his father, more than all his other brothers, he was content to defer even to his half-brothers, the sons of the maids, as if these wives were נשי יעקב, full-fledged wives of Jacob.
  ויבא יוסף את דבתם רעה . Joseph told his father that his brothers were eating forbidden food such a limbs removed from live animals, that they were belittling the sons of the maids by calling them "slaves," and that they were suspected of immoral conduct. Everybody wonders how we can reconcile such behavior by the founders of the Jewish nation. If the brothers were not guilty of such conduct, however, why would Joseph report such behavior to his father? Would Joseph have reported such conduct to his father unless the brothers had been guilty of it? The very wording of the Torah: "He brought, ויבא their דבה to their father makes this unlikely. When the דבה is false, the Torah would have written ויוצא דבתם, "he invented gossip about them." At any rate, how could the brothers have been guilty of such gross misconduct?  
  I have heard about an explanation found in an ancient manuscript: Abraham wrote the ספר יצירה, and handed it over to his son Isaac. Isaac in turn passed it on to Jacob. Jacob passed the book on to those of his sons who were the most deserving. Torah secrets are not supposed to be handed to undeserving people. As a result, only the sons born of Jacob's fully fledged wives were given copies of the book. We find in the Talmud that Abraham created a calf every Friday, by using instructions in the ספר יצירה on how to arrange the various letters in G–d's name in order to accomplish this. Since the brothers had access to that information, they may have done the same thing. Anything which came into being through this method is not subject to the halachot requiring slaughter, removal of blood, etc., before the animal is fit to be consumed. An animal created in such a way may be eaten while "alive." Joseph was not aware of this, hence he thought that what he reported to his father was a misdemeanor by his brothers.
  Sanhedrin 65b reports that the Amora Rava created a human being [using the technique discussed in the ספר יצירה, Ed.]. He sent that creature to Rabbi Zeirah who addressed him. The creature did not respond to what Rabbi Zeirah said to it. Thereupon Rabbi Zeirah ordered the creature to turn back into dust (if he was the creature made by one of the scholars). Rabbi Chanina and Rabbi Oshiyah are reported to have studied the ספר יצירה together every Friday, and to have created a three-year-old calf [a calf which appeared as big as a three-year-old, when it is most tasty; compare Rashi on that folio] and to have eaten it. [In that connection the Talmud states that had they wanted to, the scholars could have created a whole world with the help of the ספר יצירה. I presume that the reason the Talmud tells us all this is that it wants to put the relatively minor accomplishments by soothsayers and other so-called magicians which are discussed on that folio into proper perspective. Ed.] There are letters in certain names of G–d, which, if manipulated in the correct manner, enable one to create female creatures, whereas other letters in other names of G–d, when correctly manipulated, produce male creatures. It is quite possible that the brothers used their knowledge of the ספר יצירה to create female creatures (human look-alikes), and that they consorted with these creatures. Joseph arrived at the erroneous conclusion that there was something immoral about the brothers' conduct with those "females." Whenever the brothers were busy using the ספר יצירה, and the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah wanted to join them, they told their half-brothers that they could not, seeing that they were of an inferior status, being the sons of the maids. Such statements by the sons of Leah were not derogatory in nature, since the brothers wanted to protect the secrets of the ספר יצירה from falling into the hands of those for whom the book was not intended. It follows that both the brothers and Joseph were righteous. Whatever Joseph told his father was intended to lead to the brothers improving their ways through being admonished by Jacob. Nonetheless the Torah refers to these reports of Joseph about his brothers as דבה רעה, "reports of evil," because he should have investigated the circumstances before assuming the worst and telling his father about it.
  When looking at what happened to Joseph as a result of his well intentioned tale-bearing, we must reflect how much more prone to punishment we must be, when our tale-bearing is not לשם שמים, as was Joseph's.
  ויעש לו כתונת פסים . The Talmud in Shabbat 10b tells us that one must not treat any of one's children differently, since, on account of the extra two silver-coins-worth of money spent on Joseph's colored coat his brothers became jealous of him and this in turn led to the exile in Egypt. 
  ולא יכלו דברו לשלום . Rashi comments that we can learn the praiseworthy character traits of the brothers from the very criticism the Torah directs at them. The brothers were no hypocrites, fawning on Joseph to his face and cursing him behind his back. They were candid and frank. We have a parallel to this frankness in Samuel I 25,3, where Naval is described. Our sages say that he was just as evil as is implied by his very name [hardly a name given to him by his father at birth. Ed.], i.e. he did not bother to conceal his עין הרע, ill-will. The difference between Naval and the brothers was that whereas Naval was offensive to everybody, the brothers refrained from speaking to Joseph altogether. They did not want to be guilty of hypocrisy by speaking to him peacefully, hiding what was in their hearts; they also did not want to be guilty of hateful behavior towards him.
  ראה את שלום אחיך ואת שלום הצאן . We learn from here that first and foremost a person must concern himself with the welfare of his family before turning his attention to the welfare of his property, in this instance the flocks. Jacob sent out Joseph out of concern about the welfare of the brothers who were tending sheep near the town of Shechem, a town which had become the symbol of the hostility of the local population of the region after the brothers Shimon and Levi had killed its inhabitants.
  Joseph accepted his father's mission with alacrity as we know from his immediate response: הנני, "I am ready!" Although Joseph had known intellectually that he faced deathly danger, he did not demur by saying to his father:"my brothers hate me, who knows what will happen when they merely see me." His father, who did not entertain such concerns, felt in a way that he complied with something decreed already since the time of Abraham. When the Torah describes Joseph as parting from his father in the valley of Hebron, (Genesis 37,14), the Talmud in Sotah 11 comments that the reason that detail is mentioned is to show us that this mission was the first step in the fulfillment of the prophecy which Abraham (who is buried in Hebron) had received that his descendants would be strangers and slaves in a land not theirs (15,13). Joseph obeyed his father's instructions despite the danger he knew himself to be in. Our sages have said in Yevamot 5 that when one is commanded by one's father to desecrate the Sabbath, one must not obey such an instruction, the reason being that both father and son are under G–d's orders to keep the Sabbath holy and thereby to honor G–d Himself. Such exceptions to the requirement to obey father or mother apply only when commandments between man and G–d are involved. When the father's command may jeopardize the son's life without, however, infringing on one of G–d's commandments, the son is not free to disobey his father.
  Gersonides comments that when one observes someone about to perform something terrible, one should try and dissuade such a person in stages instead of demanding that the person desist immediately and absolutely. If one did the latter, one might just reinforce the sinner's intention to go ahead, because his ego has been challenged. 
  This is why when Reuben saw what his brothers were up to, he did not demand the immediate and unconditional release of Joseph. Reuben realized that if he were to demand more than that the brothers throw Joseph into a pit at that stage, they would not listen to him at all. This is why he only asked them not to spill Joseph's blood with their own hands. He intended to gradually convince his brothers to release Joseph unharmed and to personally bring him back to their father. Similar considerations also motivated Yehudah who suggested that Joseph be sold to the Ishmaelites.
  וירא שם יודא בת איש כנעני . From this verse, our sages in Kidushin 41 derive the rule that one must not marry a woman until one has seen her.
  The death of both Er and Onan was due to their deliberately destroying their semen. We need only to examine what occurred here in order to get an idea of how seriously the sin of wasting one's sperm is considered. The Torah had not yet been given. The Torah had not specifically warned man not to become guilty of willful destruction of his sperm, and yet the punishment from Heaven was so severe. Man, of course, had an oral tradition going back to Adam that deliberate waste of semen was strictly forbidden. We, who have been the recipients of the Torah, are forewarned in the strictest terms not to engage in any activity which would lead to the emission of semen for purposes other than procreation.
  לאיש אשר אלה לו אנכי הרה . The Talmud Sotah 10b concludes that this verse teaches that one should rather suffer oneself to be burned alive than to shame one's fellow-man publicly. The penalty for publicly shaming someone is so great that one must not do it even if one can save lives, and even if the person who would suffer the embarrassment is guilty of the crime one accuses him of.
  ויבא הביתה לעשות מלאכתו . The Zohar understands the words "to do his work," as referring to the study of Torah and performing of מצות, activities which make up one's מלאכתו in this world. One should take firm hold of these activities as does an איש. When the Torah continues by saying: ואין איש בבית, the reference is to the evil urge observing that there was no one to oppose him; he immediately grabs the potential sinner by his garment, i.e. ותתפשהו בבגדו, and demands that one join him. If someone is righteous, he holds on to his garment, i.e. ומתחזק בבגדו, and one battles the evil urge, i.e. וינס החוצה. Only then can one be saved from the attack of the evil urge.
  The mention of the "garment" in this story is an allusion to the "leather garments." Ever since man became degraded, so that he needs to wear these kinds of garments, he has also become a target for the evil urge to focus upon.
  ולא זכר שר המשקים את יוסף וישכחהו . The lesson here is clearly that one must only place one's trust in G–d Himself.
  
  Miketz
  
  את חטאי אני מזכיר היום . The Chief Butler was of course, a pagan. He exposed himself to the death penalty by confessing his sins in order to be of assistance to his king, to Pharaoh. It is in the nature of people that when they confess sins they expose themselves to death. What can man do? If he does confess he takes a chance, if he does not confess he is guilty of death anyway. From a Jewish point of view we must say: אשרי אדם מודה על חטאיו ירוחם. "Praised be he who confesses his sins, he will experience mercy." We have proof from scripture (Proverbs 28,13) ומודה, ועזב ירוחם, "He who confesses and abandons [sin] will find mercy." This teaches one to regularly make confessions of one's sins in honor of the King of Kings, G–d Almighty. Provided that such confessions are accompanied by repentance and the forsaking of one's sins, the sins will be swept away to the depths of the sea.
  בלעדי אלהים יענה את שלום פרעה . It is noteworthy that G–d's name was constantly on Joseph's lips. He gave G–d credit for all his talents and accomplishments. We must all learn from this admirable trait of Joseph, remembering that by ourselves we would amount to nought.
  בטרם תבא שנת הרעב . Our sages learned from this verse that it is forbidden to have marital relations during a famine. They also said that one must share the pain of the community even if one's personal circumstances are such that one can live insulated from its troubles.
  ויוסף הוא השליט . The prophet Isaiah quotes G–d as saying: "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, etc," (Isaiah 55,8). Man's thoughts are vain. When man believes that a certain course of action would prove beneficial to him, the reverse is often the case. The brothers, who had attempted to frustrate any chance of Joseph ever realizing his dreams, had furthered Joseph's career by their very actions. We must learn from this example to always strive to further G–d's plans and to abandon our own will when it appears to conflict with the will of G–d.
  למה תתראו . The Talmud Taanit 10b, on which Rashi bases his first explanation comments that although Jacob and his family were not short of provisions, Jacob told his sons not to arouse the envy of their neighbors by appearing to have ample supplies. The Zohar feels that by provoking one's neighbors envy one also provokes Heavenly judgment.
  איש אל אחיו אבל אשמים אנחנו  . They confessed their sin and went into the details as is necessary in order for a confession to be legally valid. Even according to the opinion that one does not have to confess to all details it is certainly better if one does so. In this instance the details included watching Joseph's anguish, listening to his entreaties, and failing to respond. When man confesses before his Maker, he must weep, entreat, and mourn. When the brothers said אבל אשמים אנחנו, the first word should be read as Eyvel.
  
  
   ויחרדו איש אל אחיו . We find an outstanding example of how G–d employs the principle of מדה כנגד מדה, tit for tat, in this paragraph. When Jacob masqueraded as his twin brother Esau in order to obtain the blessing from his father, the Torah spoke about the עורות גדיי העזים, "the skins of the goats," with which he covered the smooth skin of his arms (Genesis 27,16). G–d punished him for this when the brothers dipped Joseph's coat in the blood of the goat they slaughtered in order to deceive their father. Jacob caused his father חרדה, great alarm, when Isaac realized that he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau. The brothers caused their father great alarm when they asked him to determine if the blood-drenched coat was Joseph's. Yehudah, who had deceived his father, was in turn deceived by Tamar who challenged him with the identical words Yehudah had used to his father at the time, i.e. 38,25) !הכר נא). Now, when the "one" i.e. Levi (who had been separated from Shimon whom Joseph had imprisoned) opened his sack and found his money, he experienced alarm. The expression והנה … ויאמר אל אחיו ויחרדו איש אל אחיו … מה זאת עשה אלוקים לנו in 42 27-28, parallels the time when Shimon and Levi had announced the approach of Joseph with the words: הנה בעל החלומות בא ויאמרו איש אל אחיו in 37, 19. The latter words correspond to what they had said to their father in 37,32: זאת מצאנו. When we keep this in mind, we understand a number of words in these paragraphs which otherwise appear superfluous. The Torah wanted to direct our attention to the manner in which G–d made the punishment fit the crime. The author credits the above comments to a book called .דברי שלום
  
  Vayigash
  
  ולא יכלו אחיו לענות אותו . We find in Bereshit Rabbah (93,10), that this verse teaches us how impossible it is to confront those who admonish us. Bileam, the wisest of the Gentiles, could not justify himself before his ass (Numbers 22,30), and Joseph, the youngest of the brothers, silenced his older brothers when he confronted them with admonitions. In due course, G–d will admonish each one of us individually (Psalms 50,21 "I shall censure you and confront you with charges"). The Zohar comments at length on 43,18, describing the brothers' fear when escorted to Joseph's private residence (Sullam edition Miketz page 53). "Woe to those who neither know nor bother to study the Torah. G–d will demand an accounting from them. Body and soul will both have to answer for their deeds before they are finally separated."
  וינשק לכל אחיו ויבך עליהם . We learn from here to what extent a person has to forgive wrongs committed against him. The brothers had sinned against Joseph, and yet Joseph was the one who cried and kissed them!
  ואת יהודה שלח לפניו . Jacob's purpose was to establish a Torah academy in advance of the family's arrival in Goshen. Spiritual needs have to be attended to first. When building a home, one must first plan the study in which one learns Torah and says one's prayers. This room should also serve as a place for quiet contemplation and as a meeting place for scholars. Only after having attended to this does one plan the remainder of the house.
  ויכלכל יוסף ... לחם לפי הטף  . Rashi (47,12) says that Joseph provided based on need. He did not provide luxuries. We must not seek luxuries in our lives. Jacob too said to the brothers: לכו שברו רעבון בתיכם, מעט אוכל "Go back, buy us a little food." We should eat only to still our hunger and not to fill our bellies (43,2).
  רק אדמת הכהנים לא קנה  . Gratitude is a virtue which must be practiced even with pagans. The Egyptian clergy had saved Joseph when he was brought to trial before them accused of the attempted rape of Potiphar's wife. When these clergymen realized that the tear in the garment Joseph left behind was in the front, they realized that Joseph was innocent [based on ספר הישר Ed.] As a result, Joseph now repaid them in kind.
  
  Vayechi
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Thi section is named בית יעקב. בית ישראל. בית יוסף.
  The positive commandment mentioned in our portion is that of גמילות חסד, the performing of a deed of loving kindness, and specifically that of performing a service for a person after he has died. Such deeds are called the true גמילות חסד. Jacob described the act of burying his remains in ארץ ישראל as such an act of loving kindness. Attending to the burial of a departed, or performing rites of mourning as described near the end of our פרשה are all part of this מצוה. All of this comes under the heading of the positive commandment: והלכת בדרכיו, "You shall walk in His ways, which the סמ"ג enumerates in his list of the 248 positive commandments. I have copied the exact words of the סמ"ג on this subject at the beginning of פרשת וירא.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Jacob said to Joseph that he wanted him to perform a חסד ואמת, with him (47,27); he described the kindness as a "true kindness" because in performing a deed of this nature to a departed there can be no expectation of recompense to the performer. Many people raise the point that Joseph had already received his reward for this kindness before he actually performed it. Had not his father promised that Ephrayim and Menashe, Joseph's two sons, would each inherit a slice of the land of Israel, just like Jacob's own sons? So how can we speak about a חסד של אמת? Not only that, Jacob gave special blessings to Joseph's children (something that is not recorded as having happened with his other grandsons); he also allocated the city of Shechem as belonging to the tribal territory of Joseph. In view of all this, how can one speak about a חסד של אמת, a totally altruistic act of kindness? Bereshit Rabbah 98,2 understands the additional שכם Jacob bestowed on Joseph as the birthright and the garments of Adam (which had been owned by Esau; Genesis 27,15). In view of all this, how can we speak about a totally altruistic act of kindness?
  The author quotes an anonymous source in the name of Rabbi Yitzchok of Orleans: When Jacob said: ועשית עמדי חסד, he had in mind that the act of kindness he requested from Joseph would be an act of true kindness if performed for other deceased people. The author finds it difficult to credit this explanation since if this was all that Jacob had in mind, he would not have had to elaborate that much. The author therefore follows a different approach, as we shall see.
  At the time Jacob made his request that Joseph bury him in the land of Israel, he did not hold out any promise of reward for Joseph when he requested his promise to bury him in the land of Israel. Neither did Jacob use the opportunity to apologize for burying Joseph's mother in the middle of nowhere instead of with his, Jacob's ancestors. By his withholding any promises or apologies Jacob made sure that Joseph should acquire the merit of performing an act of גמילות חסד that was totally altruistic. Once Joseph had promised his father to bury him in the land of Israel, and had sworn an oath concerning this, -on a different occasion,- as attested to by the words ויהי אחרי הדברים האלה, "It was after these events," in 48,1, Jacob did explain why he had buried Rachel where he did, and that Joseph would inherit in the land of Israel as if he had been his firstborn son, etc. All of this occurred after Jacob had been taken ill.
  We must try and understand why Jacob was so concerned about his burial that he made Joseph swear an oath. Actually Jacob had two reasons, both stemming from similar considerations. Firstly, Jacob wanted to acquire the merit in Heaven of having performed such an act of pure altruism, as we will explain in more detail later. This is why he turned to his favourite son, the one who was the most like him. We have explained repeatedy that Joseph was the image of his father in character, in historical significance, etc. We have a tradition that the son can confer merits on his father, whereas the father cannot do the same thing in reverse (Sanhedrin 104).
  The second reason stems from the fact that, as we have explained elsewhere, Jacob, Joseph and the brothers are the mystical dimension of the בנין in the Celestial Regions. Jacob is a mystical dimension of the emanation תפארת, the domain of the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d. The twelve tribes represent the twelve ways that this name can be spelled. When the Torah wrote: ואלה תולדות יעקב יוסף, the latter was equated with the former. We will come back to this later. The words: ועשית עמדי חסד ואמת, mean that by your performing an act of true kindness with me you will cause me to acquire the merit of a truly performed act of kindness in the Celestial Regions. By adding the word עמדי, Jacob intimated that between them they could complete the בנין in its fullest sense. Jacob conveyed to Joseph that whereas he, Jacob, was the essence of that בנין, Joseph was its extension. The existence of such an extension enables the root of this בנין to be placed in a still higher region in the emanations than it had started out from. It is in those regions that חסד של אמת has its roots. We will still explain all this.
  In my commentary on פרשת וישלח I have already explained at length the meaning of the statement that "Jacob did not die," and how Jacob's "death" occurred when he received the news about Joseph's disappearance, and how his soul was restored when he received the news that Joseph was alive and well. He thus became his own re incarnation. That re-incarnation was no longer subject to physical death. "Death" happened only to the part of the Jacob-Israel personality known as Israel. This is the deeper meaning of 47,29: ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות, "the death of the person called Israel drew near." The spiritual part of Jacob's soul (נפש) called Israel, was on a higher level than the spiritual part of the נפש called Jacob. Jacob's request to Joseph to perform a חסד של אמת emanated from his “ישראל” aspect. The word עמדי emphasized that he was speaking in his capacity as ישראל.
  The concept of שלמות הבנין and the acquisition by Jacob of the merit of חסד של אמת converge into one overall concept. The word ארץ appears here three times, (verses 3-4-7) We also encounter the expression היכל השם three times in Jeremiah 7,4. The Sanctuary called היכל השם is situated in a sacred ארץ. In commenting on Isaiah 12,6: כי גדול בקרבך קדוש ישראל, "For The Holy One of Israel will be great in your midst," our sages state that G–d will not take up residence in the Jerusalem "above" until He has been able to do so in the Jerusalem "below." The plain meaning of that statement is that the Jerusalem "below" is the Sanctuary in the Holy Land, ארץ ישראל, the Temple whose speedy rebuilding we pine for every day. This Temple is on a site that corresponds to the Sanctuary in the Celestial Regions. The Sanctuary in the Celestial Regions in turn is the סוד, mystical dimension of the ארץ העליונה, the "Earth" of the upper regions, also known as ארץ חפץ. Chabakuk 2,20 says of that land: וה' בהיכל קדשו הס מפניו כל הארץ, "And the Lord is in His Sanctuary, be silent before Him all the earth!" The Sanctuary of G–d, היכל, discussed here is that of the attribute known as א-ד-נ-י, the numerical value of which equals 65, the same as the numerical value of the word היכל. These two words also have the same numerical value as the word הס in the verse from Chabakuk quoted. The היכל is the ארץ של ישראל סבא, the land of the founding father of the Jewish people, Israel, otherwise known as תפארת ישראל a mystical dimension of the Ineffable Name.
  There are even higher regions than these. We find the deeper meaning of the coming of G–d to the Jerusalem on earth as per Isaiah 12,6, the name of G–d used: the Ineffable Name of G–d י-ה-ו-ה. In the היכל קדשו, we encounter a union between the name א-ד-נ-י, and the name י-ה-ו-ה seeing we have the equivalent of the name א-ד-נ-י in the letters of the word היכל, and the four-lettered Name in the same expression. The mystical dimension of a union in the terrestrial world is expressed by the letter ו, combined with the letter ה, i.e. י-ה-ו-ה is divided into two parts. The mystical dimension of a זווג, union, in the Celestial Spheres is the letter י followed by the letter ה. The Jerusalem of the Celestial Spheres is the union between the emanations חכמה and בינה. These principles are explained in the Zohar and quoted in Pardes Rimonim chapter 13 of the treatise called מהות והנהגה.
  Briefly: The Sanctuary exists on three levels, i.e. there are three Sanctuaries, היכל השם. One is located on earth, one is in the domain of the emanation תפארת, and yet another one is in the domain of the upper three emanations כתר-חכמה-בינה. Each Sanctuary is situated on ארץ (of a kind). The terrestrial Sanctuary is located in the Jerusalem of our ארץ ישראל. These Sanctuaries are all "opposite" their counterparts in the Celestial Spheres which in turn are also perceived as rooted in a kind of “ארץ”.
  The Zohar writes at the end of פרשת וזאת הברכה: "We have learned that Jacob, Moses, and Joseph pursued a similar path. Jacob died and was buried in ארץ ישראל, both flesh and bones. Joseph had only his bones buried in ארץ ישראל. Moses had neither his flesh nor his bones buried in ארץ ישראל. What is the reason for this? Jacob was the original "husband" of the שכינה called "Matronita." [We have explained how Jacob's name was engraved on the throne of G–d. The throne is a form of the "upper" שכינ ה also identified with the emanation בינה, which is perceived of as female. The "lower" שכינה is the emanation מלכות. In either case, both at the beginning of his career and at its end, Jacob is perceived as the "husband" of that level of the שכינה. Ed.]
  Once Jacob died, Moses became the second "husband" of the relevant שכינה [presumably the "upper" one, בינה, seeing that Moses had attained 49 of the 50 levels of בינה Ed.]. However, this union could last only while Moses lived on this earth, since upon the death of a wife's second husband she "returns" to her former husband, having only been on "loan" during the interval. Since Jacob was by then in the Holy Land, Moses, automatically had to remain outside the Holy Land. The reason that Jacob was buried body and bones in ארץ ישראל is that he represented the גוף, body, of the ארץ של ישראל סבא, as we have mentioned before. Joseph, being the extension of his father, was the extension of the גוף, limbs or bones. These "bones" symbolize the spiritual forces or permutations of G–d's Ineffable Name that radiate in all directions from the emanation בינה, enabling a physical universe to take shape. A צדיק, as such is also called צבאות, part of G–d's armies or executive arm. It was therefore appropriate that Joseph's bones rather than his entire body were interred in ארץ ישראל.  None of this reflects negatively on Moses. On the contrary, whereas Moses was able to establish a union with the "upper" level of the שכינה during his life on earth, Jacob established his union with that level of the שכינה only after he had departed. We find an allusion to Moses' intimacy with that part of the שכינה in Numbers 7,89, where the way the Torah describes Moses' being at home in the אהל מועד, the visible manifestation of the בינה on earth, is most striking. Moses did not need to be invited in; he acted as if he were the owner of that domain. The author finds in the number of the 600,000 Jews that left Egypt allusions to the radiations of the various combinations of G–d's Name in all the six directions of the compass, proof that Moses led the people by means of the power inherent in the emanation בינה. If Moses was already on such a level while his soul was still enshrined in his body, it is clear that once Moses died, his soul would ascend to an even higher region than the level represented by בינה. That level, which we have described elsewhere as יובל, is beyond any level associated with any of the three levels to which the term ארץ can be applied. Moses' being "buried" in what we commonly call חוץ לארץ is a compliment to him thus rather than a reminder of some inadequacy on his part. In fact, once Moses' life on earth had come to an end, he joined the souls of "his" 600,000 people who also had not been buried in the Holy Land.  If we find that Moses separated from his terrestrial wife Tzipporah –something used by his sister Miriam as an accusation against him in Numbers 12,1 – the reason was simply that Moses had already "used" [in the sense that one has relations with one's wife. Ed.] the spiritual light from extra-terrestrial regions as we know from Exodus 34,29 where Moses is described as emitting supernatural light from his face. Having a "wife" in those regions, it is easy to understand that Moses could no longer share life with a wife on earth. Jacob, on the other hand, had married four wives and had shared a fully terrestrial life with them, one of the reasons that his bed, מטה, was called שלימה, "complete" by our sages. This means that only upon his death did his רוח ונשמה, soul and spirit, merit entry to the seventh level i.e. בינה. 
  Moses surpassed Jacob in that respect by having separated from his wife during his lifetime. This was called כלת משה, the perfection of Moses while on this earth. The word כלה is an expression used by Kabbalists to denote completion of a spiritual stage, in this case the attainment of the highest level of the emanation מלכות. [Cf. More about this in chapter 23 of the שער ערכי כנויים of Pardes Rimonim under the heading כל. Ed.]
  [We have discussed on pages 207-209 the meanings of the terms שמטה, יובל within the framework of a discussion on the relative meaning of "time" and the emanations, and will assume that you, the reader, will look there to refresh your memory if necessary. Ed.]
  When Abraham made Eliezer swear that he would not take Isaac back to Charan, he made him swear by the organ on which circumcision had been performed, an organ that therefore had become dear to him, the symbol of the covenant with G–d (Genesis 24,3). Granted that there were good reasons then for the method employed by Abraham, why did Jacob request that Joseph, his son, perform the oath in the same manner by placing his hand on his father's organ (47,29)? Why did Joseph not mention the symbol of the oath that he made the brothers swear by when he in turn requested that the brothers swear they would take his remains with them when the time came for the redemption from Egypt (50,25)?
  Jacob made Joseph swear by his own "root," seeing Joseph symbolized the ברית, the covenant with G–d, as we have pointed out on numerous occasions. Placing his hand on his father's organ then was not symbolic of the covenant of circumcision, but of the ברית העליון, the covenant between G–d and man that ensures the continued existence of the universe. The word ירך in that context represented the seat of reproductive activity, the root of physical man, not merely its sanctification by circumcision. When Joseph made his brothers swear, he merely made them swear by his own מדה, attribute, not in his capacity as symbol of something higher. Since Joseph considered himself as an "extension," a pipeline of the domain of his father, he merely made sure that his bones would be moved from the ארץ התחתונה, the lowest level of earth (in this case Egypt), to the "lowest" level of היכל השם, Sanctuary, to the land of Israel. It is precisely because Joseph was that pipeline between the ארץ עליונה, the equivalent of earth in the Celestial Regions, that Jacob blessed Joseph's children by invoking their father. This is the meaning of ויברך את יוסף, "He blessed Joseph," before the line: המלאך הגואל אתי מכל רע הוא יברך את הנערים, "May the angel who blessed me bless the lads" (48,16). No רע, evil, stuck to our patriarch Jacob. Evil is the very reverse of maintaining the Holy Covenant as we know from: ויהי ער רע בעיני השם, "Er was evil (same letters reversed) in the eyes of the Lord" (38,7). Concerning people who are evil, it is written: לא יגורך רע, "Evil cannot abide with You" (Psalms 5,5), seeing Evil has no foothold in ארץ העליונה, the celestial equivalent to earth. That ארץ is known only as ארץ טובה, and טוב is the צדיק, the foundation of the universe as we know from: אמרו צדיק כי טוב הוא, "Say (about) the righteous he is good" (Isaiah 3,10). This is why the seed of Joseph, the keeper of the Covenant, was more sacred than any other, and as a result merited to be counted among the other founders of the tribes. 
  This also explains what Joseph meant when he said: אנכי אעשה כדברך, "I shall do as you have said" (47,30). It should have sufficed for Joseph to say merely אעשה כדברך, without the addition of the word אנכי. With the word אנכי, Joseph alluded to the fact that he in turn would act just like his father and make those responsible swear to take his own remains with them to ארץ ישראל. This also explains Jacob saying: השבעה לי, and Joseph's response being described as: וישבע לו. Jacob said: "Swear to me that you will do for me the very same thing you want to do for yourself."
  We can understand now why Jacob had to insist that Joseph confirm what he had promised by an oath. Surely he had no reason to distrust his son, and such a son at that! He was concerned with the benefit Joseph himself would derive from having taken an oath on the matter. This is the reason he made him swear.
  There is another mystical dimension to an oath. We know that the Kabbalists relate the word שבועה, oath, to the word שבעה, seven. This is an allusion to the seven days of the בנין whose root is the attribute Jacob and whose extension is Joseph the foundation of the Covenant and extension of the "body" i.e. Jacob. [The "lower" 7 emanations are perceived as emanations that translate the thoughts formulated in the "upper" 3 emanations into practice. Hence the description of the 7 days of the בנין, the 7 days during which the physical universe came into being. Ed.] Body and Covenant are considered essentially as one which enables us to understand the subject matter we are dealing with.
  Let us first refer to one vitally important verse תתן אמת ליעקב, חסד לאברהם כאשר נשבעת לאבותינו מימי קדם, "You grant truth to Jacob, kindness to Abraham as You have sworn to our forefathers in days gone by" (Michah 7,20). [The normal translation of the verse is not applicable here. Ed.] Why was the patriarch Isaac not mentioned? Besides, why was Jacob mentioned before Abraham? 
  The answer is found in the fact that it was Jacob who redeemed Abraham as we have learned from Jeremiah 31,11. Abraham was saved from Nimrod's furnace only in order for Jacob to be born in the future. This does not mean that Jacob's merits were greater than those of Abraham. On the contrary; Abraham, the founder of Judaism, possessed comprehensive merits. He had such great merit that he should not have been denied the ultimate merit of being a martyr for his faith. Had G–d allowed such martyrdom, however, Jacob would never have seen the light of this world. The fact that Jacob's מטתו שלימה, that he raised all his children to remain loyal to his teachings, represented the mystical dimension of completing the בנין in the Celestial Regions, as we have described this elsewhere.
  Let me now explain that when the words אמת and חסד are used together the meaning is חסד של אמת, a true, altruistic act of kindness, whereas when these words are used separately they retain their normal meaning of "truth" and "kindness." "Truth" refers to the attribute of Justice, tit for tat. When the word חסד is appended to the word אמת however, the meaning of אמת is changed to אמת נצחיי, an eternal truth, as distinguished from a mere reaction to a denial of truth which we know as מדת הדין, the attribute of Justice. Although Jacob's attachment to the mystical dimension of בנין derived from his merits, i.e. was in the nature of a reward, tit for tat kind of מדת הדין, he desired something beyond that. 
  He wanted to be part of the higher היכל השם, a domain higher than that of merely בנין. He wanted to be associated with the domain that is the root of בנין, the domain of יובל, the domain attained by Moses. He desired to be associated with that domain in his capacity as ישראל, even though only part of his personality would qualify. He hoped to attain this level through Joseph performing a חסד של אמת with him. The words אשר נשבעת לאבותינו מימי קדם in the verse we quoted from Michah allude to the root of the domain of בינה, a period prior to "time," at the very beginning of the emanations which led to the Creation.
  
  This is the mystical domain of שבועה. Although Jacob did not attain his wish, a small part of his personality did succeed in getting a glimpse of the spiritual domain of יובל also. His request of Joseph to render an oath, a שבועה, must be understood in that vein. 
  When the Torah reports Israel as bowing down at the head of the bed, 47,31) ראש המטה), this is a reference to Jacob and his "bed" (children) jointly having completed the בנין, and having thereby acquired a claim to a domain higher than that of בנין itself. If the ultimate that Jacob attained is symbolized by the word Mittah, the ultimate that Moses attained is symbolized by a word composed of the same letters, i.e. Matteh, only the vowels being different. He is described as holding the מטה אלוקים בידו, the staff of G–d in his hand, an allusion to a higher היכל השם. The word is composed of the letters מט,+ the letter "heh". 49 of the 50 gates of בינה were revealed to Moses; the letter ה is an allusion to the first letter ה in the Ineffable Name, a letter representing בינה.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  All of Israel heard the Ten Commandments in one single phrase without punctuation. G–d repeated the first two commandments so that they could be comprehended by everybody word by word. This makes a total of twelve that every Israelite heard from G–d directly. This in turn corresponded to the twelve tribes, two of whom were allocated special functions, as we have mentioned. When you add the fact that the commandments were inscribed on two tablets you have the figure 14. This also corresponded to the fact that the twelve tribes had extensions, תולדות, the sons of Joseph. The reason there were two tablets was to distinguish between the written and the oral law. The number fourteen symbolizes the יד (14) החזקה of Moses who was the recipient of the Torah (cf. last verse in the Torah).
  The reason that these numbers need to be found in the construction of the תפילין is the statement of the Talmud Kidushin 35, based on: למען תהיה תורת השם בפיך that the entire Torah is compared to תפילין (Exodus 13,9).
  The author explains the tradition that G–d lays תפילין as related to the concept of the emanations. The four Torah portions that are placed within the תפילין of the head are perceived as alluding to the emanations חכמה, בינה, גדולה, גבורה, whereas the four portions in the תפילין של יד, allude to the emanations תפארת, נצח, הוד, יסוד. The תפילין on the head belong to the emanation כתר, crown, which presides over the emanations mentioned, whereas the four portions in the תפילין של יד "belong" to the lowest of the emanations מלכות. Jacob, by dint of having achieved a degree of תקון, spiritual repair work, after the damage caused to the universe by Adam, is perceived as laying תפילין in the Celestial Regions, i.e. "wearing" תפארת. The fact that the phylacteries are made of leather are a reminder of the leather garments G–d made for man after he forfeited the garments of light. It is due to Jacob's spiritual accomplishments, that wearing תפילין made of leather has become a mark of distinction rather than a reminder of man's fall from grace. The 12 stitches needed to sew together the "housings" of the phylacteries are an allusion to the assistance Jacob received from his twelve sons in performing that spiritual repair work. G–d's "laying" phylacteries can therefore be understood as G–d donning the תפארת which Jacob had attained. 
  
  
  
  The verse which tells us that Jacob bowed at the head of the bed, is an allusion to the phylacteries of the head; Jacob's extension, Joseph and his brothers, are the allusion to the phylacteries of the hand. When Jacob crossed his hands (48,14) while blessing Joseph's sons, he took a cue from the manner in which we don the phylacteries. 
  The commentators have difficulty with the word כי in the verse. Rabbi Bachyah, for instance, understands the word in the same sense as it is used in such verses as סלח לנו אבינו כי חטאנו, "Forgive us our Father, although we have sinned," or as in Psalms 41,5: רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך, "Heal me although I have sinned against You."
  The author does not think there is a need for translating the word כי as "although." He believes the word is translated perfectly adequately as "for." Jacob wanted to give some distinction to Ephrayim over Menashe; he also wanted to accord honour to Menashe, however, for he was the firstborn. He acted very wisely in granting greatness to both sons. This is why he did not want Ephrayim placed on his right side but preferred to cross his hands. Had he had Ephrayim moved to his left side, this could have been interpreted as his having denigrated Menashe.
  Although the phylacteries are placed on the left arm, this does not denigrate the right arm; it is required in order that the phylacteries may be placed on the left arm. The right hand is the hand with which both the writing of the portions of Torah within the phylacteries and the tying of the knots is performed. The right hand thus has in no way been denigrated when it comes to the performance of the מצוה of תפילין.
  When Isaiah 49,3 quotes G–d as saying of Israel: ישראל אשר בך אתפאר, "Israel, you, in whom I glory," the reference may well be to Jacob in his capacity of ישראל סבא who dons the phylacteries of the head. Those phylacteries are known as פאר, as glorious headdress, as is well known. I have already mentioned that the whole Torah is compared to תפילין. Torah itself is subsumed in the word את, which the Talmud in Shabbat 55 understands as referring to people who observe Torah from א-ת. The extra letters את in אתפאר refer to such people.
  We may be able to answer a question raised in the Zohar on Genesis 49,25 where Jacob in his blessing for Joseph says: מאל , ואת שדי ויברכך, "The G–d of your father who helps you, and Shaddai who blesses you." The Zohar questions why the Torah wrote ואת שדי instead of וא-ל שדי. According to our approach the answer is simply that Jacob indicated that Joseph just like his father also has a part in the מצוה of תפילין, albeit in his capacity as an extension of his father. Therefore, Joseph's part in that מצוה is the phylacteries which are worn on the arm, and which feature the letters of the word שדי in the manner in which the strap is wound around the hand and the knot near the housing.
  To get back to the number of stitches used to stitch together the תפילין. The author had stated elsewhere that the number of tribes is usually 12. When we include Levi and the two sons of Joseph it is 14. When we subtract the two tribes described as מלכא and שמשא who were designated as heads of Zion and Jerusalem respectively, there are only ten tribes, corresponding to the Ten Commandments. The twelve tribes which usually feature in our considerations, and which represent the number of sections the land of Israel was divided into, also represent the number of divisions of the ארץ ישראל למעלה, the celestial counterpart of the Holy Land down here as described in Ezekiel. The division into ten, twelve or fourteen respectively also occurs in other crucial contexts, even at the giving of the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai.
  Originally it was customary to make twelve stitches when sewing together the upper and lower parts of the housing of the phylacteries. This corresponded to the twelve tribes. Maimonides, in Hilchot Tefillin 3,10 allows for either 10 or 14 stitches. The Ari Zal noted that there were different customs in this matter. Jews from Italy, Spain, North Africa and Eastern Europe had different customs in that regard. Since there are twelve gates in the Heavens corresponding to the twelve tribes, the Ari Zal did not see any reason why these customs could not co-exist. This is all based on Ezekiel. Every tribe's prayer is perceived as ascending to Heaven via his particular gate. This does not mean that all these gates are of the same size, nor that access to them is equally easy. In view of this we understand why the various tribes have different nuances in their respective liturgy, though they all pray to the same G–d. Everybody has to retain his particular custom since nowadays we do not know who belongs to which tribe. Concerning the liturgical details found in the Talmud, these are equally valid for all the tribes, howeverAuthor's comment<i class="footnote">When the Torah stresses in 49,28 that Jacob blessed each of his sons according to his particular blessing, no doubt this is meant to emphasize that despite the fact that all the sons together were extensions of Jacob, there were individual differences and that these individual differences were worth preserving.</i>.
  The entire subject matter under discussion revolves around the spiritual levels of ארץ ישראל and the three levels of היכל השם we have discussed at the outset. This is why, when Jacob noticed that his death was approaching, he called for his son Joseph to instruct him to bury him in ארץ ישראל. When he said: ושכבתי עם אבותי, "I wish to lie with my fathers" (47,30), he intended to answer a question that arises from a statement of our sages in Ketuvot 111, that dying and being buried in ארץ ישראל is not to be compared to merely being buried in ארץ ישראל after one has died outside the Holy Land. The Talmud there describes the scholar Ulla as regularly travelling between Babylonia and the land of Israel though he was resident in the land of Israel. He died while in Babylonia, and Rabbi Eleazar grieved over Ulla's misfortune of having died on unclean soil. When informed that his bier was being transferred to the land of Israel, Rabbi Eleazar stated that this did not make up for Ulla having died in a foreign country. In view of this, Joseph might have questioned the value of transporting the remains of his father to the land of Canaan.
  The issue raised in Ketuvot 111 is raised by the Zohar (Sullam edition Vayechi page 106) in an even more drastic manner. To those who have died in חוצה לארץ and whose body is being transferred to ארץ ישראל, Rabbi Yuda wants to apply the verse from Jeremiah 2,7: ותבאו ותטמאו את ארצי ונחלתי שמתם לתועבה, "You have come and have defiled My land and made My inheritance an abomination!" Rabbi Yuda answered that Jacob was an exception to this rule; the שכינה had accompanied him on his descent to Egypt and had never left him. This is the reason G–d had said to him in 46,4: אנכי ארד עמך מצרימה, ואנכי אעלך גם עלה, "I shall go down with you to Egypt and I shall also go up with you." The message to Jacob was that, in spite of the fact that his soul would depart on foreign soil, it would remain close to G–d, whereas his body would be buried with those of his ancestors.
  This may also explain why Joseph's burial in the Holy Land conferred spiritual elevation upon him. We have already explained that the reason G–d sent Joseph to Egypt ahead of the rest of Jacob's clan was to ensure that when Jacob and his family would begin their exile, they would come to a land where G–d's שכינה had already established a foothold. As a result, Joseph's body too would not taint the Holy Land when it would be buried in there.
  I prefer a different approach to this problem of bodies defiling the land of Israel. We know that in all places where the entire Jewish people is present it is permissible to offer sacrifices because the atmosphere prevailing in the Holy Land is also present when the whole Jewish people are in one location. This is exactly what the Jewish people did in the desert for forty years after the Tabernacle had been erected. The sacrifices offered on the altar outside the land of Israel have never been considered as in the class of שחוטי חוץ, disqualified because not offered on a holy and designated site in ארץ ישראל. We can now conclude that because Jacob and Joseph died in an environment in which all of Israel was present, a holy environment, one in which the atmosphere of ארץ ישראל could be perceived, there was therefore no problem in burying their bodies in ארץ ישראל proper. The advantage of the land of Israel consists in that it confers elevated spiritual status on Jews living there even when only a tiny fraction of the Jewish people is present. It is this lesson that Jacob conveyed to his son Joseph when he said: "I wish to lie with my fathers." He hinted to Joseph that the latter should not think that his father perceived of himself as dying in an unclean land, and that he would only be "lying" with his fathers when transported there but would not be integrated in the Holy Land. Seeing that at the time of his death an atmosphere of the Holy Land prevailed even in Egypt there would be great spiritual benefit to having his remains transferred to the cave of Machpelah.
  The author credits the Zohar with having inspired him with the explanation just offered, but he could not recall where in the Zohar he had come across such an idea.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ועשית עמדי חסד ואמת . The main ingredient of חסד, kindness, is that it be performed without expectation of a reward. Only when performed thus is one called generous; otherwise one is simply a trader. There is no greater virtue than that of חסד. This is why a person must train himself to practice this virtue until it becomes second nature to him. Not only should he perform acts of kindness for the dead, but even more so for the living. By doing so he will emulate the virtues practiced by G–d Himself who constantly performs acts of kindness without any thought of compensation. Concerning this David has said in Psalms 63,4: "For truly Your kindness is better than life itself; my lips declare Your praise." David meant that whereas when human beings practice acts of altruistic loving-kindness, this is almost always with the dead. You, G–d, perform deeds of loving-kindness for the living, by the very fact that You grant us our life. What could we possibly do in the way of compensating You!? All we can do is to pay You lip-service, extol Your virtues in song and prayer. Rashi referred to this in his commentary on 49,21, where he interprets the אמרי שפר as an allusion to the song of victory sung by Deborah after Israel defeated Sisera under her leadership. G–d performs the miracles and all we can do in return is to acknowledge them with our lips.
  ויתחזק ישראל וישב על המטה . Israel's ability to strengthen himself and sit on "the bed," was due to "his bed" being שלימה. Hail to anyone who merits it. Every pious person constantly prays that he will not be the cause of any פסול, defect, among his children or children's children. All that man can leave behind in this world are children and grandchildren who by their own righteousness bear testimony to the piety of their fathers.
  This thought is reflected in the blessing Jacob bestowed on Joseph's sons. The Torah calls that blessing: "He blessed Joseph," because whatever Jacob's blessing would help Ephrayim and Menashe to accomplish would reflect beneficially on their father. When Jacob added that any children Joseph would sire after Ephrayim and Menashe לך יהיו, "shall be yours" (48,6), he meant that they should follow in the footsteps of Joseph; this is the greatest blessing one can bestow upon a father.
  ויברך את יוסף ויאמר האלהים אשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו . The "walking before Him," mentioned here is an allusion to the spiritual awakening which proceeds in an "upward" motion and confers increased holiness on a person. I have explained this in my commentary on פרשת נח. Walking "before" G–d means to perform acts which in turn elevate a person spiritually. Walking "with" G–d means that G–d's input comes first.
  Bereshit Rabbah 97,2 explains this verse on two levels. Rabbi Yochanan says that Jacob viewed G–d as like a shepherd who stands and looks at his flock, whereas Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says that Jacob viewed G–d in this blessing as like a prince who walks while his elders walk in front of him. According to Rabbi Yochanan we must show respect to the shepherd, i.e. G–d, whereas according to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish G–d is expected to show us respect. This Midrash clearly needs further analysis. 
  The Midrash also refers to Rabbi Berechyah, without telling us with whose view Rabbi Berechyah identifies. A further difficulty is the wording of Rabbi Yochanan who describes the shepherd as "standing" and looking. What does the fact that the shepherd is "standing" contribute to our understanding of Jacob's blessing? On the other hand, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish seems to emphasize the aspect of "walking." 
  I have already commented on all this in פרשת נח. Basically, the Midrash highlights the two aspects of walking "with" or "before" G–d. If Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish uses a metaphor which dares to suggest that man is entitled to respect from G–d, this assumes that our performance of מצות and our service to G–d is something that G–d "needs." Hence those who excel in this respect are entitled to be honored by Him.
  Rabbi Yochanan concentrates on the other -Noach-like- aspect of serving G–d, i.e. waiting till one is inspired by G–d. He uses a metaphor describing input from above, i.e. the gaze of a shepherd on his flock. This always originates from a higher vantage point but is benevolent at the same time, much as when G–d said in Exodus 33,19: "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious." This means that the recipients did not have a claim on G–d's grace. The very fact that Rabbi Yochanan uses dumb animals as the subjects in his metaphor shows that he speaks of a lower class of spiritual motivation. 
  Since it is clear that Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish do not disagree, but describe different people, we can understand that there was no need for Rabbi Berechyah to identify with the viewpoint of either scholar.
  We can now also understand the comment made by Rabbi Azaryah on this very blessing in the paragraph of Bereshit Rabbah preceding the one we just dealt with. Taking as his cue the verse in Psalms 34,10: "Fear the Lord, you His consecrated ones, for those who fear Him lack nothing," Rabbi Azaryah describes Joseph as leaving his father very happy after receiving his blessing. The brothers commented that everybody defers to someone who is at the height of his powers. Upon hearing such remarks, Jacob quoted the latter half of the verse in the Psalm above so as to reassure the brothers that he had blessings in store for all of them.
  How could the brothers have suspected their father of engaging in the sin of flattery? A man whose likenesss is engraved on the throne of G–d who hates flattery as the worst kind of sin would surely not be guilty of it! Another difficulty is the repetitive way in which Rabbi Azaryah expresses himself in the Midrash. [I have not bothered to quote the Aramaic original. Ed.]
  The brothers observed that Joseph's face was inordinately radiant. We have a tradition that a person's wisdom is reflected in his facial features. The Holy Spirit that illuminated him, and which Joseph received through his father, caused the brothers to become jealous in a constructive manner, קנאה לשם שמים. This is similar to the jealousy among Torah scholars, a permissible or even desirable form of jealousy (Baba Batra 21a). The brothers therefore did not suspect Jacob of flattering Joseph; they merely worried that they themselves would not be granted similar insights.
   Jacob reassured them by applying to them the verse in Psalms 34,10 describing them not only as G–d-fearing but also as קדושיו, His consecrated ones, stemming from holy seed, and therefore entitled to prepare themselves to also receive a measure of the Holy Spirit. He intimated that though Joseph preceded them in that achievement, having been among those who "walk before" G–d, they themselves as דרשי השם, desiring intimacy with G–d, would not be denied their aspirations.
  האספו ואגידה לכם את אשר יקרא אתכם באחרית הימים . Jacob wanted to reveal to the brothers details about the final redemption; this is why he used the expression האספר, "gather together," since redemption cannot come when there is strife and unprovoked hatred between them. 
  
  In 50,16, the Torah reports the brothers as saying to Joseph that prior to his death their father had commanded them to tell him to forgive their trespass against him. Most commentators have difficulty finding the source of the brothers' statement. They may have referred to the מוסר, moral instruction in the word האספו, which put the brothers on notice to be forgiving toward one another.
  We are told in Pesachim 56 that the שכינה departed from Jacob when he was about to reveal details of the forthcoming redemption. Jacob became upset over this and wondered if any one of his sons present was perhaps unfit to be in the presence of the שכינה, and that this was the reason the שיכנה had withdrawn from him. His sons responded by reciting the שמע ישראל, the declaration of faith and willingness to bear the yoke of G–d's commandments.
   It is puzzling that the brothers should have called their father by his first name ישראל, something not compatible with good manners. We must conclude that they used the name ישראל not as a personal name but as the symbol of authority, as if they had said: "Hear our lord." We can conclude from the above that if someone has a father who at the same time doubles as his teacher, it is more respectful to address one's father by his title "Rabbi" than merely as "father." When one is faced with the choice of honoring one's father [who is not one's spiritual mentor] and one's teacher, the teacher takes precedence.
  לא יסור שבט מיהודה ומחוקק מבין רגליו עד כי יבא שילה . It is of the utmost importance to understand the true meaning of this verse in order to be able to refute apostates, Christians, etc. Nachmanides expresses himself as follows on this subject: The meaning of this verse is not that the kingdom will never depart from Yehudah. After all, the Torah writes very clearly in Deuteronomy 28,36: "The Lord will drive you and the king you have set over yourself, to a nation unknown to you or to your ancestors." If both Israel and its king will be in exile, then they will obviously not have kings or aristocracy. History has shown that Israel has been in this condition for many hundreds of years. No prophet has ever assured Israel that it would not be exiled so that the tribe of Yehudah could continue to rule over it. What the verse does tell is that the sceptre, symbolising kingdom, would not depart from the hands of Yehudah in favour of a member of another tribe. The same is true of the second half of the verse which discusses scribes. Any scribe in Israel who is authorised by the signet ring of the king will be so authorised by a king from the tribe of Yehudah. This state of affairs will continue until his son, the Messiah, will arrive, at which time the kingdom of Yehudah will extend over all the nations. The word שבט is an allusion to David, the first king from the tribe of Yehudah, whereas the word שילה, his son, is the Messiah around whom all the nations will gather. Thus far Nachmanides.
  Rabbeynu Bachyah comments on this verse as follows: "My teacher Rabbi Shlomoh said that the word עד in this verse must be understood to mean לעד, (forever); this is the reason the tone sign is before the vowel Patach to alert us to the fact that the word does not belong with the subsequent words כי יבא שילה. This consideration prompted Onkelos to translate the word as "עד-עלמא," forever. Anyone who translates the verse as "until the Messiah comes," is in error. The meaning of the verse is that once the Messiah comes, the sceptre will never again depart from Yehudah. We have an analogous verse in Daniel 2,44: "a kingdom that will never be harmed." Thus far Rabbeynu Bachyah.
  Rashi's commentary is based on our sages and views the authority promised here to rulers of the tribe of Yehudah as also extending to the heads of Jewish autonomy in exile, the Exilarchs. These heads were always descendants of the tribe of Yehudah and were appointed by the local kings (Sanhedrin 5a). The words מחוקק מבין רגליו refers to the princes [equivalent of Exilarchs] in the Holy Land.
  The apostates and heretics who claim that we do not even have the authorities that Rashi refers to, simply do not understand the words of our sages and their sometimes enigmatic ways of expressing themselves, nor do they understand the beautiful parables of our sages. The sages meant that both the word שבט and the word מחוקק refer to outstanding people. In the generation when Rabban Gamliel was the נשיא, "prince," he was able to point out with his fingers who were the people that qualified under the heading שבט, and how the promise of Jacob in his blessing had come true. Subsequently, in each generation and in different locations, outstanding Jewish men have served in distinguished positions at the respective Royal Courts in their host country. One can say with certainty that these people were all descended from the tribe of Yehudah. This is an ongoing process that will not stop till the coming of the Messiah. Even though, due to our many sins, we are not in a position to trace the lineage of each of these people directly to the tribe of Yehudah, there is sufficient evidence to cause us to bless the Lord who fulfilled His promise, whether the sphere in which Yehudah rules be small or great. This situation will continue till the Messianic age. At that time, all nations will gather around the Messiah and he will rule forever. The sages who understood the verse as referring to the "princes" as well as Rabban Gamliel, pointed out the part of the prophecy which was applicable in their respective generations. There are many similar statements by our sages. 
  Eicha Rabbah interprets that in a verse in Kings II 25,9 in which Nevuzaradon is described as destroying Jerusalem and "the great house," "the great house" refers to Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai. Since Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai lived over 600 years later than Nevuzaradan, it is clear that the Midrash views the person of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai in a sense similar to what Rabban Gamliel told us. The Talmud is replete with similar interpretations.
  יששכר חמור גרם . The Zohar (Sullam edition Vayechi page 246) asks: "Was then Issachar a donkey?" If the reason he was called thus was because he studied Torah, why was he not called "lion," or "horse," or "leopard?" What is the special significance of the "donkey?" The answer is that the donkey is an animal which willingly shoulders heavy burdens and does not protest to its master as do other animals. It is humble and undemanding. It is willing to sleep in uncomfortable quarters. It is not concerned with its own dignity but with that of its master.
  Another interpretation, also quoted there, is that when David composed Psalm 27,1: "The Lord is my light and my help; whom should I fear?" He meant that just as Torah is dear to G–d so are those that study Torah very dear to G–d. Anyone who is steeped in Torah study need not worry about all the destructive forces that abound on this earth. He is able to subjugate all these destructive forces and consign them to the Deep. When night falls the gates of another world are opened. Dogs and wild asses roam the streets and while their owners are asleep in their beds, the destructive forces are allowed full reign. During that time, the souls of the righteous ascend to Heaven to enjoy its atmosphere. When the North Wind becomes active at midnight, forces of sanctity become active in the world, as has been explained in several places. Hail to the man who arises from his sleep at that hour and busies himself with Torah study. Due to his Torah study he is able to expel all the forces of destruction that are around at that time. He subjugates the קליפה of the חמור and consigns it to a sphere where the pollutants prevail. Hence Issachar whose toil is with Torah, succeeds in banning the חומר, [play on words, “non is symbol of all that is physical. Ed.] The חמור, cause of the ascendancy of the destructive elements is consigned by Isaachar to the nether regions גרם, the reservoir of the pollutants.
  Take a good look at what is written here: וירא מנוחה כי טוב. This refers to the written Torah. ואת הארץ כי נעמה, ויט שכמו לסבול ויהי למס עובד. The words הארץ כי נעמה, refer to the oral Torah. The next few words refer to the willingness to shoulder the yoke of the Torah and to cleave to it by day and by night. The last words express the willingness to be G–d's servant to the point of weakening one's physical prowess.
  Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi Yossi, and Rabbi Chiyah were walking in Upper Galilee towards Tiberias. Rabbi Shimon said: Let us study the profound meanings of the Torah because anyone who is able to do so and fails to do it commits a capital crime against his soul. Not only that, but he will become subject to the yoke of civilisation. We know this from the verse (under discussion) that ויט שכמו לסבול, when he inclines his shoulder (away from Torah study), he will have to suffer the yoke (of דרך ארץ). Thus far the quote from the Zohar. 
  Here you have the duties of the true Torah scholar spelled out. He is considered a Torah scholar as long as he diligently uses every opportunity to deepen his Torah knowledge both by day and by night. While doing all this he is relieved of the obligation of paying taxes, and other duties imposed on ordinary citizens. Everyone else will take care of such a Torah scholar's needs. If, however, the Torah scholar chooses a restful existence, וירא מנוחה כי טוב, then his status is reversed and and he becomes למס עובד, subject to paying taxes, etc. In such a situation he will feel the duties of ordinary citizens as especially burdensome. The statement of our sages in Avot 3,6 will apply to him: "He who casts off the yoke of Torah studies will have the yoke of government and secular life imposed upon him." 
  אנא שא נא פשע עבדי אלהי אביך .  We learn from here to what extent a person has to be prepared to forgive evils committed against him by his fellow human beings (when the latter repent and ask for forgiveness). On the other hand we observe that if such giants of our history as the founders of the twelve tribes, who themselves were comparable to angels, prostrated themselves in front of a human king, Joseph, and offered themselves as slaves to him, to what length does an ordinary individual who has slandered someone have to go so as to gain the favor of the person whom he has wronged. Even when he has obtained the forgiveness of his victim, this does not yet mean that G–d has forgiven him. G–d kept the brothers' "file" until the time when Hadrianus executed the Ten Martyrs who represented the brothers who had wronged Joseph. We have an allusion to this in 50,21 where Joseph tells the brothers: ועתה אל תיראו, "For now, fear not." Joseph hinted that there would come a time when they (or their descendants) would have reason to be afraid on that score. Although Joseph foresaw such a development in his Holy Spirit, for the time being the comfort he offered his brothers was very real.
  
  Shemot
  
  Introduction
  
  
  The author explains that he combines these 8 portions of the Torah in a single introduction, since in those years which have an extra month, אדר, added special prayers and fastdays are observed during those 8 weeks. In regular years these special prayers and fastdays are observed only during the first six of those weeks.
  
  We know that the sun and moon had originally been created equal in size and power (compare Genesis 1,16, את שני המאורות הגדולים, i.e. the two great lights). The Talmud, חולין 60 describes that the moon argued with G–d that two kings cannot reign simultaneously, and was told to diminish its size. Whereas the Talmud, of course, refers to the physical sun and moon, the ones we can see, the story mirrors a corresponding dichotomy in the higher Celestial Regions.
  Kabbalists understand קטרוג, jealousy, in our physical world as reflecting jealousy in the world of the spirits. Had the latter not existed, there would not be a Satan, i.e. יצר הרע in our world, no force that promotes sin, as a result of which more dichotomy is added in the "higher" worlds. In the messianic future, the light of the moon will equal the light of the sun, i.e. dichotomies will disappear. There will no longer be any קליפות, "peels," which intervene between us and G–d. There will no longer be a יצר הרע, a force actively promoting sin.
  If the moon had not been required to reduce its size there never would have been a "leap" year, since solar and lunar orbits would have matched perfectly, and no adjustments would have been called for. As it is we need to insert an extra month seven times in each nineteen year cycle to ensure that פסח and סוכות occur in spring and fall respectively. In other words the lunar year has to be matched to the solar year by means of these insertions of the extra month. Leap years then are the result of קטרוג, dichotomy or jealousy, which in turn is the cause of sin. For this reason these seven years evoke a special need for repentance.
  These portions of the Torah have been selected since they -more than any other string of פרשיות -contain the subject matter of תשובה, תפלה, and צדקה, repentance, prayer and the giving of charity as well as Torah study. These four activities represent the four רוחות, winds or spirits respectively, of the universe. They are like the four walls of the universe (if we consider the latter like a house). I have already referred to this concept when discussing the תולדות האדם, the generations of man, in my introduction to volume one, under this same heading.
  I have stipulated the principle that G–d-Torah-lsrael are linked together, the Torah being G–d's imprint, whereas Israel is the Torah's imprint. By keeping this point in mind the statements of our sages about the commandment to procreate can be understood (as I explained in my introduction to chapter six of tractate יבמות). Every "wall" is actually composed of a double wall, as רשי has explained on Lamentations 2,8, on the words ויאבל חיל וחומה, "He made both wall and rampart wail." Similarly all the four walls are to be viewed as double walls. Repentance can be expressed visibly by fasting, donning of sackcloth and public prayer, or it can be expressed invisibly by a heart full of remorse, good resolutions, etc. It can be motivated by fear of retribution, or it can be due to a feeling of love for G–d. The invisible repentance is the real repentance. This is why it is called אמת, "truth". It is an offshoot of the attribute אמת.
  It is accompanied by prayer, תפלה which is עבודה service of the Lord. Our sages have stated that service of the Lord with the heart is none other than prayer (תענית ב). Prayer was instituted as a substitute for animal sacrifice after the destruction of the Holy Temple. צדקה, charity, is also two pronged. It comprises גמילות חסדים, the performance of deeds of loving kindness (with one's body), as well as the performance of charitable deeds (with one's checkbook). This latter category includes gifts given to G–d, i.e. for religious institutions, the Temple Treasury, repair of synagogues, etc. Although all that we own originates with G–d, donating it to G–d or to His representatives is still rated as an act of charity on our part.
  The Torah's function is to acquaint us with דין, a system of jurisprudence, especially when conflicting demands are made upon us. Civil laws as expressed in פרשת משפטים are placed there to tell us that just as the Ten Commandments emanate directly from G–d, i.e. "Sinai" so do the more mundane sounding pieces of legislation revealed in פרשת משפטים. This is stated in Exodus 18,16, "I make known the laws and teachings of G–d;" 
  Laws concerning property damage, financial compensations, etc. in the portion of משפטים are listed right after the Ten Commandments to show that all legislation emanates from G–d. When our sages in Avot described תורה, עבודה, גמילות חסדים "Torah, service of the Lord, deeds of loving kindness" as well as אמת, דין, and שלום , "truth, justice and harmony" as being the pillars which are the foundation that all civilization is based on, that is what they had in mind. אמת and תשובה are category A; עבודה and תפלה are category B; תורה and דין are category C; צדקה, and גמילות חסדים are category D, the final category. There remains the pillar of שלום, peace, harmony, which must be viewed as the "seal" of the previous four categories listed. Unless there is שלום, none of the other categories can achieve their purpose. This is what the prophet Zachariah 8,19, has in mind when he says "והאמת והשלום, אהבו!" "love truth and peace!" He states that success and happiness are contingent on the presence of these factors. It is written concerning the repentant sinner "peace, peace to the distant as well as to the near one," which our sages interpret as referring to people who were once far removed from our tradition but have found their way back (Isaiah 57,19). The "seal" of the עבודה, the priestly blessing, in our daily prayers is שלום, peace, as is the concluding benediction in our principal prayer, the עמידה. We find a similar thought expressed in Isaiah 32,17: "The work of the righteous shall be peace."
  It is also written in Psalms 29,11: "May the Lord grant strength to His people, may He bestow peace on His people." The very fact that דין, a system of jurisprudence, governs relations between people ensures that they do not eat each other up alive. The system prevents anarchy. We have this statement as an introduction to the fourth section of the שולחן ערוך of the טור (based on Avot 3,2). The four categories, which are really eight, are the ones that the eight weekly portions starting with פרשת שמות, and commonly known as שובבים ת"ת, particularly reflect.
  פרשת שמות which describes the tortures the Jewish people experienced in Egypt, shows how these experiences led to the repentance by the Jewish people, caused them to appeal to G–d. Afflictions cleansed them of their sins. This will be explained in detail in פרשת וארא, where repentance springing from a sincere heart will be described, i.e. repentance originating in the attribute of truth, אמת. The term עבודה will be explained in פרשת בא, whereas the focus of our commentary on פרשת בשלח will, of course, be פרשת יתרו  .תפלה concentrates on תורה, whereas פרשת משפטים focuses on דין. The next פרשה i.e. תרומה, emphasizes generosity of heart, i.e. gifts for the erection of the Tabernacle, part of the צדקה syndrome, whereas פרשת תצוה describing the making of the garments for the High Priest, the איש חסד, the pious man, concentrates on the גמילות חסדים aspect of our duties in this world. The first letters of these eight portions suggest four duties that we have to perform, namely תשובה-תפלה-צדקה-תורה. The "word" שובבים, hints at תשובה, as in שובו בנים שובבים, "turn back, rebellious children" (Jeremiah 3,14). How is this to be accomplished? By ת"ת, i.e. through תשובה and תפלה. At the same time, the letters ת"ת are also an acronym for the words תלמוד תורה. The same acronym with the vowel segal under the first letter, i.e. tet "giving," also suggests charity, i.e. צדקה.
  There is an interesting Midrash on Psalms 2,2, יתיצבו מלכי ארץ, "The kings of the earth will take their stand, and regents will intrigue together against G–d and His anointed." Rabbi Berechyah quotes Rabbi Levi as saying that the wicked are cursed, since they conspire against Israel. Each one claims to outdo the other in his devious plot. Esau describes Cain as having been foolish, since he killed Abel during Adam's lifetime, enabling Adam to replace Abel with other children. He, Esau was going to wait to kill Jacob until after his father had died and Jacob could no longer be replaced by Isaac siring any other children (Genesis 27,41). Pharaoh considered Esau as having been foolish, since he had overlooked the fact that while he waited, Jacob himself had a chance to sire many children, thus ensuring survival of the Jewish nation. He, Pharaoh, would not go about in in this way, but he would kill the Jewish males as soon as they emerged from their mother's womb (Exodus 1,22). Haman, on the other hand, considered that even Pharaoh had been foolish, since the latter had not realised that when the Jewish girls would marry they would multiply, the children being considered Jewish in Jewish law. Hence he decreed death for all Jews (Esther 3,13). In the future Gog and Magog will consider all former enemies of the Jews as having been fools for having ignored the fact that the Jews have a Patron in Heaven who may come to their rescue. Hence Gog and Magog plan to first contend with said Patron of the Jews, i.e. G–d, and only afterwards to attack Israel itself. This is why the verse in Psalms we quoted, reads "against G–d and His Messiah." G–d is reported as smiling, saying to Gog and Magog that their undertaking is both foolish and arrogant, since they have no idea how heavily outnumbered they will be when G–d employs His lightning, etc. After all, it is written (Isaiah 42,13): "G–d will go forth like a warrior, like a fighter. He will awaken His jealousy like a man of war." It also says (Zachariah 14,9) that "G–d will be king over the entire universe" (after having battled Gog and Magog).
  The so-called "great wicked," which the Midrash has described were in fact very intelligent; alas, they used their intelligence for nefarious purposes. They were well aware of Israel's attachment to their father in Heaven. Their entire endeavour was to sever this relationship between Israel and its G–d. 
  This is why each one of them is quoted as saying "my plan is better than yours." This implied approval of the other party's plan while substituting a still better plan. It seems that Gog and Magog were even more foolish than their predecessors. If they did believe in G–d and in His power, how could they say that they would first attack G–d? If they did not believe in G–d's power, how could they say that Israel had a Patron in Heaven?The answer cannot be that, whereas they did believe in G–d, they only advised how to go about destroying the Jewish people, since this is exactly what Pharaoh tried to do, i.e. Pharaoh also knew that G–d makes the punishment fit the crime, and that therefore he tried to forestall the advent of the Jewish messiah (i.e. Moses) by having him die before he had a chance to develop into the redeemer (Exodus 1,10). It says there הבה נתחכמה לו, "let us outsmart him." It should otherwise have said הבה נתחכמה להם, "let us outsmart them."
  Opposition to the concept of a Jewish nation began soon after the creation of man, since only Israel is described as "אדם" (Yevamot 61). The jealousy commenced with Cain, who was the first rebel who wanted to effect a separation between man who cleaved to G–d, and who wanted to destroy the whole celestial structure (as per commentary of Rekanati, commentator of the Zohar). All of this because his offering to G–d had been rejected (Genesis 4,5). In this way he wanted to "pay back" G–d, so to speak. He believed that by killing off one of the seven human beings that comprised mankind at that time, i.e. Adam, Eve, himself, his twin sister, as well as Abel and his two twin sisters (compare Bereshit Rabbah), he would not only destroy the equilibrium on earth , but also the equilibrium in the Celestial Regions. Thus far the Rekanati.
  Concerning this idea of Cain, Esau said that Cain was a fool. The whole paragraph is to be understood as each successive enemy of the Jews saying that his predecessor (only) was a fool, that though his own suggestion might be inadequate, at least it was superior to that offered by his predecessor inasmuch as it would further decrease the amount of sanctity in the world. Cain killed Abel, whose soul was something outstanding, i.e. the soul that would be re-incarnated in Moses, a soul equivalent to the entire Jewish people. In this way, he had imagined that he had destroyed the celestial counterpart of Moses/Israel. 
  Esau ridiculed this, saying that Adam had been able to reproduce other human beings of whom the Torah testifies that they were "in His image and form," i.e. of equal or greater worth. Thereby he had restored the damage Cain had wrought (Genesis 5,3). This occurred when Shet was born, who provided the strain of mankind that survived the deluge. Esau vowed not to repeat Cain's mistake, but to ensure that no one could be sired by Isaac to replace Jacob. He particularly wanted to destroy one of the pillars supporting the universe, i.e. the Torah, which was represented by Jacob, the יושב אוהלים, the dweller in tents (a euphemism for Torah academies). On Genesis 25, 27, Rashi explains the plural as comprising the academies of Shem and Ever respectively. Esau reasoned that during the days of mourning for their father Isaac Jacob would have to interrupt his Torah study and the angel of death, Esau's guardian angel, would be able to claim him at such a time. We know from king David that the angel of death could not touch David while he was immersed in Torah study. He had to be distracted so that the angel of death could claim his soul. The Talmud relates a similar occasion when the angel of death tried to claim the soul of Rabbah. The latter had to be distracted through some tremendous noise (Baba Metzia 86).
  Pharaoh considered Esau's plan as foolish since it allowed for Jacob himself to become fruitful in the interval preceding Isaac's death. Since the continuity of the universe is due to the Torah study of children (Shabbat 119), Esau's plan would have misfired even if Jacob had been sufficiently diverted from Torah study during the mourning period for his father. The Torah study of small children is of such merit that it even nullifies evil decrees that have been promulgated in Heaven against the Jewish people. The future of the Jewish people would certainly not have been cut short or even endangered. By drowning all the Jewish baby boys Pharaoh also meant to undermine the second of the three pillars the universe stands on, i.e. עבודה, sacrificial service and prayer. He hoped to achieve this since women are not qualified to perform such service. We know that Pharaoh had at one time become willing to allow a three day absence from work of the Jewish males in order to enable them to perform such sacrificial service (Exodus 10,11).
  Haman said that Pharaoh's plan had been foolish, since anyone cohabiting with a Jewish woman and siring a child would be siring a Jewish child (It makes no difference whether such a child is considered a ממזר, "bastard" in Jewish law in the sense that he cannot legally marry a Jewish partner). This is the reason he determined to kill all the Jews. By doing so, he would also destroy the third pillar that keeps the universe going, i.e. that keeps its spiritual potential alive. The pillar referred to is גמילות חסדים, the performance of deeds of loving kindness. Once Israel would be wiped out no vestige of חסד love, would remain in this world. Our sages in Yevamot 79 have stated that חסד is one of the three attributes that distinguish members of the Jewish people and make them different from the Gentiles (the others being chastity and pity. The relevant verse is “כי גבר עלינו חסדו”, Psalms 117,2). All the three attributes mentioned are sub categories of חסד.
  Gog and Magog viewed even Haman as foolish when they said "did he not know that these people have a patron who will accept their repentance even if the three pillars supporting the spiritual potential of the universe have been ruined?" They realised that the Jewish people would be able to regain their former stature if they did תשובה. We read clearly in Deut 4,30: "If you are in trouble, and all these dire predictions have indeed befallen you, and in the end you will return to the Lord,….He will not forget the covenant, etc." How then could Haman allow a whole year to elapse before his decree was to take effect? During that year Israel had ample time to repent its sins. This is the reason Gog and Magog are reported in Psalms to have declared war on "G–d and His anointed," (meaning the Jewish people). Penitence reaches right up to the throne of G–d! Gog therefore said "I will engage G–d," i.e. see to it that Israel has no chance to do תשובה. We have a similar statement by the Midrash Eychah Rabbati 3,3, that Nebuchadnezzar ordered his general Nebuzaradan not to allow the Jews a chance for public prayer, so that their repentance could not reach the Throne of G–d and be accepted.
  G–d answered that lightning and other frightening experiences had accompanied the revelation at Mount Sinai, and had produced the desired effect on Israel then. Similarly, during the frightening experience of the war against Gog and Magog, these very experiences will soften and purify the Jewish people into doing penitence. That experience will not be comparable to the time of Nebuchadnezzar or to times when the afflictions were in the nature of punishments and therefore interfered with Torah study. Any repentance then was of an inferior quality, being due to fear. During the Gog and Magog war the afflictions will be viewed as expressing G–d's love, they will cause more Torah study, deeper knowledge and understanding כי מלאה הארץ דעה את ה', until the whole earth is filled with the knowledge of G–d (Isaiah 11,9). At that time G–d will reign supreme on earth.
  Now to the individual portions, and discussion of the respective hints in each פרשה briefly, since the Exodus has already been explained at length, and many of the secrets contained in the portions שמות through בשלח, have been explained in my commentary on the tractate פסחים or in my commentary on the Haggadah Shel Pessach or my discourse on the significance of שבת הגדול, the Sabbath preceding the Passover holiday. I also discussed פרשת יתרו at length, when discussing the tractate שבועות- מתן תורה.
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Exodus 3,15: "This is My name and My appellation for all eternity." We find the following quote at the end of the third chapter in tractate פסחים referring to the verse in Zachariah 14,9: "On that day there shall be one Lord with one name." The Talmud asks whether prior to that day G–d was not unique? Rabbi Nachman son of Yitzchak says that the present world cannot be compared to the world of the future. In our world, G–d's name is written with the letter י and ה, but pronounced as if written with the letters א and ד. In the world after the arrival of the Messiah, His name will be read in the same way as it is spelled, i.e. with י-ה.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  In the third chapter of Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer we read that prior to the creation, G–d and His name were all that existed. This statement is very profound and we have discussed it in our introductory chapter of תולדות האדם. Here is not the place to discuss this. We only need to know that if the universe had been created according to plan, and if man had not introduced sin, there would not have been קליפה, a "peel," i.e. something like an iron curtain between man and G–d. Sanctity would have prevailed on earth, and G–d's name would have been read and pronounced exactly the way it is spelled (י-ה-ו-ה). The atmosphere of the world would have been totally pure, uncontaminated. Since this קליפה unfortunately has grown and expanded further and further, this name cannot be pronounced even when Israel is on its own land, except within the confines of the Holy Temple. This is so because the universe will not again be purified until the advent of the Messiah, when the state of the earth will correspond to the original desire of its Creator.
  The purpose of Israel's exile and enslavement in Egypt was to refine the nation in the "iron crucible," to enable it to receive the Torah so that the contamination caused by the original serpent would be purged from them. At that point (מתן תורה), the whole of the universe would rejuvenate itself and become like it had been at the time G–d had created Adam. It would have remained in that state had the Jewish people not sinned during the episode of the golden calf. Proof of this theory is found in Psalms 82,6-7: "I said, I had taken you for Divine beings, (immortal) sons of the most High, but you have to die as men do…"
  G–d had planned for the Exodus to become mankind's renewal, and this was the revelation to Moses when He taught him that He had not truly revealed His name i.e. the four-lettered name (Exodus 6,3). All this had been in answer to Moses' question "when they say to me what is His name, what shall I tell them?" (Exodus 3,13). At that time G–d had revealed to Moses the concept of חידוש העולם as I have explained at length in my commentary on the Haggadah Shel Pessach.
  We find that all Moses' warnings to Pharaoh were uttered in the name of that name of G–d, i.e. כי גדול השם מכל האלוקים. I have explained all this in my commentary there (compare Exodus 7,17--8,6,---8,18-9,13/14, etc). The essential element in this description of G–d was that it reflected the היה-הוה-יהיה, the eternal nature of G–d, the Source of all existence and the One without whom no existence endures. He alone is the One who supervises everything that goes on in His universe. He is totally free to do as He pleases.
  G–d told Moses that in this imperfect world His name cannot yet be pronounced as it is written, but that only at such time as Israel would accept the Torah, be purified, and cleave to G–d, this would commence. This was G–d's plan for the חידוש העולם, the world's rejuvenation.
  The statement of our sages זכור ושמור בדבור אחד, that "remember" and "observe" -the Sabbath- was said simultaneously (i.e. the difference in the version of the Ten Commandments recorded in Exodus 20,7, and the version recorded in the Deuteronomy 5,11), is linked to the Exodus from Egypt (as distinct from the Sabbath of creation). In Deuteronomy the reason for the legislation is יציאת מצרים, the Exodus, whereas in Parshat Yitro it is מעשה בראשית. Clearly then the Exodus is equivalent to the act of creating the universe, in other words a חידוש העולם. I have explained this at greater length in my commentary on מסכת שבת and on other occasions. Originally, G–d had considered to create a universe that was to be run along the lines of strict justice, מדת הדין. This is hinted at in the story of creation. Rabbeynu Bachyah in his commentary sees a hint of this in the first-forty two letters of the Torah, concluding with the letter ה in the word ובהו. The idea is spelled out more clearly in the Pardes Rimonim of Rabbi Moses Cordovero, in the chapter dealing with names and צירופים.
  The Zohar, in commenting on the line יהי שם השם מבורך, (Job 1,21) divides the word מב-רק into מב =42, the name of the attribute of גבורה, i.e. that G–d had first planned to create the world based on מדת הדין הקשה. Subsequently, this attribute was softened through the co-option of the attribute of רחמים, mercy. After the first 42 letters, we have another 42 letters until the letter ר in the word ויאמר. This is followed by another 42 letters ending before the letter ד in ויבדל. The sign, סימן, of this sequence is ב-ה-ר-ד, with the letter ב referring to בראשית. You find a parallel in Israel's experience in Egypt, when the עבודה קשה, hard labour, was tempered by פה רך soft words, (Exodus 1,14) (the second time the expression פרך is used) The reason that this word also appears prior to עבודה קשה, is to remind us that the wicked are initially allowed to live in peace, only to face יסורים, afflictions, in the Hereafter. The opposite is true of the righteous whose experience in life begins with afflictions. G–d in His righteousness begins with מב i.e. the attribute of Justice, only to co-opt the attribute of Mercy, i.e. מצרף רך, at a later stage. This is why His name is blessed, i.e. מברך. Just as creation began with the מב, so the initial experience in Egypt which emanated from the wicked Pharaoh proceeded in the reverse order, i.e. commencing with פה רך, while ending in עבודה קשה.
  This experience led to a refinement of the character of the Jewish people. The Zohar, Parshat Shemot (Sullam edition page 48), quotes Rabbi Shimon: "When the Divine Presence descended into Egypt, (with Jacob), one חיה of the 4 חיות that form the Divine entourage descended with it. This חיה was called "Israel," i.e. it was accompanied by 42 angels (compare Ezekiel 1,5, and the Malbim's comment there. Ed.). These are the בני ישראל that are reported to have descended to Egypt with Jacob (Exodus 1,1).
  In this explanation, the word שמות is viewed as having been written with the vowel tzeyre under the letter ש. Also the numerical value of the word ואלה, totals 42, lending further support to the Zohar's comment that there were 42 letters in the name of G–d. All of this shows that the Exodus from Egypt, when it occurred, represented a חידוש העולם. The stay in Egypt refined the souls who had caused damage to the original state of the universe. The Talmud, Eyruvin 18 which says that during the one hundred and thirty years that Adam had separated from his wife, he emitted semen which developed into negative forces in the world, instead of children, is reflected in the one hundred and thirty years that Yocheved was old when she gave birth to Moses. This is a further aspect of Moses in his capacity as the equivalent of the Jewish people, atoning for mankind's past sins, and enabling the חידוש העולם to commence (Mechilta Beshalach 15,1). This according to the view that she had been born while Jacob was on his way down to Egypt, Sotah 12. 
  I have explained this elsewhere and especially on Genesis 15,12, that "a great darkness and fear overcame Abraham." Rabbi Yitzchak Luria (Ari zal) writes that the word אימה, fear, in that verse refers to the generation of Enosh during which the ocean flooded one third of the earth's surface. The word חשכה, darkness, refers to the generation of the deluge which represented a failure of the sun and moon to perform normally. The word גדולה refers to the tower of Babel, Moses' stammer and speech impediment being equivalent to the confusion of language which occurred at that time. His being placed in the basket smeared with clay is reminiscent of the clay used to make the bricks for the tower of Babel. His being cooped up without seeing anything in the basket amid the reeds of the Nile river is comparable to the blindness the men of Sodom had been smitten with. The word נופלת, was falling, refers to the destruction of Sodom. By being exposed to water Moses and the Jewish people atoned for the generation of Enosh part of whom were drowned whereas part survived. Every difficulty Moses experienced was in some way a means of atoning for other past generations' shortcomings. Moses' experience in Egypt paralleled that of mankind up to that point; i.e. he suffered to achieve mankind's rehabilitation.
  Cain and Abel were the first men born by woman. They were intended to be the typical "אדם" i.e. representative of what mankind should develop into. Now it had become the turn of the people of Israel to be refined and to acquire the appellation "Adam." According to our Kabbalists, Moses was the re-incarnation of Abel, הבל, whereas Yitro was the re-incarnation of Cain, חבר הקיני (see Judges 1,16, Zohar 3,216).
  The latter's 3 souls, i.e. the "lower" soul, life force נפש, was re-incarnated in the body of the Egyptian who was slain by Moses. (Exodus 2,2) His "middle" soul, רוח, was re-incarnated in the body of Korach, whereas his "upper" soul, i.e. נשמה was re-incarnated in the body of Yitro. Cain had killed Abel because he had wanted Abel's second twin sister for himself. She was re-incarnated in the person of Tzipporah, and that is why Yitro represented Abel at that point. 
  This explains how the same Moses who was reported to have refused to suckle on the breast of a non Jewish wet nurse (Sotah 12), could nonetheless marry a woman of non Jewish origin (because she was to him like Eve had been to Adam, i.e. a missing part of his body, see Genesis 2, 21-23). When Yitro came to Moses in the desert, he said to him; "come forth on account of your wife whom I give to you, and her two sons." The first letters in the verse אני חותנך יתרו (Exodus 18,6) spell אחי, my brother. This was when he had realised that he, Yitro, representing Cain, was Moses' brother, whose former incarnation had been Abel.
   Yitro's words "עתה ידעתי" "now I know," (Exodus 18,11) reflect this new-found knowledge of Yitro (Cain). Cain had murdered because he did not believe that G–d is a judge, that there is justice in the world, and that there is life after death. The Targum Yonathan says that the word "עתה" represents Yitro's new found insight, and that this is the reason that this portion about the installing of a broadly based system of judges was added at Exodus 18,21. (I have not been able to find this in the Targum Yonathan. Ed) The reason Yitro had entrusted (given) his flock to Moses (Exodus 3,1) was that it was symbolic of the sheep he had stolen from his brother Abel in his previous incarnation, the latter having been a shepherd (Genesis 4,2). Moses had not wanted to accept this flock, believing it to be rightfully Yitro's. The Rabbis do not like someone tending the property of an idol worshipper, since the chances are that such property may have been acquired as payment for services rendered to idols. The Torah therefore stresses צאן יתרו, that the flock was not derived from such sources.
  All this helps us understand the Midrash Shemot Rabbah 1,32, on the verse איש מצרי הצילנו "an Egyptian man has saved us," that the daughters of Yitro described their rescue at the hands of Moses as having been the work of an Egyptian (Exodus 2,19). Surely Moses did not claim to be an Egyptian! The Midrash then describes a person who had been bitten by a wild ass as rushing to the river to get relief for his feet. As soon as he gets to the river, he finds a baby about to drown in the river. He reaches out, and saves the baby. Had the man not been bitten by the wild ass, the baby would have drowned. Similarly here. Had Moses not killed the Egyptian, and had he not been forced to flee for his life, he would now not have been in a position to help Yitro's daughters. This is what those daughters meant when they said "an Egyptian man has saved us." They attributed their rescue to the Egyptian whom Moses had killed.
  The problem is that if the daughters wanted to describe the cause of their rescue, why did they not mention the immediate cause, i.e. the fact that Datan and Aviram had informed against Moses to Pharaoh thus forcing Moses to flee for his life? Or take the even more immediate cause, Pharaoh's decree to have Moses executed? The answer is that the killing of the Egyptian was not an occurrence of secondary importance; rather it was a primary occurrence. It was the lower life form, נפש, of Cain that was killed when Moses struck that Egyptian. This enabled the "higher" soul, נשמה, of Yitro to become refined, since it was no longer attached to the נפש part of Cain. It enabled Yitro to establish brotherly relations with Moses, and as a result the former jealousy between Cain and Abel was no longer part of the relationship of their respective re-incarnates.
  This also helps explain Yitro's question "ואיו, למה זה עזבתן את האיש" (Exodus 2,20) "where is he, why did you abandon the man?" The sequence should have been , למה זה עזבתן את האיש, ואיו, "why did you abandon the man, and where is he?" Then the letter ו would be justified as a letter denoting something additional. Yitro was not clear whether he should understand the words איש מצרי literally, i.e. an Egyptian, or whether he should read a more profound meaning into it as we have just described. Therefore, he said "call him so he can eat bread." These words would be appropriate both if the man was indeed an Egyptian in which case he deserved to be rewarded at least with a meal. If, on the other hand, איש מצרי meant what we have just described, then the words "call him and he shall eat bread" is a euphemism for offering Moses one of Yitro's daughters' hand in marriage, since clearly one of them was meant to become Moses' wife. This is why he said ואיו, the letter ו both at the beginning and at the end of the word אי "where?" That letter could then be applied to either possibility. It would then be a reminder of G–d's original question "אי" "where is your brother Abel?" (Genesis 4,9) Another possibility is the one mentioned by the Zohar, that the letter ו is symbolic of the sign, אות that G–d gave Cain, i.e. a letter from the holy Torah, so that no one who came across him would kill him as a murderer. (Rosenberg Montreal edition page 42)
  This also explains the Midrash saying that Tzipporah was so named, since like a bird, צפור, she purified, the reference being to the offerings of צפורים to signify purification of people who had previously been afflicted with צרעת (Shemot Rabbah 32; Leviticus 14,4). Similarly it is used to purify the house afflicted with certain kinds of stains (Leviticus 14,49). Rabbi Yossi used to refer to his wife as "his house". As long as this twin sister of Abel had been under the control of Cain,- maybe she (Tzipporah) blamed G–d. Cain was jealous, blaming his fate on the original sin of his father Adam who had brought contamination into the world, had made him an outcast like the מצרע the person afflicted with that skin disease. This fits because we know that such an affliction is usually due to slanderous talk of a person (Eyruvin 15). Moses' staff, מטה, was rooted in the עץ החיים, tree of life, the סוד of Abel who had not been tainted with sin. Abel lived for 49 days as the Ari zal explains the meaning of the word שבעתים "sevenfold," to mean seven times seven (Genesis 4,15). The word יקם, "will be avenged," is composed of the respective letters in the threesome יתרו-קין-מצרי. Abel lived 49 days in this world which was created with the letter "ה" (Genesis 2,4, see Menachot 29). The number 49 is equivalent to the numerical value of the word מט"ה, Moses' staff. The letter ה in the word is a reference only to G–d having created the world with the help of that letter. It became the staff and symbol of Moses later on. When Moses refused the mission to go to Pharaoh and bring about the חידוש העולם, his staff was turned into a צרעת serpent, and his hand became afflicted with צרעת, to show that he had aborted his purpose in life.
  We find two opinions in Bereshit Rabbah 22,12, as to the kind of "sign" G–d gave to Cain. Rabbi Yehudah says that G–d made the sun shine for him. Rabbi Nechemyah says that G–d certainly would not have gone out of His way to make the sun shine for such a sinner, rather the "sign" was a form of צרעת, skin excema, very visible. This comment is not to be understood as disagreement with Rabbi Yehudah. G–d said to Moses: "If they will not believe you, and not listen to the impact of the first "sign" (miracle), they will be convinced by the impact of the second miracle." The first sign was that Moses' face would shine like the sun, and Cain would benefit from this. Rabbi Nechemyah elaborates that Cain certainly would not benefit from this, until, when re-incarnated and his soul had been cleansed since he had accepted G–ds judgment, he had become Yitro. Only then would his sign be radiation of the face of Moses, rather than the sign of צרעת. We find a reference to this in Exodus 22,1: "If the thief is discovered in a hideout." The thief referred to is Cain who had tried to cheat G–d (גנבת דעת, see Rashi's comment on Genesis 4,9). The Torah in Exodus 22,1, continues: "If he is struck down and dies as a result, there is no blood (guilt)." However, if the sun shone upon him, (the thief) there is blood (guilt). What is meant is the גלגל החמה, i.e. after he had reformed and had become rehabilitated (galgal should be read gilgul metamorphosis).
  I have explained why Moses named Gershon as he did, and why his second son Eliezer is not mentioned until Exodus 18,4, long after the Exodus. Only at that point does the Torah give the reason he had been called Eliezer, since G–d had already saved Moses from the clutches of Pharaoh. 
  The usual reason cited is that Moses had not wanted to publicise his escape from Pharaoh so that he could not again be informed against, as had happened to him in Egypt. However, if we view all the happenings in the light of the re-incarnation of Abel-- Shet-- Moses, we view the earthly existence of Abel as having been very brief. When his soul was in the body of Shet, he was still in ארץ נכריה, i.e. not within the body he was destined to inhabit ultimately. Once his soul inhabited his present body, it could be said of his body "his eye did not weaken, etc." (Deut 34,7). This proved that his body and soul were well matched. The reason the grave of Moses could not be located (Deut. 34,5) was because his body had not lost its vigour, had not become a cadaver. Not only at the revelation could it be said of Moses that he could stand next to G–d (Deut 5,28). 
  When he had said "the G–d of my father has come to my assistance" (Exodus 18,4), he implied that even his father Amram had become so refined and purified that he qualified as an איש האלוקים. The words "He has saved me from the sword of Pharaoh," in addition to "the G–d of my father came to my help," mean that just as one grants additional wisdom to those who already possess a degree of wisdom, so Moses, seeing he had already possessed basic qualifications, advanced to even higher rank both spiritually and physically, so that even Pharaoh's sword could not harm his neck anymore than it could harm a pillar of marble. This is a hint that marble is incapable of becoming ritually impure. When the four sages entered the פרדס, i.e. the study of esoterics, מעשה מרכבה, Rabbi Akiva warned his colleagues "when you see pure marble, do not say "water, water!" (Chagigah 14)
  It is written of Moses that "I have drawn him from the water" (Exodus 2,10). When pondering the statements of our sages, we must remember that though they may be describing things physical, i.e. water, marble, etc., these are merely euphemisms for matters spiritual. The same applies to the verse "and the name of the one was Eliezer." The word "the one" refers to "The One," i.e. G–d. His name could not be revealed until the giving of the Torah, since only then did it become clear how Moses was particularly qualified to assume the role he had been assigned by G–d. Since he had already possessed all the basic qualifications, he could now ascend further, i.e. Mount Sinai, receive the tablets, etc. When Job in 28,12, asks rhetorically "where is חכמה, wisdom to be found?" this is an allusion to Moses; i.e. only people who are already spiritually and physically prepared, will achieve that stature (being the re-incarnation of הבל, (another meaning of whose name is "heat" which purifies). Being the re-incarnation of Abel meant having been purified by fire into being sinless. (Shabbat 89 describes Moses as being fearful of the heat, הבל, that emanates from the mouths of the angels since the latter are sin-free creatures, seeing they have no body). The immediate re-incarnation of Abel had been Shet, some of whose descendants survived the deluge, i.e. became the founders of mankind. The world's survival depends on Torah. The word me-ayin quoted previously in Job 28,12, equals 101 in numerical value (מאין). This is a hint at what our sages say when they claim that if one studies a subject matter one hundred times, this is not as good as when one studies it one hundred and one times (Chagigah 9). 
  Moses' teacher was the angel זגנזגל (=100+1 for the value of the word itself) whose name has a numerical value of 101. In other words, he was the source, or מאין, of Moses' wisdom, חכמה. We see that the verse "והחכמה מאין תמצא" is a hint referring to Moses, to whom the principle that once you possess the basics you will be endowed further was applied. The relationship between Moses and Yitro became possible after Moses had killed the נפש part of Cain's re-incarnation in the person of the Egyptian who had abused or killed a Jew (Exodus 2,11-12). Yitro had absorbed the "higher" soul, נשמה, of Cain, and as such could -"twin"- Moses who had absorbed the נשמה of Abel.
  The allusion -רמז- to all this we find in the numerical value of the words המצרי [ויך את] the word hamitzri equalling 345, the same numerical value as that of משה. The word ויך itself equals 37 when you add an extra value of "1" for the word itself. This is the numerical value of the name הבל. After that Moses fled and joined Yitro. 
  Moses is known by seven different names, (Shemot Rabbah 40,4). Rabbi Yitzchak Luria writes that Moses used the 42-lettered Name of G–d when he killed the Egyptian in order to elevate that person's נפש. It is well known that the 42-lettered name incorporates seven different names. Yitro also had seven names (Shemot Rabbah 27,7). At that time, Yitro converted to monotheism and abandoned idol worship. Moses had not wanted to kill Bileam by using the 42-lettered name of G–d, but he had wanted him to die by the sword which is the symbol of defilement, טומאה. This is why Bileam did not die the מות ישרים, the "death of the righteous." He had not said אמות מות ישרים, I want to die the death of the righteous, but had said only "my soul will die the death of the righteous, using the word נפש to describe his soul. His נפש then was redeemed, not his body. So far the Ari zal (compare Numbers 31,8).
  I have explained a Midrash in Bereshit Rabbah on Noach where Moses and Noach are contrasted. It says that Moses was more beloved than Noach, since the latter is first described as איש צדיק, a righteous man (Genesis 6,9), whereas later he is called איש האדמה, man of the earth (Genesis 9,20). Moses, on the other hand, is first called איש מצרי and later on he is called איש האלוקים.
  The idea is to tell us that even though Noach was called איש צדיק תמים, this was true only in the generations during which he lived, i.e. בדורותיו. His righteousness was relative, when one considers the environment into which he had been born. Had he and his family not survived, the world would have been totally destroyed. The meaning of איש האדמה then is that his survival ensured the continuance of the אדמה, earth. It would have reverted to Tohu vavohu otherwise. Still, the word אדמה, severely limits Noach's achievement. The reverse is true of Moses. Even when engaged in the lowliest of his pursuits, the killing of the Egyptian, he employed the 42-lettered name of G–d. If he is called איש האלוקים (Deut, 33,1,and Exodus 24,13), it is because of his deep understanding of the names of G–d. Even when he killed the Egyptian he used this knowledge. According to the Ari zal the entire sojourn in Egypt and every event recorded of it, was under the heading of חידוש העולם, and the 42-lettered name of G–d was employed in creating the universe originally.
  This was also the subject Moses and Pharaoh debated, i.e. when Pharaoh challenged "who is G–d that I should listen to Him!" (Exodus 5,2). Moses, on the other hand, said "thus said the Lord G–d of Israel, let My people go!" (Exodus 5,1). He argued the existence of G–d and the fact that the people of Israel have a close relationship with Him. This is why he described Him as "the G–d of Israel." From a philosophical point of view, Pharaoh challenged Moses, saying that even if a חידוש העולם were to occur- something he denied, not having heard about it, surely it could not be claimed that a special relationship already existed between this G–d and Israel, seeing it is claimed that the world was entering a new beginning! Since G–d is self-sufficient, any relations He establishes with anyone are for that party's benefit. Since this is so, how could Israel be special? He must dispense favours equally! Surely, He would also have commanded me to serve Him! His failure to do so makes Moses' claim unbelievable. Therefore, Pharaoh would not allow Israel to go and serve G–d in the desert.
  Onkelos translates the words "the G–d of the Hebrews has called upon us," as "the G–d of the Hebrews has revealed Himself to us" (Exodus 5,3). What he means by this is that a new perspective of the universe had been revealed for the sake of Israel. From now on Israel would be the fruit and everything in the universe would become of secondary importance. The reason Israel would become of primary importance was that they would travel three days' distance into the desert, to receive the Torah. This is in accordance with the statement in Baba Kama 82, that the verse "they walked three days in the desert and did not find water," refers to their not receiving the Torah during that period (Exodus 15,22). We have a tradition that אין מים אלא תורה that the true meaning of "water" is Torah (Baba Kama 17). Their fatigue was due to the absence of Torah, which would have inspired them. Isaiah 55,1, refers to this מים-תורה according to the Talmudic source quoted. It was then that the prophets arranged for public Torah readings on every Sabbath, Monday and Thursday, to insure that Israel would never be without the benefit of Torah for three days.
  Since the havoc wrought on G–d's creation was due to the original נחש, and that serpent was ערום, sly, or naked, i.e. brazen, Israel descended into the "iron crucible" of Egypt to experience ערום ועריה (Ezekiel 16,7), facing Pharaoh who is described elsewhere as the תנין הגדול, the great sea monster, the serpent being עפר לחמו, having been condemned to subsist on dust (Genesis 3,14). The letters in the name Pharaoh, i.e. פרעה when re-arranged spell העפר "the dust." This is the reason the first miracle Moses performed transformed the staff into a תנין to allude to Pharaoh. In order to cleanse themselves spiritually from the pollutant of the original serpent, Israel had to perform עבודת פרך, hard labour. Since the pollutant of that serpent had kept permeating more and more of the human being, it required potent cleansing measures to eradicate it. Had there not been such a pollutant, man would have lived indefinitely. As it is, the only two means to regain the original state of man are afflictions while he is alive, and the experience of death itself. Exile is one of the manifestations of such afflictions. So we have a progression of afflictions which will culminate in serenity, light, until the original light of creation which has been hidden will be revealed again. Nowadays the world is desolate, due to the sin caused by the נחש, i.e. our sins. Physical death is described in Genesis as טוב מאד, very good according to Rabbi Meir (Genesis 1,31). This is because it is the catalyst that leads man to repentance and thereby to eternal life and resurrection (Midrash Hagadol).
  Though Pharaoh had intended the opposite, and even Moses had remonstrated with G–d (Exodus 5,22-23), he was taught that this was an occasion when in order to build anew, one must first tear down the old. The very addition of affliction resulted in accelerated redemption.
  You should not think that Pharaoh's increasing of the Jewish people's workload (Exodus 5,6-9), was merely his own idea. On the contrary, it represented the will of G–d. He had sent Moses to Pharaoh in order to produce this result. This is why two expressions are used when G–d enlists Moses' services. A) לכה, B) ואשלחך (Exodus 3,10). The first expression usually refers to an undertaking due to one's own initiative, whereas the second word אשלחך refers to the carrying out of a mission at someone else's bidding. The Ari zal states that G–d sent two missions. One mission had as its purpose the redemption of Israel, i.e. ואשלחך. The other had as its objective the increased burdens imposed by Pharaoh on the Jewish people, i.e. something apparently painful for the Jewish people. Since G–d never describes a mission undertaken at His behest as לרעה, meant to have negative effects, it was couched in language that normally describes one's own initiative, i.e. לכה-לך נא (go please). 
  We find the same idea in Isaiah 6,8, when G–d asks "whom shall I send, and who will go?" The words "who will go for us" signal that G–d does not want to be associated exclusively with a שליחות לרעה (The subject matter was the wasting of cities, etc.). 
  When he responded, Isaiah only volunteered for the שליחות, G–d's mission, not for the הליכה, which could have passed for his own initiative. G–d had to tell him then that at that point in time He needed a messenger only for the unpleasant part of the mission. This is why He said to him לך ואמרת, "go and say." Similarly, in our case, G–d wanted to provoke Pharaoh so that out of the additional "darkness" the contrast with the "light" of the redemption would be so much greater. In other words, יהי שם השם מברך, first afflictions, then peace, serenity. G–d Himself is with us even while we suffer, i.e. His own name will become greater only in the future. This is the meaning of עמו אנכי בצרה, "I am with Israel when it is in trouble" (Psalms 91,15). There is no greater trouble than that G–d's Presence must exile itself on account of our sins. In Exodus 1,14, וימררו את חייהם בעבודה קשה, "They made their lives miserable with hard labour," the word חייהם refers to that which gives us our strength, i.e. G–d. In other words, the Egyptians made our lives in the Celestial Regions bitter. 
  This is the secret behind the code words that would herald the arrival of the Saviour that Joseph told his brothers in Genesis 50,24/25, פקוד יפקוד, and that would identify the true Saviour when Moses said in the name of G–d "פקוד פקדתי אתכם." It is strange that the word פקוד should have been chosen for that role, and that the word is spelled without the letter ו (in the Torah). עמו אנכי בצרה
  If the salvation, i.e. פקד is mentioned prior to the enslavement, i.e. צרה, or וימררו, then this confirms that G–d arranges for the רפואה, cure, already before He inflicts the מכה, affliction. It proves that when the afflictions do occur, they must not be viewed as caused by an enemy, but as something designed to refine our character so that we will emerge as innocent as Adam before the sin. Then G–d's whole name can be revealed, the one that has been desecrated amongst mankind due to our sins. When that day arrives, He and His name will be one, i.e. ברוך השם לעולם אמן ואמן.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ויוסף היה במצרים. Rashi comments on Exodus 1,5, that this statement is to testify to the righteousness of Joseph who had tended his father's flock, and who was the same Joseph after he had become viceroy in Egypt. This teaches us to cleave to G–d with all our heart even when destitute and humiliated. Also, when one achieves great stature, one should not become arrogant but remain humble and use one's greatness to perform additional מצות.
  וימררו. I have already explained that the purpose of the torture was to refine their character.
  ויאמר לרשע. Even raising one's hand without actually striking makes one a wicked person.
  ויקם משה ויושיען. A person should stand up for the weak and disadvantaged.
  ומשה היה רועה את הצאן. The shepherd displays kindness towards his flock in ensuring they do not eat what is not their master's, by enforcing his will with the staff. Similarly, G–d tends Israel and by the legislation in the Torah He sees to it that we stay on the right path.
  Exodus 3,5, tells Moses to remove both his sandals, whereas in Joshua 5,15, we find the latter commanded to remove only one of his sandals. Why? There are three differences in the two stories. A) Moses is asked to remove "your sandals," i.e. plural. B) Here we read that the earth Moses stands on is holy, i.e. אדמת קודש. In the book of Joshua the word "soil," אדמה is missing. C) In the book of Joshua, it is reported that Joshua complied, i.e. ויעש כן, he did so. This comment is missing in the case of Moses.
  A person has two kinds of skin that serve as clothing/protection for man. One is the skin/leather of animals, i.e. shoes. The other is his own skin. We find in Job, 10,11, עור ובשר תלבישני, "You have dressed me with skin and flesh." The latter is the material part of man that he shares with the animal kingdom. Man whose physical origin was אדמה i.e. "holy soil" should have been garbed in כתנות אור, the word אור spelled with the letter א. The fact that this word was spelled with the letter ע instead, represented the demotion of man. He was now clothed in skin and flesh being compared to the animals since he had sinned. Moses ascended to a level where his face reflected אור as had been intended for all of mankind (compare Exodus 34,29 et al, כי קרן עור פניו). The word קרן אור suggests that the word for skin should have been spelled with the letter א in the first place. He gave off rays of light. He had been predisposed for such stature from the day he had been born, to wit his mother's comment at his birth "she saw that he was good" (Exodus 2,2). Our sages comment that this was in response to the whole house having been filled with light (Sotah 12). One of the superior qualities of Moses' prophecy was that he received communication from G–d without his body undergoing any kind of weakening, as we have explained elsewhere. This was a level Joshua had not attained. If Joshua stood on ground described as holy, then the ground Moses stood on must be viewed as the holiest of holy. This is why Moses had to take additional steps to sanctify himself. 
  This is why G–d had hinted to him that he had to divest himself of two kinds of shoes, i.e. the animal skin, and afterwards the עור בשר, i.e. he had to refine the raw material he had been made of. This latter stage was something Joshua was unable to achieve. This is what is meant by the אדמת קודש in our portion. It is said of Joshua therefore, that "he did so" i.e. he achieved the best level he was capable of achieving, meaning he shed the animal skin only. Since what Moses did was not a physical activity, the word ויעש, he did, would not have been appropriate. Another reason that this expression would not have been in place when applied to Moses is that the word ויעש denotes an activity which is final, which is the completion of something. Moses had only just begun this process of refining his personality, a process which was not complete till after he had received the tablets from G–d. Only then do we read that his face emitted rays of light.
  The above is to teach us that when in a holy place we must take steps to insure our own sanctity.
  We also see that Moses was very humble, saying "who am I that I should go to Pharaoh." He had preferred that this privilege be accorded to his older brother Aaron (Exodus 3,11). How much humility must the likes of us practice when even a great man such as Moses wanted to defer to his brother!
  ויאמר ה' אליו מה זה בידך. G–d said: "what is this in your hand?" (Exodus 4,2). Moses was punished with צרעת for having said that Israel would not believe him, even though his motives in saying so had been pure, i.e. he had wondered how he could overcome that lack of belief. This teaches how careful one has to be not to impugn the honour of Israel.
  Complete your daily assignments as every day!" (Exodus 5,13). We learn that even here, when making bricks, no allowance was made for any shortfall ever. When someone has wasted time instead of serving the Lord, he cannot make up for it by saying he will henceforth serve G–d by day and by night. He should have done so in the first place. Waste is something that cannot be compensated for.
  ויכו שוטרי בני ישראל. The overseers of the children of Israel were beaten" (Exodus 5,14). This teaches the degree to which Jewish leaders must risk their well being on behalf of the people whom they represent.
  
  Vaera
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  למען תדע כי אין כה' אלוקינו. למען תדע כי אני השם בקרב הארץ. בעבור תדע כי אין כמוני בכל הארץ. The three times Teyda that we have quoted from this portion spell out the Existence of G–d, His active role in running the universe and His Power.
  There is no one like the Lord our G–d because He has called the universe into existence, has created every aspect of it.
  He is G–d בקרב הארץ, in the midst of the earth; this means that He is active within the laws of nature.
  There is no one like Me in the whole world," means that G–d's Power is supreme compared to other apparent sources of Power. These three statements must be appreciated by us not merely as articles of faith, but as something we know. It is not enough to accept such tenets as something handed down by our ancestors, but they must be ידיעות, something that we know as facts. The Torah reminds the Jewish people who had stood at Mount Sinai, that their experience was defined in the words (Deut. 4,39): "Know therefore this day and keep in mind that the Lord alone is G–d in Heaven above and on earth below." It is spelled out that G–d exercises control both in the Celestial Regions and on Earth. Any other powers that we perceive in this universe have been endowed by G–d and could not generate power independently. These are facts which we must appreciate over and above what we normally refer to as "faith."
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  וידבר אלהים אל משה ויאמר אליו אני השם. I have expounded at length in my treatise on Passover, as well as in my commentary on the Haggadah shel Pessach on the opening lines in our portion, commencing with Exodus 6,2 until the words לא נודעתי להם in verse 3. All the miracles performed by G–d in Egypt which defied all known laws of nature, were invoked by the Ineffable Four- lettered Name י-ה-ו-ה which symbolises G–d as היה, הוה, יהיה the One who created the world ex nihilo and who is eternal. 
  The name אלוקים, on the other hand, symbolises nature, i.e. the laws of nature. We have repeatedly mentioned that the Hebrew word for nature, הטבע, has the same numerical value as the word א-להים. According to the Zohar, that name represents a קו, line, the rule of law and order, i.e. justice. The characteristics of all living creatures were determined by G–d invoking His attribute אלוקים.[In the words of the Ari Zal: "After G–d had created the הרשימו, the "place" for a universe, He created all that was to fill that "place." This was accomplished by means of a קו, sort of a pipeline. The light G–d created entered and dissipated within the "place" designated for the universe by means of the קו. Ed.] The fact that the Ineffable Four-lettered Name is a "higher" attribute than that of אלוקים is documented in Exodus 18,11: כי גדול י-ה-ו-ה מכל הא-לקים, when Yitro acknowledges the superiority of that attribute of G–d over all others. All other attributes (names) of G–d are derived from the Ineffable Name. 
  One of the allusions to this is found in Psalms 136, in which the Psalmist commences by calling upon us to praise 1) הודו - לי-ה-ו-ה כי טוב כי לעולם חסדו, 2) הודו לא-לוקי הא-לקים כי לעולם חסדו, followed by 3) הודו לאדני האדנים כי לעולם חסדו. G–d created the system of planets, which are referred to as אדנים. Every Sabbath we read in a liturgical poem א-ל אדון: כח וגבורה נתן בהם להיות מושלים בקרב תבל, "G–d equipped them with might and power to rule in the midst of the world." G–d nonetheless remains אדון אדונים, the Lord of lords. On a higher level than the planets are the שרים, the Celestial Forces who are in charge of these various planets and basic forces of nature. They are known as א-להים. Above those שרים is the attribute known to us as אלקי האלקים. The Ineffable Four-lettered Name towers above the aforementioned three names for deity-like powers that operate in the universe. It was this Name and what it implies that G–d employed when performing supernatural miracles in Egypt. 
  Whenever Moses appeared before Pharaoh he appeared as a messenger of that attribute. Pharaoh's reaction in Exodus 5,2 was that he had certainly never heard of such an attribute of any deity, מי י-ה-ו-ה אשר אשמע בקלו? Pharaoh had no difficulty in accepting G–d in His attribute as אלקים, as we know from Genesis 41,38. The Zohar (Sullam edition Miketz page 13) already comments on Genesis 41,16 where Joseph says: אלקים יענה את שלום פרעה "G–d will provide a reply for the welfare of Pharoh." Rabbi Abba said: "Observe the wickedness of Pharaoh who claimed not to have heard of G–d. He was extremely clever and exploited the fact that Moses had not presented himself as a messenger of אלקים -whom he could not have denied- but as a messenger of י-ה-ו-ה. He found it puzzling that Moses did not come in the name of the "same" G–d as the G–d of Joseph whom he recognised. He could not come to terms with that name of G–d. When the Torah writes ויחזק י-ה-ו-ה את לב פרעה, the meaning is that it was the use of that name that made Pharaoh's heart become obstinate. This is the reason that Moses never used a different name for G–d when confronting Pharaoh. Thus far the Zohar. 
  When we follow the approach taken by the Zohar we realise that G–d never interfered with Pharaoh's decision-making process at all. Pharaoh duped himself. The cause of his obstinacy was אני, G–d saying: אני י-ה-ו-ה. When G–d said to Moses early on in Exodus 7,3: ואני אקשה את לב פרעה, I shall make the heart of Pharaoh obstinate, the implied meaning is: "My revelation to him that I am י-ה-ו-ה, will harden his heart." When the magicians acknowledged that the plague of כנים, lice, was not the result of superior magic by Moses or Aaron (8,15), they limited their acknowledgement of its origin to אלקים, thereby excluding י-ה-ו-ה. Pharaoh had learned the meaning of אלוקים from Joseph; he acknowledged this deity as superior to other deities. His acknowledgement did not extend to such a deity's control of what he considered the laws of nature. We have a rule in Berachot 48 אין מלכות נוגעת בחברתה, "since G–d has assigned sovereignty to a certain king, or kingdom, another king or kingdom must not infringe on the sovereignty of such." [The Talmud illustrates this principle by pointing out Saul's artificially delayed arrival in order that the commencement of his kingdom should not shorten by as much as a minute the period G–d had designated for the leadership of the prophet Samuel. Ed.] Pharaoh understood that the existence of the kingdom of אלקים, though presumably greater than that of his own or other kings, would not interfere with the sovereignty of other kingdoms. There are many kingdoms in this world which co-exist although some are more powerful than others. It is also possible that Pharaoh acknowledged G–d as the Master of the Universe, but did not consider the Universe as G–d's creation, but rather considered Him part of the Universe. Other philosophers conceive of G–d as inseparable from the world, much as they view light as inseparable from the sun. For all these reasons, i.e. limiting G–d's possible domain, Pharaoh was angered when Moses pointed out that there was an added dimension to G–d. Pharaoh reacted by increasing the workload of his Jewish slaves, as we read in Exodus 5,9.
  When Moses observed this result of his first mission, he called out: "Ever since I have come to Pharaoh to speak in Your name, i.e. the Four-lettered one, he has made the burdens of the Jewish people even harder to bear" (5,23). This was something like a challenge to G–d to demonstrate the full impact of His Four-lettered Ineffable Name.
  At the beginning of our portion in 6,2, G–d therefore responds to Moses by saying that what He will do will prove that אני י-ה-ו-ה. When Hillel in Avot 1,14, coined the phrase אם אין אני לי מי לי, וכשאני לעצמי מה אני, "If I do not do for me who will do for me? And if I do only for myself what good am I?" this was a rhetorical question posed to describe man's inadequacy in this world when he acts only as an individual. G–d posed a similar question concerning His position in the universe, by indicating that if He did not now demonstrate the true meaning of having described Himself as אני, then מי לי who else would do so on His behalf? Pharaoh's comment מי י-ה-ו-ה, would then be justified! On the other hand, if I do reveal My Essence עצמי, then מה אני, I can demonstrate מה רבו מעשיך י-ה-ו-ה, the greatness of G–d's works, how they were all intitiated with profound wisdom, i.e. בחכמה עשית, a reference to creatio ex nihilo. At the very end of the Torah, in Deut. 34,11, we read that Moses is credited with having performed כל האתת והמופתים, all the miracles that it had been Moses' mission to perform on G–d's behalf in Egypt. 
  Moses' level of intimacy with G–d was such that he had what our sages call אספקלריא מאירא, a clear vision. G–d enlightened Moses with this clear vision and he acted as G–d's agent. G–d in His Essence, however, performed these miracles, using Moses as a "filter" i.e. עבר. This is the true significance of Exodus 12,12: ועברתי בארץ מצרים בלילה הזה, "I shall pass through the land of Egypt during that night, etc." Moses was called איש האלוקים, which our sages have interpreted to mean that his upper half was אלוקים, whereas the lower half of his body was איש, human. This simply means that Moses had not commenced his career on the same level as he completed it. Once he had ascended to Sinai, to אלוקים in Exodus 19,3, he became not only איש האלוקים but אלוקים. Shemot Rabbah 3 describes Moses as a טירון, "a private," in G–d's army in terms of his prophetic powers at the beginning of his career. Later on he rose to a level where he was described as אלוקים. 
  Some Kabbalists explain Exodus 18,1, in which we are told what Yitro "had heard," as a description of Moses' spiritual ascent. According to that view, the words אשר עשה אלוקים למשה, mean that G–d in His capacity as י-ה-ו-ה, made an Elo-him of Moses. Yitro had heard that G–d said about Moses: ראה נתתיך אלוהים לפרעה, "See here, I have made you a deity over Pharaoh," while at the same time He had made the people His עם, nation. It was Yitro's understanding that becoming G–d's people meant becoming His "army." This would have been the realisation of G–d's wish ever since the Creation to have a residence in the material world. The reason that G–d, i.e. His manifest Presence, שכינה, withdrew from earth was only because man had seriously damaged that part of G–d's creation by his sins. Now G–d had refined the Jewish people in the "crucible" of the Egyptian bondage experience to the point where He chose them to be His "army" in lieu of His Celestial Army. This is the meaning of the words in 6,26: הוציאו את בני ישראל מארץ מצרים על צבאותם, "Take the children of Israel out of Egypt in their armies." Rashi comments that the words: צבאותם mean "every army according to their tribes." Had not these people participated in the sin of the golden calf afterwards, they would have remained on that lofty level indefinitely, just as they will be in the Messianic future of which the Torah says in Leviticus 26,12,: והתהלכתי בתוככם, "I shall be walking amongst you." 
  What has happened instead is best described by Assaph in Psalms 82,6: "I had taken you for divine beings, sons of the Most High, all of you; but you shall die as men do, fall like any prince." When Moses is described as אלוהים over Pharaoh, this means that he is superior to the spiritual representative of Egypt, its שר, in the Celestial Spheres. The שר של מצרים is the highest of all the שרים; this shows that Moses did indeed occupy a lofty position. When Assaph, in the Psalm quoted, refers to Israel as אלוקים אחת, "you are divine (plural)," it is a reference to Moses being perceived as equal to the 600,000, i.e. all of Israel. The expression ובני עליון כולכם in the Psalm refers to the people of Israel who were on a spiritual level qualifying them to be the "army" in the Celestial Regions with Moses as their leader compared to a divine force in charge of that "army." Israel's failure during the episode of the golden calf reduced them to a human level, made them mortal. Just as G–d had overthrown divine forces (such as the protective angel of Egypt) before Moses, now it would be the Jewish people's turn to be overthrown.
  The introductory line of our portion: וידבר אלקים אל משה ויאמר אליו אני י-ה-ו-ה, means that G–d told Moses that he, Moses, would be אלקים, whereas He would be active in His capacity as י-ה-ו-ה, i.e. greater than any אלקים.
  Once we understand 6,2 in the Torah in this way we will be better able to understand an extremely enigmatic verse in Samuel II 7,23: ומי כעמך ישראל גוי אחד בארץ אשר הלכו אלקים לפדות לו לעם ולשום לו שם ולעשות לכם הגדולה ונוראות לארצך מפני עמך אשר פדית לך ממצרים גוים ואלו-היו, "And who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation on earth, whom G–d went and redeemed as His people, winning renown for Himself and doing great and marvellous deeds for them and for Your land [driving out] nations and their gods before Your people whom You redeemed for Yourself from Egypt." All the commentators have great difficulty with this verse. One of the difficulties is the expression "like Your people Israel." Another difficulty is that in this instance G–d is described as הלכו, went (pl.), whereas in a parallel verse in Chronicles I 17,21, G–d is described as הלך, went (sing.).
  I have already pointed out that Moses was appointed אלהים over all the שרים in the Celestial Regions, and that the Ineffable Name is reserved for The deity who controls and suspends laws of nature at will. We pay tribute to this fact in the Haggadah shel Pessach, where we describe G–d's interference in the line: "I, and not an angel, I, and not a Seraph, I, and not any agent." In view of the above, how are we to understand the verse in Numbers 20,16: וישלח מלאך ויוציאנו ממצרים, "He sent an angel and took us out of Egypt?" Clearly the "angel" was Moses. G–d transferred His power העבר, as the Torah says in Exodus 12,23: "ועבר ה' G–d will pass through Egypt to strike, but will see the blood, etc." We have a similar verse in 12,12: ועברתי בארץ מצרים בלילה הזה, "I shall pass through the land of Egypt during this night." The expression עבר, is a way of transferring power. This explains the threefold statement תדע which we quoted at the very beginning of our commentary (page 409). All three verses describe that there is no one like the Lord our G–d. The first one emphasizes His existence, whereas the second one emphasizes that He exercises control everywhere in His universe. The third statement features the word בעבור תדע, instead of למען תדע. The expression בעבור must be understood as העברה, transfer of His authority via Moses.
  It is nonetheless true that G–d personally performed these judgments on the firstborn of Egypt. The distinction of both Moses and the Jewish people at that time was that the people were prepared to become G–d's people, i.e. army, and that the שכינה was ready to resume residence on earth because by their absorption of Torah precepts and their performance of good deeds, the people of Israel had repaired the damage that had previously caused the שכינה to withdraw. Service to G–d is something that is "needed" by G–d, as we know from the Zohar's comment on ועשיתם, read attem. When someone performs all the commandments, G–d considers this as if that someone had in a sense "made Him." Our sages have stated, that when Israel performs the will of G–d, it adds strength to the גבורה in the Celestial Regions. We find such a concept applicable in Samuel II 8,13: ויעש דוד שם, "David made a Name." One can add lustre to someone's name; this is another way of "making" such a person. This is the very reverse of what a רשע, evil person, does by this wickedness. Such a person is described as נקב השם, having pierced or perforated the Shem, name of G–d, as we know from Leviticus 24,11. Cursing G–d is tantamount to perforating His image. This דרש is lengthy, and I shall explain it in its proper place.
  We shall now explain the verse preceding the line of כח וגבורה נתן בהם in Samuel II 7,23 we have quoted earlier. It says there: אין כמוך ואין אלוקים זולתך, "There is no one like You nor any other deity beside You." [There actually seems to be an error in the text, since the wording in Samuel II 7,23 is not identical with the wording quoted from the liturgical poem א-ל אדון which the author also quoted. Ed.] The first half means that there is no one of equal status. Even if You were to create such a power, it is impossible for it to be comparable to You. The very fact that You had to "invent" such a power makes it inferior to You. The words אין זולתך, refer to powers, deities, already in existence to whom G–d has assigned various domains within which they appear to reign supreme, as mentioned in the poet's statement כח וגבורה נתן בהם להיות מושלים בקרב תבל, "He has equipped them with strength and power to be ruling in the midst of the universe." Their rule is not independent of You, i.e. אין זולתך. When it is Your will, these powers exercise dominion; when it is Your will, You take this power away from them.
  We continue in Samuel: ומי כעמך ישראל גוי אחד, "Who is like Your unique nation Israel?" After the damage inflicted on the earth by Adam, the generation of Enosh, and subsequent generations, the שכינה withdrew to the Celestial Regions and the angels then constituted G–d's army and assumed the role of G–d's "people." It is in reference to these angels that David speaks about "who is like Your people," these are the people of G–d. Once the Jewish people had been refined, G–d wanted to bring bring back His שכינה to earth, and He selected Israel to become His people. This is why the prophet has both the words עמך and ישראל preceded by the letter כ. Without this letter, we would have thought that the "Your people" referred to are the same as "Israel." As it is, the message is that Israel on earth i.e. its domain, is as unique as the angels, i.e. the "people" of the Celestial Regions, in their domain. The words אשר הלכו in the plural in Samuel, and אשר הלך singular, in the matching verse in Chronicles, are essentially the same. Inasmuch as the miracles were performed by G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name, the use of the singular is appropriate. In view of the fact that G–d employed Moses as the instrument of העברה, "filter," the use of the plural is justified. David alluded to the latter aspect in Samuel, and to the former in Chronicles. This is the meaning of the second last verse in the Torah in which Moses is described as having been assigned by G–d to perform all the signs and miracles in Egypt against Pharaoh, his servants and his country. Both the use of the singular and the plural are justified when describing who promoted the redemption of the people of Israel. 
  In any event the term Elohim used in these two verses refers to Moses whom G–d had elevated to such a position. The reference to the Jewish people becoming His people refers to their appointment as G–d's צבאו, "army." The words: לשים לו שם, are to be understood in the same way as the verse in Samuel II 8,13, which speaks about David making a "name," in line with the Zohar which describes performing G–d's commandments as making a "name" for G–d, i.e. ועשיתם אותם-ועשיתם אתם. The words לעשות לכם הגדולה ונוראות, refer both to G–d and to Israel. As far as G–d is concerned, we are already familiar with the hints contained in the line ועשיתם אתם that such performance is tantamount to "making G–d," hence the word "הגדולה," "the (known) greatness." As far as the people of Israel is concerned, the word: ונוראות alludes to the spiritual elevation achieved by Israel as mentioned in Exodus 34,10: וראה כל העם אשר אתה בקרבו את מעשה השם כי נורא הוא אשר אני עושה עמך, "And the whole nation among whom you are will see the work of the Lord that I am about to do with you, that it is awesome."
  The words לארצך מפני עמך are an allusion to the כנסת ישראל in the Celestial Regions and in the corresponding Sanctuary in those Regions. We know that that Region is known as ארץ חפץ. The words מפני עמך in the corresponding verse in Chronicles I 17,21, refer to the people of Israel on earth, as David there speaks about the need לגרש, to expel nations on account of "the people whom You have redeemed for Yourself from Egypt." David says in effect that G–d redeemed the people and their G–d, meaning that the שכינה had also been in exile. We have other examples in scripture which suggest the same theme, i.e. that the redemption of Israel goes hand in hand with the "redemption" of the שכינה. To mention one, קומה בעזרתי, "Arise when I am helped" in Psalms 35,2, suggests a simultaneous salvation for Israel and G–d, so to speak. Or, Isaiah 45,17 ישראל נושע בה' תשועות עולמים. Here too the meaning could be that the ישועה for G–d כביכול, is dependent on Israel being helped.
  In light of what I have have written, the verse in Exodus 7,1: ראה נתתיך אלוקים לפרעה, "Behold I have made you a deity over Pharaoh can be understood. When one speaks of someone who is going to see something (future), the continuation of the verse should have been: "I will make you a deity over Pharaoh (future), instead of the past tense employed here by the Torah. Even though it may be argued that, when matters of prophecy are concerned, the future is often described as if it had occurred already, the expression Re-ay is certainly most inexact, seeing that Moses saw something now and not in the past. Besides, what is the meaning of Moses having become Elohim?
  If we want to explain the verse according to its simple meaning, we can accept the commentary of the Ran: Since Moses was the "father" of all subsequent prophets and his accomplishments as a prophet were far above the laws of nature, as vividly described in Deut. 34,11 how can we understand that he was afflicted with a physical blemish such as a stutter? He could not even control ordinary nature! How could a person underprivileged by nature rise to become a master of nature?! There is hardly a greater blemish than if someone cannot express his thoughts due to a physical handicap! Man's entire advantage over the animal kingdom is the ability not only to formulate thoughts but to express them! Moreover, we know from a number of sources in the Talmud such as Nedarim 38, and Maimonides, that G–d does not grant the gift of prophecy to people who do not possess physical prowess, wealth, wisdom as well as the virtue of humility and that Moses possessed all of these attributes. How then could Moses be plagued by such a deformity? In Sotah 12, where the verse in Exodus 2,6 in which Pharaoh's daughter finds a crying lad, i.e. Moses, is discussed, we find the description of Moses both as a ילד, young child, and as a נער, a description normally reserved for a boy entering his teens, not for a three months old baby. Rabbi Yehudah explains this to mean that Moses had a voice as strong as that of a נער, though he himself was a ילד. Rabbi Nechemyah questions this by saying that this would be considered as a physical deformity, and that is obviously not satisfactory! What he means is that if a minor blemish is inconceivable in Moses, how could a major blemish such as his difficulty to express himself be acceptable! When the Torah describes the creation of man in Genesis 2,7, we are told ויהי האדם לנפש חיה, which Onkelos translates as man becoming a talking spirit. 
  The Ran proceeds to answer this question at length. What he says in essence is that Moses' speech defect was a necessary component of his very greatness. The Torah is called תורת משה; had Moses had a perfect command of speech, the greatness of Torah would not have become evident because people would have attributed the brilliance of the Torah's thoughts to Moses' eloquence. We all know that orators by their presentation can make mediocre content appear brilliant.
  Although the words of the Ran are those of an outstanding scholar, we cannot ignore the fact that the Torah states in Exodus 19,19: משה ידבר והאלוקים יעננו בקול, "Moses would speak and G–d would reply in thunder." Since the Ran has said that it was necessary for Moses to be a stutterer prior to the giving of the Torah in order to confer credit on the Torah's words, how can we explain that Moses' stutter was cured prior to the giving of the Torah? One of the astounding features of Moses' voice at that time was that it could be heard clearly throughout the camp of the Israelites which extended over 12 kilometers. His voice was heard in spite of the presence at the same time of lightning, thunder and the sound of an ongoing blast of the Shofar! Our sages already commented how could the man who said: לא איש דברים אנכי, "I am not a man of words," display this ability? For the above cited reasons we cannot accept the Ran's explanation.
  It seems far easier to explain the matter in conjunction with the well known Midrash Sefer-Hayashar, (Berlin edition 245) according to which Moses was not born with a speech defect, but contracted it when Pharaoh tested him as a baby because his astrologers had voiced suspicions that he might become the saviour of the Jews. When an angel made Moses reach for the glowing embers instead of for the glittering jewels and he then put them in his mouth, he burned his mouth, leaving a permanent stammer and disfiguration of his tongue. The reason Moses was subjected to the test was that he had once playfully grabbed the crown of his step-father Pharaoh.
  When Moses came to warn Pharaoh of the impending plagues he used Aaron his brother as his interpreter because he had a stammer. Pharaoh noticed the reason that Moses used Aaron as his interpreter, when he reminded himself of what had transpired almost eighty years earlier when Moses had taken his crown off his head, which had given rise to the test of whether this had been merely a childish prank or whether it portended something sinister in the future. Pharaoh now realised that he had erred, and that Moses really meant to deprive him of his crown. This is the meaning of G–d saying: "Behold I have made you an elohim, ruler, governor over Pharaoh. This, I think, is how the Midrash has to be understood.
  There is, however, another aspect to that statement in the Torah. The explanation I propose will also answer the question of why the Torah had to write in 6,26: הוא אהרון ומשה אשר אמר ה' להם הוציאו את בני ישראל מארץ מצרים על צבאותם. "This is Aaron and Moses to whom G–d said: 'Take the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt with their armies.'" In the very sentence following, the Torah reverses the order and refers to: הוא משה ואהרון. What is the reason for this reversal in view of the fact that both Moses and Aaron are described as speaking to Pharaoh and demanding that he release the children of Israel? It appears that the Torah makes a point of showing that Moses and Aaron were of equal stature. How do we reconcile this with one of the thirteen Articles of Faith postulated by Maimonides that no prophet ever matched Moses? Why was Aaron given precedence in the first of the two verses ?
  Another difficulty is that the same paragraph in the Torah which describes the suffering of the Jewish people also mentions the marriage of Aaron to Elisheva and that of his son Eleazar to one of the daughters of Putiel, etc., whereas we have a rule that we do not mix happy events with unhappy events.
  I have already alluded to the Midrash which describes Moses as a טירון, private, in G–d's army of prophets at the beginning of his career when he experienced his first vision of G–d at the Burning Bush. G–d had said to Himself at that time: "If I appear to him with a thunderous voice, I will frighten him. If I approach him in a low voice, he will treat prophecy with scorn. So what did G–d do? He addressed him using the voice of Moses' father Amram. When thus approached, Moses responded by saying: הנני, "I am ready" (what does my father wish of me?) (Exodus 3,5). G–d then told Moses that He was not his father but the G–d of his father, that He had called him in a seductive manner so as not to frighten him. He explained that He was also the G–d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Thereupon Moses was very happy to hear that his own father was included in the list of patriarchs, and had even been mentioned ahead of the patriarchs. At this point, Moses hid his face, saying that he must surely hide his face in the presence of the G–d of his father. 
  I have mentioned already that at the beginning of his career Moses was on the level of איש. When a person is referred to as איש, this means that he is someone of substance. Later on Moses rose to higher levels and became אלוקים. In his Moreh Nevuchim, Maimonides explains this as follows: All the prophets receive their prophetic inspiration by means of a go-between, i.e. angels who are called אישים, because they are the medium through whom men are granted prophetic insights. This rule did not apply to Moses, however. Moses enjoyed direct inspiration. Maimonides goes on to explain the words of our sages on Numbers 16,4 where the Torah describes Moses as falling on his face after hearing the accusations of Korach. According to Sanhedrin 110, Korach accused Moses of adultery. This seems a very strange accusation, seeing that Moses had been faulted by his own sister for separating from his wife, abandoning marital life, due to his calling as a prophet who had to be "on call" at all times in case G–d wanted to communicate with him (Numbers 12). Why would Korach level such an unreasonable accusation against Moses?
  The meaning of Rabbi Shemuel bar Nachmeyni in Sanhedrin must be that Korach claimed that Moses' prophecy was not of a higher level than anyone else's and that he was perfectly within his rights to pursue a normal married life. Korach first wanted to reduce Moses to the level of a person who receives his prophetic inspiration not from G–d Himself but, indirectly. He described Moses as a טירון in his stature as a prophet. This would make Moses like all other prophets, i.e. אשת איש, a wife, someone who is a recipient rather than an initiator. When the Talmud described the accusation levelled against Moses as being that he was חשוד באשת איש, the meaning is not the customary "suspected of consorting with a woman married to someone else," but to his status as a prophet being comparable to the status of any married, lady i.e. passive rather than active. As someone born of woman, he was the product of a man's drop of semen. This is a veiled reference to Exodus 2,1: וילך איש מבית לוי ויקח את בת לוי, "A man from the house of Levi went and married a daughter of Levi." All of this illustrates the beginning of Moses' career as a prophet, when he received indirect inspiration, such as when G–d had to impersonate the voice of Moses' father Amram. The reason that the Midrash tells us this is to indicate that despite the as yet indirect inspiration, there was early on already a tendency towards the male, active, rather than the female, passive. G–d was already hinting that He wanted to disabuse Moses of the fact that he was merely another creature sired by a father and a mother. When G–d told Moses: "I am the G–d of your father," He meant that there were three partners involved in the making of a human being. G–d wanted Moses to appreciate that He had a major share in creating him because He also had a share in creating his father. As to G–d having adopted the voice of Moses' father, this was to remind Moses that he was born of human seed. This accounts for Shemot Rabbah 3,3 reporting G–d as saying as part of the deception: באתי אליך בפתוי, "I have come to you in a deceptive manner." G–d referred to the original seduction practised by the serpent on Eve in Paradise which is the reason that nowadays the origin of man is the proverbial טפה סרוחה, "evil-smelling drop of semen" familiar to us from the saying of Rabbi Akavyah in Avot 3,1. If Adam and Eve had not allowed themselves to be seduced into sinning, all seed would have been holy seed. The whole subject of the covenant, the ברית מילה, which is performed on the reproductive organ, is designed to reconsecrate it to G–d. This ברית is no less holy to G–d than the laying of תפילין which originates in the Celestial Regions. The world, as we have repeatedly explained, is founded on a pillar, on the צדיק, who is the יסוד, foundation, of the universe. The mystique of the covenant of circumcision is that one is thereby able to sire children of a similar spiritual niveau. Ever since the sin, when Adam and Eve became aware that they were naked and became ashamed on that account, and the whole rite of circumcision became connected to ערוה, nakedness and shame, observance of circumcision has become much more crucial. Man's attachment to material values stems from the original sin. This sin is the reason why Moses did not immediately merit prophetic insights without any intermediary and was called a טירון. G–d mentioned Abraham, Isaac and Jacob because all three were examples of תקון, repair-work, performed to the damaged spiritual state of the universe.
  Moses, constantly engaged in purifying the physical aspects of his personality, ascended to ever higher spiritual levels after the first vision. This reached a level where he had so purified his body that he separated from his wife. All of this was in order to refine the טפה סרוחה, evil smelling drop, that he originated from. Once he had attained that stage, it could be said of him that no other prophet ever compared to him, nor would there ever be another prophet who could compare to him in that respect. He actually possessed an advantage over the angels who never had any bodies to start with, for he, who was made of חומר, physical matter had overcome the limitations inherent in it and refined it eventually to such a degree that his skin began to radiate light. 
  When the Midrash described Moses' joy that his father had been included by G–d with the patriarchs, and had even been mentioned ahead of the patriarchs, Moses now ascended to an even higher level than his father. The words "that his father was greater," used in the Midrash to describe Moses' joy, really mean that Moses through his ascent conferred greatness on his parents in that their son, though he started out on a level similar to that of Abraham and the other patriarchs, eventually elevated himself to a still higher level. Aaron became a prophet before Moses; hence the Torah mentions Aaron first when Moses was still at the beginning of his career.This is why Aaron is complimented, as is his son, who was a fit successor of his father. When people make the right kind of שידוך, marriage in this world this reflects on their stature in the "higher" world. In that respect, too, Aaron was on a higher level than Moses whose sons did not contract marriages that were praise-worthy enough for the Torah to mention them. Later on, however, Moses surpassed Aaron spiritually when he ascended to G–d (19,3) to have the title Elohim bestowed upon him by G–d. This is implied in the mention of Moses before Aaron in 6,27. Moses' greatness commenced when he performed the various miracles in Egypt, and when G–d humbled the שר של מצרים before him. Inasmuch as that שר was the senior spiritual power in the Celestial Regions, Moses' victory over him made Moses into an Elohim.
  To come back to the words: ראה נתתיך in 7,1, which we questioned on page 413. We must compare it to Deut. 2,24: ראה נתתי בידך את סיחון מלך חשבון האמורי, "See I have given into your hand Sichon the king of Cheshbon the Emorite." G–d humbled the spiritual שר of that king before the feet of Moses. The adversaries of the Jewish people are first defeated in the Celestial Regions, before the Israelites on earth execute a similar judgment on their proteges on earth. The words: ראה נתתיך, refer to what had transpired already in the Celestial Regions. The Zohar (Sullam edition Shemot page 26), commenting on Exodus 1,8: ויקם מלךם חדש על מצרים, "A new king ascended the throne in Egypt," explains that Egypt's predominance in the world only began after the Jewish people had been exiled there. In fact, the stability of any kingdom on earth is only due to Israel. This is why Moses ascended to G–d in order to humble that nation. Simultaneously, the people of Israel ascended to a loftier position to become the "armies" of G–d and to receive the Torah. Bereshit Rabbah 1,1 explains that the universe was only created for the sake of Israel and the Torah, and that the Torah is called ראשית דרכו, based on Proverbs 8,22: השם קנני ראשית דרכו, "The Lord created me at the beginning of His way." Israel is called ראשית תבואה, "first harvest," based on Proverbs 8,19. The Midrash there also mentions that Moses is called ראשית, based on Deut. 33,21.
  I have explained repeatedly that the Exodus was in the nature of a renewal of G–d's work of Creation, and that Israel was refined in Egypt as metal is refined in a crucible. Removal of the pollutants of the serpent from the people of Israel enabled a "new" universe to emerge at that time. The description of Moses as ראשית, a beginning, is therefore very appropriate. The reason why G–d expressed the desire to have a Residence on earth is because עבודה, Service by humans is very necessary for G–d, strengthens the fabric of the Celestial Regions.
  Another reason G–d desires a Residence amongst man on earth is that אדם, man, combines within him the attributes of the creatures in the physical world with the attributes of the creatures in the spiritual world. The fact that man was created in the image of G–d means that he combines within him all the developments, השתלשלות, from the highest emanation downwards that form the whole process of Creation and which we have explained in the introduction to our treatise תולדות אדם. This concept is evident in man when we look at his parts, i.e. the body which corresponds to our lower world. Then there is the life-force called נפש, which corresponds to the world of the incessantly moving planets, and the רוח החיוני, the spiritual element in man which corresponds to the world of G–d's angels, of whom it is said in Psalms 104,4: עושה מלאכיו רוחות, "He makes the winds His messengers." Finally, man possesses a נשמה, which corresponds to the region in which the Ineffable Name is at home. In view of all this, it is easy to understand that man - when at his best - is a home fit for the Presence of the Divine. When man is on that level he cleaves to the mystical dimension of אדם העליון, which is above the throne, the mystique of דמות וצלם.
  G–d created these parts of man to correspond to the other parts of the greater universe. Of course, when man is depraved and does not correspond to these lofty ideals we have just outlined, the קליפות will affect him and he will become just an ape with a human face. Whereas Israel is the only nation that qualifies for the title אדם, depraved man (or better depraved Israelite) becomes part of the general pool of nations who are not "G–d's portion." G–d is on record in Deut. 32,9: כי חלק השם עמו, יעקב חבל נחלתו, "For the Lord's portion is His people, Jacob His own allotment." The other nations are assigned to the guidance of nature and their respective spiritual representatives called שרים. The שר של מצרים is the most exalted of all those שרים.
  We find a strange statement by Avital the scribe reported in the name of Rav in Moed Katan 18: "The Pharaoh in Moses' time was one cubit, his beard was one cubit, and his male organ was a cubit plus one זרת, (span between thumb and little finger). This is in keeping with Daniel 4,14: 'And the lowest of men he will raise over it.' The same Avital went on to say that this Pharaoh was also a magician, because the Torah reports that he would go out to the river Nile in the mornings (Exodus 7,15).” This statement certainly demands analysis since we cannot explain it away by simply saying that it is only allegorical. The words of the sages must also be capable of being understood at face value. Let me explain the reason G–d created רמזים, hints or allusions, describing a person in such a form and size. 
  I have already said that man combines within himself elements of all parts of the universe. However, if someone has a face like a human being but acts like an ape, his power extends only within the domain of this physical universe. Afterwards his home would be in the world of the planets since the world of the planets has been assigned by G–d to the various nations, because its origin is also physical. Beneath that world of the planets you have the domain of the קליפות which spawn ghosts and various kinds of evil spirits. All magic, etc. originates in those spheres. The magicians of Egypt derived their power from these spheres. All of these phenomena have their limitations and set measurements. Israel, on the other hand, as a holy nation which cleaves to G–d enjoys an everlasting relationship with G–d and is not subject to limitations in size or function. The standard measure when building is the cubit which consists of 6 handsbreadths. When something approaches the end of its "measure," it is reduced to a single cubit. [We have an example of this description when Noach is instructed to build the slanting roof of the ark in Genesis 6,16: ואל אמה תכלנה מלמעלה Ed.] Pharaoh's body is described as only one cubit tall, since it symbolised a human being whose only place is this physical world. The physical universe is perceived as progressively reducing in size until finally it is only a single cubit high. Our sages have described the physical universe as comprising a distance of 500 years' walk. A man is presumed to walk an average of 10 Parsa-ot daily. [45 km] daily. Ed.] Every one of those 10 Parsa-ot comprises 4 Milin, and every one of those Milin equals 2000 cubits. A cubit is presumed to be the length of an average person's step. Just as there are 6 handsbreadths in a cubit, so there were 6 days during the course of which G–d created the physical universe. This universe is supposed to last for 6000 years. When Avital the scribe referred to the beard of Pharoh as being one cubit long, he referred to the world of the planets, since their size will also experience reduction to a single cubit, albeit 500 years' walk away from earth.
  Our sages have described the רקיע, sky, as being such a distance above earth. They have also described the thickness of that world as corresponding to the distance between earth and the sky (Chagigah 13). The same distance exists between each of the 7 רקיעים, skies, our sages speak of as comprising the universe. A cubit comprises 6 handsbreadths. The world of the planets comprises 12 מזלות, zodiac constellations six of which are above “earth,” whereas six are "below." Avital the scribe alludes to this when he describes the beard. Man's head is the symbol and seat of his brain. In a true human being the brain is the מרכבה, carrier or support of the soul. Among the Gentile nations, however, it has become the carrier of the קליפות, impurities introduced by the serpent. The beard is symbolic of impulses radiating from the brain. In the case of ape-like man such radiations are all negative. Pharaoh was closely linked to the world of the planets. The first of the constellations, the zodiac sign of the lamb, a major Egyptian deity, is very high [if we perceive of the 6 constellations arranged in a semi-spherical order starting at the top of the globe. Ed.]. Here all the "radiations" originated in that constellation. The hairs of his beard must be understood as the emanations from the world of planets which are subject to a certain size and certain functions. Avital the scribe described this as Pharaoh's beard being a cubit long. He also described the length of Pharaoh's male member, an allusion to the power of his שר. This is something that can be understood only after a suitable introductory note.
  We know that terrestrial man was created in the image and form of his Celestial Counterpart, אדם העליון. As soon as man and woman had been created they were commanded to procreate, to be fruitful and to multiply. We read in Genesis 1,28: ויאמר להם אלוקים פרו ורבו, meaning that they should produce other human beings similar to themselves, i.e. similar to the אדם העליון, the spiritual human prototype on the throne of G–d. G–d had, after all, created man on earth in the likeness of that prototype; if man on earth had not failed and as a result become garbed in the pollutants emitted by the serpent, there would not have been such a thing as shame, negative aspects to the act of procreation. On the contrary, the act of procreation would have been the performance of a commandment exactly like that of putting on phylacteries and other commandments performed with one's body. The semen would have been an emission originating in the brain, and the person born as a result of such an emission would have come into the world with the same stature as Adam. In spite of what may be valid amongst the Gentile nations, Israel -because it is holy- needs to sanctify itself prior to engaging in the act of procreation as we have explained on pages 22, 39, and elsewhere.
  Moses sanctified his body to such an extent that even the parts he had inherited from his father and mother at birth became purified, refined, so that he was able to receive the word of G–d without the help of any intermediaries. The שרים of the Gentile nations, whose brains emit only material infected with the pollutants of the serpent, are in a different class. The שר של מצרים is the foremost amongst all those spiritually defective forces. The nation whose patron he is is a prime example of people steeped in sexual immorality, whose seminal discharge has been compared by the prophet to the seminal discharge of horses (Ezekiel 23,20). Egypt is a prototype of all that is morally abhorrent. We already pointed out in our commentary on פרשת מקץ that Egypt is called ערות הארץ, the most shameful place on earth. When Avital the scribe therefore referred to the measure of אמה, a cubit, this is not inappropriate. Although the שר של מצרים is, of course, a spiritual being to whom measurements in the physical world do not apply, yet he can be measured by such a yardstick. Our sages have described even angels as possessing such measurements as we know from Chulin 91, where the Talmud discusses the measurements of the ladder Jacob saw in his dream. The ladder is supposed to have been 8000 Parsa-ot wide in order to enable 2 pairs of angels each to ascend and descend simultaneously because the angels are each 2000 Parsa-ot wide. Most likely there is a deeper significance to that statement in the Talmud. The fact remains that it shows that the sages think of spiritual beings in terms of physical measurements.
  As we have said, the measurements of such physical phenomena gradually decrease until only a single cubit remains. This cubit which comprises 6 handsbreadths corresponds to the 6 wings with which each of the angels that we read about in Isaiah 6,2 were equipped. Those angels developed "downwards," to eventually form the 70 שרים representing the 70 Gentile nations in the Celestial Spheres which we have called the army of the Heavens. It is said of G–d (Isaiah 40,12) that He established the Heavens with a זרת, the span between the thumb and little finger. When Avital the scribe mentioned the אמה+זרת as the size of Pharaoh's male member, he alluded to the שר של מצרים and the fact that he had some influence in the Celestial Regions. We, the Jewish people, extend to the ראש העליון. 
  We know from Tossaphot in Shabbat 92, that the average size of a human being is 3 cubits, not including the head. These three cubits are a metaphor for the three worlds, in all of which man (Israel) or part of man is more or less at home. The head serves as the מרכבה, carrier for the נשמה, soul, which corresponds to the domain of the Ineffable Name. That domain is one to which Israel cleaves eternally, hence it is not subject to measurement. This explains why the Talmud does not give a measurement for the head. The Gentiles externally look no different from the Jews, and yet there is a world of difference. They are like apes with a human face. They have no access to what we have described as the ראש העליון. The definition from Daniel 4,14, ושפל אנשים יקים עליה applies to them. Israel, by comparison is called אדם.
  Let us get back to our main subject. When G–d made Moses His messenger, He revealed to him that there are several layers of holiness in the Celestial Spheres, one above the other, and that He in His capacity as the Ineffable Name effects changes in nature and re-arranges the whole planetary system if need be. He revealed to Moses the extent to which He exercises supervision over all that transpires in our world. He acquainted Moses with all aspects of His power which extends over all other so-called powers. All of this is included in the verses quoted at the very outset of our פרשה, namely: למען תדע כי אני י-ה-ו-ה בקרב הארץ, בעבור תדע כי אין כמוני בכל הארץ. The Torah warned us that we must know all these things, that it is not sufficient to relate to them only as tradition. This is underscored in Deut. 4,39: וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי י-ה-ו-ה הוא האלוקים בשמים ממעל ועל הארץ מתחת אין עוד, "You must know this day and record it in your heart that the Lord your G–d is the only true G–d in the Heavens above and on the Earth below, there is none other." The expression והשבות אל לבבך is an allusion to repentance. Having firm knowledge of the power demonstrated by G–d on behalf of Israel establishes a close link between the individual Jew and his G–d, and acts as a powerful inducement to do תשובה. Moses is on record in Psalm 91,14, that when G–d sent him as a messenger to deliver the Israelites this was a sign of His fondness of him. The reason cited for G–d being fond of Moses is כי ידע שמי, "Because he knew My name." The sinner does the reverse; he distances himself from G–d. We are told in Isaiah 59,2: כי עונותיכם הבדילו ביני וביניכם, "For your iniquities have created a barrier between Me and you." If one had put distance between oneself and G–d and wants to re-approach Him one needs do repentance. Repentance is the act of returning and re-establishing one's bond with G–d. This return has to originate in the heart, and that is why the Torah in Deut. 4,39 used the expression: והשבות אל לבבך.
  I have explained repeatedly that there are two kinds of repentance. The first is occasioned by the sinner experiencing various forms of afflictions at the hand of G–d; their purpose is to get him to remedy his mistakes and change his life-style. This may be considered an externally induced repentance. The second, which we will call internally induced, originates in the heart. The prophet Joel 2,13 calls on Israel: "Rend your hearts rather than your garments; turn back to the Lord your G–d. For He is gracious and compassionate, etc." When the heart is sincere such repentance is viewed as emanating from love for G–d, meaning that one feels remorse that one has rebelled against the King of Kings. It is not merely due to fear of punishment.
  These concepts are hinted at in our portion, namely that the heavy labours and torture that the Jewish people had to endure in Egypt (as described in the previous portion) is the externally induced repentance. In our portion the emphasis is on the internally induced repentance which is the result of a sincere heart.
  G–d speaks about hardening the heart of Pharaoh in 7,3, something with which most early commentators had so much difficulty. They could not understand why G–d would deprive Pharaoh of his freedom of choice and at the same time punish him for failing to repent. We know that G–d is just and fair, and it seems incompatible with G–d's declared attributes that He should proceed in such a manner. I have earlier described the way the Zohar deals with this problem. I now want to concentrate on Rashi's approach, whose words are based on our sages. All those who have attacked Rashi's interpretation have simply misunderstood him. They have left me room to rectify those misunderstandings.
  Let me first quote a statement by our sages before turning to the text of Rashi's commentary. Shemot Rabbah, 13,3, commenting on Exodus 10,1: כי אני הכבדתי את לב פרעה, "For I have hardened the heart of Pharaoh," quotes Rabbi Yochanan as follows: "Here the Torah seems to provide an opening for the heretics to say that Pharaoh was not guilty because G–d prevented him from repenting. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish replied that on the contrary we can use this verse to stop such heretics in their tracks. Solomon tells us in Proverbs 3,34: 'At the scoffers He scoffs, but to the humble He shows grace.' G–d warns a person up to three times. After a person ignores three such warnings and fails to repent, G–d makes such a person's heart unresponsive to thoughts of repentance in order to now pay him his just deserts. This is what happened with the wicked Pharaoh. G–d gave Pharaoh five chances [during the first five plagues no mention is made of G–d hardening the heart of Pharaoh. Ed.] and Pharaoh failed to respond. Then G–d said to him: 'Since you have insisted on being obstinate, and have made your own heart unresponsive, I shall now add more impurity to the impurity you have already heaped upon yourself.' This is the meaning of 10,1: 'I have hardened Pharaoh's heart '" Thus far the Midrash.
  Let us examine the verse Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish quoted in justification of G–d versus the heretics. What exactly did he have in mind when he said that the verse in 10,1 serves as a means to silence potential heretics? Furthermore, why is G–d described in our Midrash as exacting punishments for sins committed, when apparently G–d also exacted punishment for sins not committed voluntarily! Why does the Midrash repeat itself by speaking about: הקשית ערפך as well as הכבדת את לבך? The words “I will add impurity to existing impurity,” also seem unnecessarily repetitious!
  The text in Rashi is as follows: "In view of Pharaoh התריס והרשיע, having sinned and rebelled against Me, and of My being aware that the nations of the world have no serious intentions of returning to Me in penitence, I want his heart to remain hard in order to perform an increasing number of My miracles against him and so that you will all recognise My mighty deeds….In spite of this we do not find that G–d interfered with Pharaoh's heart during the first five plagues. It only says: 'Pharaoh's heart remained hard'" (8,15). There are a number of details in this text which bear examination. Why, for instance, does Rashi speak about Pharaoh being both התריס and הרשיע? What is the difference between these two words? Why is Rashi so careful when describing the Gentile nations in the words: 'the nations of the world do not derive pleasure from concentrating wholeheartedly to do penitence?' A third peculiarity in Rashi's wording are the words: 'it is better for Me that he should harden his heart in order, etc.' How does Pharaoh's behaviour contribute to or detract from G–d's well-being?
  I have already mentioned that the essential part of repentance is performed by the heart. If someone repents without a total involvement of his heart, it is as if he had not repented at all. Even remorse in his heart accompanied by a confession as well as by a resolution not to sin again, but inspired by fear of retribution, is not a perfect repentance. How much more inferior is the kind of repentance in which the heart does not fully concur? Such a person is apt to relapse into sin as soon as the afflictions which prompted his contrition have stopped. This is not repentance but deception! Such repentance has no moral value. The prophet Jeremiah already referred to this kind of "repentance" sarcastically when he said (Jeremiah 2,27): "They say to the tree 'You are my father,' and to the stone: 'You have given birth to me;' for all the time they turn their necks towards Me and not their faces. But in their hour of calamity they cry: 'Where is our Lord? Arise and save us!"'
  Pharaoh's repentance was of the category described by Jeremiah. He even said it openly when he exclaimed in 10,17: ויסר מעלי רק את המות הזה, "In order that He should remove from me only this death!" His servants who told him "dismiss these people and let them serve their G–d, for do you not know yet that Egypt will perish?" were not much better. This is why Moses said to Pharaoh in 9,30: "I know that neither you nor your servants have yet experienced true reverence for the Lord G–d." Moses merely intimated that he knew that the motivation of Pharaoh's professed remorse was not a true תשובה. G–d confirmed this in 10,3 when He said to Pharaoh (through Moses): "How long do you refuse to humble yourself before Me?"
  Now the whole matter is quite clear. G–d did not punish Pharaoh for any of the sins he committed while being manipulated by Him after he had been deprived of a free choice. All of the Ten Plagues as well as the drowning in the sea were retributions for acts of rebellion against G–d committed while Pharaoh had the unimpeded use of his free will, i.e. during the first five plagues when he refused to humble himself and to become penitent. When the author of the Haggadah shel Pessach quotes Rabbi Akiva as saying that each of the Ten Plagues consisted in reality of five plagues, he may well have alluded to the five opportunities G–d had given Pharaoh to display true remorse and penitence. It means that each plague was a retribution for five successive failures to respond to G–d's afflictions and instructions.
  When G–d hardened Pharaoh's heart it was only because G–d knew well in advance that he would eventually let the Jewish people go. G–d also knew that this would not represent an honest change of heart by Pharaoh, i.e. Pharaoh as the prototype of the Gentile nations would not derive satisfaction, נחת רוח, from his penitence. Such repentance would not free Pharaoh from having to suffer further chastisements. If that were to happen, a desecration of G–d's holy name would result because the nations -unaware of Pharaoh's true state of mind-would conclude that a man who had repented was still being persecuted by G–d. In order to prevent such a חלול השם, public desecration of G–d's name, G–d preferred to manipulate him so that he would not release the Israelites and would therefore not even appear to be penitent. 
  G–d had examined Pharaoh's heart and knew that his remorse was not sincere. This is why Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish quoted the verse from Proverbs in which G–d is described as dealing with the scoffers according to what is in their hearts, i.e. tit for tat, whereas He shows grace to the truly humble. Solomon discusses the state of mind of someone professing to have become penitent. 
  It is quite appropriate then for Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish to say that Exodus 7,3 can be used to refute the arguments of the heretics. He takes his cue from the word בפיהם, people whose repentance is only "mouth-deep," does not involve their heart. Pharaoh was a perfect example of such a person. This is meant by "the addition of impurity to already existing impurity." Rashi refers to the additional refusals of Pharaoh to repent sincerely after he had failed to repent during the first five plagues. From that time on the impurity remained anchored in his heart, i.e. invisible to outsiders. G–d considered it necessary to demonstrate to outsiders the true state of Pharaoh's mind, therefore He made sure that Pharaoh would display universally visible signs of his impurity. 
  Rashi was quite right therefore in referring both to Pharaoh's being התריס, opposing G–d (in his heart), as well as הרשיע, adding wickedness (during the last five plagues when his obstinacy became visible to all), although he had already mouthed remorse. G–d therefore concluded that it was better for His reputation to harden Pharaoh's heart so as to avoid a desecration of the holy name of G–d.
  One may be able to explain something puzzling in Exodus 32,25, in a similar vein. It says there: "Moses saw that the people were out of control for Aaron had let them get out of control so that they were a menace to any who might oppose them." The Torah obviously refers to the fact that it was Aaron who had actually made the golden calf. However, Aaron's whole purpose had been לשם שמים, to further G–d's interests, to prevent a desecration of G–d's name. Aaron was aware that the people had forfeited their lives already from the moment they had planned to make an alternate deity for themselves. While it is true, that generally speaking, G–d does not account the intention to commit a sin as something culpable, that rule does not hold true when the sin involved is idol-worship. We have a special verse in Ezekiel 14,5, to make this plain: למען תפש את ישראל בלבם, "In order to take hold of the family of Israel in their heart." Aaron was convinced that if the Jewish people were punished this would constitute a desecration of the name of G–d, since the Gentile nations would say: "where is their G–d now?" The Gentile nations would never associate the death of the Jewish people with a sin they had committed merely in their hearts and which had not become common knowledge. Aaron thought he could prevent this descration of G–d's name by making the golden calf and causing an already culpable thought to be translated into a culpable action. Once the Gentile nations would hear about Israel worshipping the golden calf and being punished, clearly this would demonstrate to those nations that Israel had been punished for a grave sin.
  This then is the meaning of: כי פרעה אהרון. The translation of the word פרע is that he brought the matter into the open. This expression is also used in connection with the final stage of the rite of circumcision, and refers to the baring of the glans. The expression in Exodus 32,25: לשמצה בקמיהם, means that Aaron wanted Israel's sin to be revealed to their enemies. Once that was the case, G–d's honour would remain unimpaired. Aaron may have learned this from the manner in which G–d treated Pharaoh, and due to which Pharaoh's true state of mind was revealed to one and all.
  Perhaps we have something similar in a statement of our sages on Samuel II 15,32: ויהי דוד בא עד הראש אשר ישתחוה שם לאלוקים, "When David reached the top where he would usually prostrate himself before G–d." Rabbi Yehudah in Sanhedrin 107 uses this verse to claim that David was about to commit an idolatrous act, claiming that the word ראש is a description of an idolatrous deity. He cites proof from Daniel 2,32. All this occurred when David had to flee for his life from his own son Absalom. His friend Chushai remonstrated with him saying that it was unseemly for a king of his stature to become guilty of such a grave sin. David responded: "How is it possible that a king such as myself should be pursued by his own son! Better that I should die having committed the sin of idol-worship than that the name of the Lord be desecrated publicly if my own son were to kill me." We must ask ourselves what could have possessed David to even contemplate the commission of such a sin? Clearly David knew that in the eyes of most of his people he was viewed as a pious G–d-fearing individual. Many people would begin to question G–d's justice if he were to become the victim of Absalom's revolt. He therefore preferred to commit a public sin so that people would not question how G–d could have allowed a pious man such as David to have been killed by his own son. David certainly harboured no idolatrous thoughts which would have led him to commit such a sin. Eventually, he did not go through with his plan, and that is why he said: "a king such as I, etc." [He fled, leaving ארץ ישראל, which is tantamount to serving idols, since one foregoes G–d's direct protection, cf. Maharsha. Ed.]
  To get back to our subject. Perfect repentance is performed with a totally sincere heart. Such repentance is welcome and eagerly accepted by G–d. When Israel was purified in Egypt it returned to G–d and was redeemed. A similar process will occur in the future, as the Torah has assured us. Our sages have extolled the importance of repentance saying (Yuma 86) that it hastens redemption, as we know from Isaiah 59,20-21: "And a redeemer shall come to Zion and to them that turn from transgression in Jacob, says the Lord." Amen.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  וידבר אלהים אל משה. G–d spoke harshly with Moses because Moses had been adamant in saying to G–d: "Why have You caused things to get worse for this people and why have You sent me?" Moses was guilty of questioning the ways of G–d, and that was why G–d expressed regret at the passing of the patriarchs who had never been guilty of questioning His ways. Rashi explained all this at length. We therefore have to learn from this to be extremely careful not to question G–d, whether it is when He confers benefits or when He appears to afflict us. G–d is the true צדיק. Sometimes we think that what happens to us is bad; G–d however, knows that it is all for our good even if we fail to recognise this at the time.
  ונתתי אותה לכם מורשה. The expression מורשה instead of ירושה, inheritance, is puzzling. The people addressed were after all those slated to inherit the land, not the ones slated to pass it on to their children. We must understand the verse as do our sages who have told us that this particular inheritance is of a different nature than all other inheritances. Under normal circumstances the living inherit from the dead. In this instance the dead inherited from the living. Rashi explained this procedure on Numbers 26,55. As a result, the land returned to the generation that had left Egypt as a מורשה, since the people who died in Egypt died on behalf of the land, though they did not merit coming to the land of Israel. Consequently we may view those that left Egypt as inheriting it from their deceased parents. It was therefore a מורשה, something that had been transferred to them by their parents. It is part of G–d's practice to display grace to those who find themselves in pain.
  וידבר ה' אל משה ואל אהרן ויצום אל בני ישראל. Rashi comments that G–d commanded them to lead the people by displaying even-temperedness and tolerance. We must learn from this that any leader must suffer the burden of governing the people of Israel, not become angry with them or harass them. A leader of the Jewish nation must relate to them like an ox to his yoke. When he does that he will be amply rewarded by our Lord in Heaven.
  אלה ראשי בית אבותם בני ראובן וגו' ובני שמעון וגו' ואלה שמות בני לוי. It is difficult to understand why the word שמות, names, is used in connection with the descendants of Levi and not with the descendants of the other tribes mentioned. 
  The reason is that the whole tribe of Levi did not share the exile experience properly, because it did not have to perform slave labour. The tribe wished to demonstrate its empathy with the rest of the tribes who were suffering, and they did this by way of the names they gave to their children. For instance, the name גרשון alluded to the fact that they considered themselves as aliens in a land which was not theirs. The name קהת is symbolic of קהות שניהם, that their teeth were on edge in frustration. The name מררי, alluded to the bitterness experienced by their brethren, as we know from Exodus 1,14. 
  This is the meaning of "These are the names of the sons of Levi." This verse teaches us to always share in the troubles of the community even if one has been spared such trouble personally. This is the message G–d conveyed here to Moses. אהיה אשר אהיה . When G–d had said this originally, the meaning was that He would be with us in our troubles, every time. 
  When Moses suggested that it would be counterproductive to introduce this dimension of G–d to the people at this stage, G–d agreed and told Moses to use the word אהיה only once to describe a hitherto unknown dimension of G–d. This does not mean that G–d reversed Himself, and that we could not expect Him to display empathy for us every time we are in difficulties. It simply means that this dimension of G–d was revealed only to Moses at that time and not to the people (based on Shemot Rabbah).
  ויקח אהרן את אלישבע בת עמינדב אחות נחשון. The additional words "sister of Nachshon," prompted the Talmud in Baba Batra 110 to comment that before marrying a girl one should check out her brother's moral character.
  כצאתי את העיר אפרוש את כפי. Moses did not pray inside the capital of Egypt since the city was filled with idols. This teaches the Jewish traveller who on occasion is forced to use inns and hotels owned by pagans which may prominently display icons or pigs, etc., to be careful to choose only locations that are free from these when he says his prayers. On occasion it may be preferable to pray en route rather than in such surroundings.
  
  Bo
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This portion contains 9 positive and 11 negative commandments.
  The first commandment in this portion, which is the fourth commandment of the Torah, is the need to sanctify the moon each month and to arrange for leap-years when necessary.
  Commandment 5 deals with the slaughter of the Passover lamb on the 14th of the month of Nissan in the afternoon.
  Commandment 6 requires the eating of this lamb by all Israelites on the evening of the 14th to the 15th of Nissan, since the Torah says: "They shall eat the meat during this night."
  Commandment 7 deals with eliminating all leavened matters on the 14th of this month; the Torah writes: "But on the first day you must destroy all leavened things, etc."
  Commandment 8 requires us to eat unleavened bread on the evening of the 14th to the 15th; the Torah says: In the evening you shall eat unleavened bread."
  Commandment 9 requires the sanctification of the first-born male Israelites and the first-born males of the pure animals; the Torah says: "Sanctify unto Me all the first-born, whatsoever opens the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast, it is Mine."
  Commandment 10 enjoins us to tell of the Exodus from Egypt on the night of the 15th of Nissan. The Torah says: "You shall tell your son."
  Commandment 11 demands the redemption of a first-born male donkey. The Torah says: "And every firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a lamb."
  Commandment 12 enjoins us to break the neck of such a firstling of an ass if it was not redeemed. The Torah says: "If you do not redeem it, you must break its neck."
  Commandment 13 is the prohibition of eating the meat of the Passover sacrifice either raw or boiled in water, but to eat it only roasted on the fire. The Torah says: "Do not eat of it raw or boiled in water, etc."
  Commandment 14 is the prohibition of leaving any part of the Passover sacrifice until the morning of the 15th of Nissan. The Torah says: "Do not let anything remain of it until the morning."
  Commandment 15 enjoins that no leavened matter must be found in our possession during all the seven days of the Passover holiday. The Torah says: "For seven days nothing leavened must be found in your houses."
  Commandment 16 prohibits consumption of foodstuffs containing any leavened matter, even if the Chametz part is only a minor ingredient in such food. The Torah says: "כל מחמצת," anything containing something leavened (you must not eat)." Our sages explain and Maimonides rules, that it is a violation of a Biblical commandment to consume any food containing sufficient leavened matter so that -if one ate from that food for a length of time it would take to consume the equivalent of four eggs- one would thereby eat an amount of חמץ equivalent to the size of an olive. The penalty for that transgression is 39 stripes, not כרת, premature death at the hands of Heaven, as is the case when one consumes undiluted חמץ knowingly. If the amount of חמץ contained in the mixture described is less than can be consumed during the time it takes to eat four eggs, no Biblical prohibition has been breached, but one is subject to being flogged by Rabbinic authority for having transgressed a Rabbinic ordinance. According to Maimonides, the whole reason the Torah repeats the prohibition of כל מחמצת לא תאכלו is to inform us that the penalty for transgressing this prohibition is less than that of eating שאור.
  Nachmanides is of the opposite opinion; he does not consider the verse just quoted as a prohibition as such, i.e. as one of the 613 commadments, but as one of the many prohibitions mentioned in connection with the whole subject-matter of חמץ. He understands this verse as speaking of matters which turned into חמץ by themselves, without any human input, as well as חמץ prepared by a Gentile. Without the verse in question I would have concluded that only חמץ under the control of a Jew is prohibited. He does not consider that there was a need to prohibit חמץ found in a mixture, but considered this included in previously mentioned legislation, though not subject to a penalty administered by the Court. This is the majority view in the Talmud. The subject matter is discussed in Pessachim 43.
  Commandment 17 forbids the participation of a Jewish heretic in eating of the Passover sacrifice. The Torah says: כל בן נכר לא יאכל בו, "Anyone who has become estranged must not eat of it."
  Commandment 18 prohibits us from feeding a stranger or even a resident stranger [one who observes the basic Noachide laws] from the Passover lamb. The Torah says: "A resident or hired hand must not eat of it."
  Commandment 19 prohibits anyone from taking part of the meat of the Passover lamb outside the house in which the group to which it has been assigned consumes it. The Torah says: "Do not take any of its meat outside."
  Commandment 20 prohibits the breaking of any of the bones of the Passover sacrifice. The Torah says: "You must not break any of its bones."
  Commandment 21 prohibits any uncircumcised person from eating of the Passover lamb. The Torah says: "Any uncircumcised person must not eat of it."
  Commandment 22 prohibits consumption of חמץ on Passover. The Torah says: "חמץ must not be eaten."
  Commandment 23 forbids the visible presence of חמץ in all our dwellings during all the seven days of the holiday. The Torah says: "Neither Chametz nor Se-or shall be found in all your territory for seven days."
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  I have outlined in my introduction to this treatise on the written Torah that anyone who studies Torah in order to be able to observe the commandments to the extent that it is possible for him to observe them will get the credit also for having observed those commandments which he studied but was unable to perform due to conditions beyond his control. If someone who is not a priest and is therefore unable to perform service in the Holy Temple, has studied how to perform that service, he is given credit as if he had performed such service. Study of much of the legislation found in our portion is in the same category. Although due to our collective and individual sins, we do not have a Temple nowadays, we can still perform those commandments vicariously through study with a view to performing them as soon as the opportunity will present itself again, hopefully in the near future. I will therefore endeavour to reveal a little of the mystical dimensions that are part of the Passover sacrifice legislation.
  החודש הזה לכם. The commandment to sanctify the New Moon and to arrange for leap-years when necessary that we find in Exodus 12,2 is designed to ensure that the various holidays set out in the Torah occur in their respective seasons. Passover must occur in spring, Tabernacles in autumn. Leap-months and leap-years were determined by calendar calculation even during the eras when the appearance of the new moon was confirmed by visual observation. Astronomical factors were not ignored. 
  We have a tradition that the luminaries symbolise a two-faced concept [such as Adam and Eve before Eve was separated from Adam by G–d. Ed.]. The moon receives its light only from the sun. The secret of when the moon renews itself is when it is positioned close to the sun. This statement needs a detailed analysis. I have dealt with it in my commentary on tractate פסחים under the heading ותורה אור, sub-category ראש חודש.
  Women observe the New Moon more than their husbands, since, symbolically speaking, the moon (as the lesser of the luminaries) remains on the wane for no more than seven days before it begins to shine again. Similarly, a menstruating woman becomes pure again after seven days. The normal menstrual cycle of a woman is thirty days, similar to the cycle of the moon. We find in the Midrash Ha-nee-elam of the Zohar Chadash that whereas the Gentile nations arrange their calendar according to the orbit of the sun, the Jewish people count according to the orbit of the moon. At first glance we would have thought that the opposite should be true. When G–d told the moon to diminish itself, the moon was not placated until told that Israel would use it for its calendar calculations (Chulin 60). The moon was also promised that the צדיקים would bear its name. 
  This is a metaphor and means that Israel walks in darkness in this world, whereas the nations of the world walk in light. The moon in this world shines only at night when it is dark. When Israel is in exile it experiences an existence similar to that of the moon. Just as the moon, despite its temporary eclipse, re-emerges and shines, so will Israel re-emerge after its exile. The blackness [absence of moonlight. Ed.] of the moon is an allusion to its being in mourning over the fate of Israel in exile. Shemot Rabbah 15,26 makes the point that there were 15 generations from Abraham to King Solomon. These generations represented the rising star of the Jewish people, similar to the first half of the month when the moon is in its ascendancy. After Solomon the star of the Jewish people began to decline, much like the moon towards the end of the month. King Tzedekiah was the 29th generation after Abraham, and it was during his life that the Temple was destroyed, that the light of the Jewish nation was eclipsed. The fact that King Tzedekiah had his eyes gouged out by the Babylonians further re-inforces the allegory between the moon and the fortunes of the Jewish people. There will come a time, however, when the light of the moon will be as brilliant as that of the sun, when the Lord and His name will be one, when a new light will shine over Zion. The formula used in our benediction when we recite the prayer for sanctification of the moon each month contains the words עטרת תפארת לעמוסי בטן. We refer to the Lord who bade the moon to renew itself, "a crown of glory to those burdened from birth, who are likewise destined to renew themselves just like the moon, and to glorify their Maker because of the glory of His kingdom." I have dealt with this in the chapter mentioned earlier. 
  The subject of the orbit of the moon, the fixing of leap-months and leap-years, is also related to aspects of the transmigration of souls. The appearance and disappearance of one generation after another reminds one of the lunar cycles. Our sages have jealously guarded what is called the סוד העיבור, the mechanics of how and under what conditions to declare these leap-years and leap-months. [cf. Ketuvot 112, based on Ezekiel 13,9. A collegium of seven scholars would deal with this issue in a closed session: normal sessions were open to the disciples Ed.]
  The purpose of the Passover sacrifice is first and foremost to demonstrate G–d's superiority over all other deities both in Heaven and on earth. This is important; G–d had endowed many agents with different powers, and the impression that there were a number of primary sources of power in the universe had to be refuted. The discrediting of the strongest of these forces, the שר של מצרים, automatically brought about the discrediting of all other deities.
  The zodiac sign of the lamb is the first of the twelve zodiac signs and represents the senior power to which G–d delegated a variety of such functions. It was this symbol which had to be slaughtered to drive home the point that without the consent of G–d it represented impotence instead of power. Since the Egyptians had made it a symbol of their שר, counterpart in the Celestial Regions, it had to be slaughtered by the Jews. For the same reason it was important that the redemption take place in the month of the ascendancy of that sign, and on the day that symbolised the zenith of its orbit, i.e. its power at its supposedly strongest. The Torah's explanation in Genesis 46,34, that any shepherd was an abomination to the Egyptians is logical. The mere suggestion that sheep needed human guardians -when they were viewed as a supreme deity- is an insult to their religion. When G–d said: החודש הזה לכם, "This month is for you," it is an announcement that Israel would be redeemed during the month of Nissan. G–d commanded that the lamb be taken in order to slaughter it and to humiliate by this single act the entire system upon which the Egyptians had built their position in this world. G–d performed judgments on the sheep, on the Egyptian deities, to demonstrate that He is not only a deity (like others, i.e. אלוקים) but that He is י-ה-ו-ה.
  The Zohar, commenting on 12,3: ויקחו להם איש ה לבית אבות שה לבית, "They shall each acquire for themselves a lamb per family or a lamb per household," comments that in effect G–d told the Jews to physically get hold of the Egyptians' deity, to keep it locked up for three days and to publicly excecute it on the fourth day. The Egyptians had to witness all this. This was a harder pill for them to swallow than all the other plagues that they had been subjected to previously, and this their idol was afterwards to be roasted on the fire as part of its execution. It was not to be boiled in water because the Torah's command to burn the idols (of the nations we conquered) in fire legislated in Deut. 7,25 would not have been carried out by boiling. If one were to boil the Passover lamb it would be equivalent to hiding it, covering it up, and one could not smell its fragrance. The distinctive smell of its roasting should permeate the house. The reason that it must be roasted whole with its legs and head is to prevent giving the impression that it is alive or that it is a pig, for instance. It must be prepared as food in such a way that everyone notices that it is an Egyptian deity that is being treated in this fashion. The Passover lamb must also not be eaten in a ravenous manner, but at a time when one has almost completed one's meal. No bone may be broken so that the skeleton can be viewed as whole, and its inability to save itself be demonstrated. For all these reasons the Torah speaks about ובאלוההים עשה שפטים "He executed judgments on their deities" (Numbers 33,4).
  The commandment in 12,46: "You must not break a bone of it," applies only to the owners. Dogs are allowed to break the bones of the remains. The Egyptians would come and collect the bones and inter them so that the dogs would be unable to get at them which would constitute the utter destruction of the idol. According to Halachah a Jew cannot totally destroy the deity of a Gentile; in order to be fully effective this must be done by the Gentile himself. This is why the Egyptians had to bury these bones. Causing the Egyptians to perform this act of annihilating the remains of their one time supreme deity was the most effective act of boosting the belief in the One and Only G–d of the Jews. All of the foregoing is spelled out in the Zohar.
  The prohibition of חמץ on Passover even in the minutest quantity, is an allusion to the power of the evil urge, the quintessence of idol worship, which was utterly destroyed during the days preceding the Exodus and must also be destroyed in our time. חמץ in turn confers its status on any other food or drink it comes in contact with, be it even the most minute quantity. The peculiar sequence of verses 17 and 18 in Exodus 34,: אלוקי מסכה לא תעשה לך את חג המצות תשמור, "You must not construct for yourself a cast deity; observe the festival of unleavened bread," is explained by the relationship between חמץ and עבודה זורה, idol worship. To come back to 12,12: "I shall execute judgments on all the deities of Egypt." This is a reference to the שר של מצרים and his whole system in the "lower" world. G–d announces that he will judge all of them. This is the reason why the word "all the deities of Egypt" is in the plural. When the Torah describes the month of Nissan as being לכם, "for you the Jewish people," the message is that the very month which is under the auspices of the zodiac sign of the lamb will now become "your" month.
  The following is an excerpt of the Rekanati: "In the matter of the Passover lamb, remember the following rule. It is well known that the Redemption was orchestrated by an angel instructed by G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name. This is the meaning of the words אשר הוצאת מארץ מצרים בכל גדול וביד חזקה, "Who has taken you out of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand” (Exodus 32,11). The Passover lamb is an allusion to this, the attribute of מלכות. It is further alluded to in the words: זאת חקת הפסח, “This is the statute of the Passsover" (12,43). You are familiar with the fact that the word זאת חקת which refers to the emanation מלכות, is an alternate name for חקה. Because this is so, a בן נכר, heretic, must not eat of the sacrifice in order to facilitate the expunging of all aspects of impurities and קליפות by those who do eat from it. When that is the case, this emanation can be totally surrounded by רחמים, the attribute of mercy. This is the secret why the lamb must be male (12,5) so that all the attributes mentioned can interchange with one another. Our sages claim that this is the reason we must mention the attribute of day at night and the attribute of night by day. G–d further commanded the lamb to be without blemish (12,5) because it is designed to secure רצון שם הנכבד, the goodwill of G–d's glorious name, another description of the שכינה. It is said of Israel in Song of Songs 4,7: כולך יפה רעיתי ומום אין בך, "You are entirely fair, my beloved, and there is no blemish in you." By performing the rites of the Passover sacrifice properly we aim to qualify for the praise expressed in Song of Songs. After all, G–d came to establish peace and harmony in the world, the reverse of what we read in Jeremiah 6,7: חמס ושוד ישמע בה על פני תמיד, חלי ומכה, "Lawlessness and rape are heard in her; before Me constantly are sickness and wounds." Try and understand this as it is important.
  The time to offer this sacrifice is בין הערבים (12,6), during the period when the מנחה prayer which the patriarch Isaac introduced is recited. You are familiar with the deeper significance of the prayer. The requirement to smear some of the blood of that sacrifice on the lintel and doorposts of your houses, [only on the first Passover, the one slaughtered prior to the Exodus] is a symbol of the attribute of מלכות, also displayed by Isaac, known as פתח האהל, "entrance or gateway to the tent." This is the meaning of: והיה הדם לכם לאות על הבתים אשר אתם שם, "The blood will be a sign for you on the houses wherein you are staying” (12,13). The consumption of the meat of the sacrifice, which must take place at night, is an allusion to the attribute לילה, and this is why you must not leave any of it until the morning (12,10). The reason it has to be roasted on the fire (12,9) is that the sacrifice is symbolic of the Heavenly Fire which is known as אש אוכלת, “a consuming fire.” By roasting it on the fire, the power of that אש אוכלת is diminished and the power of all the accusers of the Jewish nation who derive their “fire” from it is weakened. This is another reason why it is forbidden to boil the meat of the sacrifice in water.
  What the Rekanati is trying to convey is that when one draws the אש הגבורה, the consuming fire of the emanation גבורה or דין, inwards, towards the קו האמצעי the “centre line” in the diagram of the emanations, the corresponding destructive force in our world is weakened and the fire consumes our accusers just as that fire weakened the power of the lamb (in its capacity of an Egyptian deity). The mystical dimension of this thought is that, since the whole power of our accusers derives from the attribute of גבורה, the proper way to neutralise it is by employing this very attribute in a way that attracts the attribute of Mercy. This is the deeper meaning of the statement is ליל שמורים לי-ה-ו-ה, “that this night (12,42) is reserved for arousing the attribute of Mercy (implied in the Ineffable Name).
  The author directs the reader to many additional comments about the Passover sacrifice in his treatise מסכת פסחים. He declines to duplicate at this juncture.
  We read in 12,48 that any male convert who wants to participate in the celebration of the Passover [in later years, after the Exodus. Ed.] must first circumcise himself. The same applies to a slave owned by a Jewish master (12,44). The reason is simply that as long as the powers of impurity are still a tangible part of such a male by reason of the presence of his foreskin he is not fit to approach the Presence of G–d. It is only by revealing the sign of the holy covenant that he becomes fit, and the Divine Presence is viewed as if drawing nourishment from that sanctified spot of the Covenant. There is another dimension to the inability of Israel to be redeemed except by the combination of the blood of circumcision and the blood of the Passover lamb. I have elaborated on this in the treatise cited above; here I will only summarize. A major component of the experience in Egypt was the need to re-instate the Holy Covenant and to repair the damage of the 130 years during which Adam had not maintained marital relations but had emitted semen which resulted in the creation of destructive agents in this world. This is why the redeemer (Moses) was born only 130 yars after the family of Jacob came to Egypt. Yochevet was 130 years old when Amram re-married her and when Moses was born, and she herself was conceived in the land of Canaan, but was not born until Jacob and his family arrived in Egypt, [viz: Rashi when reconciling the numbers of the Israelites who came down to Egypt as counted in Genesis 46,26. Ed.] I have alluded to this fact already several times in פרשת שמות.
  Now I shall quote only what the Ari zal has written about this subject. I have found the following in a booklet of his. In Genesis 41,55, at the beginning of the famine, we read that Pharaoh told the people: "Go to Joseph and do whatever he tells you." I have already explained that Joseph circumcised all the Egyptians at that time. The background of this (as I explained) was that the first 130 years the Jews stayed in Egypt -before Moses was born- in order to salvage the emissions of Adam's semen during the 130 years he lived apart from Eve. Israel's hard labour was needed in order to purify the impurity Adam had created by his actions. During that period the Jewish people were the atonement for Adam.
   I have also told you that these "sparks," i.e. result of these emissions, first surfaced during the generation of the Deluge and the generation of the Tower of Babel. Those generations were similarly remiss. Joseph first circumcised the Egyptians and then transferred them in order to morally refine them. He wanted to repair the damage inflicted on the world through the wasteful seminal emissions by all those generations. He tried to lead those people back to sanctity and the holy covenant by his action. This is the real meaning of Genesis 47,21: ואת העם העביר אותו לערים מקצה גבול מצרים ועד קצהו, "He transferred the people from the cities from one end of Egypt to the other." Joseph had first circumcised the people whom he transferred. The transfer was to refine them morally. In the course of time the mixed multitude that joined the Jewish people at the time of the Exodus were people descended from those whom Joseph had circumcised. This is the mystical dimension of Exodus 1,9: ויאמר אל עמו הנה עם בני ישראל, He said to his people: "Here are the people of the children of Israel, etc." Pharaoh later on referred to the people who became the ערב רב, the fellow travellers.
  The Torah refers to the children of Israel twice; once in verse 9, and once in verse 12. Only in the second reference are we told that the Egyptians abhorred the Israelites. The latter reference is to the Jews who were circumcised and who performed slave labour in their own cities while preserving their Jewish way of life, including circumcision. Pharaoh observed another group of people, who, though described as עם בני ישראל, were nonetheless not of Jewish descent. This is why the Torah says: "He said to his (own) people." Although the former (verse 9) group were Egyptians, they did not view themselves as the people of Pharaoh. We are told later of the Egyptians' reaction to the true Jews. This helps to explain the positive function of the exile, namely to collect (in a spiritual sense) the "sparks" of this impurity represented by the seminal emissions which had contributed to making Egypt the ערות הארץ, centre of immorality on earth. This is also one of the deeper reasons for the mixed multitude who joined the Jewish people at the Exodus. Just as it is possible to absorb "sparks" of impurity, it is equally possible to absorb ניצוצות, "sparks" of sanctity. In the case of the mixed multitude, they had absorbed "sparks" of sanctity from the Jewish people and at the right moment this translated into their desire to become part of the Jewish people.
  This may be the reason the Torah describes these people as ערב רב. The word suggests that "sparks" of purity and sanctity were מעורבות, "mixed," within their personalities. Moses wanted to capitalise on those positive traits within these people and therefore he accepted them wholeheartedly. G–d, however, realised that these people had not yet achieved the spiritual plateau necessary to prepare them for Judaism. This is why He had not wanted to take these people out of Egypt at the time of the Exodus. There are actually two different kinds of fellow travellers; this is why the Torah calls this group ערב רב, "the large mixture." In the Zohar on Parshat Ki Tetze we also find a reference to ערב קטן, "a small mixture." When the former term is used it indicates that the spiritual point of departure of the people concerned is the רב, the Divine inspiration called דעת עליון, "senior" or "major." The numerical value of the expression ערב רב is the same as that of דעת, i.e. 474. It was these people who committed the sins, who impaired the harmony in Heaven, who were stigmatised as the עם קשה עורף, "the stiffnecked people" in פרשת עקב (Deut. 9,6). The meaning of אחד, One, is explained there.
  This brings us to the meaning of Exodus 13,2, where the Torah demands the sanctification of each Jewish male or even that of his livestock. The first difficulty in that legislation is that Moses does not appear to have complied with G–d's instructions. From verses 3-11 Moses tells the people about other matters, and only in verse 12 does Moses mention the legislation about the first-born, and then only in connection with entry into the Holy Land.
  We have already explained that Moses wanted to bring the ערב רב under the protective wings of G–d's Providence, whereas G–d was not ready to do this. G–d made a point of emphasizing בני ישראל, when He introduced the legislation about the first-born in 13,2. He did not say a word about העם. It follows that the first-born of the ערב רב were not included in the legislation at that stage. The other ערב, called קטן, is rooted in the emanation יסוד, also known as קטן. The mystical dimension of קרי, seminal emission, reaches until the domain of דעת העליון, also known as בכור. Moses realised, however, that if he were to tell Israel at this stage about the sanctification of the first-born and the ערב רב would perceive themselves as excluded from this מצוה -which was the first to be promulgated at the time of the Exodus- they would most likely feel discriminated against and would return to Egypt immediately. They did display a similar reaction later during the episode of the golden calf when they saw the Holy Ark travelling in front of the בני ישראל and not in front of them. This prompted them in Exodus 32,1 to call on Aaron: "Arise and make for us a deity who will walk before us." It was this fear that prompted Moses to first convey the kind of commandments which applied to all the people equally, such as the prohibition of leavened things on the Passover. 
  He "slipped" in the information that the ערב רב did not qualify for the commandment to sanctify their first-born by using the plural יצאתם in verse 3 an היום אתם יוצאים in verse 4, when referring to "you have left Egypt." The remainder of the paragraph was said in the singular. He certainly addressed the ערב רב at the beginning when he said: "Remember the day you went out of Egypt." He did refer to "the house of bondage" because Egypt was known as "the house of bondage" on account of the Jewish people who were kept in bondage there. Moses did not mean to imply that the ערב רב themselves had been kept in bondage. The fact that the Torah reports Moses as speaking "to the people," as distinct from "to the children of Israel," makes it quite clear to whom he was speaking. When Moses referred to the חוזק יד, "strong hand," which G–d had to use to effect the Exodus, he clearly did not refer to the children of Israel. Moses, basing himself on the fact that the children of Israel were G–d's people, had come to Pharaoh with a legitimate request to let them go and serve their G–d. No such argument existed to justify the request to let the ערב רב leave the country. These people, after all, were fully fledged Egyptians, under Pharaoh's legitimate sovereignty. If G–d had not employed all the miracles described in our portion Pharaoh would never have consented to let them go as well.
  As a result of benefitting from all those miracles, the ערב רב were required to celebrate the Passover and to observe all the prohibitions connected with the leavened bread. You have already been made aware that the ערב רב do have a mystical bond with the emanation דעת עליון, or בינה. The mystical dimension of the מלכות של בינה contains the secret of the significance of המצה השמורה העליונה which is symbolised by the enlarged letter ד in the word אחד of Deuteronomy 6,4, as I have explained when discussing the deeper meaning of that מצוה. This is why the Jewish people were commanded to eat unleavened bread. This is also where you find the secret of why the Talmud (Shabbat 33) considers נשים דעתן קלה עליהן, "the minds of women are shallow." The numerical value of the word מצה is 135, the same as of the word קלה. Moses said to the ערב רב: "You are leaving Egypt this day," היום אתם יוצאים ממצרים. The reason Moses added these apparently superfluous words was to make them understand that there is one commandment which will be addressed only to the children of Israel and not to them. They should not be surprised at this, since they did not need this commandment; G–d did not select them as His people. They had already been given the commandment of מצה because that commandment had a significance which related to them. The reason that the original Jewish people needed the commandment of sanctifying their first-born was that G–d saved the first-born of the Jewish people when He slew the first-born of the Egyptians. An expression of eternal gratitude by those who were spared was indicated as a result. The ערב רב had not been spared; those surviving had joined the Jewish people only on the morrow at the time of their departure, i.e. היום!
  After Moses had assuaged the feelings of the ערב רב, he turned to the children of Israel, addressing them in the singular. Considering the fact that the reason for the commandment of חמץ as it applies to the children of Israel and as it applies to the ערב רב is totally different, Moses repeated the legislation about the חמץ to the children of Israel once more so as to show that when it came to performance of that commandment the children of Israel and the ערב רב were both alike. Only after that did Moses tell the children of Israel about the law to consecrate the first-born, and the reason for והעברת כל פטר רחם לה', "You shall set apart every first issue of the womb for the Lord.". Thus far the booklet of the Ari zal.
  Now we can get back to our main subject, the עבודה, service, which is mentioned in this portion many times, and the reason why the Torah repeats the warning to observe this service. We must understand why this paragraph repeats: "You shall be careful to observe this statute from year to year." Although I have written at some length about the importance of עבודה when discussing the meaning of שובבים ת"ת on page 386, I shall explain a number of verses in our portion in which עבודה is stressed. He (Pharaoh) said to them go and serve the Lord your G–d" (10,8). Or, in verse 24: עבדו את ה' רק צאנכם ובקרכם יצג, גם טפכם ילך עמכם, "Go and serve the Lord; only your flocks and cattle will remain; your children may go with you." Moses replied: "You too will give us various kinds of offerings which we will sacrifice to the Lord our G–d; our cattle will go with us, not a hoof will remain behind, for from it we will take to serve, לעבוד the Lord our G–d; we do not know how we shall serve, נעבוד the Lord our G–d until we get there."
  The first difficulty is: What did Moses have in mind when he told him that he, Pharaoh, would also give in our hands total offerings and meat-offerings. If the word "also" refers to an addition to the cattle owned by the Jewish people which would accompany them, the question is why no mention was made of the cattle "walking" until the following verse. Besides, when Moses told him that he, Pharaoh, would contribute his own offerings, since when was Moses allowed to accept such? Moses should have said: "You will give us cattle and sheep," not זבחים ועולות. 
  Another difficulty is the expression: "We do not know what we shall serve to the Lord." What did Moses mean by this? Rashi explains that Moses meant that he did not know whether the demands made by G–d on the Jewish people would not exceed the Jewish people's ability to deliver and that as a result Pharaoh's own cattle should go with them to be used if needed. This is an amazing comment. How can anyone suggest that G–d would make demands on people that they are unable to meet?
  Perhaps the answer is similar to the statement by our sages in Ketuvot 67 that if someone wishes to be generous in his charitable gifts, He should not give away more than 20% of his wealth so as not to risk becoming poor and dependent on others. Wealthy people are able to donate 20% of their wealth. What they are left with will still be ample. When one has limited means, however, giving away 20% of those means may represent a great hardship. When Rashi speaks about something being beyond a person's ability he refers to something beyond a person's ability to part with without suffering hardship as a result.
  We can explain the plain meaning of these verses in the following manner. First, (10,8) Pharaoh enquired who the people that would actually participate in that service to G–d would be, i.e. מי ומי ההולכים? Moses replied: "We will go with our young ones and with our old ones; with our sons and with our daughters as well as with our sheep and with our cattle, we will go, because it is a festival to G–d for us." Why did Pharaoh repeat מי ומי? The word ומי seems superfluous! Why did Moses twice say נלך, "We shall go?" When Pharaoh denied this request in verse 11, why did he preface his words with לא כן "Not so"?
  Pharaoh said to Moses that he did not comprehend the meaning of the term עבודה, "service." He did not know if Moses referred only to the offering of a sacrifice, and if that was the meaning of עבודה, or if Moses referred to some other activity which represented the carrying out of a Heavenly command but not including sacrifices. If the meaning of עבודה was the performance of other activties it made sense that both adults and children would be required. This would be similar to the Torah requiring the presence of adults and children in Deut. 31,12 for the public reading of the Torah once in seven years during the מצות הקהל, the general assembly at the end of Tabernacles. On such an occasion however, there would be no need for the presence of their livestock. If, on the other hand, the meaning of עבודה was the sacrificial service of slaughtering animals, surely only the presence of men of all age groups was mandatory. What need was there for the presence of women and small children, i.e. טף? This is why Pharaoh repeated the word מי; he referred to the two alternatives.
  Moses understood quite well what Pharaoh alluded to, and he said: "We shall go with our young ones and our old ones," concluding with the words "we shall go;" this was to put Pharaoh on notice that these people would go regardless of the definition of עבודה. Moses later added that they would also go with all the children, male and female, and all the livestock even though they might not fit either one of Pharaoh's definitions of the word עבודה. When Pharaoh heard this he became angry and withdrew his offer of letting either the one or the other category go. This is when he said sarcastically: יהי כן ה' עמכם "May the Lord so be with you." He implied that on no account would he permit the Israelites to go with both all their children and all their livestock. All he would permit was that the adult men and their livestock could go. He implied that the women and infants would have to remain behind, since he had realised that the meaning of Moses' request had been to have the best of both worlds, i.e. both possible definitions of the term עבודה. This is why Pharaoh added: כי אותה אתם מבקשים , "For it is what you are seeking."
  Later, after experiencing the plague of darkness, Pharaoh humbled himself yet more and offered to let go all the people, women and infants included (10,24). He excluded only the livestock. He implied that the Israelites could take sufficient livestock with them to offer sacrifices. When he said: רק צאנכם ובקרכם יצג, "Only your sheep and your cattle has to stay put, he referred to the livestock that would remain after the sacrifices had been offered. The word גם in גם טפכם indicates that he had already conceded something else, namely the livestock required for the sacrifices, before conceding the departure of the infants. When speaking about צאן ובקר, Pharaoh added the word רק, "only," to show that he restricted the amount of sheep and cattle that could be taken. We now understand both the use of the word גם, which indicates an inclusion, and the word רק, which indicates an exclusion. 
  Moses said to Pharaoh in verse 25: Not only will we not accept any exclusion from you, but we will receive even more than we have asked for. Whereas you, Pharaoh, wanted us to sacrifice part of our own livestock, the fact is that we will sacrifice livestock that at the present moment belongs to you, so that ours will stay intact. Moses indicated that the Jewish G–d was prepared to accept sacrifices offered on behalf of the Gentiles. The reason that both the Egyptians' cattle and sheep and the Israelites' own had to go, said Moses, was because they did not know at this time which livestock G–d would require and find acceptable. Since the offerings under discussion were all free-will offerings, it was not certain that Israel's natural generosity would be considered adequate by G–d. They had to have reserve livestock with them in order to provide for such a contingency. Thus far the plain meaning of these verses.
  There is, of course, also a deeper meaning to this dialogue or dialogues. Before elaborating on it, I must quote a Midrash on 12,25: "Moses said: 'you too will give into our hands total offerings and meat-offerings which we shall offer in your name.'" The Midrash says that Moses told Pharaoh he should not imagine that the Israelites would use their own livestock; Pharaoh would provide them with livestock to offer sacrifices on his behalf. The difficulty in this Midrash is how Moses could say that the Israelites would not use any of their own livestock. If true, how could the "service" be called Israel's service? Besides, the Midrash seems to contradict what Moses said: "Also you will give into our hands, etc." What Moses said certainly implies that Pharaoh's contribution would only be addtional and not in lieu of the Jewish contribution. The other difficulty is that the Midrash speaks about the Israelites offering sacrifices in Pharaoh's "name." 
  There is also the expression "not a hoof will remain" which Moses spoke of in 10,26. If "hooves" would remain, obviously animals would remain also. What point then was there in mentioning פרסה, a hoof? It appears that Onkelos changed the word in his translation when he renders "not anything will remain." When the word ]רסה occurs in Leviticus 11,3 , Onkelos translates it as "hoof." Rashi, on the other hand, explains the word as meaning the same both here and in Leviticus. His exact words are: "sole of the foot." Targum Yonathan also adopts the translation "hoof."
  We must first understand why the offering of an animal sacrifice is called עבודה more so than the performance of any other of G–d's commandments involving an activity on our part when such activities are performed out of feelings of reverence and love for G–d.
  The answer may be that all other acts of מצוה performance originate outside ourselves, such as the building of a סוכה or the purchase of a לולה, and most of the other 248 positive commandments. When it comes to the offering of an animal sacrifice, however, the person offering it is the עובד, or better עבד, servant, so that the service which an עבד, servant, performs is accurately called עבודה, service. One may view the servant as the "service." We know that such an animal sacrifice is an expression of the mystical dimension נפש תחת נפש, "One life-force in exchange for another life-force," such as in Exodus 21,23 et al, and that when the guilty party slaughters the animal he is keenly aware that his own life should have been offered to G–d in expiation of his sin. The same applies to what the guilty party feels when the blood of the animal is sprinkled on the altar. The owner confesses his sin and resolves not to repeat it. When all this, including the burning of the flesh of the animal on the altar, is the result of animal sacrifice, then the servant has truly become the "service." The first time this happened was when Abraham slaughtered the ram on the altar after G–d had told him not to slaughter Isaac in Genesis 22,12. [In the case of Isaac, he had not been personally guilty; hence how could his death expiate for a crime of his? Ed.] As a corollary, other sacrifices such as wine, bread, oil, etc., accomplish a similar function; they substitute for man offering his own body to G–d, because all the products mentioned are forms of nourishment that keep the human body alive, and therefore are able to serve as a substitute for the human body. In spite of the fact that this service involves an external object, i.e. the animal in question, the thought behind it is strictly internal. The external object enables the sinner to look inward into his own personality. עבודה is called קרבן because the person offering the animal sacrifices his own personality to G–d who in turn has entrusted him with the keeping of his body. When this service is performed according to הלכה, the person offering the sacrifice experiences an elevation of his soul; he approaches ever closer to G–d.
  In earlier eras all such sacrifices were performed with firstling animals, as indicated by the phrase קרבן ראשית in Leviticus 2,12. Moses' whole mission to Pharaoh was to inform the latter that Israel's was G–d's true firstling, i.e. בני בכורי ישראל (Exodus 4,22). As a result it was appropriate that the Jewish people first and foremost should perform עבודה for G–d. The only reason Jacob had purchased the birthright from Esau was to qualify as the first-born in order to perform this service to G–d. Jacob would not otherwise have been been qualified to perform this service, [at a time when the Levites had not yet replaced the first-born as priests. Ed.]
  G–d Himself is the Origin of all origins, the Cause of all causes, the First among all first. He created the universe, and all that exists is only something that developed out of Him. I have hinted already that the one who performs service thereby becomes transformed into such service, the עובד becomes the עבודה, and even his body is elevated. For all these reasons the first-born, which is ראשית, is more like G–d who is the quintessence of all ראשית. On earth no first-born is a true ראשית, since every first-born was sired by a father and born by a mother who both preceded him. It follows that only G–d can be a true ראשית. Having shown that the בכור, first-born, does contain an element of ראשית within himself, at least vis-a-vis those who are born after him, we are to select the בכור to perform the service to G–d which will bring us closer to Him. This service represents a rapprochement between man and G–d, after G–d had withdrawn from man for most of history since Adam was expelled from גן עדן. 
  We find that the שר של מצרים, Egypt's spiritual representative in the Celestial Spheres, was called בכור, i.e. he was the first or senior of the representatives of the seventy Gentile nations. We have explained previously that this spiritual representative of Egypt was described in פרשת מקץ as the מרכבת המשנה, G–d's secondary chariot or carrier. Egypt was second only to the land of Israel in this respect. The land of Israel was G–d's own share in this world. Egypt, however, played the role of first-born amongst the 70 Gentile nations. As a corollary we find that physically speaking, Esau was a first-born, for it was his respective שר who appeared first at the Celestial Court. This שר is a powerful force seeing that his protege became the instrument that destroyed the Holy Temple because of our sins, as mentioned in Psalms 137,7 where the Jewish people are reported as asking G–d to redress that outrage. Alas, this שר is still very powerful. We must view the שר של מצרים as the first of a number of forces who succeeded in dominating Israel in exile. G–d humiliated that force at the time of the Exodus. The שר של עשו, on the other hand, is the very last of such forces. He is so powerful that the present exile is called the גלות אדום. He may therefore be considered the head of the existing שרים. It is this force that Jeremiah refers to in Lamentations 1,5: "Its (Israel's) oppressors have become לראש, a head." Whenever an oppressor of Israel is temporarily successful, he becomes a ראש, head. What all this means is that whereas the שכינה, G–d's Presence, does not depart from Israel, does not ignore what happens to Israel, these happenings are nonetheless delegated by G–d to a שר. When our sages frequently describe the שכינה as being in exile, this is what they mean. When a שר assumes a role as ראש, this means that G–d's Presence has subordinated itself, so to speak. In practice this means that Esau has regained his position as Isaac's first-born and will retain it until the redemption, when G–d will de-throne him. All the above is an "external" view of things. 
  In reality, Israel is the true בכור, because the Jewish people were the first creation of G–d, as the very concept of the people of Israel in G–d's mind gave rise to the creation of the universe, as pointed out by many Midrashim. We have quoted these various statements throughout our treatise on the written Torah. To repeat briefly: The world was created because of Israel and the Torah, i.e. to enable the people of Israel to receive the Torah and to live by it. As a result, Israel is the true first-born of G–d. The fact that we are in exile is a temporary aberration which has made the שר of Esau senior to us for a while. The Presence of G–d has temporarily donned the garments of that שר, since he has robbed Israel of its pride of place.
  Moses therefore hinted to Pharaoh that is was appropriate for him also to offer sacrifices to G–d as a representative of an aspect of ראשית, as he was temporarily a first-born. Moses alluded at the same time also to the שר של עשו, and the other spiritual representatives of the 70 nations, suggesting that it behooves them to offer sacrifices to G–d who had assigned to them the role of first-borns for a period of time (as alluded to in Lamentations). Although not all of the שרים of the 70 nations have become ראש, i.e. replaced Israel in its role for a while, they are able to offer such sacrifices. Our sages have ruled that Gentiles may offer free will offerings, and that those may be presented on the altar of the Holy Temple (Menachot 73). The reason is that they possess an aspect of ראשית. We must remember that though we view these pagans as קליפות, even the origin of Samael is in regions of purity, as we have demonstrated elsewhere. There is nothing in this universe which is not ultimately rooted in purity. It could not be otherwise, because G–d is the original Cause of everything. It was He who gave life to all these phenomena. There is no independent existence on earth below or in the Heavens above. The קליפה concept did not emerge until the universe was already in an advanced stage of development. Reflecting on this we appreciate that while Israel was placed under the dominion of these שרים, this does not mean that G–d has abandoned us to the forces of the קליפה. 
  We have been handed over to the dominion of a force which after all originated in the regions of sanctity and purity, i.e. we have been subjected to their ראש, which is metaphor for their origin in Holy Spheres. These pagans are not allowed, however, to have sin-offerings presented on their behalf on the altar of the Holy Temple because their sin-offerings are impurity personified. All of this is the mystical dimension of the 70 bulls the Jewish people offered on behalf of the Gentile nations during the course of the holiday of Tabernacles as described in Numbers 29,14-34. It will be explained there in greater detail. While we have said that Esau was first-born from the physical aspect, i.e. that he was born first, we nonetheless look forward to the time of the redemption when it is he who will become the עקב, heel, not Jacob. When the Torah describes Jacob as holding on to the heel of Esau in Genesis 25,27, this is an allusion to Esau being the last of the שרים to have dominion over Israel at any time.
  This brings us to the mystical dimension of Exodus 10,1: למען שיתי אתתי אלה בקרבו, "In order that I can place these My signs in its midst." G–d performed all these miracles in His capacity as י-ה-ו-ה, as I have pointed out in my commentary on the last two portions, in connection with G–d proclaiming: אני י-ה-ו-ה. The Zohar, commenting on Kohelet 8,9: עת אשר שלט האדם באדם לרע לו, "There is a time when one man rules over the other to his detriment," explains that just as the oppressors of the Jewish people became the ראש because they temporarily enjoyed the fact that the שכינה had chosen them to be its "mantle", so the same שכינה, when the time is ripe, will exploit this fact to humiliate these oppressors. This is the mystical dimension of the words אשר שלט האדם, the ideal prototype of man as found under G–d's "throne," in the verse just mentioned. The second word באדם in the same verse refers to אדם הבליעל, depraved man. The letters in G–d's name "expand" to engulf and humiliate the respective שר who functioned as a temporary בכור, first-born. The plagues on the nation of Egypt were orchestrated with the help of the מטה, staff. The letter י of the name of G–d on that staff expanded into Ten Plagues, whereas the letter ה engraved on that staff ensured that each plague would appear in five guises as mentioned by Rabbi Akiva in the Haggadah shel Pessach.
  We must remember that though the redemption from Egypt was indeed a great redemption, it was not an ultimate redemption. Such a redemption will occur only in the future when the Messiah comes, at which time the impact of the remaining two letters in G–d's Ineffable Name will also be felt. The fact that during the episode of the Exodus only the first two letters of G–d's Ineffable Name had manifested themselves is alluded to in Exodus 17,16: כי יד על כס י-ה מלחמה לה' בעמלק, which alerts us to the fact that only the first two letters in G–d's Ineffable name carry on the war against Amalek. Our sages have confirmed this when they point to the שירה חדשה, song in the feminine gender, that the Jewish people sung in appreciation of G–d's salvation at that time. This song will be replaced by a שיר חדש, song in the masculine gender, which will be composed and sung by the Jewish people in the future when the final redemption will occur. The redemption from Egypt was rooted in the עולם הנקבות, the "female" world. We read in Jeremiah 31,21 (22) where the prophet speaks about the ultimate redemption, that: ברא השם חדשה בארץ נקבה תסובב גבר, "For the Lord has created something new on earth; a woman courts a man!" This is an allusion to the type of redemption that still awaits us. I have elaborated on this theme in my commentary on the הגדה של פסח. The time of the redemption is the time when all the letters in the Ineffable Name combine and form the dual-faced, male-female Name, i.e. the concept that prevailed at the time the prototype of אדם -who was created male and female combined- was conceived. The prevalent name then was masculine, as is clear from the word אדם as opposed to אדמה.
  I have heard some interesting comments by people who specialise in the exegesis of רשומות, "records." The Torah states in Exodus 8,19: ושמתי פדת בין עמי ובין עמך, למחר יהיה האות הזה. Moses tells Pharaoh in advance of the arrival of the plague of the wild beasts: "And I will make a distinction between My people and between your people; tomorrow this sign will come to pass." The commentators point out that the word פדות which is normally spelled with the letter ו, is here spelled defectively. Rashi points out in his commentary on Lamentations 1,6: וילכו בלא כח לפני רודף, "They could only walk feebly before the pursuer," that the word רודף is always spelled without the letter ו, whereas in this instance it is spelled plene. This is an indication that here the pursuit was totally unrelenting. This spelling gave rise to one of our liturgical poets becoming upset about the fact that whereas the pursuit of the Jewish people by their adversaries is spelled plene, the word for redemption, i.e. גאולה, is spelled defective in Isaiah 63,4: ושנת גאולי באה. He was also upset that the word פדת in our verse was spelled defective. [I have not seen an edition in which the words שנת גאולי are spelled defective. Ed.] Moses is therefore supposed to have referred to a different morrow, i.e. למחר, at which time the redemption, פדות, would be total and include the letter ו.
  I would like to offer an additional thought on this anomaly. Rashi in his commentary on Leviticus 26,42- where the Torah writes that even while in exile, and while being persecuted, G–d will always remember the covenant with Jacob, Isaac and Abraham (in our favour)- states that the name יעקוב is spelled with the letter ו on only five occasions in the Bible. The name אליהו, on the other hand, is spelled without the final letter ו on five occasions. Rashi views Jacob as having "borrowed" a letter from the name of Elijah on those five occasions. He considers that letter as a pledge by the prophet Elijah that he will come to announce the deliverance of Israel. The mystical dimension of these five occasions is that they refer to the last two letters ו and ה in the Ineffable Name. Jacob, because he is the מרכבה, "carrier" of G–d's Presence, "borrowed" the letter ו from the name of אליהו five times. This letter was to serve as guarantee that the eventual redemption would be a full and comprehensive one. It should be able to combine with the letter נקבה תסובב גבר, the female element. This is an allusion to the promise in Jeremiah 31,22, that at that time שירה חדשה, "woman will court man," as we have mentioned elsewhere, and that the שירה חדשה, will be transformed into a שיר חדש. When Moses speaks about האות הזה, instead of האות הזאת in Exodus 8,19, this is an allusion to the time when the word אות will be treated as masculine in all its aspects. The word אות refers to the extra letter which will be added to the spelling of the word פדת, so that it will be seen to be פדות. Moses speaks of האות הזה as in (זה לך האות), to show that at the time of the final redemption the numerical value of the word זאת (when you ignore the "zeros,") will be 12, the same as the numerical value of the word זה. It is an allusion to the 12 צירופים, different permutations, in which the Ineffable Name can be spelled when using a word for each letter. It is significant that in Michah 7,15 we read concerning such a time in the future: כימי צאתך מארץ מצרים אראנו נפלאות. The prophet describes that the miracles performed by G–d at the time of the Exodus will pale into insignificance, and he describes how the nations of the world will react to G–d's manifesting His power anew. It is at that time that the real thrust of Moses' promise in Exodus 8,19: "I will set these My signs," will truly be fulfilled.
  To return to the subject which we touched upon earlier of how the שר can don the "mantle" of the שכינה. Although this is a tremendous display of power for such a שר, it will boomerang and become the cause of his downfall as we mentioned earlier. This procedure is alluded to in the words of our פרשה in 10,2, where the Torah says: "how I have made a mockery of the Egyptians." Rashi explains that the word התעללתי במצרים, means "I have toyed with them." We need to understand the meaning of this שחוק, game, that G–d played. When we consider the august position of the שר של מצרים as we have described, we realise that when he was at the height of his power, this שר gave no thought to his eventual demise, and that the higher he would rise, the greater would be his eventual fall into a deep pit. The very "mantle" of the שכינה which he wore would become the cause of his downfall. At that time, G–d in Heaven, who is aware of the exact moment in time when events would cause the שר של מצרים to fall, would smile. The timing of these events is alluded to in Moses' words to Pharaoh in 10,3: "How long will you refuse to humble yourself before Me?" Humbling oneself means to turn from being evil to being good. We have a prime example of this when Samael, who had been Jacob's arch-enemy, changed direction and accorded Jacob his blessing, his recognition (Genesis 32,29). 
  This is the secret of "finding favour in the eyes of Egypt," something which happened to the Egyptians after their first-born were slain. They humbled themselves before the Israelites, and as a result the Israelites emptied Egypt of silver and gold (12,36). Pharaoh also eventually humbled himself, when he asked Moses to give him a blessing in 12,32. He said this because he had come to realise that Israel itself represented blessing, and that he could be included in the blessing that is bestowed upon Israel.
  Keeping this in mind, we understand that when Pharaoh said: לא כן (10,11) he rejected this concept and heaped a curse on himself instead. He actually said: ראו כי רעה נגד פניכם, "I see destruction facing you." At that moment the מלאך רע, the "evil" angel, speaking through Pharaoh's mouth, responded against his better judgment: לא כן, "not so," i.e. the blood which Pharaoh believed to be facing Israel, and which he interpreted as a sign of Israel's defeat in battle, would be turned into the blood of circumcision and have a beneficial effect on Israel. Although this was not what Pharaoh intended when he said these words, this is only one of many instances when man utters something while unaware of the far-reaching effect of his words. The words spoken in such cases are really G–d's words.
  I have found a similar interpretation in a book called כנפי יונה, chapter 68. Concerning the verse: ל"א כ"ן ראו כי ראה נגד פניכם,the author states that the numerical value of the high-lighted words is the same as that of the names of the angel מיכאל =101. The angel Michael happened to have been present at that moment of Moses' meeting with Pharaoh, and he placed words into Pharaoh's mouth which effectively neutralised the curse contained in the words immediately prior to לא כן. This meant in effect that Pharaoh, i.e. the "evil" angel, was now transformed into a messenger of the angel Michael. The numerical value of the seven words starting with ראו, amounts to a total of 870. Ten times the name א-להים plus the letter י from the name מיכאל total 870. The words: ברכת אברהם also total 870. We therefore see that by adding the words לא כן to the previous curse of: רשאו כי רעה נגד פניכם, the curse of Pharaoh was changed into the blessing of Abraham, i.e. the blessing implied in fulfilling the commandment of circumcision. Thus far the author of כנפי יונה.
  
  
  We are now able to understand Pharaoh saying to Moses: לכו עבדו את השם, "Go and serve the Lord," as explained and Moses' reply: "you too will give us sacrifices." Moses simply meant that since Pharaoh would donate free-will offerings of his own, the Jewish people would offer them on his behalf. The words "you will give them into our hands," meant that Israel would derive an indirect benefit from these offerings of Pharaoh. Whenever G–d responds to a person's offerings, the party offering them also becomes a beneficiary of G–d's response. When Moses said: "Our cattle will also go with us," he meant that inasmuch as they have become our sacrifices, they will "go" with us, confer a benefit upon us in the World to Come. Moses added the word עמנו, with "us," to exclude other nations. Only of Israel is it said in Deut. 32,12: השם בדד ינחנו, "The Lord guided him (Israel) alone."
  Moses said afterwards: -"Not a hoof will remain;" this was an allusion to the other "temporary" first-born, the spiritual representative of Esau, otherwise known as Edom. There is a special sign which proves that this שר has a hold on a holy domain. It is known that Esau is also called חזיר, the pig. The source for this is Psalms 80,14: יכרסמנה חזיר מיער וזיז שדי ירענה, "Wild boars gnaw at it and creatures of the field feed on it." The pig is known to stretch out its hooves as if to demonstrate that it possesses the marks of purity [Leviticus 11,7, although it does not chew the cud, the other mark of purity required. Ed.]. When the Torah describes Jacob as holding on to the heel of Esau at the time he was born, this is allegorical. It means that Esau does possess one mark of purity, and it is this mark of purity, his heel, read: its hoof, to which Jacob cleaves. Moses alluded to this mark of purity of Esau when he said that he would not leave a hoof in Egypt, "for from it we shall take to sacrifice to the Lord our G–d." This verse is parallel to the earlier verse in which Moses described how Israel would offer sacrifices on behalf of Pharaoh, or the שר של מצרים. The words "from it," indicate that something of Esau's is fit to be rendered as an offering to G–d. Israel would benefit from this, but Moses was not yet sure how and when that benefit would accrue to Israel, i.e. "we do not know what we shall serve the Lord until the time comes to prepare the offering." The basic benefit we derive from our own sacrifices cannot be assessed until the Hereafter, since no human eye has beheld the glory in store for us there. The true dimension of spiritual benefit reserved for us is known only to G–d Himself.
  This is what the Midrash had in mind when it said:"do not think that we shall bring our own animals as offerings." We are not going to eat from the meat of these offerings of ours, for the concept involved in the service to the Lord is neither material nor physical. We are not concerned with our share in the here and now; our entire share in this world is the reward for offering sacrifices on your behalf. The sacrifices which we offer on our own behalf, however, will result in benefits accruing to us in the Hereafter, a world that only G–d has seen.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ושמרת את המצות. Rashi (12,17) comments on this verse: "Be careful with the מצות so that they will not become leavened. We learn from this verse that when the dough begins to swell you have to put cold water on it. Rabbi Yoshiah understands the word מצות here as having a different meaning. It can be read as Mitzvot, commandments. The message we can derive is that just as one must not allow the dough to become leavened through leaving it unattended for any length of time, so one must not tarry before carrying out a מצוה when the opportunity presents itself. 
  Why does Rabbi Yoshiah say: "Do not read Matzot, but read: Mitzvot?" Furthermore, he applies the word ושמרתם to all commandments while this paragraph has dealt exclusively with matters related to Passover and Matzot! Another difficulty is the definition of the word ושמרתם by Rashi to mean not allowing an existing condition to continue. Normally the word שמירה means that an existing condition is to be preserved. When the Torah says of Jacob ואביו שמר את הדבר, "His father kept this matter in mind" (Joseph's dream Genesis 37,11), it certainly meant that this condition would be preserved. As a rule, whenever a commentator uses the phrase אל תקרי, "do not read, etc.," there is some proof in the text that would cause us to read it differently. What is the proof in this case?
  Many commentators have used much ink in showing how the entire חמץ-מצה legislation is full of allusions of one kind and another, in particular that anything even faintly related to חמץ is an allusion to the evil urge. These commentators tried to establish parallels between the behaviour of a dough and the behaviour of a person under the influence of the evil urge. The human body is compared to a dough composed of flour and water. The evil urge is perceived as the ingredient that adds the leavening to that dough. מצה, on the other hand, symbolises the יצר הטוב, the "good" urge. The good urge causes man to remain low, deflated, whereas the "evil" urge causes people to inflate their ego. Humility results in piety, freedom from sin, whereas an inflated ego leads to the opposite.
  When one looks at the letters in the two words חמץ and מצה, one is struck by the fact that though they represent diagonally opposite concepts, the only difference is that the letter ח of the word חמץ appears as slightly imperfect in the guise of the letter ה in the word מצה. Our sages have said that the reason the letter ה has two openings is to give potential penitent sinners an additional opening from the side. To the query why such a penitent sinner cannot simply "enter" from below, they answer that this would not represent an assist to him. The letter ה in the word מצה is therefore seen as an invitation to the בעל תשובה. The letter ח in the word חמץ, is closed off above. This is an allusion to the need to examine one's house for any חמץ before the Passover wherever such חמץ could have entered. When we apply this to our bodies, it means we must examine every limb and organ to ensure it has not been invaded by the evil urge. To illustrate: The mouth has to be examined if it has not been guilty of slander, defamation of character, and all the other abuses of speech we are commonly guilty of.. We also need to check whether the mouth instead of "exporting" something unseemly has not "imported " something forbidden in the way of food and drink. The heart must be examined to see if it has harboured forbidden thoughts and desires. The eyes have to be examined to see whether they have not been guilty of watching and enjoying forbidden sights such as pornography, etc. The best time to conduct such an examination is at night when one is alone and can concentrate on the matter without fear of being distracted. It is best to do all this immediately prior to going to sleep. This is the time to review one's activities and to examine if one has been remiss in some respect. Once one has found such sins, one must "burn" them. Our sages have told us that the most important element of ridding oneself of such חמץ is to eliminate it from one's heart. When a person is truly sorry and approaches G–d with a broken heart his repentance will not be rejected. Our sages arranged that people should also express the destruction or annullment of their חמץ with their mouth; this is why they formulated the short prayer כל חמירא. After having recited this formula one has cleansed oneself spiritually both in thought, in word and in deed. When reviewing one's sins one must search both for sins committed against one's fellow-man as well as for sins committed against G–d directly. I have written more about this in my treatise on מסכת פסחים.
  The commandment not to have חמץ around for seven days was given in Egypt at the time of the Exodus, though it only took effect in the following year. At the time of the Exodus G–d took us to be His people and asked us to resolve that in the future we would not eat or own חמץ during the seven calendar days commencing with the anniversary of the first Passover sacrifice. Once we had concentrated on that commandment, even while not yet practising it, this would serve as a stimulant for subsequent years to remember the Exodus and everything connected with it.
  The prohibition that חמץ must not be found in our possession, not even in a mixture where it is not actually visible, demonstrates how important it is for a person to keep far away from any negative influences. 
  This is the meaning of: ושמרתם את המצות, אל תקרי המצות אלא המצוות. This statement is not a suggestion to read the text differently, but when reading this verse, not to restrict its meaning to the particular מצוה of unleavened bread, but to use the example of how we fulfil this מצוה as a model for the way we relate to all מצוות. 
  The first comment on that verse, which suggests that one must pour cold water on the dough the moment it displays signs of rising, teaches the same lesson. The evil urge "heats" up a person, arouses him to commit some act in line with his "natural" desires. The commentator suggests that in order to control the evil urge one should "take a cold shower;" he uses the מצה mentioned in our verse as an illustration for the advice of how to deal with the evil urge. The commentators in the Mishnah (Pesachim 1,1) have described the search for leavened things as being conducted אור לארבעה עשר, in the night of the thirteenth to the fourteenth of Nissan. The reason is that for thirteen [years Ed.] the evil urge has uncontested rule within us. We only become equipped with the "good urge" when we officially become בר מצוה. This is why the impurity that we have accumulated within us during the first thirteen years of our lives has to be searched out and neutralised at that time. This action on our part enables the fourteenth of the month to be described in the Torah as "the first day," although on the face of it, the first day of Passover is really the fifteenth of the month. The Torah (12,15) writes: אך ביום הראשון תשביתו שאור מבתיכם "But on the first day you must destroy all leavened things from your houses, etc." This day, allegorically speaking, is the first day that we are equipped with a יצר טוב.
  When the twelve princes offered a sacrifice each on the first twelve days after the Tabernacle was erected, they may have intended to counteract the first twelve years of our lives during which we accumulated sins due to the predominance of the evil urge within us. The thirteenth day, on which the Candelabra was first kindled by Aaron (as we read in פרשת בהעלותך after completion of the offerings by the princes), may symbolise the entry of the good urge within us, i.e. from that time onwards the holy flame of spirituality burns within us constantly. The seven lights on the Candelabra symbolise the seven days of the Passover holiday.
  Perhaps this is the reason the Jewish people consider the whole month of Nissan holy, as indicated by the opening words in chapter 12: "This month shall be the first of the months for you; the first of the months of the year it shall be for you." There seems to be a duplication here. Normally, we attribute this to the possible need to institute an extra month. If we want to see an allusion in this, however, the message may be that we should consider the entire month as on a higher spiritual plane than the other months of the year, i.e. we should treat the entire month as if it were on the level of ראש חודש.
  
  Beshalach
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  The 24th commandment forbids Jews to leave their "place" on the Sabbath; In his ספר המצות, in which he enumerates the list of 613 commandments, Maimonides understands this commandment to refer to the prohibition of travelling or walking on the Sabbath more than one מיל or two thousand cubits (about 1.2 kilometers) beyond the city limits. He holds that this is a biblical prohibition. Maimonides later retreated from this position in his major Halachic work יד החזקה. He writes there that the Bible permits one to walk as far as 3 פרסאות, i.e. the distance of the encampment of the Jewish people in the desert. (12 times the distance mentioned earlier) Nachmanides disagrees with Maimonides on both counts, claiming that this prohibition is altogether not a biblical one, as is explained in the Babylonian Talmud. Nachmanides understands the verse 16,29 to prohibit carrying on the Sabbath from a private domain to a public domain and vice versa, i.e. the words אל יצא איש ממקומו are to be understood as אל יוציא איש ממקומו. The Talmud in Eyruvin 48 also adopts this view. Regardless of who is right, the Torah imposes restrictions of movement on the Sabbath either on man, or on his belongings, or on both.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  I have written about the mystical dimension of the prohibition to carry objects on the Sabbath from the private domain into the public domain in my treatise on שבת. I have found an interesting article by the Ari zal on the subject of תחומים, the restriction of man's movements beyond a certain distance outside his home or city on the Sabbath. These are his words: "I have now decided to tell you that the biblical injunction is not to walk on the Sabbath beyond י"ב מיל (14,4 km.). The rabbinic injunction has reduced this to 1,2 km. You, the reader, are already aware that the emanations נצח, הוד, יסוד of the עולם העשיה unite with the emanations חסד, גבורה and תפארת. A חלל, vacuum is created by such a union. The numerical value of the word חלל is the same as the numerical value of the word חיים, life. This is an allusion to the disappearance or removal of the "life" of the קליפות (on the Sabbath). You have already learned that these קליפות had their hold on life exclusively in the region which has now become a vacuum by the union of the above-mentioned emanations; only death remains for these קליפות. Anyone performing work of the forbidden categories on the Sabbath thereby fills the vacuum and enables the קליפות to regain access to the three domains of of נצח, הוד and יסוד. Each of these domains represents one פרסה (4,8 km). The emanation מלכות is also included with them. Every פרסה consists of 4 מילין giving us a total of 12 מילין. In earlier times when the קליפות had not yet attained such predominance in our society, a person was permitted to walk on the Sabbath as far as the biblical limits, i.e. 14,4 km. Since the destruction of the Holy Temple -proof of the pervading influence of the קליפות which had penetrated into half the domain of נצח- the Rabbis decided to restrict the domain we can walk in on the Sabbath. This was alluded to in the words of the prophet Samuel (Samuel I 15,29) when he upraided Saul about not having killed Agag, king of the Amalekites: וגם נצח ישראל לא ישקר, "the domain of Netzach will not be forfeited by Israel." [My translation, to accommodate this רמז of the Ari zal. Ed.] Samuel only promised that Israel would not forfeit the entire domain of נצח. He did not promise that half of it would not be forfeited.
  Concerning the domain of הוד, we are told in Daniel 10,8: "My vigor was destroyed," i.e. הודדי נהפך למשחית. For these reasons the permissible distance one may walk outside one's city or abode respectively has been reduced to 2000 cubits. The technical term for this distance, called תחום, in Hebrew, can also be written as חותם by re-arranging its letters. [the word spelled thus alludes to the seal of G–d. Ed.] The numerical value of these last two words is 454, which is equal to three times the name of G–d א-ה-י-ה, when spelled as words instead of letters, thus: אלף-הי-יוד-הי=161.The second variant uses the letter ה when making up the letters as a word thus: אלף-הה-יוד-הה= 151. The third method uses the letter א when spelling the letters as words, i.e. אלף-הא-יוד-הא=143. When you add the three results of these variant spellings you obtain 455, the equivalent of תחום or חותם. [This method presumes that you add the digit 1 to represent the whole word rather than merely the letters, something called the כולל in the system of גימטריות. Ed.] Allegorically speaking, this is perceived of as a barrier against the קליפות "invading" the domain of the 2000 cubits until the night following the Sabbath. Once the Sabbath is over, the "seal," חותם, is removed, and the three emanations נצח, הוד, and יסוד resume their normal positions, allowing the קליפות to resume their dominion. When G–d is described at the completion of the process of Creation (referred to in Exodus 31,17, and recited by us every Sabbath), as וינפש, commonly translated as: "He rested," [or by Rabbi Hirsch as "He withdrew into Himself," Ed.] the question arises why the word נפש is used instead of such roots as רוח or נשמה, both far more appropriate to describe the activity of a spiritual Being. The simple reason is that in our world of עשיה the spiritual force present is called נפש. When this נפש returns to the world of עשיה it experiences pain because it has to share with or be close to the קליפות which abound in this world. A spiritual force of the level of רוח or higher would not experience such a pain when in the same domain or adjacent to the קליפות. Thus far the Ari zal.
  We need to clarify that the significance of מקום, place, is something that pertains to all matters pertaining to קדושות, sacred matters. Here, in the instance of the holiness of the Sabbath, limitations have been put in place as to the transfer both of objects to a different domain regardless of distance and of the human being to a different domain beyond certain boundaries. The views of the different Rabbis on the subject are all דברי אלוקים חיים, reflect genuine Torah viewpoints. When we observe the holiness of the Temple, a distinction has been made between service that is performed inside the Sanctuary and service performed on the copper altar outside the Sanctuary itself. [the majority of all service. Ed.] The Torah (Leviticus 21,12) says of the High Priest: ומן המקדש אל יצא, "he must not leave the Sanctuary." When discussing the sanctity of the place where one studies Torah, our sages say that whoever has reserved a specific place for himself for the study of Torah will overcome his enemies (Berachot 7). The same applies to someone who prays in the same place regularly. The sites in which holy tasks are performed are surrounded by קליפות, wicked people or influences. These influences form a barrier between our sins and our ability to approach G–d. Reserving specific places, seats, etc., is a method adopted by G–d's holy people, Israel, to internalise holiness so that it is not perceived externally. We know that the real "honour" of the king's daughter is פנימה, within the confines of her house (Psalms 45,14).
  Let us now examine this concept of the רשעים, wicked people, who surround people engaged in prayer. These are groups of forces trying to prevent the prayers from reaching their various objectives. We need great sophistication in order to thwart these forces. One of the devices that help thwart these evil forces are the פסוקי דזמרה, the various Psalms and hymns that are an introduction to our prayers. The effect of reciting these Psalms is to cut a path through the forces trying to impede our prayers. This is explained in שערי אורה. At this point I wish to concentrate only on a few verses from the present portion.
  The Torah (14,15) quotes G–d as saying to Moses before the crossing of the sea: מה תצעק אלי, דבר אל בני ישראל ויסעו "Why do you cry out to Me, speak to the children of Israel, and they will start moving!" Rashi, quoting ancient sources, says that this verse teaches that while G–d spoke to him thusly Moses was engaged in lengthy prayer. G–d reprimanded Moses for spending all this time in prayer at a time when the Jewish people were in distress. This seems exceedingly strange. The Psalmist tells us in 86,7: ביום צרתי אקראך כי תענני, "On the day of my distress I call upon You, so that You will answer me." Had it not been for Rashi's comment on 14,15, we would not have experienced any difficulty. We would simply have understood G–d as telling Moses that there was no need for prayer since G–d had already assured Israel of His help when He said: ואכבדה במצרים ובכל חילו, "I shall deal severely with Pharaoh and his entire army" in 14,4. All Moses had to ask was how best to go about defeating Pharaoh. Nachmanides follows this approach in his commentary.
  We must assume, however, that the word which troubled Rashi in that verse was the word אלי, "to Me!" Who else would Moses have cried out to? Why did G–d have to add this word? Would Moses have addressed the angels Michael and Gabriel? Surely not! Another difficulty is the very reply of G–d. How could G–d tell Moses that the Jewish people would (or should) march when the sea which they faced prevented them from doing just that? Maybe G–d should have said: "Tell the Jewish people if they get moving I shall split the sea for them!"
  If we are to explain the plain meaning of the text we must keep in mind the preceding verses and pay close attention to them. Our sages in the מכילתא comment on the expression: "The children of Israel cried out to G–d," in 14,10, that they did the same time-honoured thing their ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had done when in trouble. The Talmud adds that there were four different groups of Israelites, each of whom reacted differently to the problem they faced.
  Verse 11, seems to contain unnecessary verbiage: The Israelites are portrayed as sarcastic in lambasting Moses that, since there was no suitable burial sites in Egypt, why did they have to come thus far only to be buried? -followed by what seems as a repetition: "what did you do for us to take us out of Egypt?" Rashi attempts to explain the repetition by saying they asked Moses in a different language, maybe Egyptian: "Did you take us out to bury us?" He seems to exchange the usual meaning of the word לקחתנו, "you took us", for "you have seduced us." His reason maybe that man is first and foremost propelled by his intellect. It follows that the word "לקח", does not really fit when applied to human beings. One "takes" objects or animals, but not human beings. The truth is therefore that Moses had to induce the Jewish people to leave Egypt by promising to bring them to a land flowing with milk and honey. This still leaves the question why the Israelites did not say: למה הוצאתנו, "why did you lead us out," instead of saying "לקחתנו?" After all they did use the verb להוציא at the end of the same verse when they said !" להוציאנו ממצרים"
  The very words "what is this you have done to us," seem a repetition. When Moses answers them at length, saying a) "do not fear," b) "stand upright," c) "watch the salvation of G–d," plus the words "the way you see Egypt this day you will never see Egypt again," this surely appears an unnecessarily long answer! Besides, the last statement is not a clear-cut promise, but could be interpreted in exactly the reverse manner! In fact, in the days of Jeremiah, the Israelites who fled from the land of Israel after the ruin of the Temple turned to Egypt for succour! Moreover, the Torah (Deut. 28,68) describes Israel's return to Egypt as one of the curses in store for them for not observing the Torah! For all these reasons our sages did not view this latter statement of Moses: לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד עד העולם as a promise, but construed it as a prohibition not to settle in the land of Egypt (Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah 5,5). Even so, how can the historical period under discussion be related to what happened a millenium later to permit a distorted text at this point! This was surely not the time and the place to teach Israel never again to settle in Egypt! At this time the only thing that mattered was a timely prayer! This is why G–d said to Moses: "Israel is in distress and you indulge in overly long prayer!"
  Our sages explain that the words in 14,10: "And here Israel saw מצרים travelling behind them,” refer to the שר של מצרים. This is the reason the Torah speaks about מצרים instead of about מצריים. When the Israelites saw this, they were assailed by great doubts. At the time of the slaying of every first-born in Egypt they had believed that G–d personally was in their midst and that all these miracles had not been orchestrated with the help of angels, etc., but had been performed by G–d in His capacity as the four-lettered Ineffable Name. They had been convinced that the first-born highest-ranking שר של מצרים, had also been defeated and no longer existed. They had believed that G–d had disposed of that force because no one but G–d Himself was able to accomplish this! The very fact that the Egyptians had buried all their dead had served as a sign for the Israelites that G–d personally had struck down every first-born (as described in Numbers 33,4). When Israel saw that all the Egyptian first-born on earth had been slain, they naturally assumed that their שר in the upper regions had been slain also, because we know of the principle that the spiritual counterparts of the nations on earth suffer defeat in the Celestial Regions prior to the defeat of the nations on earth whom they represent. In this instance, however, the שר של מצרים had not yet been totally eliminated. When the Torah in Numbers 33,4 spoke about G–d having struck, i.e. הכה Egypt, this did not mean that G–d struck a fatal blow at that time. G–d had allowed the שר to survive until the Egyptians were drowned in the sea. The שר had already been weakened. 
  When the Israelites saw the שר של מצרים, at the sea, he had allied himself with Samael in order to be a real threat against Israel. This is how the Rekanati explains this in his commentary on our portion. I have quoted part of his commentary in פרשת בא. G–d allowed this שר to exist in order to impress Israel even more deeply with His miracles. Israel was unaware of this at the time the Egyptian pursuit was in full swing. 
  They did not yet know that G–d was going to split the sea, save them and drown the Egyptian army in it. As a result of all this, they were beset by doubts as to whether it had been G–d or Moses who had orchestrated the Exodus. They thought that G–d perhaps had only wanted them to travel three days' journey into the desert, after which they were to return to Egypt, though not as slaves. They believed that Moses had over-stepped his authority and decided by himself that Israel should not return to Egypt at all. They believed that Moses had done so in the belief that G–d carries out the wishes of His prophets. This is why they cried out to G–d to demonstrate that He was a living G–d in their midst just as He had demonstrated this at the time He slew the first-born. They were angry at Moses, and this is why they accused him of taking them into the desert to die. The letter ה in the word המבלי, is one denoting a permanent question such as in הלבן מאה שנה יולד, "Can a hundred year-old man expect to sire children" (Genesis 17,17), or: הנגלה נגלתי "Was I in the habit of revealing Myself" (Samuel I 2,27)? The Israelites referred to their assumption that the שר של מצרים had been killed by basing themselves on their having seen the Egyptians bury their dead. They now doubted what their eyes had seen and implied that possibly the interment they believed they had witnessed did not prove that the first-born Egyptians were really in their graves. If so, instead of G–d having taken the Jews out of Egypt, "you Moses have taken us, לקחתנו, acquired us instead of G–d!" The word לקחתנו is used in contrast with G–d's והצלתי אתכם מעבודתם ולקחתי אתכם לי לעם. Those words had implied that Israel would be saved from the שר של מצרים who represented their deity i.e. עבודתם. When the children of Israel said: מה זאת עשית לנו, they merely paraphrased Pharaoh in 14,6 who had said: מה זאת עשינו כי שלחנו את ישראל מעבדנו. The word מעבדנו means that Pharaoh regretted allowing Israel to serve their own deity instead of that of the שר של מצרים.
  At this point Moses revealed to them that they would not again observe the שר של מצרים as he had been. His demise was about to occur amongst tremendous miracles which they would witness. At that moment G–d's promise of והצלתי אתכם, "I will save you from their deity and take you to be My people" (a higher spiritual level by far) would be fulfilled. As to proof of its immediacy, they would observe G–d doing the fighting on their behalf. An even more immediate proof: None of the projectiles the Egyptian army hurled at the Israelites caused any damage. They were all caught by the angel described as travelling between the camp of the Israelites and that of the Egyptians (as per Rashi 14,19).
  When G–d criticized Moses for calling out to HIM at that time, He meant that by doing so Moses only re-inforced the people's suspicions that he had acted high-handedly without consulting G–d and that he was now pleading with G–d to come to his assistance. If now He Himself would tell the Israelites that they should move forward they would realise and believe that whatever Moses had done in the past was also at G–d's behest, and that G–d personally slew the Egyptian first-born, not an agent. All of this message is contained in the brief instruction to "get moving." G–d purposely did not waste any time explaining that He would split the sea, etc. If G–d would now reveal His plan of drowning the Egyptians it would be perceived as a new decision by G–d and not as part of His overall plan conceived much earlier. An allusion to this impending miracle was already contained in the announcement of the plague of killing the first-born in 11,9, when G–d referred to רבות מופתי, "increasing My miracles" (pl). One of the "miracles" referred to was the slaying of the first-born, the other the splitting of the sea and the Egyptians being drowned in it (Rashi). G–d's entire purpose in the sequence of events was to build up Moses' reputation amongst the people. 
  We know that G–d succeeded in this because the Torah tells us in 14,31: "They believed in G–d and in His servant Moses." The verse in question refers to the Israelites having seen מצרים dead in verse 30. The Zohar is at pains to point out that the Torah does not speak about מצריים, Egyptians, being viewed as dead, but מצרים, i.e. the שר של מצרים. G–d made a point of showing the dead שר to the Israelites. I believe that this is the plain meaning of the verses dealing with this episode. 
  There is yet another dimension, which, if properly understood also explains the words of Shemot Rabbah 21,4 on the question מה תצעק אלי. The Midrash quotes Psalms 65,3: שומע תפלה עדיך כל בשר יבואו, "All mankind comes to You, You who hear prayer;" Rabbi Pinchas, quoting a number of sages, says that the Jewish people do not offer their prayers at one and the same time or from one and the same location, but stagger the times of their prayers. Once all congregations have concluded, the angel in charge of prayers gathers them all up, forms them into "crowns," and places the crowns on the head of G–d. We know this because of the verse quoted from Psalm 65. The word עדיך means "crown," as per Isaiah 49,18: כלם כעדי תלבשי, "You don them all like jewels." We have a similar verse a few lines earlier (49,3) in the same chapter: "Israel I glory in you!" This refers to G–d putting on the phylacteries of Israel as: עטרת תפארת בראשך, "a beautiful diadem will crown Your head" (Proverbs 4,9). Thus far the Midrash.
  All those who are familiar with the exegetical system employed by the Midrashim know that, when the Midrash compares a verse in the Torah to another verse in scripture and prefaces the quotation with the introductory comment הדא הוא דכתיב, such as in the Midrash we have just quoted, the author of the Midrash found an obvious difficulty in the wording of the scriptural proof cited. The Midrash used the text of the Torah in order to explain the difficulty in the scriptural "proof" or analogy cited. We first have to understand where lies the difficulty in the verse cited from Psalms 65,3. Why would the Midrash feel that the words שומע תפלה need explaining? What difference does it make whether the prayers of the Jewish people are all offered up simultaneously or not? How do the words מה תצעק אלי in our portion help resolve the problem in the verse in Psalms?
  We find that there are two important aspects to the way prayer is presented. First and foremost it is important that man approach G–d with a crushed heart when he asks G–d for something. We learn this from Psalms 102,1: "A prayer of the lonely man when he is faint and pours out his plea before the Lord." Our sages comment that even though all the other gates of Heaven peradventure may be locked, yet the gates of tears are never locked (Berachot 32). On the other hand, songs, such as the Israelites sang after the deliverance, must be offered to G–d only when the person or persons offering them are in a happy frame of mind.
  We further have to keep in mind that the שירה, song, in our portion is introduced by the words: את השירה הזאת, "-in the feminine gender. This is peculiar in view of the fact that the corresponding song offered by the women under Miriam's leadership is addressed to להם, masculine. Why is Miriam's song not introduced by the words: ותען להן in the feminine gender? There are some linguistic experts who claim that the women never actually engaged in song, that they were not obligated to thank G–d in song but only played the drums and cymbals to give vent to their joy. According to these linguists, a number of Jewish men came to watch the women dance, whereupon Miriam called out to them: "Sing to the Lord, etc." Our sages reject this interpretation, saying that the women paraphrased Moses in their song.
  Be that as it may, perhaps we can answer our question with another question. We know from various sources, including the Tanchuma Beshalach 10, that the whole song of הלל is not to be recited on the last day of the Passover, even though it is a full holiday, because G–d said that when He was forced to drown His creatures it would not be fitting for Israel- another one of G–d's creatures- to engage in such expressions of joy as reciting the whole of הלל. How do we reconcile such sentiments with the statement in Proverbs 11,10: באבוד רשעים רנה, "There is jubilation when the wicked perish"? I am indebted to the Zohar's explanation that such jubilation is in place only when the wicked have become so wicked that they have forfeited all redeeming features. As long as the wicked still possess some of them it is not appropriate to rejoice over their destruction, since the fact that the redeeming features did not lead them back to repentance causes sadness in Heaven, and, if G–d killed them all the same He did so only in order to protect the people of Israel or an individual deserving Jew. This is why G–d is described as saddened when מעשי ידי, "My handiwork drowns in the sea." When G–d drowned the Egyptians their measure of sin had not yet reached irrevocable dimensions. G–d killed them only on account of the people of Israel. This is the meaning of Exodus 18,8, where Yitro is reported as having heard what G–d did על אודות ישראל, "On account of Israel." This means that the death of the Egyptians at that time was orchestrated for less than objective considerations. The same considerations apply when we read in 14,25: אנוסה מפני בני ישראל כי ה' נלחם להם במצרים, "I shall flee on account of G–d fighting on behalf of Israel." The שר של מצרים realised that subjective considerations prompted G–d to personally intervene against his proteges and himself. Whenever the expression מפני is used we can understand it in this vein. It suited G–d's purpose at that time to have Israel witness this wholesale destruction of its enemies.
  As there are 70 ways to explain the Torah, we are are permitted to approach these problems from a different angle. We will do so by referring to a different Midrash. Commenting on Song of Songs 4,8: תשורי מראש אמנה, Tanchuma Beshalach 10 states that the redemption of the Jews was triggered by G–d's knowledge that they would compose the song of gratitude and extol G–d's virtues as recorded in our portion. In turn the merit that enabled Israel to proclaim this song originally was Abraham's for he had expressed faith in G–d as reported in the Torah (Genesis 15,7) that he believed the promise that he would have children and that their children would inherit the land of Canaan. 
  The Hebrew expression used here by the Midrash, עתידין ישראל לאמר שירה coupled with the more customary לעתיד לבא for describing an event in the future is somewhat unusual. Why did the Midrash have to repeat itself? Either one of these expressions would have sufficed!
  The Midrash's question "By what merit did Israel sing the שירה,” is itself difficult to comprehend! It is the practice of the צדיקים to give thanks to G–d immediately upon receipt of the promise of a forthcoming event. The צדיק does not wait until the promise has been fulfilled. The expression of his gratitude is no more than a true reflection of his abiding faith in G–d. If Moses, nonetheless had delayed his song of thanksgiving until after the miracle promised had actually materialised, this was but due to his lack of confidence in Israel's faith. This is why the Torah waited to report that Israel believed both in G–d and in Moses His servant until after the successful crossing of the sea and the drowning of the Egyptians in it (14,31). Only then was Moses able to break out in song. I have found this answer to the query raised in the introduction of a book called ברכת אברהם.
  Our sages in Sanhedrin 94 discuss how G–d had intended to appoint king Chiskiyahu as the Messiah and to make the battle against Sancheriv the one the prophets describe as the war of Gog and Magog. When apprised of this, the Attribute of Justice demurred, saying that if King David, who had composed so many hymns to G–d, had not been found worthy to become the Messiah, how could G–d appoint Chiskiyahu, for whom He had performed so many miracles, and who had not composed a single song of thanksgiving in return as the Messiah? This objection is hard to understand in view of Isaiah 38,9 which introduces a "letter" (poem) from Chiskiyahu in which he expresses his thanks to G–d for his recovery in very lyrical terms. We must therefore assume, that the Attribute of Justice faulted Chiskiyahu for having waited until after he had recovered before composing his poem of gratitude. A man whom we associate with the stature of the Messiah should have thanked G–d immediately after having been told by G–d that he would recover, especially since that promise had been accompanied by a sign from G–d (the sun dial turning backwards).
  Now we understand the Midrash which described the Israelites as עתידין ישראל לומר שירה לעתיד לבא. The Midrash tells us that in the future, עתידין, Israel will give thanks by means of a song as soon as they are told good news, even if the promise has not yet been fulfilled. The level of faith that the Jewish people will display at that time will exceed the level they displayed during the Exodus. This is the meaning of the quotation cited in the Midrash שירה לה' שיר חדש. The quotation continues כי נפלאות עשה, "for He has done wonderful things," although no miracles had yet been performed (Psalms 98,1). [We would have expected the sequence in that verse to be the reverse. Ed.] The quotation of the Midrash from Song of Songs 4,8: תשורי מראש אמנה now also falls into line. Israel is encouraged to start singing מראש, immediately, thus displaying its faith, אמונה. 
  This also explains G–d's comment: "While My handiwork drowns in the sea, you want to intone a song?" G–d must be perceived as saying to Israel: "Had you chanted your song before the drowning of the Egyptians, such a testimonial of your faith in Me would have been very welcome indeed.
  We find that women are apt to display a higher degree of faith in the Lord than men. It was due to the merit of righteous Jewish women that the Israelites were redeemed from Egypt. Immediately upon hearing that G–d had promised salvation, they took the drums and cymbals because they believed G–d implicitly. This display of faith turned the women into heroes, a masculine quality; hence the Torah uses the masculine pronoun להם. The men, by comparison were turned into the weaker sex by their lack of faith, so that the Torah uses the feminine gender when describing their song. This is one way of answering some of the questions raised.
  I have already pointed out that prayer involves two diametrically opposed emotions, joy and happiness on the one hand, a crushed heart on the other. 
  There are two diametrically opposed verses, each one of which purports to tell us how to serve the Lord by prayer. In Psalms 100,2 we are told: עבדו את ה' בשמחה, "Serve the Lord in joy," whereas in Psalms 2,11 we are told: עבדו את ה' ביראה, "Serve the Lord in trepidation, reverence!" The plain meaning of the verses in question is that they apply to prayer which is called עבודה שבלב, "service with the heart." Our sages have said that while praying, we must direct our heart toward Heaven and our eyes towards Earth: Our downcast eyes to remind us of our puniness, our insignificance before G–d the Exalted. Our uplifted heart will induce fear and trepidation so that we may serve the Lord out of true reverence. Once we have attained this level of reverence our heart will contemplate what is above us and thus will be full of joy that we have been found fit to serve such a Master. We note that both emotions are an integral part of prayer.
  There are still other mystical aspects to this problem of prayer. I have already mentioned earlier that I have discussed the problem of all the forces that interpose themselves between us and Heaven, trying to prevent out prayers from reaching there. The sages who formulated the sequence of our prayers arranged for us to recite the פסוקי דזמרה, various hymns, so that we may cut a path through these forces impeding our prayers. This is why someone who engages in conversation between the recital of ברוך שאמר, the beginning of the פסוקי דזמרה, and ישתבח, its conclusion, thereby undermines the purpose of the recital of these hymns, and, as a result, the major part of our prayers will not be able to proceed heavenwards while the פסוקי דזמרה should have been engaged in deflecting the קליפות which try to prevent our prayers from "breaking through." The Zohar describes these hostile forces as two groups which are called two harlots, one of which is called Machalat, whereas the other is called Lilith. Machalat controls 478 groups corresponding to the numerical value of its name מחלת, whereas Lilith has 480 such groups at her command, again corresponding to her Hebrew name לילית. These hostile groups fill up the entire atmosphere between them. 
  Details of this concept have been explained in a book called קולבוכים in its reference to Lamentations 5,11: נשים בציון ענו, "They have ravished women in Zion." [according to the interpretation now offered, the translation should be: "women have ravished Zion." Ed.] Clearly, even during the period of the destruction of the Holy Temple, there must have been numerous Torah scholars and pious people who tried to intercede on behalf of the Jewish people by means of their prayers. The reason their prayers did not reach Heaven was the presence of these two "women" referred to in Lamentations, who ענו "violated", or "held up" and "delayed" these prayers from reaching their destination. By doing this, the prediction referred to in Lamentation 3,8: שתם תפלתי,”He (G–d) shut out my prayer," was fulfilled. The author of קול בוכים explains that normally Machalat and Lilith are constantly at war with one another for they represent opposing forces. Machalat, as implied by her name represents dances, joy and happiness. All the happy-go-lucky scoffers who consider life one single long row of sensual pleasures derive their impetus from that "woman.". Lilith, on the other hand, also true to her name, represents melancholy, despair and the heretical views portrayed in the early chapters of Kohelet that all life is a futile, heart-breaking experience. As a result, these two "women" are in constant conflict with one another. This conflict benefits the prayers of Israel. As long as these two forces are engaged in feuding with each other they do not have the energy to concern themselves overly with the prayers of Israel and with their desire to interfere with these prayers. Our prayers can ascend to Heaven without undue interference. At the time of the destruction of the Holy Temple, however, they made a truce and thus shut out the prayers of Israel.
  When Joshua was about to conquer the land of Israel, he sent out two spies who, due to their lofty spiritual level, overcame and humbled the two "harlots" mentioned by the Zohar. Once the Holy Temple was built in the days of King Solomon, when the fortunes of the Jewish people were at their peak [the 15th generation after Abraham. Ed.], these two "harlots" were defeated absolutely, and this is one of the reasons Solomon is described as sitting "on the throne of G–d" (Chronicles I 29,23). This is the mystical dimension of the two נשים זונות, harlots, who approached him, each claiming that the surviving baby was hers (Kings I 3,16-27). The above is all based on the Zohar, and elaborated on in the book קול בוכים.
  I have found an allusion along these lines in the portion dealing with expansionary wars in Deut. 20,1-9, participation in which is restricted to certain categories of people outlined there. It is clear that the paragraph speaks about מלחמת רשות, a permissible expansionary kind of war, as distinct from מלחמת חובה, an obligatory war against the seven Canaanite nations in which no potential soldier of military age was exempt. In connection with this מלחמת חובה, the Torah writes: לא תחיה כל נשמה, "you must not allow any soul to survive" (Deut. 20,16). The sequence of the paragraphs dealing with the capture of a physically attractive woman prisoner (Deut. 21,11), followed by the paragraph of a man who has two wives and wishes to appoint the first-born of his more beloved wife as his principal heir, though the son in question is junior to another son from his first wife whom he grew to hate in the meantime (Deut. 21,15), is intriguing. The two wives which the Torah describes as האחת אהובה, והאחת שנואה, may be understood as referring to the "harlots" mentioned in the Zohar. The אהובה, refers to מחלת, the happy and beautiful one. The שנואה refers to לילית, the melancholy one. When the Torah speaks about a beautiful woman whom you see in captivity, this is a woman captured during a מלחמת רשות in one of the surrounding countries where the קליפות are permanently at home. The duty to subjugate these קליפות is part of the injunction to do good. This has to be done in one of two ways. In order to defeat and humble Lilith, harsh measures are required. Prayer "a la" Lilith, has to originate from a crushed heart, has to be accompanied by tears. Lilith can only be rehabilitated in this way. In order to be successful, the process of subjugating and rehabilitating Machalat, the happy-go-lucky one of these two harlots, needs to be handled differently. We have to demonstrate to Machalat the joyful aspects of Judaism, the Sabbath days, the holidays, the joy experienced in helping the less fortunate, etc., as well as to convey some of our knowledge about the goodness and grandeur of G–d. As long as we are exiled from our homeland all our joy on holidays is subdued due to the קליפות surrounding us on all sides. It is extremely difficult to totally defeat the קליפות of Machalat in such circumstances. When the Torah refers to the beautiful woman prisoner as: וראית בשביה אשת יפת תואר, this is to tell us that under conditions of exile, i.e. שביה, the קליפה מחלה continues to exist. We have only succeeded in eliminating the קליפה לילית. When the Talmud teaches that all gates are sometimes closed except the gates of tears, this is a hint that at least the קליפה לילית can be overcome at all times.
  To sum up: We are to serve the Lord with joy to help us eliminate Machalat, and we are to serve the Lord with fear, awe, and tears, to help us eliminate Lilith. The application of שמחה, in prayer is the knowledge and use of the names of G–d in the proper manner. This makes such a deep impression in the Celestial Regions that it creates a "crown" for the "head" of G–d Himself. It contributes to the unification of His Name in those regions. 
  This is the reason that G–d is perceived of as desiring the prayers of the righteous, since the service of G–d by means of prayer is a need that G–d feels, as we have mentioned on numerous occasions. The above is true only when the prayers are offered up in the Holy Land, a region from which the prayers ascend ever higher, something that cannot occur in the Diaspora in which the קליפות predominate and interfere. Prayers offered חוץ לארץ are as if dressed in the air of impurity, and it would be presumptuous to say that G–d longs for such prayers. Even in חוץ לארץ, however, the gates of tears subdue the forces of Lilith so that prayers offered in such circumstances are acceptable to G–d. The main difference between such prayers and identical prayers offered within the boundaries of ארץ ישראל is that the latter are something G–d has expressly desired. When the Torah speaks about וראית בשביה, the message is that while we are in exile, שביה, G–d does not desire that we worship Him in joy because we have not been found worthy to live in our homeland. 
  Jacob made this point in Genesis 30,2,when he said to Rachel: התחת אלוקים אנכי? "Am I under the personal supervision of G–d?" Rachel had asked Jacob to offer prayer so that she could conceive and bear children. She thought G–d had made her barren because He wanted to hear the prayer of the righteous Jacob (as our sages have explained about all the difficulties our matriarchs experienced in having children). Jacob had to explain to Rachel that G–d had withheld children from her not because He waited for Jacob's prayer, since Jacob could not compare himself to Isaac and Abraham who were on Holy Soil when they prayed. He, Jacob, was in exile, not a place from which G–d desires prayer to emanate. He, Jacob, was not under the guidance of אלוקים, but under the guidance of one of the שרים as long as he was away from ארץ ישראל.
  The Sifri has stated that Deut. 21,10 speaks about a permissible expansionary war, and that the legislation introduced by the words: וראית בשביה אשת יפת תואר applies only when such a war is fought outside the boundaries of Israel, whereas when a war is fought on the soil of Israel the command: לא תחיה כל נשמה, "you must not take any prisoners," applies. The reason is that within the boundaries of the land of Israel both harlots, i.e. Lilith as well as Machalat, can easily be eliminated. This is the mystical dimension of Joshua sending two spies in order to totally defeat these two harlots, as did indeed happen during the rule of King Solomon.
  This is also the deeper reason that the righteous Miriam and her companions took drums and cymbals (15,20). The word תף, drum is spelled defectively, without the letter ו. This is an allusion to the subjugation of לילית, whose name has the same numerical value as תף, =480. We have read about these destructive forces in page 474. The women's taking up of the מחולות, cymbals, is an allusion to the efforts on their part to neutralise the forces under the command of מחלת. It was most appropriate that righteous women should be the instruments whereby the two "harlots" and their underlings should be defeated.
  We are told in 14,20 that after the angel of the Lord took up his position between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of the Israelites, ולא קרב זה אל זה כל הלילה, "that one did not approach the other during the entire night." We may understand the word לילה to be an allusion to לילית, one of the perennial accusers of the Jewish people. The Torah tells us that the efforts of Lilith during that night to accuse Israel at the Celestial Court failed. When the Torah writes in 15,26 that if the Jewish people listen to G–d's voice and perform His commandments: כל המחלה אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך, "I will not set the whole מחלה against you but against Egypt," the Torah refers to the "harlot" Machalat. I have found in the commentary of Rabbenu Bachyah that the word אשר which can also be rad as ראש, has the same numerical value as the abbreviation of the Ten Plagues mentioned in the name of Rabbi Yehudah in הגדה של פסח, דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב =501. .
  G–d's question in 14,15: מה תצעק אלי, which Rashi had understood as a criticism of Moses who engaged in lengthy prayer when the need of the hour was action, becomes clearer now. G–d hinted to Moses that he was mistaken when he thought that he fulfilled G–d's desire, i.e. that his prayer was something which G–d "needed." As long as Israel was in distress, i.e. in exile, not on the soil of the land of Israel, there is no such thing as G–d "desiring" or "needing" such prayer. As long as the שר של מצרים is still in pursuit of the people of Israel, "I may be with My people, as I am always when they are in difficulties, but I do not 'desire' their prayer." At a time such as this the adversary has to be humbled; this can only be done by action. Hence: "tell the Israelites to get moving!"
  Such considerations also help to explain the Midrash which I mentioned earlier. Let me first mention a comment I have seen in a book called בית אלוקים. The author of that volume questions that we have a tradition according to which G–d has made a covenant with Israel (Berachot 8) that communal prayer is always welcomed and accepted by Him. A comunity which prays to G–d never returns empty-handed. The origin of that tradition is based on: הן א-ל כביר לא ימאס "See G–d is mighty; He is not contemptuous" (Job 36,5). The author's question is: "Everyday we see that what the verse in Job purports to promise does not happen! How many times has the Jewish community prayed for redemption and our prayers have not been answered! We pray daily in the עמידה that תקע בשופר גדול, or: השיבה שופטנו, or: ולירושלים עירך תשוב and other similar entreaties. All of these prayers are offered up three times a day, communally, and nothing has changed! We are still in exile after close to two thousand years!" The author of בית אלוקים answers in a variety of ways. Personally, I believe that the plain meaning of the statement in the Talmud is not that G–d has to respond immediately and totally whenever a community offers a prayer. Such prayer will not be rejected out of hand; any time we pray daily for our redemption, part of our prayers will find a ready response. Although our enemies try constantly to destroy us, the very fact that we are still in existence and, in many instances, more prominent and numerous than before, shows, that every day we experience some nucleus of the redemption. Were it not for G–d having listened to our prayers and responded to them at least partially, we would have ceased to exist a long time ago. We are, after all, like a sheep surrounded by seventy wolves.
  When we examine the statement of the Rabbis concerning the efficacy of communal prayer, the true meaning is not that G–d carries out the expressed will of the petitioners. The meaning is that the prayer itself, if offered by a community, is welcome before G–d. Just as other commandments observed by us are favourably received by G–d, such as when one builds a סוכה in order to observe the holiday of Tabernacles, or when one purchases a לולב, etc., so communal prayer is always welcome. Performance of a commandment leaves an indelible impression in the Heavenly Spheres; so does communal prayer. The reward for such prayer is stored up in Heaven, just as is the reward for מצות performed by the individual. Although reward in this life has not been promised for performance of most מצות, some dividends accrue to us in this world while the "capital" is left intact pending our transfer to the Hereafter. 
  It is a positive commandment to pray to the Lord, a sub-category of the commandment to serve Him, in this instance by means of one's heart. Prayers offered by individuals are sometimes rejected, not being always considered ריח נחוח, "sweet smelling fragrance" by G–d. Publicly offered prayer, however, converts into a "crown" for G–d's "head," at all times. 
  There is a qualitative difference between a commandment performed by a numerically small group of people and the same commandment when it is performed by large numbers of people. When the Midrash above described the angel in charge of prayers as gathering up the various prayers of different communities not offered simultaneously before fashioning a "crown" for G–d's "head" out of those prayers, the angel is described as doing so in order to weave the most precious "crown" possible, that composed of prayers by the largest number of worshippers. 
  
  The Midrash also teaches that though the individual congregations here on earth may be diverse, i.e they pray at different times in different locations, in the Celestial Regions they are all viewed as having prayed together and simultaneously. The uniqueness of G–d and the uniqueness of His people are found side by side when G–d wears the "crown" woven out of the prayers of His people. The verse from Psalms 65,3: "עדיך כל בשר יבואו” is therefore quite appropriate since עדיך is a reference to that crown. 
  The reason that the Midrash also quoted the verse from Proverbs 4,9 describing the crown on G–d's head as His תפארת, glory, is, that it wishes to alert us to the fact that there are times -such as when Israel is on its own land- when G–d actively desires our prayers. At such a time the prayers are both עטרת and תפארת. During such times G–d is perceived as courting כנסת ישראל, the spiritual equivalent of the people of Israel, much as a groom courts a bride. This is understood in kabbalistic circles as the union of the emanation תפארת and מלכות.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  כי אמר אלהים פן ינחם העם בראותם מלחמה ושבו מצרימה. We can learn from here to what length a person has to go to make "fences," artificial safeguards to prevent himself from sinning. Even G–d Himself made such a "fence" when He decided to let the Israelites travel via an indirect route so as to preclude the people from having second thoughts and wanting to return to Egypt.
  ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף. Shemot Rabbah 20,19 comments here that someone with a wise heart chooses to perform מצות. The reference is to Moses who, while all of Israel was busy collecting silver and gold, busied himself with locating the remains of Joseph to keep the promise made to him on his death-bed that his bones would be taken for permanent burial in ארץ ישראל. We must all learn the lesson to fulfil a מצוה when it is at hand, and to desist from the pursuit of riches during the time it takes to perform the מצוה in question.
  ויקח שש מאות רכב בחור וכל רכב מצרים. The Zohar asks if the 600 choice chariots were not also part of Egypt's cavalry that the Torah had to add the words "and all the chariots of Egypt?" The Zohar answers that the subject in this verse is Samael who took the chariots of other nations with him in the pursuit of the Israelites. G–d paid those people back when Sisera lost all his iron chariots in the battle against Barak and Deborah (Judges 5,20-21). 
  We learn from this that whenever Israel finds itself in trouble, parties that have no quarrel with Israel also gang up on it. We must therefore realise how important it is at such times to do repentance, since during such critical times all our past deeds and actions are examined in minute detail to see if our enemies are justified in their attack upon us. The Zohar quotes a Rabbi Yossi on 14,10 as saying that the unusual construction of ופרעה הקריב, instead of ופרעה קרב for "Pharaoh approached," is an allusion to the sentiments of repentance that the approach of Pharaoh evoked in many Israelites. The word הקריב must be understood as "he brought them close to their father in Heaven." 
  What is required in addition to remorse, is the forsaking of evil and the performance of good deeds. One needs to hold on to the pillar of Torah which is the banner of true freedom, i.e. freedom from the evil urge. We are capable of performing mighty deeds as long as we embrace Torah with our right hand, paraphrasing the words of Moses describing G–d's mighty deeds: ימינך ה' נאדרי בכח ימינך ה' תרעץ אויב. Our sages (Midrash Hagadol) in commenting on Genesis 27,22: הקול קול יעקב והידים ידי עשו, "The voice is the voice of Jacob, whereas the hands are the hands of Esau," interpret this phrase to mean that as long as the voice is the voice of Jacob, the hands of Esau are powerless against us. 
  If the repentance is not total G–d withdraws His right hand, מאחור, away from the face of the enemy. The "enemy" is Samael, our perennial accuser and his armies who face us in this world; we know this from the Tikkuney Hazohar who comments on Genesis 16,12 where Hagar is told about the forthcoming birth of Ishmael: על פני כל הארץ ישכון, "He will be at home all over the earth." The significance of the parable describing G–d as withdrawing His right hand backwards is that the left hand normally is employed in adiministering דין, justice, whereas the right hand symbolises חסד, love extended to the חצונים, the קליפות which are known as אחוריים, "the ones behind". Psalm 77,1.1 refers to this idea when the Psalmist says: "I have said that it is my fault that the right hand of the Most High has changed."
  Another peculiarity is the wording of 14,25, where G–d is described as removing the wheels from the chariots of the Egyptians. The Torah writes: ויסר את אופן מרכבותיו, "He removed or locked the wheel (sing.) of their chariots." If the Torah refers to the chariot of Pharaoh it should have said the "wheel of his chariot." If the chariots of the army are meant, the Torah should have spoken about the 'wheels' of their chariots." Why this peculiar phrasing? We must say that the שר של מצרים who is an extremely powerful שר had assembled many other chariots of חצוניים, "external" forces as explained by the Zohar we have quoted earlier. The word אופן which is often used for angels, is used here as a description of Pharaoh's שר. When G–d detached this שר, all of the chariots of the Egyptians came apart, which in turn caused the confusion of the Egyptians described in the Torah. When this happened all the אלופי אדום, and the אילי מואב as well as the inhabitants of Canaan were seized with fright, as described in 15,15.
  
  
  ויאמר אם שמוע תשמעו לקול ה' אלוקיך והישר בעיניו תעשה והאזנת למצותיו ושמרת כל חוקיו. Take note of how much a person must be tuned in to G–d in order to engage all his senses in carrying out G–d's wishes and instructions. Each one of the expressions mentioned in this verse carries multiple implications for all of us.
  הנני ממטיר לכם לחם מן השמים … למען אנסנו הילך בתורותי. This verse contains an indirect instruction to say a word of Torah during meals.
  לקטו ממנו איש לפי אכלו. The Torah tells us here how much a person needs to eat to sustain himself. This is the reason the measurements are spelled out in such detail, as well as the fact that people's subjective estimate of their "needs" were proven wrong, since, regardless of how much they believed they had gathered, once they measured it, they found that every person had obtained the same quantity. When the Torah afterwards describes some people as "storing" extra מן for the following day against Moses' instructions, and it turned into worms, this was a warning of what our sages (Avot 2,7) called מרבה בשר מרבה רמה, that he who eats excessively, over and beyond his needs, only increases the number of worms that will eventually invade his corpse. When the Torah added: ויבאש, this is a hint that decomposition can set in even during one's lifetime when one gorges oneself on too much unneeded food. I have enlarged on this subject in my treatise שער האותיות under the heading of שלחן and the letter ק for קדושה.
  בחר לנו אנשים. Rashi sees in the word לנו proof that Moses equated Joshua with himself in this task. The Rabbis deduced from this a rule that a teacher should always be as concerned with the honour of his student as with his own. The honour of someone of equal status to oneself, however, should be placed on a par with the honour of one's teacher. The source for this is found in Numbers 12,11 where Aaron, Moses' older brother, addresses him with the words: בי אדוני, "Please my lord!" The honour of one's teacher should be treated as equivalent to the honour of G–d Himself. We derive this from Numbers 11,28 where Joshua pleads with Moses to kill Eldod and Meydod for prophesying the death of Moses. The words used are: אדוני משה כלאם. Joshua felt that insubordination against his teacher Moses deserved the same penalty as insubordination against G–d Himself. We can now understand why we are taught in Avot 4,1: "Who is truly honoured? He who honours G–d's creatures."
  
  Yitro
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Commandment 25 of the 613 commandments is אנכי ה' אלוקיך, "I am the Lord Your G–d."
  Commandment 26 is לא יהיה לך אלוקים אחרים, "You must not have any other God."
  Commandment 27 forbids the making of any cast image.
  Commandment 28 forbids prostrating oneself before such an image.
  Commandment 29 forbids serving idols.
  Commandment 30 forbids vain or false oaths.
  Commandment 31 enjoins us to observe the Sabbath as a day of rest.
  Commandment 32 forbids the performance of work on the Sabbath.
  Commandment 33 enjoins us to honour father and mother.
  Commandment 34 forbids the commission of murder.
  Commandment 35 forbids adultery.
  Commandment 36 forbids kidnapping.
  Commandment 37 forbids perjuring oneself through false testimony against someone else.
  Commandment 38 forbids us to covet the wife or property of our neighbour.
  Commandment 39 forbids us to construct a silver or golden deity as a partner of G–d.
  Commandment 40 forbids the construction of an altar the stones of which have been shaped by metal tools.
  Commandment 41 forbids the ascending of an altar by steps.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The Ten Commandments on the tablets were engraved in two groups of five each. Nachmanides comments on this as follows: "Five of the Ten Commandments deal with the honour of the Almighty, the Creator, whereas the other five address the well-being of man. The commandment to honour father and mother is a part of the commandments honouring G–d Himself, since by honouring one's father and one's mother one honours G–d, because G–d is a partner in the formation of any human being. We are therefore left with five commandments which address man's needs and dignity. It appears that one set of five commandments was engraved on one of the two tablets, and the second on the other. We are to regard both groups of commandments as equally important. This corresponds to what is written in the ספר יצירה, that the Ten Emanations parallel the ten fingers, five on each hand with a covenant forming the link between them in the centre. This explains the need for two tablets. Up to and including the commandment of honouring father and mother, the commandments allude to the written Torah; the commandments found on the second tablet are an allusion to the oral Torah. Our sages may have had this in mind when they said that the reason that there were two tablets was that one symbolised Heaven whereas the other symbolised Earth; they symbolised the relationship between bride and groom. They symbolised the two worlds, the here and now and the Hereafter. All of this is reflected in a single allusion. Intelligent students will understand this." Thus far Nachmanides.
  Rashi comments as follows on Song of Songs 4,5: שני שדיך כשני עפרים תאומי צביה, "Your two breasts are like two fawns, twins of the gazelle," that the expression שני שדיך refers to the two stone tablets. They are described as "twins" because they were both of identical dimensions and contained five commandments each. The commandments are very parallel to each other. The injunction not to murder corresponds to the commandment that "I am the Lord Your G–d," for the murderer diminishes the stature of G–d by destroying His handiwork. The commandment not to have other gods corresponds to the prohibition of adultery, because the adulteress practises deceit of her husband, whereas the idol-worshipper practises infidelity against his Maker. The commandment not to use the name of the Lord in vain corresponds to the prohibition of stealing; in the end every thief will resort to a false oath to deny his deed. The commandment to observe the Sabbath and keep it holy corresponds to the prohibition of being a false witness; anyone who does not observe the Sabbath testifies that the Lord did not create the universe and rest on the seventh day. The commandment to honour father and mother corresponds to the commandment not to covet; he who covets someone else's wife will ultimately sire children who will repudiate and curse him instead of honouring him. The Zohar on this portion also deserves study. I will first proceed to explain the commandments themselves, later on their mystical dimensions.
  The commandments: "I am the Lord your G–d," and "you must not have any other god," tell us that אנכי, "I am the Lord your G–d," is the source of all positive commandments, and לא יהיה לך tells us that the same G–d is the source of all negative commandments. Our sages teach us that Israel heard these two commandments directly from G–d's mouth (Makkot 24). This is why you find that G–d addresses Israel in the second person in these two commandments. When G–d introduces the third commandment, He switches half-way through the commandment (20,7) to indirect speech, i.e. כי לא ינקה, "For He will not consider blameless, etc." He also did not say "Do not utter My name in vain, but "do not utter the name of the Lord your G–d in vain." It was Moses quoting G–d who said these words; hence the change in style. The same applies to the remainder of the first set of the Ten Commandments.
  Maimonides, in his ספר המדע writes as follows: "We must appreciate a fundamental truth, something basic to all knowledge. There is a SINGLE original Cause who in turn has created all other phenomena. If you ever were to think that HE does not exist, it would follow that none of the phenomena we perceive exist either. If you could imagine that all other phenomena would cease to exist, HE still would continue to exist, since all phenomena need Him for their continued existence, whereas He does not need them for His existence. His "truth" is therefore not comparable to any other kind of "truth," and this is why the prophet says: וה' אלוקים הוא לבדו אמת, "And the Lord G–d is truth" (Jeremiah 10,10). This is also what the Torah means in Deut. 4,35 ואין עוד מלבדו, "There is no one else beside Him." No truth exists independent of G–d. It is His Existence that is the supreme G–d of the universe, and He guides the universe. It is a positive commandment to acquire knowledge of and guard these facts, for the Torah says: "I am the Lord your G–d, etc." Anyone who entertains the thought that there is any other deity is a כופר בעיקר, violates a fundamental negative commandment, because the Torah says: "You must not have any other god in My Presence." Such a person denies the central pillar of the Jewish faith that everything depends upon Him. Thus far Maimonides. 
  We find almost identical language in the Semag at the beginning of his book where he discusses the first of the negative commandments. Rashi states the same principle. The Semag adds that the words על פני are the key to the prohibition to consider G–d as having any partners.
  While everything quoted is true, of course, and relates to the practice of idolatrous religious activities, there is another dimension to these two commandments, namely the entertaining of idolatrous thoughts in one's mind. When considering this additional dimension the word לך, "for yourself," makes sense. The word maybe understood as "for yourself alone, i.e. in your mind only." The word לך refers to what is known only to the person thinking along certain lines, whereas the words על פני refer to activities witnessed by others. Nonethelees, even certain practices do not necessarily reveal the thoughts of the one who practises them to anyone except to G–d Himself who knows all our thoughts. Who, after all, can truly know what goes on in the mind of his friend, much less what goes on in the mind of a stranger? The Torah, i.e. G–d, underlines with the words: על פני, that He is everywhere, that therefore nothing is concealed from Him. 
  Seeing that both the beginning and end of the statement in this verse refer to what goes on or should go on in our minds, it is fair to say that the principal thrust of these two commandments is directed at our minds. Had the Torah referred only to what goes on in our minds, one half of the statement, such as לא יהיה לך אלוהים אחרים would have sufficed. To ensure that we understand that maintaining existing idols is equally forbidden, the Torah had to add the words על פני without the conjunctive letter ו in front. 
  Nachmanides also writes in a similar vein that whenever the expression אלוהים אחרים is used, the Torah refers to the belief in such deities. When it wants to prohibit active idol worship, the Torah speaks about not constructing אלוהי מסכה, "graven images" and the like. He elaborates on this at length.
  The result of all these considerations is an awareness that G–d is the Original Cause and Existence, and has in turn, brought into existence any phenomena we observe. As a result He is able to do whatever He wants as He demonstrated in Egypt when He performed all the miracles. This is why the first of the Ten Commandments concludes with the words: "who has brought you out of the land of Egypt from the house of slaves." It was in that environment that the uniqueness of G–d and His Power was demonstrated to the greatest number of people simultaneously.
  The making of images is prohibited even if these are not meant to be worshipped [such as when they are displayed in museums as relics of primitive man. Ed.]. The existence of such images may become the cause of someone somewhere choosing to worship them. The prohibition applies no less when one commissions someone to construct a cast image than when one fashions them with one's own hands. According to Maimonides, culpability results from one's being the cause of these images being made.
  According to Nachmanides, this verse concerns itself exclusively with the making of such images with the intent of worshipping them. He holds that this prohibition is not to be counted as a separate negative commandment (of the 613 commandments), because the Torah here only concerns itself with the kind of idol worship that is prohibited on pain of death, whereas construction of cast images, provided one has not worshipped them, is punishable only by 39 lashes. Nachmanides holds that the prohibiton contained in this verse comprises the admission that some other deity could exist, whether one decides to personally worship such a deity or not. Making any of the classic obeisances to such an image falls under the heading of the prohibition included in this verse. This is so even, if, in our culture, the same obeisance would be interpreted as an expression of revulsion vis-a-avis such an image. According to Nachmanides, the prohibition of constructing a cast image and the like is derived from אל תפנו אל האלילים ואלוהי מסכה לא תעשו לכם "Do not turn to idols and do not construct for yourselves a graven image," (Leviticus 19,4).
  לא תשתחוה להם. This means that when one prostrates oneself before a graven image or idol, though this may not be the normal way in which such an idol is worshipped, one is guilty of idol-worship, because prostrating oneself before G–d is the way of service in the Holy Temple before the Almighty. The act of השתחויה is a definite form of worship. We are told in Exodus 22,19: "Whoever sacrifices to a god other than the Lord alone shall be proscribed" [is subject to the death penalty by stoning. Ed]. While it is true that we learn from Exodus 22,19 that any acts that constitute normal worship such as slaughtering the animal, burning its flesh on the altar, pouring libations of wine on the altar, etc., are all actions punishable by death when performed in honour of other deities (regardless of whether such acts are part of the system in which that particular deity is worshipped), the question is why the Talmud did not derive the prohibition of prostrating oneself from this verse in Exodus. Prostrating oneself, which does not involve a sacrificial act, could not be derived from the words זובח in Exodus 22,19. Hence a special verse was needed for this prohibition. The act of prostrating oneself symbolises that one humbles oneself utterly and thus becomes culpable. 
  ולא תעבדם. This is a warning not to serve idols in the manner in which they are usually being served, even though such ways revolt us. The classic example is the idol בעל פעור, which was worshipped by means of humans excreting before it. The culpability for such an act stems from one's having demonstrated that one is on the theological wavelength of the adherents of such a cult, something abhorrent in the eyes of G–d. One tried to please such a deity.
  לא תשא. Even a king of flesh and blood insists on not lending his good name to something criminal or dishonourable. How much more so is the Creator of the entire universe entitled to have His Holy Name respected! We must remember that the existence of the Lord our G–d, i.e. His eternal existence, is not comparable to any other existence in this universe. This awareness must be reflected whenever we utter His Name, something that must be accompanied by feelings of awe and reverence. One does not use His Holy Name in light-hearted conversation. It is not appropriate to bring G–d's Name into conversations which deal with transient matters. Needless to say that it is even less appropriate to associate His name with lies and cheating.
  זכור את יום השבת. The Talmud in Pessachim 106 states that one fulfils this commandment by reciting a benediction over wine on the Sabbath eve. Whence do we know that one needs to recite a similar benediction on the Sabbath day also? This is why the Torah says in this verse זכור את יום השבת לקדשו. One sanctifies the Sabbath by speaking about its sanctity during meals while enjoying this day of rest. In the absence of wine, the benediction may be recited over bread since eating bread also contributes to one's feeling well and contented, though not to the same degree as drinking wine. When the Sabbath ends, we are also required to speak of its holiness and to signify that there is a difference between the holiness of the Sabbath and the secular nature of the days following. The reason the Rabbis do not permit the reciting of הבדלה over bread may be that since we have eaten extensively during the Sabbath, the addition of another piece of bread would not contribute to our feeling of well-being. This is why the benediction הבדלה, is to be recited over wine. By its very definition, the Sabbath is a reminder of the fact that the universe had a beginning, i.e. it did not precede G–d; it testifies to the fact that G–d has created the universe and all that is in it ex nihilo.
  כבד את אביך ואת אמך. Our sages (Kidushin 30) have said that a man is the product of three partners, two of whom are father and mother. It follows that G–d, the third partner, has given some of the honour due to Him to His partners in creating the human being in question. This concludes the description of the plain meaning of the first five of the Ten Commandments.
  I shall now attempt to convey some of the mystical dimensions of the Ten Commandments, five of which address themselves to our Maker and five to the well-being of our fellow-man. We are already well aware that the entire Torah consists of permutations of the name of G–d, permutations which extend endlessly in all directions of the universe. The four-lettered Ineffable Name י-ה-ו-ה is the Name which symbolises G–d's Essence. All other names are somehow derived from this four-lettered Name. These various כנוים, "pseudonyms" of G–d's names, in turn derive from the names that are subordinate to the four-lettered Name. There is not a word or letter in the Torah which does not in some form allude to a כנוי and therefore indirectly to a name of G–d, and which in turn links up with the four-lettered Ineffable Name. This means that תורת ה' תמימה, that the Torah of G–d is whole, complete, and all its aspects somehow lead back to the Ineffable Name.
  Keeping this in mind it is easy to understand that the Ten Commandments contain within them the whole Torah in "capsule form." The Ten Commandments consist of 620 letters, corresponding to כתר תורה. 613 of these letters represent the 613 commandments of the Torah that are addressed to the Jewish people, whereas the other 7 letters represent the 7 Noachide laws addressed to all of mankind It is fairly obvious then that the Ten Commandments more than any other part of the Torah contain the mystical dimension of the Ineffable Name. The shape and size of the tablets on which the Ten Commandments were engraved allude to the letters of the Ineffable Name. The number 10 corresponds to the letter י of that name, the 5 Commandments engraved on either one of the tablets correspond to the two letters ה of the Ineffable Name; the letter ו is represented by the height, width and thickness of the tablets, i.e. 6 טפחים, handbreadths each. When we "cube" the dimensions of the tablets, 6 by 6 by 6, we obtain 216 cubic טפחים. This number equals the mystical dimension of the Ineffable Name when we spell the letters as words, using the method involving the letter י. This is how it appears: 15=הי + ;22=ויו + ;15=הי + ;20=יוד; the total you obtain is 72. Viewing this number in the three dimensions of the tablets, you arrive at three times 72=216. This number corresponds to the number of letters (three times 72 in each verse) in the three successive verses in Exodus 14: 19,20,21, describing the interposition of G–d's angel between the camp of the Israelites and that of the Egyptians. The author of גינת אגוז comments that the Ineffable Name (spelled in letters) amounts to 26, and that this number equals the numerical value of the Ten Commandments, [no explanation is offered as to how that number is arrived at. Ed.] The author adds that there are 620 letters in the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the numerical value of the word כתר. 
  In order to understand this calculation you must realise that the Ten Commandments are the mystical dimension of the Ineffable Name in the way it is written and in the way it is read. This is what G–d meant when He told Moses: זה שמי וזה זכרי, וה-י-ה-ו-ה בהיכל קדשו, "This is My name and this is the way I wish to be mentioned." [the additional quote may demonstrate that in His own abode G–d is referred to by a different name than when in communication with man. Ed] This refers to the written spelling of G–d's name. The name א-ד-נ-י is G–d's name as it is pronounced when we read it. Between the two spellings we have the mystery of the relationship between G–d and כנסת ישראל the spiritual equivalent of the people of Israel. The soul of Israel, which is called אדם, corresponds to the emanation מלכות, which represents the name א-ד-נ-י, the secret of the union with the emanation תפארת, (the emanation which produces the souls, נשמות). We know that מלכות is the source of Israel from the verse: במקהלות ברכו אלוקים א-דני ממקור ישראל "In assemblies bless G–d, the Lord, you who are the fountain of Israel" (Psalms 68,27). In view of the above it is justified that the first five of the Ten Commandments speak of the name of G–d as it is spelled, i.e. י-ה-ו-ה, whereas the last five Commandments speak of that name as it is read, i.e. א-ד-נ-י the source of Israel, seeing that these five Commandments regulate conduct between Jews and Jews. All is one at the very core of things, all leads back to the Ineffable Name. 
  This is in line with what I have copied from the writings of Nachmanides where he stated that the dual nature of the tablets, i.e. 2 tablets instead of one, symbolises Heaven and Earth, groom and bride. All is based on the mystical dimension of the Ineffable Name spelled as either י-ה-ו-ה, or א-ד-נ-י. On Exodus 19,20, Nachmanides writes as follows: "If you take a close look at this chapter you will understand that G–d descended on Mount Sinai in His capacity as the Ineffable Name and resided there in fire. Whenever G–d is mentioned as speaking with Moses throughout this chapter, He did so as the Attribute י-ה-ו-ה, i.e. He used the Ineffable Name as His means of communication. G–d elevated Moses and brought him towards a level of great honour and warned that the people should not overstep their bounds or they would cause themselves grave harm (Exodus 19,21). The warning pertained to efforts to secure visions of G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name, something that even the אצילי בני ישראל, "The nobility of the children of Israel," mentioned as having a vision of G–d in Exodus 24,10-11, did not see. However, all of Israel heard the voice of G–d out of the fire. Thus far Nachmanides.
  G–d informed the Israelites of the fact that His Ineffable Name represents His Essence. They heard His voice via היכלו, His Sanctuary, which is a description of the name א-ד-נ-י. [G–d's Sanctuary or palace, in this case the fire on Mount Sinai, must be perceived of as a "shell" which protects the listener or viewer from being burned by G–d's Essence. Ed.] This "name" or fire, [the אש דת Ed.] is maintained by performance of the 613 commandments on Israel's part. This is what G–d alluded to when He said: זה שמי וזה זכרי. The Zohar has already pointed out that when you pair the word שמי with half the Ineffable name י-ה, you obtain the number 365, i.e. the number of negative commandments in the Torah, whereas when you pair the word זכרי with the other half of the Ineffable name i.e. ו-ה, you obtain the number 248, the number of positive commandments in the Torah. In order to emphasize the division we have outlined further, the Torah (Deut. 4,36) describes the episode of the revelation at Mount Sinai in the following words: מן השמים השמיעך את קולו … ועל הארץ הראך את אשו הגדולה, "From the Heaven He let you hear, etc.,on Earth He showed you His fire." It was because G–d wanted to acquaint Israel with the meaning of His Ineffable Name, that He commenced the Decalogue with the words: אנכי י-ה-ו-ה אלוקיך, and concluded the statement with: אשר הוצאתיך מארץ מצרים. I have already explained on previous occasions that the miracles G–d performed in Egypt had as their objective to bring home to Israel the idea that the Ineffable Name stands for the G–d who was, is, and will be; who is able to renew the world-order at will, and who once before created the whole universe out of nothing. He is the absolute Master, and assigns what He chooses to whom He chooses. This was never more clearly demonstrated than when G–d dealt a fatal blow to the שר של מצרים, the most powerful force in the universe next to Him. 
  I have dealt with this verse in still greater depth in my essay on מסכת פחסים.  Pardes Rimonim, which makes a point of giving definitions for many terms used in the Torah and in kabbalistic literature, warns against misunderstanding the term שם העצם, "personal noun," when applied to G–d. Whereas generally speaking this name supposedly gives us information about the essence of the thing or person described, this cannot be true of G–d. It is quite impossible for a creature to comprehend the "Essence" of his Creator. The term שם העצם is used in connection with G–d when it refers to עשר ספירות, the ten emanations, a name which encompasses all aspects of these emanations.
  [The author quotes from Pelach Harimon and other kabbalistic texts dealing with the meaning of שם העצם, and he also refers the reader to his introduction in the treatise תולדות האדם. I have taken the liberty to omit complicated descriptions of the mystical significance of the shapes of some of the letters and other matters dealt with which are meant for those who have studied more Kabbalah. Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  I have alluded to the fact that the name אנכי may be understood as י אנ"ך the letter י describing the Decalogue, and the other three letters being the opening letters of the three words אורייתא, נביאים, כתובים. (short for the Bible) Since the letter י is considered the "highest" of the letters, it comprises all the other letters within it; it also includes within its essence the other letters forming the Ineffable Name, and especially the letter א. When the sages stated that the Ten Commandments were said בדבור אחד, as a single unbroken utterance, this meant that a single thought was subdivided into ten thoughts. The higher one ascends spiritually, the clearer one will perceive that all the variety of facets of the subdivided original parts which are a result of the original One subdividing, will once more coalesce and form the original One. It is perhaps easiest to understand the Ten Commandments as a single commandment to which G–d added nine amendments. This perhaps is the deeper meaning of Psalms 62,12: אחת דבר אלוקים שתים זו שמעתי, "One thing G–d has spoken, two things have I heard." First G–d made a single statement including all that He had to say; subsequently He fed Israel this message in smaller selfcontained doses. We ourselves heard only two statements directly from G–d, אנכי, and לא יהיה לך.
  I have found the following comment by Nachmanides on the commandment לא תשא את שם ה' אלוקיך לשוא: "They heard the first two commandments from G–d directly. This is why the sages said that these two commandments are the essence of all the Commandments. How do we reconcile this with the view of Rabbi Eliezer who points out that the Torah says in Exodus 20,1: 'G–d spoke all these words?' Moses said to the people in Deut. 5,19: את הדברים האלה דבר ה' אל כל קהלכם בהר מתוך האש. 'G–d spoke these words to your entire congregation at the Mountain out of the fire.' The Torah (Moses) continues there: 'He inscribed them on two stone tablets and gave them to me' (Moses). This clearly implies that what G–d inscribed on the tablets was exactly what He had said to the people!
  I will now explain the tradition of our sages in this respect. Without doubt, Israel heard all Ten Commmandments directly from the mouth of G–d as per the plain meaning of the verses quoted. In the case of the first two commandments the people not only heard the words but they understood them in the same way as Moses understood them. At that point G–d spoke to them just as a master speaks to a servant. From the third commandment onward, however, the people heard the voice of G–d without understanding what G–d said; this is why they needed the services of Moses as interpreter." Thus far Nachmanides.
  The difficulty with Nachmanides is that what he describes as the plain meaning of the verse implies that the "first time" the whole nation heard the entire Ten Commandments in one continuous "word." The second time, when G–d spelled out the different commandments individually, the people only heard the first two commandments from G–d directly.
  It would seem that this is precisely what Rashi had in mind when he wrote as follows: "The words את כל הדברים האלה mean that G–d uttered all the Ten Commandments in a single word, something impossible for man to do. In that case, what is the meaning of "I am the Lord your G–d….Do not have any other gods?" Surely this is an example of G–d spelling out details! It means that G–d repeated everything He had first said in one single word (based on Mechilta). Thus far Rashi on the subject. At first glance we cannot even understand Rashi's question "what is the additional information conveyed in 'I am the Lord your G–d etc.?"' Did G–d not have to tell us exactly what the Ten Commandments were which He first uttered as a single word? Rashi alludes to a statement by our sages who said that Israel heard the first two commandments directly from G–d. He could not understand this, seeing that they must have heard all the commandments from G–d directly when G–d said them in a single utterance! Rashi's comment concerned this latter statement of the sages; He explains that G–d repeated the commandments.
  This matter of a single utterance is also alluded to in a calculation called מרובע (squaring the letters in a given word and adding the result). You take the word אחד and multiply the letter א byitself=1; then you mutiply the letter ח by itself=64; lastly you multiply the letter ד by itself=16. The result of this calculation, i.e. 81, is the numerical value of the letters in the word אנכי. The letter א is not subject to multiplication since when you multiply it by itself the result still remains 1. This is an allusion to the absolute Oneness as pointed out earlier. It is clear that the word אנכי and the four letters of that word as we explained plus the word itself (as a value of 1) alludes to the concealed aspect of the One in this universe, i.e G–d. The only true Existence in this universe is the one that is hidden, and yet it is the origin of all that is visible in this world. It is not by accident that the name the Kabbalists have used to describe this most hidden facet of G–d, i.e. His Essence, is אין סוף. The name that alludes to all existence, however, is the name י-ה-ו-ה. It is this latter name that is responsible for the existence of the various "worlds" known to Kabbalists as אצילות, בריאה, יצירה and עשיה. [abstract concepts needed to make the conversion of pure ideas into physical matter intelligble to our limited minds before G–d could proceed to create the universe known as the world of עשיה. Ed.] These four "worlds" correspond in some degree to the four letters in the Ineffable Name, and form the מרכבה, chariot, or "carrier" of G–d. In the world called עולם הבריאה the carrier is composed of the four attributes חסד, גבורה, תפארת, מלכות. Each attribute represents one of the four letters in the Ineffable Name. In the world called עולם היצירה, the carrier is composed of the four חיות described in Ezekiel's vision (Ezekiel chapter 1) who support G–d's throne, i.e. אדם, שור, נשר, אריה. In the world known as עולם העשיה, i.e. our world, the patriarchs form the מרכבה: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob respectively represent the attributes of גבורה חסד, and תפארת, whereas David forms the fourth leg of the מרכבה, that of מלכות.
  לא יהיה לך אלהים אחרים על פני. The verse not only discusses our conduct in this world, but also alludes to the Celestial Regions. On the one hand G–d forbids the worship of anything which is part of the עולם העשיה, our physical world, on the other hand worship of any beings, even in the Celestial Regions other than G–d Himself is equally forbidden. Nachmanides is quite explicit about all this in his commentary on this verse. Every angel found in the Celestial Regions is called Elohim and therefore falls under the category of forbidden deities.
  Maimonides describes the beginnings of idol-worship both in his ספר המדע and in his מורה נבוכים. He explains that when man first "worshipped" some deity other than G–d this was not meant as an affront to G–d, but, on the contrary, was addressed to Him. Since He is invisible, whereas some of His agents such as the sun are most prominent, people felt that if G–d had Himself given so much power to the sun, the sun as His agent deserved a measure of man's respect. He draws a parallel between the honour due to a king and that due to the king's ministers. If one honours the king's servant, it was reasoned, this is proof that one honours the king immeasurably more. Enosh committed this error when he began to call the worshiping of angels "service of G–d." Subsequently, all other powers of nature became objects of worship out of similar considerations, until in the end, the multitude made idols which supposedly symbolised the different powers of nature. In order to prevent such errors from happening again, the Torah warns us not to pay homage to anyone or anything except the invisible G–d. This in spite of the fact that the forces in question can be described as possessing Elohut, G–d-like powers. They possess powers similar to the angels who are שרים of the various nations. 
  The fallacy in the reasoning of the people who felt that the servant deserves some of the glory of the master was that such reasoning is valid only when one speaks of a king of flesh and blood and his servants. Such kings and such ministers both have something in common. They share the fact that the ministers have installed or crowned their respective kings in the first place. Not so in the case of G–d, the Ineffable Name. He was neither appointed by another nor is He comparable to any other. His servants all depend upon Him absolutely, whereas He does not depend upon them in any manner at all. He exists eternally, even if all His agents perish for any reason. If, G–d forbid, He were not to exist, they, His agents would disappear automatically and totally. 
  This is the meaning of "Do not have any other gods in My Presence!" Our sages say that these last two words simply mean "as long as I exist!" One difficulty is why -according to the sages- here more than in any other place, does G–d add these words על פני? I believe that our sages had in mind that here G–d simply alludes to His eternal existence, that His existence will continue as opposed to anything that has merely been created. G–d tells us why we should not reserve some special feelings of awe or reverence for His servants who are so totally dependent upon Him. In order to warrant being worshipped, the object or phenomenon being worshipped must at least be eternal, something that does not apply to any phenomenon known in nature or in the Celestial Regions.
  The sages also consider the words: על פני as alluding to the fact that חלק ה' עמו, יעקב חלק נחלתו. Other deities are part of אלוקים, peripherally connected to G–d, whereas the Jewish people who are described as "cleaving to G–d" are as closely attached to G–d as one's face, i.e. פנים. "Face to Face did the Lord speak with you" פנים אל פנים דבר ה' עמכם, (Deut.5.4). There is another reverse aspect to this "face to face" relationship, a relationship that could be called a "back to back" relationship, אחוריים לאחוריים. When G–d "expanded" into this physical world, He allowed for both kinds of attachment to man, i.e. "face to face," and "back to back." The Hebrew word אחרים symbolises this relationship, hence the term אלוהים אחרים describes the way the pagans relate to their god, which is itself an outgrowth of the סיטרא דשמאלא, the "left side" of the diagram depicting the emanations. The philosophers of the Gentiles as well as their rulers are all well aware of the existence of G–d as the Ineffable Name, and when they refer to Him they describe him as אלוקי האלוקים, "the G–d of G–ds." Their attachment to G–d does not extend beyond the level of אלוקים אחרים, i.e. what we described as אחוריים. The commandment לא יהיה לך warns us not to slide backwards into a peripheral relationship with G–d when we have been chosen to have a much more intimate relationship --a personal one-- with Him. Perhaps we can define the meaning of על פני as G–d saying that someone who has been granted access to what to others is the most hidden aspect of G–d, the אין סוף, must not squander such a close relationship by addressing himself to subordinate instruments of G–d. [Here I have paraphrased the author's remarks. Ed.]
  
  לא תעשה לך פסל וכל תמונה. The emanation מלכות is also known as תמונת י-ה-ו-ה. According to the Kabbalists G–d says of this emanation in Numbers 12,8: ותמונת ה' יביט "He (Moses) beholds a picture of G–d." The Rekanati says "I have already told you that actions performed down here on earth leave an imprint in the Celestial Regions. Anyone who constructs a graven image or picture of a deity diminishes the בנין, "the whole fabric" from which the universe is built." The prohibition pertains to לך, "for yourself, for your own purpose." When such images as the cherubs were fashioned for use in the Tabernacle or later in the Holy Temple, this does not fall under the heading of לך, since it is G–d Himself who derives satisfaction from such figures. The two cherubs symbolise the "two faced" nature of א-ד-נ-י and י-ה-ו-ה. The numerical value of the word תמונה is identical with the numerical value of the expression פרצוף אדם, =501 (the face(s) of the cherubs on the lid of the Holy Ark). This is the mystical dimension of תפארת אדם.
  לא תשתחוה להם. Prostrating oneself is an allusion to drawing Celestial influences earthwards. This is the bending of one's head downwards. Though the Gentile nations attract to themselves or draw down such influences, the fact remains that they prostrate themselves to non existent influences. On the other hand, when we do so -such as during the Temple service- we prostrate ourselves before the King of Kings the Holy One blessed be His name. We do not relate to G–d "back to back" as explained earlier, but פנים אל פנים, "face to face."
  לא תעבדם. Do not serve them in the manner in which one performs such service, even when its is a revolting form of obeisance such as the service performed in front of the בעל פעור. By doing so we have strengthened the influence on earth of the forces that originate in the left side of the diagram of the emanations. It is our duty to put as much distance as possible between ourselves and those forces. The Torah enjoins us: והיה מחניך קדוש, to be surrounded only by holy influences (Deut. 23.15). This means that the 248 organs and 365 sinews of man should symbolise the encampment of ה' אלוקיך.
  לא תשא את שם ידו"ד אלהיך. The Rekanati describes anyone who swears a vain or false oath as קוצץ בנטיעות cutting planted trees, i.e. damaging G–d's universe. This is the reason the Torah used the expression לא תשא instead of לא תשבע. By using the expression תשא the idea is conveyed that the groom should not be separated from the bride, [the word is used as נישואים marriage. Ed.] When the Torah continues כי לא ינקה השם, "that G–d will not clear one who does so," this is a reference to another verse in which a person has been cleared, ונקתה, and the resulting union with her husband is fruitful (Numbers 5,28). He who separates will not be cleared, however. Thus far the Rekananti. I have already explained elsewhere how the word שבועה, oath, is derived from שבעה, seven, and is connected with the בנין the "structure" of the universe, something G–d created in seven days. You may read up about this in my treatise שבועות, פרק תורה אור, חלק תורה תמימה.
  זכור את יום השבת לקדשו. This commandment testifies to the eternal nature of G–d, that He created the world out of nothing. We have a tradition that the two formulas זכור ושמור בדבור אחד נאמרו, the one here and the one in Deuteronomy were uttered by G–d simultaneously (Rosh Hashanah 27). The first version in our portion mentions the Creation, something which demonstrated חידוש העולם, G–d creating the universe in 6+1 days. The second version in Deuteronomy 5,12, introduced by the word שמור, mentions the Exodus, the occasion when G–d was seen to establish new ground rules for the universe. There He proved that He was the Creator. The meaning of His name י-ה-ו-ה was demonstrated in Egypt. Our sages say that when one consecrates the Sabbath over a cup of wine one alludes to a world in the future which will be on the spiritual level of the Sabbath all the time (Pesachim 106). We will merit that world of the future by observing the שמור part of this commandment in this present world. The Sabbath in the world of the future represents the mystical dimension of the emanation בינה, where the יין המשומר the wine from the days of גן עדן, has been preserved and is awaiting us.
  לא תעשה כל מלאכה. There are thirty nine categories of work which are forbidden on the Sabbath. Rabbi Menachem Habavli writes that these categories correspond to the types of work the Israelites had to perform for the Egyptians during their years of bondage, i.e. the nnfl nnap mentioned in Exodus 1,13. When you look at the letters in the word עבודת פרך by using a method called את,בש,גר,דק, etc., you will find that the letters פ-ר-ך when exchanged with each other according to this method, when added together amount to 39. [compare Sanhedrin 22 on how Daniel deciphered the writing on the wall of Belshazzar's palace by using this method. Ed.] Thus far Rabbi Menachem Habavli. The Sabbath and the Exodus are part of the same utterance by G–d, as I have explained. The mystical dimension of the "private domain" on the Sabbath is that it must be a minimum of י (10) טפחים high and occupy an area of not less than ד (4 by 4) טפחים. 4 by 4 plus 10 equals the numerical value of the Ineffable Name י-ה-ו-ה=26.
  כבד את אביך ואת אמך. Here too we can find an allusion to the Ineffable Name. Father and Mother are at the same time son and daughter, respectively. These four between them symbolise the emanations חכמה, בינה, תפארת and מלכות. The four letters in the Holy Name exert their influence on these four emanations.
  לא תרצח לא תנאף לא תגנוב לא תענה לא תחמוד. These last five commandments are called תורת אדם. Israel is called אדם. This fact lies at the root of the concept of כנסת ישראל. This corresponds to the name א-ד-נ-י, the source of Israel as we explained earlier. These last five commandments, if violated, would blemish the Holy Name of G–d. The murderer definitely diminishes G–d's image, seeing that G–d had imparted His image to man when He created him in His image and His likeness. Man's G–d-given soul was already within the womb of his mother before he was born. This is what is called the מלכות שם א-ד-נ-י, the union between the two separate names of י-ה-ו-ה and א-ד-נ-י. The union between איש and אשה is parallel to the relationship between these two names of G–d we have just mentioned. The commandment not to steal refers to kidnapping of a human being. Doing this means uprooting the kidnapped person from his destiny as a human being, depriving him of the appellation that symbolises the purpose of his existence. Testifying falsely against a human being has the same detrimental effect upon that human being as the kidnapping of him. A human being created in G–d's image is reduced to something not worthy of that image by means of the testimony of the false witness.
  If someone commits adultery with the wife of another man he prevents the good influence from the emanation מלכות devolving upon him and making him something to be proud of. Instead, he opens the path for the influence of Lilith and all the negative influences associated with her. [We have discussed these influences as "harlots" in פרשת בשלח ] Lilith is seen by Kabbalists as the "wife" of Samael. This is supported by the numerical value of the word נאף, adulterer, being identical with that of סמאל, = 131.
  The tenth commandment, that of not coveting what is not yours, is none other than the one and only commandment G–d gave to Adam and Eve in גן עדן. The tree of knowledge was described in Genesis 3,6 as נחמד להשכיל, "desirable as a source of wisdom," i.e. she coveted it. Eve separated its fruit from the tree, i.e. she tore apart the fruit which represents the emanation מלכות from the trunk which represents the emanation דעת. We have observed that violating any one of these five commandments involves separating things which ought to remain joined together.
  As stated, the two tablets with five commandments each represent the two-fold spelling of the Ineffable Name, one as written, the other as read by human beings. There is another allusion that we can detect in the fact that the Commandments were written on two tablets instead of on a single one. Each tablet may symbolise five of the ten emanations mentioned in the ספר יצירה. Rabbi Moshe Cordovero, at the beginning of his book Pardes Rimonim mentions that there is an allusion in the first five commandments to the phylactery of the head, which symbolises חכמה, בינה, גדולה, and תפארת, i.e. the four portions of the Torah contained in that תפילה. The fifth emanation כתר is represented by the housing that contains the four portions mentioned. Four of the other five emanations, i.e. תפארת, נצח, הוד, יסוד are represented by the four portions of the Torah contained in the תפילה של יד, the phylactery worn on the hand, whereas the tenth and last emanation מלכות is represented by the housing of that phylactery. The two always have to be worn together; one must not make a separation between the two. When the Torah speaks of: לא תעשון אתי אלוהי כסף ואלוהי זהב, "Do not make beside Me silver or golden deities," this is an allusion to the "arms" of the world חסד וגבורה; [silver and gold are symbols here, not intended as a description of actual cast images. Ed.] G–d must not be served in a manner that causes things that are joined to become disrupted. Rekanati writes that the sin of Jerovam ben Nevot (the first king of the Northern kingdom of the ten tribes) consisted of his causing a disruption between the five upper emanations and the five lower ones. The five lower emanations are viewed as being "silver" and extend as high as חסד וגבורה, whereas the five "upper" emanations are perceived of as "gold." "Silver" is considered white, and represents the attribute of Mercy, whereas "gold" is considered red and represents the attribute of Justice. There are many different ways in which one can bring about a קצוץ, disruption, in the pattern in which G–d has created the universe. 
  The mystical dimension of true אמונה, faith, is the striving to re-unite (make whole) the Holy Name which embraces all aspects of the highest spiritual domain, אצילות. We have explained that G–d's Ineffable Name is spelled either as י-ה-ו-ה when written, or as א-ד-נ-י when read, and that it "resides" in His היכל קדשו הס מפניו כל הארץ, Holy Sanctuary, and that the whole Earth is ordered to be silent in His Presence (Habbakuk 2,20). The numerical value of this Sanctuary in the Heavens, היכל, is 65, the same as the numerical value of אדנ"י. We know that in our world we try to emulate what goes on in Heaven. It follows that the Tabernacle or Temple on earth is also the abode of G–d's Holy Name. This is the reason that no sword i.e. metal tool, instrument of potential death, was allowed to be used in its construction. The sword brings to mind Samael, the very concept that the Temple is designed to banish from earth. It is also clear why ערוה, nakedness, must not be displayed wholly or partially within the confines of the Holy Temple. The latter symbolises the אשה זונה, the harlot, whereas the Temple symbolises the אשת חיל the woman of valour as described by Solomon in Proverbs chapter 31. In the Temple the High Priest is therefore able to express our attachment to G–d by pronouncing His Ineffable Name in holiness and purity on the Day of Atonement. While it is true that the Torah (Exodus 20,21) has stated: בכל המקום אשר אזכיר את שמי אבא אליך וברכתיך, "I shall come to you and bless you in any place that I allow My name to be mentioned," the meaning is not that we may mention His name in any place of our choosing. The Torah was careful not to write: "in any place where you choose to mention My name."
  I have seen the following very pertinent comment in Tzror Hamor on the words אזכיר את שמי. "G–d says אזכיר instead of תזכיר. This indicates that it is G–d who mentions His name, not the High Priest. Even though, technically, the High Priest utters the name of G–d in the Holy Temple, it is G–d who causes these letters to be put in the mouth of the High Priest. Once they have been placed in his mouth, the High Priest utters them in the order that makes them form the Ineffable Name. This is also what is meant when the Jerusalem Talmud discusses the meaning of Deuteronomy 27,14, where the Levites are told to pronounce the blessings, etc. בקול רם, "with a loud voice." The words בקול רם must be understood as "with the voice of the exalted, the high One." This teaches that G–d reinforced the voice of the Levites; He put the words in their mouths while they uttered them. It is very similar to Exodus 19,19 where Moses is reported as משה ידבר והאלוקים יעננו בקול. Here too we have to understand this as G–d putting the words in Moses' mouth which he was supposed to say.
  Our Rabbis have drawn our attention to this in the liturgy of the Mussaph service of the Day of Atonement in which the various steps of the High Priest's service are detailed. It says there: והכהנים והעם כשהיו שומעים את השם המפורש יוצא מפי כהן גדול. "And when the priests and the people heard the Ineffable Name emerge from the mouth of the High Priest." The Rabbis did not describe the name as מוצא, as "emitted," but as יוצא, "coming out," as if it came out by itself. This idea comes across even more clearly in the continuation of that description אף הוא היה מכוון לגמור את השם כנגד המברכים, "He (High Priest) also timed the completion of the name to occur so that the worshippers could intone their response." The Rabbis who composed this part of the liturgy did not speak about להזכיר or לומר את ה' but used the word לגמור. They wanted to indicate that G–d had initiated placing His name in the mouth of the High Priest. Once the High Priest realised these words (letters) were in his mouth, he would לגמור, complete the process. This then is the reason that the Torah here speaks about אזכיר את שמי. The Zohar has also explained it in a similar way. Thus far the Tzror Hamor.
  We observe that the whole subject matter revolves around the Ineffable Name, the name representing G–d's Essence. It seems evident that Yitro knew something about the name of G–d, and this is why he said: "Now I know that י-ה-ו-ה is greater than any אלוהים (Exodus 18,11)." His statement included both idols and other aspects of G–d's names. Our sages have reported that Yitro in his search for truth had not omitted a single one of the religions practised during his time (Mechilta). He first came to the conclusion that there are several names i.e. manifestations of the true G–d, and that there was also a name that signified G–d's ability to effect changes in the laws of nature. He arrived at the conclusion that the four-lettered Ineffable Name was that Name.
  We have a tradition that after Yitro, i.e. Yeter, or Re-uel, converted to Judaism, his name was changed to יתרו to indicate that he had accepted the 613 commandments. If this is so, why was his name changed to one whose numerical value is 616 instead of 613? It seems to me that after Yitro converted to Judaism he was only entitled to a name whose numerical value is 606, since by converting Yitro assumed only an additional 606 commandments. He had been obligated to observe the 7 Noachide commandments already prior to his conversion. We have the example of Ruth the Moabite, whose name was changed to רות=606. Ruth's new name symbolised these 606 additional commandments she assumed at the time of her conversion. Yitro therefore should have been called תרו. He had the letter י added to his name as a special acknowledgment of the efforts he had made to find the true greatness of G–d and His Name. Even the letter ו in his name represents an acknowledgment of his contribution to the Jewish people through his suggestion (18,21) that Moses appoint heads of thousands, heads of hundreds etc. We have his name on record as merely יתר in Exodus 4,18. Rashi (18,21) points out that 600 judges were installed when the heads of thousands were appointed; the appointment of the heads of of hundreds involved another 6,000 judges. Appointing heads of fifty involved the appointment of another 12,000 judges, and the appointment of heads over each ten Israelites involved the appointment of another 60,000 judges. The whole world wonders why Rashi gave us a lesson in arithmetic here? Were we not able to figure this out by ourselves? 
  The simplest way of answering this question is that Rashi was bothered by the fact that Yitro mentioned the appointment of these judges by starting with the heads of thousands. It would have appeared more normal to start with the need of appointing a judge for every ten Israelites (small group), and then work one's way up to the need for having heads of 50, 100, 1000 as sort of an Appellate Court. Rashi therefore tells us that in actual fact this is what Yitro did. He started with the mention of small numbers, i.e. the number of judges who would preside over 1000 Jews. The next higher number was that of the number of judges required to preside over each group of 100 Jews, etc.
  One may understand Rashi as having alluded to something more profound than this. Through Rashi's explanation the mystical dimension of the letter and/or number ו of G–d's Ineffable Name has been revealed to us. I have already explained that the letter י [when spelled as יוד.] comprises the letters in the Ineffable Name; it symbolises the ten emanations. These emanations, as I explained, are the means of pure spirit being converted by stages into a physical universe. When this בנין, structure, came into being, the means used were 6 "lines" which radiate from the emanation תפארת in all directions of the globe. The letter ד as part of that Yud alludes to the emanation מלכות which forms the fourth leg of G–d's throne as explained previously. All the direct influences which translate into perceivable physical phenomena originate from that emanation.
  We have a Midrash Tanchuma in Shoftim according to which Moses dedicated his soul to Torah, דינין, judgments, and to Israel. "Torah" refers to the Ten Commandments. They represent the letter י. "Judgments" refers to the letter ו, seeing that the world is based on דינין, dispensation of justice; the בנין originates in the 6th emanation תפארת. "Israel" is the mystical dimension, i.e. כנסת ישראל, which forms the ד, fourth leg, of G–d's מרכבה. The reason Moses was so totally dedicated to these three concepts was that his prophetic powers were of the אספקלריא מאירה level. Having explained how Yitro -by the addition of the letter Yud spelled י-ו-ד- gained fame so that a whole portion of the Torah bears his name, we may also see some mystical dimension in the letter ד of that Yud. Exodus 18,2-3 describes Yitro as bringing with him Moses' wife Tzipporah as well as her two sons. We must ask whether these sons were not also Moses' sons? If so, why were they not described as such? The Torah phrases it thus in order to show that Yitro, in addition to meriting the distinction of the letter ו (in the paragraph starting with ואתה תחזה in 18,21) also merited the distinction of the letter ד as a reward for having placed himself under the protection of the wings of the שכינה. Yitro's arrival in the camp of the Israelites included four persons; he himself, Tzipporah and her two sons. In Jewish law the children's nationality is determined by the nationality of their mother. Moses' paternity was irrelevant then for the moment. This is why in this instance the children are described as being Tzipporah's. The Zohar adds as an additional reason that it was the children's mother who raised them while their father Moses was busy looking after the Jewish people, i.e. מסר עצמו על ישראל, in the words of our Midrash. Later on, when Moses had obtained permission from the שכינה to take time out in order to welcome his wife and children as well as his father-in-law, these children are referred to as בניו, "his children" in 18,4. This concludes our presentation of some of the mystical aspects of מתן תורה, the gift of the Torah presented to the Jewish people during the revelation at Mount Sinai.
  I have composed an article dealing with numerous other aspects of מתן תורה, which I have named תורה תמימה, and which can be found in my treatise מסכת שבועות, under the heading ותורה אור.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  מדוע אתה יושב לבדך? Rashi comments that Yitro asked Moses "Why do you sit down like a king?" Yitro felt that by sitting down (while the people were standing) Moses belittled the dignity of the people. This seems difficult to credit, seeing that Yitro afterwards warned Moses of becoming too tired to be useful to his people if he continued to do what he did without help.
  We must appreciate that the reign and authority G–d has granted the Jewish people is quite different from that which He granted to the Gentile nations. The Gentile nations exercise rule and authority because they confer honour upon themselves; their entire concept of authority is a secular one. Using these terms in connection with the Jewish people, however, we deal with the spiritual aspect of rule and authority. Authority by Jewish rulers is a means to ensure that the people obey G–d's laws, comply with His wishes. In this connection the Torah says: ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים, "You shall be for Me a kingdom of priests." G–d's emphasis is on the word לי, "for Me". The authority granted to you shall be employed for the honour of "My Name." We have another verse expressing a similar thought in Proverbs 8,15: בי מלכים ימלכו, "Kings reign through Me." The Torah has said that "the royal authority which you exercise shall be through Me," i.e. in order to look after My needs. This is alluded to in Chronicles I 29,23: וישב שלמה על כסא ה', "Solomon sat on the throne of G–d" 
  Yitro had first thought that Moses used his authority like any other secular ruler. This is why he first criticised him. Afterwards he realised that Moses used his authority exclusively on G–d's behalf. He had not realised at first why the people lined up. Moses had to tell him that nothing was further from his mind than to indulge himself in the exercise of authority. This is why he told Yitro כי יבא אלי העם לדרוש אלוקים … ושפטתי בין איש ובין רעהו והודעתי את חוקי האלוקים ואת תורותיו, "For the people are in the habit of coming to me to enquire from G–d; I have to judge between one man and his fellow-man and to make known G–d's statutes and His teachings." As a result, Moses implied, I have to sit and they have to stand; I represent G–d, therefore they stand in front of G–d. When Yitro heard Moses' explanation he told him that he must not do all this without assistance for he would become too tired and as a result he would undo all he was hoping to accomplish. 
  We learn from all this how careful a person who has been granted honour by Heaven must be not to abuse such honour by honouring himself, but rather he must use his authority in order to instil the fear of Heaven in his students and to ensure the observance of G–d's commandments.
  בחודש השלישי … ביום הזה באו מדבר סיני. Rashi says that all the Torah had to write was: ביום ההוא, "On that day." Why did the Torah write: ביום הזה, "On this day?" This was to teach us that words of Torah should always appear new in our eyes, as if they had been revealed to us this very day. It is therefore incumbent upon each one of us each and every day of our lives to remember the epsiode of Mount Sinai, the revelation, and the giving of the Torah. We must be conscious that G–d chose us from amongst all the other nations although we had been so inextricably mixed up with the Egyptians that our departure from Egypt is described in the Torah (Deut. 4,34) as the removal of גוי מקרב גוי, "one part of a nation from another part of that same nation." We must remain constantly aware of all the miracles G–d performed on our account so that we should be able to arrive at Mount Sinai and shed the pollutants from the original serpent still remaining within us. We should always keep before our mind's eye that G–d gave us the Torah, something that He did not give even to the ministering angels. We must also be aware that all our collective souls were present at Mount Sinai when all this occurred and when G–d spoke to us face to face. In view of all this, how could it even occur to a person for a moment to again risk being covered with the pollutant of the serpent by disobeying G–d once again? Are we not all part of the oath which formed the Jewish response to G–d's offer of the holy Torah, i.e. "we shall do and we shall hear?" I have written more about the moral implications of all this in chapter ten of my treatise עשרה מאמרות.
  ויסעו (ישראל) מרפידים. Basing himself on the Mechilta, Rashi comments that the reason the Torah reports this departure from Refidim -although we know that this was the last place the Israelites camped- is in order to tell us that just as the arrival of the children of Israel in the desert of Sinai occurred after they had repented, so their departure from Refidim occurred after they had done תשובה before they received the Torah. The Kabbalists view this as an allusion to the difficulties some people engaged in Torah study may have in understanding the meaning of certain words or phrases. Such difficulties are often due to the influence of the קליפה created by a sin committed by such a person, which creates a barrier between him and his Maker. When a person does experience such difficulty he should examine his conduct very carefully in order to be able to do תשובה. Rabbi Cordovero composed a special prayer in his volume Pardes Rimonim to enlist G–d's help in this respect.
  אתם ראיתם. This verse (19,4) introduces a list of benefits that will accrue to the Jewish people if they listen to G–d's voice. 
  Why does G–d first speak about the Jewish people becoming a סגולה for Him, and immediately afterwards He says they will become "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation?" All of this could have been said without repeating the words "you will become?"
  There is a comment by the Zohar on פרשת בלק, (Sullam edition page 54) which may help to explain this. Deborah says in Judges 5,4: ה' בצאתך משעיר, בצעדך משדה אדום. "G–d, when You left from Se-ir and when You stepped forth from the fields of Edom, etc" G–d, before he gave the Torah to the Jewish people, first approached the descendants of Esau, as alluded to in Deut. 33,2. They refused to accept the Torah, as hinted at in וזרח משעיר למו. G–d then approached the Ishmaelites who also refused, as hinted at in והופיע מהר פארן. G–d thereupon offered the Torah to Israel. So far our tradition. 
  We must surely ask some penetrating questions regarding this tradition! There is nothing wrong with asking for elucidation about fine points in the Torah in order to understand their meaning! It is certainly not a sin! To which prophet of their prophets did G–d reveal the Torah -when He appproached Esau's descendants- to have caused them to refuse it? The same question applies to G–d's enquiry in Paran. Did G–d indeed consult the entire nation of the Ishmaelites? We have never heard of G–d revealing Himself to any nation except to Israel through Moses! Besides, the Torah should have said that G–d came from Paran to Sinai, not that He came from Sinai! Rabbi Shimon said that this question can be answered. The meaning of the words: "G–d came from Sinai," is similar to the meaning of G–d saying to Moses in 19,9: "Here I will come to you in the thickness of the cloud." G–d came to Moses from Sinai and revealed Himself to Israel. What did G–d reveal? He revealed that the בני שעיר had declined the offer of the Torah. He then displayed additional love for Israel. The same holds true for the words הופיע מהר פארן. G–d conveyed to Israel that the Ishmaelites had refused His offer. The refusal of other nations to accept the Torah made Israel more beloved in His eyes because Israel accepted the Torah knowing that other nations had already declined it.
  Concerning the question "whom did G–d approach as the respective representatives of these various nations?" This is indeed a great secret and will be revealed through the questioner. Torah itself originates in the secret recesses of the head of the Most High, in the domain בינה. When it reached the left side of the emanations [on its way to the physical world. Ed.], the side which is personified by יצחק, the symbol of the emanation גבורה, G–d saw that a lot of blood (in a negative sense) was associated with that attribute. G–d decided that He had to counteract those phenomena by "whitening" that emanation or attribute. How did G–d go about doing this? He called on Samael, the guardian angel of Esau, and said to him: "Do you want My Torah?" Samael countered: "What is written in the Torah?" G–d said that it says in the Torah: "Do not murder!" G–d deliberately selected a commandment which he knew Esau would have difficulty with. Samael was aghast at the suggestion that his protege should surrender the basic right of "by your sword you shall live," which had been Isaac's blessing to Esau. He told G–d to keep His Torah.
  He explained to G–d that acceptance of the Torah meant that he, Samael, would self-destruct. His entire authority in the universe was based on the planet Mars, the planet symbolising warfare. In order not to affront G–d absolutely, Samael suggested that G–d take the Torah and offer it to the people of Israel, a nation far more suited to live by such rules. Samael did not intend this as a compliment to Israel; on the contrary; Samael hoped that Israel would find it impossible to live by the rules of the Torah. This is the meaning of וזרח משעיר למו, "the light of Torah shone for Israel at the suggestion of Se-ir, i.e. Samael." Samael was convinced that acceptance of the Torah by Israel would lead to Israel's destruction (because of non-observance of its commandments) and would thereby prevent ultimate domination of the earth by Israel.
  G–d was not satisfied with this refusal by Samael, but pointed out that because Esau was the first-born, it was he who was entitled to receive the Torah. Samael replied that the birthright had already been sold to Jacob, and that he, Samael, had concurred in the validity of the sale during his nocturnal encounter with Jacob in Genesis 32,29. G–d thereupon said to Samael: "Since you are not interested in My Torah, depart from My domain." Samael accepted. G–d said to Samael: "Since you suggested that I offer the Torah to Israel, give me some advice how to go about persuading the children of Israel to accept the Torah from Me." Samael replied that it would be necessary to bribe Israel into accepting the Torah. He suggested that a suitable bribe would be to endow Israel with some of endowments of the Celestial Regions so as to make Israel feel superior. As an opening gesture he himself volunteered to bestow some of his own light on Israel and handed it over to G–d there and then. It is this "light" that the Torah describes as וזרח משעיר "It shone forth from Se-ir towards it" (Israel). This is the mystical dimension of Leviticus 16,22: ונשא השעיר עליו את כל עונותם, "The male goat will carry all their (Israel's) sins." The שעיר refers to Samael.
  In consequence of this, G–d transferred from the "blood" on the left side of the emanation גבורה, i.e. Isaac, to the right side of the corresponding emanation חסד, the emanation personified by Abraham. In this way, blood which would have been detrimental became beneficial blood, the blood of circumcision.
  G–d called upon Rahav, the guardian angel of Ishmael, asking whether he wanted to accept the Torah. Rahav also wanted to know what is written in the Torah; G–d told him that the Torah prohibits adultery. This proved unacceptable to the representative of Ishmael who considered his whole kingdom on earth as based on the blessing of water, i.e. the blessing given to the fish in Genesis 1,22 to multiply indiscriminately without regard to exclusive sexual pairings. When the angel told Hagar that she would give birth to Ishmael (Genesis 16,11), he told her that Ishmael would be פרא אדם, "an unbridled human being." [the word פרא here seems related to פרו in the way the Zohar uses it. Ed.] Rahav began to plead with G–d: "Abraham had two sons.; You have the choice of giving the Torah to one of Isaac's two sons. The Torah is far more suitable for either of them than for Ishmael." G–d responded that this would not be fair because Ishmael was Abraham's first-born." The guardian angel of Ishmael then offered to waive his claim to the birthright of Ishmael in favour of Isaac. He offered to also cede to Isaac and his descendants the "light" Ishmael had inherited by dint of being Abraham's first-born son. G–d accepted this offer, and this is why the Torah says: הופיע מהר פארן.
  Why does the Torah use the expression זרח when referring to Samael, whereas it uses the expression הופיע when referring to Rahav? G–d took the "light" [metaphor for the sword he was blessed with Ed.] which Samael divested himself of and used it as a legal instrument to kill with. This is alluded to in Deut.33,29: ואשר חרב גאותך, "and your (Israel's) sword is triumphant!" The blessing Moses bestows on the Jewish people in that verse is, that though traditionally the sword is not Israel's weapon- Israel will be triumphant with the sword. The other blessing, the one that Rahav waived in order not to have to accept the Torah, G–d used only sparingly, only enough to ensure the continuity of the Jewish people through an adequate birthrate. This is why the Torah used the expression מופיע מהר פארן and זרח מהר פארן. Since G–d had taken from the blessings of these two nations, the Torah describes G–d offering the Torah to all the other nations as אתה מרבבות קודש, "He came from places where He offered the Holy Torah to the various guardian angels of all the other nations, i.e. tens of thousands of people." G–d received a similar response in each and every case. G–d took away gifts previously bestowed on these various nations and instead bestowed them, or most of them, on Israel.
  This can be put into perspective by the following parable. A doctor possessed a jar containing the סם החיים, the elixir of life. He saved this jar in order to give it to his son in due course. The physician was very clever. He said to himself that seeing he had servants in his house, these servants would become jealous of his son once they became aware of the contents of the jar and for whom these were meant. Therefore, they would attempt to murder the potential recipient of that gift, i.e. his son. What did the physician do? He took a small amount of poison and placed it at the opening of the jar containing the elixir of life. He called in his servants and asked them whether they would prove their loyalty to him by accepting the contents of the jar. The servants asked to be allowed to examine the contents, intending to taste same. No sooner had they opened the bottle but they experienced death pangs even before they were able to smell or taste the contents. They said to themselves that if the physician would give that potion to his son the son would surely die, and they, the servants, would inherit the physician's wealth. They therefore told the physician that they did not consider the potion in question as suitable for their constitution, but suggested that he give it instead to his son whose constitution was far more suited to benefit from it. They offered the physician an incentive to bribe his son into accepting the gift by giving up a good part of their wages in his favour.
  G–d may be compared to the physician in the parable. He knew full well that if He were to give the Torah to the Jewish people without having offered it to the Gentile nations, these nations would persecute Israel and try to kill it on account of this gift. He therefore contrived that the Gentile nations even offered some of their own blessings in order to make Israel accept what they perceived to be the סם המות, deadly poison. This is why Israel became heir to the Torah without the slightest objection being raised by any of the Gentile nations. They even bestowed gifts on the Jewish people to encourage Israel to accept the Torah. When Moses ascended to Mount Sinai and thence to higher spiritual regions, he did not face opposition from any of the representatives of the seventy nations, though they all were aware of Moses' purpose in those regions.
  Observe that the gifts that Israel received from the princes of the Gentile nations are testimony that they wanted us to receive the Torah. Thus, being in possession of the elixir of life, neither the angel of death nor the influences found in the סטרא אחרא could gain control over us at the critical moment when G–d revealed Himself. Once Israel sinned (during the episode of the golden calf), the Torah describes (Exodus 33,6) that they had to divest themselves of their jewellery which are only man's as a gift [not inalienable, such as an inheritance, but subject to being revoked. Ed]. The only thing that Israel retained from these gifts was called שבי. This is the meaning of Psalms 68,19: למרום עלית שבית שבי, לקחת מתנות באדם, "You ascended to the heights, having taken captives, having received tributes of men."
  When Israel continued to sin, we read in the Torah Numbers 21,1: וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד … וילחם בישראל וישב ממנו שבי, "The Canaanite, king of Arad….engaged Israel in war and and took some of them captive." This means that at that point in time even what had previously remained "captive," i.e. the balance of the gifts from the Gentile nations prior to Israel accepting the Torah, was taken away from them. Whenever Israel will do תשובה, G–d will restore all these gifts. Israel will atone for its sins, and these gifts will act as protection for them.
  The gifts Israel received from the שרים of Esau, Ishmael and others are what is alluded to by Bileam (Numbers 23,9) when he said of Israel: הן עם לבדד ישכון ובגוים לא יתחשב. "It is a nation which resides in solitary splendour and is not included in the count of nations." A special reward is reserved for Israel, but they also participate in any good the Gentiles receive. This latter participation in the good received by the Gentiles לא יתחשב, is not counted i.e. is not deducted from their general reward. Compare Rashi on this verse.
  This is what G–d meant when He said to Israel: והייתם לי סגולה מכל העמים. "You will be precious to Me more than any of the other nations" This meant that any favours that the nations would experience, Israel would also experience. When G–d continued: ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש, He announced that what Israel would receive as a part of the bounty G–d shares out to the Gentiles would not be considered as of value since Israel are a kingdom of priests. All Israelites are considered as princes, sons of kings. The word "kings" refers to the kingdom of Heaven. When the Torah says of Israel "you are a holy nation," the word "holy" is to be understood as similar to what the sages say about the angels paying their respects to the righteous in the world of the future by addressing them as קדוש, "holy."
  One can also explain these verses in accordance with a statement by our sages (Yuma 72) that there are three crowns, the crown of priesthood acquired by Aaron, the crown of Monarchy acquired by David, and the crown of Torah which was granted (potentially) to everybody. Concerning all this, the Torah first says (plural) והייתם, "you will all be something precious." There is a discussion in Baba Kama 87 about the meaning of the word סגולה. Rav Chisda holds that someone could acquire סגולה by purchasing a Torah scroll. Rabba bar Rav Hunna thinks that ownership of a date-palem constitutes possession of a סגולה; the owner will be able to eat dates from it for an unlimited period of time. What Rabbi Chisda meant was that everybody is at liberty to buy a Torah scroll, hence everybody can acquire the status of being or possessing a סגולה.
  With regard to the other two crowns, the Torah says: "you will be to Me 1) ממלכת, a kingdom, or 2) כהנים, priests." The expression אתם is addressed to two people exclusively, i.e. Aaron and David who personify these two "crowns."
  Still another method of interpreting these verses would be to view the words והייתם as addressed to everybody, meaning that anyone who wants to can study Torah, as we know from Avodah Zarah where Rabbi Meir states that Gentiles who study Torah are highly regarded. The words "to Me a segulah from all the other nations" on the other hand, are addressed to Israel exclusively, warning that the priesthood is reserved for members of the Jewish nation. The same applies to the Monarchy. The Torah states in Deut. 17,15: "You shall appoint a king over you whom G–d will choose, from amongst your brethren. You must not appoint as king a stranger who is not your brother."
  אתם ראיתם את אשר עשיתי למצרים. According to tradition the word אתם occurs four times at the beginning of a verse. The three other instances are 1) (Exodus 5,11): אתם לכו קחו לכם תבן מאשר תמצאו, "You, go and take yourselves straw from wherever you can find it;" 2) (Deut.29,9): אתם נצבים היום כולכם לפני ה' אלוקיכם; "You are all standing upright in front of the Lord your G–d this day." 3) (Isaiah 43,10): אתם עדי נאום ה' ועבדי אשר בחרתי למען תדעו ותאמינו לי ותבינו כי אני הוא, לפני לא נוצר אל ואחרי לא יהיה. "My witnesses are you, -declares the Lord- My servant whom I have chosen. In order that you may believe in Me, and understand that I am He; before Me no god was formed, and after me none shall exist."
  There is a hint here that man should not be influenced when it appears to him that the righteous suffer and the wicked prosper. G–ds ways are just in all His paths and He dispenses true Justice. He is a true G–d, keeps faith, and there is no crookedness in His judgments. Moses requested from G–d that He should reveal to him how His paths work. (Exodus 33,13) G–d explained to him that when one observes that a צדיק enjoys the life on this earth, this is a sign that the צדיק in question is also the son of a צדיק. When one observes a צדיק experiencing afflictions, he is the son of a wicked person. When a wicked person enjoys the good life, this is because his father was righteous, whereas if the wicked person suffers hard times it is because his father before him was also wicked. The Kabbalists explain this answer of G–d in terms of גלגל הנשמות, transmigration of souls. The reincarnated soul is called “בן” without reference to the biological father-son relationship. Any soul inhabiting a body because it has to atone for sins of a previous life, is called the "son" of the person whose body it inhabited in that previous life. 
  Since there are four different combinations of such relationships, we have the four verses commencing with the word אתם, "You." אתם לכו קחו לכם תבן. I have already explained both in my commentary on פרשת שמות and elsewhere that the Jewish people underwent a process of spiritual refinement [including the method of transmigration of souls Ed.] dating back to the generation of Enosh, the generation of the Deluge and the generation of the Tower of Babel. When Pharaoh ordered the Jewish male babies to be drowned in the river Nile, this was a method of atoning for the sins committed by mankind during the generation that perished during the Deluge. When Pharaoh refused to deduct from the daily quota of bricks to be produced although the straw supply was withdrawn, this was in expiation of the sins mankind committed during the generation of the Tower. Inasmuch as Israel had become an inseparable part of the Egyptian nation it had become like the "wicked person who is the son of a wicked person" from the point of view of transmigration of souls. It is therefore not surprising that it experienced the classic fate of the people G–d had described to Moses as רשע בן רשע. This is the reason that the exile was so severe and why Pharaoh compounded their troubles after Moses tried to intervene to lighten their burden.
  When G–d tells Israel in 19,4: "You have seen what I have done to Egypt, etc.," this occurred at a time when they had not yet been completely purified, and were still subject to the attribute of Justice, just like the Egyptians. The attribute of Justice had wanted to know why- seeing that both the Israelites and the Egyptians worshipped idols- the former should experience redemption. The only reason G–d was able to take the Israelites out of Egypt at the time was that they were descended from צדיקים, whereas the other Egyptians were descended from רשעים. The Israelites, however, had retained a spark of their erstwhile holiness and hence the Torah said of them: ותחת כי אהב את אבותיך ויבחר בזרעו אחריו ויוציאך בפניו בכוחו הגדול ממצרים, "And because He loved your fathers, He chose their heirs after them; He Himself in His great might led you out of Egypt" (Deut. 4 37). This verse tells of the great favour G–d did for the Jewish people by taking them out of Egypt; they witnessed how G–d treated a רשע בן צדיק (in this case).
  The other אתם in פרשת נצבים, which was said to the Jewish people after they had just finished listening to Moses issue dire warnings as to what would befall them if they did not observe the Torah, included a warning that someone who observed everybody else being Torah observant should not exploit the merit of the community to protect him from the consequences (Deut. 29,18-19). Moses actually told the Israelites that his very warnings were the factor that would keep them alive as they would be afraid to sin for fear of what would befall them. He explained that though they were descendants of wicked forefathers, they personally had cleaved to G–d, and this is why they had been saved (compare Rashi on Deut 4,4). [Rashi explains elsewhere that the Jews to whom Moses repeatedly referred as obstinate, sinful, etc.,were those who had been redeemed from Egypt and had perished in the desert. This made the second generation צדיקים בני רשעים. The Rashi is not on the above quoted verse. Ed.] Whenever Israel is punished such punishment includes portion of the punishment due for the sin of the golden calf which has not yet been totally expiated. This too is part of the mystical dimension of the transmigration of souls.
  When G–d spoke of the Israelites being His witnesses in Isaiah 43,10, this was an allusion to the good G–d will perform for the Jewish people in the days of the Messiah when He will renew the covenant with us -one that will never be severed- and one which will symbolise that Israel has been totally refined, both the patriarchs and their descendants. At that time the השגחה will be based on the Israelites being צדיקים בני צדיקים, righteous people descended from righteous people. Our sages have stated in Avot 4,19: "Nothing is in our hands: we can neither explain the prosperity of the lawless nor the sufferings of the righteous." 
  Perhaps the meaning is that we should not draw conclusions from what we see with our eyes, seeing that there are other factors which play a role in G–d's השגחה to which we are not privy.
  וידבר אלהים את כל הדברים האלה לאמר. The word לאמר, suggests that G–d rehearsed the words he was going to say to Israel before actually saying them. We must surely learn from here that an ordinary mortal must carefully review what he is going to say before saying it, if even G–d is reported as doing so.
  We should read the Ten Commandments daily in a spirit of awe and reverence in order to make sure that we live up to them at all times in all their details. We must train ourselves to be extraordinarily careful not to violate the third commandment, and to avoid at all costs making statements in the form of an oath. Ibn Ezra deals at length with the serious nature of this prohibition, pointing out that violating it is a graver offence than violating any of the negative commandments following it. The prohibition not to murder or not to commit adultery applies only at certain times and when the opportunity arises to do so. The opportunity to use the name of G–d unnecessarily exists practically all the time, and it is therefore more difficult to guard against it. If someone bandies about the name of G–d, he will sooner or later become guilty of perjuring himself by using G–d's name in a false oath. If Israel were guilty of no other sin, this would be enough to prolong our exile, G–d forbid. When someone murders an enemy, he has at least put a stop to that particular temptation. The same is true if someone commits adultery. Using the name of G–d in vain does not bring in its wake the removal of the temptation to do so again. The very fact that one does not derive any personal satisfaction from violating this commandment makes it likely that one may do so again.
  וירא העם וינועו ויעמדו מרחוק. Rashi on 20,15 says that this means that the people trembled. If someone wishes to merit the crown of Torah he must relate to Torah as did the Israelites at that time, i.e. he must study with a feeling of awe and reverence; he must not consider Torah study as a pleasurable experience. He must study diligently and sanctify himself from the impurity contracted through seminal emissions. His hands should be clean before he sits down to study Torah.
  אשר לא תגלה ערותך עליו. Rashi explains the simple logic in this command (20,23). If it is forbidden to expose oneself even partially -and while wearing trousers as the priests did- to mere stones so as not to embarasss them, how much more circumspect do we have to be not to expose ourselves to a human being who has been created in the image of the Lord, and who therefore would feel far more embarassed by such a sight!
  
  Mishpatim
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This portion commences with the 42nd of the 613 commandments, the law governing the master's relations with the Jewish servant who has been sold into his service.
  The 43rd commandment deals with the marrying off of a Jewish servant maid.
  The 44th commandment deals with the manner in which a Jewish servant girl is released from her service.
  The 45th commandment concerns the prohibition to sell such a Jewish servant girl to another master.
  The 46th commandment deals with the denial of certain conjugal rights of either a Jewish servant girl or any other Jewish girls.
  Commandments 47,48 and 49 are prohibitions of striking father or mother or cursing them on pain of death; another law included in the term מות ימות, is the application of the death penalty by asphyxiation whenever that term is used by the Torah.
  Commandment 50 deals with those injuries and what penalties are applicable to those who cause them (mostly financial). They are listed in the paragraph commencing in chapter 21 verse 18.
  Commandment 51 provides for the Court to impose the death penalty by the sword in certain situations (Hereg). If a master kills his Canaanite servant by a lethal blow, he is also guilty of execution by this method, viz: (Exodus 21,20) "he shall be avenged." (Leviticus 26,25 states "the sword will wreak vengeance for the covenant" on those breaching it).
  Commandment 52 sets out legislation for assessing damages for harm or injury or even death caused by one's livestock (ox).
  Commandment 53 forbids eating of the meat of an ox condemned to death by the Court for having gored a person to death.
  Commandment 54 deals with damages caused by leaving or digging a pit in the public domain.
  Commandment 55 deals with financial or death penalties for thieves.
  Commandment 56 deals with damages caused by one's livestock having destroyed property through trampling underfoot, or through consuming it. The relevant passage commences with the words יבער איש שדה (Exodus 22,4).
  Commandment 57 deals with damage caused through fire, 22,5: "When fire escapes, etc."
  Commandment 58 deals with negligence by a trustee who is not paid for his services: "If someone gives his neighbour money or utensils to keep" (22,6).
  Commandment 59 deals with the disappearance of trust property, the trustee claiming innocence of theft (ibid.).
  Commandment 60 deals with the degree of liability incurred by trustees or renters. This is introduced by the words "if someone entrusts a donkey or ox to keep" (22,9).
  Commandment 61 deals with liability of borrowers. The Torah introduces this with the words "if someone borrows anything from his fellow man, etc." (22,13).
  Commandment 62 deals with the penalty for seducing a virgin (22,15).
  Commandment 63 forbids the keeping alive of any sorceress (22,17).
  Commandments 64 and 65 forbid taking advantage of proselytes by word or deed, since the Torah says: "Do not wrong or oppress a proselyte" (22,20). This is an additional prohibition, since neither is such behaviour tolerated versus a native born Israelite.
  Commandment 66 prohibits oppressing orphans or widows.
  Commandment 67 orders us to extend loans to poor Israelites; the Torah says: "When you loan money to My people, the one amongst you who is poor" (22,24).
  Commandment 68 prohibits demanding repayment of a loan from an indigent debtor; the Torah says: "Do not be like a creditor to him" (22,24).
  Commandment 69 forbids the paying or accepting of interest on loans (from Jews). The Torah writes: "Do not impose interest charges on him" (22,24). The guarantor of such loan, the witnesses to the contract, as well as the scribe drawing up the papers are guilty if a party to such an arrangement.
  Commandments 70, 71, and 72 warn against cursing the Lord, the judge, or the legally constituted authority (president,22,27).
  Commandment 73 forbids the tithing of תרומה prior to bringing the בכורים (alotting the gift to the individual priest before acknowledging the harvest to G–d in the Temple by means of offering the first ripened part of that harvest) The relevant passage in the Torah reads מלאתך ודמעתך לא תאחר (22,28): "Do not put off the skimming of your vats."
  Commandment 74 forbids the consuming of treyfah i.e. fatally diseased animals (22,30).
  Commandment 75 forbids a judge to listen to the arguments of a litigant when the other litigant is not present. The relevant line is: "Do not listen to false rumour" (23,1).
  Commandment 76 stipulates that the testimony of a known sinner must not be accepted, and that his statements remain without effect, since the Torah states: "Do not join hands with the guilty to act as malicious witness" (23,1).
  Commandment 77 defines the rule that a majority can declare someone guilty of a capital crime by a majority of at least two votes. This is based on "do not side with the majority to do wrong" (23,2).
  Commandment 78 prohibits a judge who had voted a defendant innocent from changing his vote. The Torah describes this as "do not bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a majority," i.e. your words should not now cause a conviction (ibid.).
  Commandment 79: A simple majority of one of the judges is sufficient to render a defendant innocent of the charge brought against him, since the Torah says: "Follow the majority le-hattot."
  Commandment 80 prohibits display of sympathy for a poor man during litigation. The Torah says: "Do not favour a poor man in his cause" (23,3).
  Commandment 81 demands the giving of assistance in unloading an overloaded beast: "When you see the ass of someone who hates you break down under its burden, etc." (23,5).
  Commandment 82 warns against perverting fair judgment of a known sinner, since the Torah says: "Do not subvert the rights of your needy in his dispute." The reference to his being "needy" refers to his lacking merits of a moral nature, not lack of money. The judge must not "steal" from him through his verdict, even though his conduct may appear to you to have given cause for a perverted verdict (23,6). In the final analysis, judgment (for sins committed) is G–d's prerogative.
  Commandment 83 cautions, that judgment must not be based on a judge's intuition, as it says: "Do not slay the innocent or righteous" (23,7). This means that one should be extremely careful not to execute a person as long as there is the remotest chance that he has not committed the crime he has been accused of. The Mechilta 211, explains that if the accused had been seen chasing someone who was unquestionably Jewish, wanting to kill him, and he had been properly warned of the consequences of murder, and had acknowledged the warning, and this pursuer had been observed leaving a tent with his sword dripping blood, such evidence is insufficient, since the deed itself had not been observed.
  Commandment 84 prohibits the accepting of a bribe (23,8).
  Commandment 85 legislates shmittah, i.e. that the land must be allowed to lie fallow every seventh year (23,10).
  Commandment 86 provides for cessation of work on the seventh day (23,12).
  Commandments 87 and 88 deal with the prohibition of swearing an oath in the name of some idolatrous deity and the law not to promote such deity in any form, since the Torah says: "Make no mention of other gods, nor let them be heard from your mouth" (23,13). Some think that the main prohibition is not to enter into business relations with idol worshippers on days that are holidays in their religion, since on such days the Gentile is bound to mention his idol and the Jew may inadvertently cause the Gentile to praise his deity. Since even Gentiles are prohibited from worshipping idols, this would be accounted a sin against the Jew causing it. Our sages have been so careful to ensure that we distance ourselves from such a sin that they forbade saying to a Gentile: "hold this package for me near the statue of such and such a deity" (Sanhedrin 63).
  Commandment 89 enjoins us to observe the three annual pilgrimages to Jerusalem (23,17).
  Commandment 90 forbids the slaughtering of the Passover lamb before disposal and destruction of leavened things. The Torah says: "Do not offer the blood of My sacrifice with anything leavened" (23,18).
  Commandment 91 prohibits the remains (the parts to be burned) of a sacrifice which have remained off the altar overnight from being burned on the altar now (although the parts that can be consumed by the owners of the sacrifice may still be eaten by them, ibid.).
  Commandment 92 describes the commandment of bringing the choice first fruit to the Temple, since the Torah says: "You shall bring the choice first fruit of your soil, to the house of the Lord, etc." (23,19).
  Commandment 93 prohibits the boiling of a kid in the milk of its mother (ibid.).
  Commandment 94 prohibits making any contract with the seven nations inhabiting the land of Canaan at that time (23,32).
  Commandment 95 forbids allowing the permanent presence of idol worshippers in our land, since the Torah says: "They must not dwell in your land lest they cause you to sin" (23,33).
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  משפטי ה' אמת צדקו יחדיו. "G–ds statutes are truth and fair in all respects."
  We must strive to attain perfection in the following areas: 1) perfection of one's soul; 2) perfection of one's body; 3) perfection of one's belongings, money matters. Regarding these three areas, the Torah says: "You shall love the Lord your G–d with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might" (Deut 6,5). The life of the body depends on the heart. The word נפש, refers to the נשמה, soul. When we speak about someone as being שלם בגופו, שלם בתורתו, שלם בממונו see Rashi's commentary on Genesis 33,18, we view תורה as well as study and achievements (in study) as elements the soul depends on.
  We also find in this portion many social laws which touch on the well being of both the body and one's finances. Examples are: legislation concerning Jewish male and female servants, who must not be abused when the time arrives that they are free to leave the master's employ. A maid-servant, for instance, may not be sold to a third party, her marital rights must not be curtailed. Similarly, we find legislation concerning the four different ways of administering the death penalty. There are laws governing people who strike parents or other human beings. There are some laws concerning prohibited foods, such as the killing of the ox which has gored, or the mixing of dairy and meat. There are laws about relinquishing rights of ownership and the prohibition of work in the field every seventh year, i.e. שמטה. There are laws governing rest on the Sabbath and holidays, the bringing of the first fruit of ripe produce to the Temple as a gift to G–d, i.e. בכורים.
  Then there is the legislation concerning financial matters, such as the provisions for a maid-servant upon her release from service, laws governing restitution for property damage caused by one's own property. There are laws governing litigation and the penalty for stealing, i.e. the restitution which may amount to up to five times the value of the goods stolen. There are rules about the extending of loans to the needy and the prohibition of charging or accepting interest.
  The laws concerning one's spirit, i.e. נפש ונשמה, comprise such matters as cursing G–d (G–d forbid), cursing judges, i.e. legitimate authorities, since all this involves the honour of G–d also. Similarly, there are laws that forbid mentioning the names of pagan deities as well as the prohibition to conclude treaties with the seven nations inhabiting Canaan at that time. It is forbidden to allow existing pagan rites to continue to be observed once Israel has taken over possession of the land of Canaan. There is also the commandment to present oneself at the Holy Temple in Jerusalem three times a year. All of these commandments touch one's soul, i.e. performance of the commandments contributes towards achieving a pure soul, a superior personality.
  In other words: דינים and משפטים, contribute to the respective perfection of the נשמה-גוף-ממון elements in our lives. משפטים are the mainstay of it all. Our sages say (Shemot Rabbah 30,3) that Torah (i.e. the Ten Commandments) is surrounded by דינים. The Torah begins with דינים, as we read in Exodus 15,25: שם שם לו חוק ומשפט, and it ends with דינים in Exodus chapter 21,1, (The letter ו in the words ואלההמשפטים, is regarded as a continuation of the Ten Commandments). You should know that there are two categories of דין. One category reflects only the attribute of Justice. The other category is a combination of the attribute of Justice and the attribute of Mercy. Our Rabbis have already said that originally G–d had planned to create a universe based on justice. However, G–d saw that such a universe would not endure, hence He co-opted the attribute of Mercy (Bereshit Rabbah 12,15). Just as the attribute of Mercy was invoked when creating man, so Torah itself reflects on occasion strict justice, and on other occasions justice tempered with mercy. As an example, consider the four possible ways of administering the death penalty to people guilty thereof, as opposed to the owner of an ox that has fatally gored a free human being repeatedly, so that the owner's negligence was the cause of what is described by the Torah as deserving the death penalty (Exodus 21,29), וגם בעליו יומת. Rashi explains that this death penalty is administered by Heaven, not by a human tribunal, i.e. the attribute of Mercy is invoked. A similar instance is the statement in the Torah: "An eye for an eye" (Exodus 21,24). This is understood by the Rabbis as referring to financial compensation to be paid to the person who has lost his eye (Baba Kama 84). The reason the Torah employs such severe sounding language, i.e. עין תחת עין, is to tell us that spoiling someone's eye deserves to be paid for by loss of one's own eye. Only because the attribute of Mercy has been co-opted, is restitution made in money, i.e. in terms of the monetary value of the eye one has destroyed.
  We find that before people engage in litigation, that the judges have to attempt to settle the dispute by arbitration first, and not immediately to explore the legal situation. All of this emulates the way of G–d Himself, who on occasion is exceedingly strict (see our sages' interpretation of Psalms 50,3, וסביביו נשערה מאד, "around Him it storms fiercely;" (compare Yevamot 121). On other occasions, He employs a large measure of the attribute of Mercy; this universe would otherwise be incapable of continuing. By modelling themselves after G–d, terrestrial judges are entitled to be referred to as אלוהים. Our sages have said that whenever the word אלוהים means a human being, these people can be said to enjoy ordination by G–d (Exodus 22,7 explained by Sanhedrin 56).
  This is what Rashi has in mind when he explains that the word ואלה as in Exodus 21,1, introduces matters related to what had been discussed previously. Thus in our case the Torah tells us that just as Sinaitic legislation is binding on us, so the judgments pronounced by properly constituted judges are equally binding; hence the details pertaining to each and every commandment are just as essential as the overall nature of the מצוה. The author quotes an unnamed source as stating that the expression אלוהים, by its very definition is in the genitive (i.e. סמוכים). [I have found in the introduction of the כתב והקבלה of Rabbi Mecklenburg that G–d is always in some relationship to His creation, does not dwell in solitary isolation. This may well be what the author has in mind when quoting the line אין אלוקים בכל מקום אלא סמוכים. Ed.] When we said that G–d decided to co-opt the מדת הרחמים, this must not be construed as G–d having abandoned the idea of a world based on the מדת הדין, attribute of Justice. If that were so, it would pose the problem of G–ds omniscience. Rather, G–d decided to apply the attribute of Justice only to those who are equipped with "superior" souls, whose souls originate in the region souls come from. This is why G–d is so strict with people of the calibre of Moses, etc Anyone who has attained the level of being a שותף של הקדוש ברוך הוא, a "partner" of the Almighty in construction of the universe, is judged by these more exacting standards. We have a tradition that anyone who pronounces true judgment becomes a partner of the creation (Tanchuma Shoftim 8). I have explained this elsewhere at greater length. This is also what is meant when G–d told Moses that He had not needed to reveal Himself to the patriarchs in His aspect of the מדת הרחמים, His attribute of Mercy (compare Rashi on Exodus 6,3). The exile in Egypt actually represented a punishment of Abraham for having questioned במה אדע, demanded proof of G–d's promise being fulfilled (Genesis 15,8). Since such exceptional people maintain בראשית, i.e. מעשה בראשית, these people who are the ראשית, the leading, superior people, are judged by the attribute that called the universe into existence.
  Aaron alluded to this when he told Moses who was about to bring his wife and children to Egypt, על הראשונים אנו מצטערים ואתא בא להוסיף, that it was sad enough that Israel found itself enslaved and tortured on account of a minor sin of Abraham. Why did Moses want to bring his sons to share the people's misery? The people referred to as having the משפטים set before them, i.e. the judges, are therefore added (ואלה) to the group that had been called ראשית, i.e. superior people, qualifying for being judged by the attribute of Justice. Moses himself would be viewed as ראשית הראשונים, the first of the elite. 
  If at Sinai it says וידבר אלוקים to indicate that the attribute of Justice was being applied to certain types of people, the word ואלה is a continuation of that thought as applied to the judges of the Jewish people.
  Examples of people to whom G–d applied the מדת הדין, attribute of Justice, are found in Baba Metzia 83, when Rabbi bar Chana was made to pay full wages to labourers who had accidentally ruined the merchandise he had asked them to transport. Similarly we find in Baba Metzia 30, that Rabbi Yishmael son of Rabbi Yossi, who was old and did not legally have to demean himself personally, nevertheless paid out money so as not to take advantage of the הלכה of והתעלמת, in Deut. 22,1, according to which he would have been able to preserve his dignity.
  This is why our Rabbis described Torah as דין from beginning to end. There is also the incident recorded in Baba Kama 99, in which Rabbi Chiyah refunded money to a woman who claimed that he had erred in evaluating a certain coin, though according to all the rules of trade and commerce there was no need for him to do so. Concerning such situations the sages said תורה תחילתו דינין וסופו דינין. This means that there are two attributes called דין. This is the attribute of Justice which G–d had intended to use as a yardstick originally, before He began creating the universe. Afterwards, He decided to apply מדת הדין הרעה (perhaps best translated as the "painful" attribute of judgment). This is why G–d ordered the judges (through the Torah), to perform their tasks in a manner similar to that of Himself. G–d inclines towards a lenient view whenever this is possible. Hence the Torah tells us לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעות, Exodus 23,2, that when there is a slim majority of one favouring a verdict of "guilty," such a majority is not enough, though it would be good enough to return a verdict of "innocent" (23,2).
  The Torah also cautions judges not to accept bribes (23,8), to distance themselves from any untruth (23,7). 
  The Talmud in Ketuvot 105, divides the word שוחד into two, i.e. שהוא חד that it causes the judge to lean only in one direction, that of the person who offered the bribe. This is the reverse of אחדות, since it automatically removes the other litigant from the judge. When both litigants are equally close to the judge we can speak of אחדות, unity, harmony. This condition must prevail when judgment is pronounced, since המשפט לאלוקים הוא, and G–d represents unity and harmony (Deut 1,17). 
  Every judgment has its root in the Heavenly Regions. Although I shall try to explain these judgments to the best of my ability, this represents only a minute aspect of the whole matter, i.e. the tip of the iceberg.
  The first of the משפטים deals with the Jewish servant, both male and female, and is hinted at already in the first of the Ten Commandments. G–d had liberated Israel from bondage to become exclusively His servants. We know from Leviticus 25,55, that כי לי בני ישראל עבדים, that "the children of Israel are My slaves." Rashi refers to this when explaining why the servant who chooses to remain in service has his ear pierced with an awl (Exodus 21,6).
  The Exodus from Egypt mentioned in this commandment is a reference to the renewal of מעשה בראשית. As mentioned in the fourth commandment, the Sabbath reminds us of the six days during which G–d created Heaven and Earth. The servant serves six years, corresponding to the six days of מעשה בראשית, and in the seventh year he goes out to freedom. 
  Just as the six days of creation being "G–d's days," are viewed as the equivalent of one thousand years each, so the Kabbalists view this as a reference to the six thousand years this physical world will exist before a period of one thousand years of ruin, i.e. a period without creative activity, ישבות. This process is supposed to repeat itself seven times until the year fifty thousand, which is the סוד, secret of the יובל, ultimate freedom. The Exodus is to be viewed as a branch of the tree which represents universal history. This idea was hinted at already at the time of the Exodus, when Israel escaped the power (limitations imposed on all creatures) of the fifty levels of בינה, insight. This is the deeper meaning of וחמושים עלו בני ישראל in Exodus 13,18, i.e. that the target of the ascent was "fifty." The idea is that when attaining the fiftieth level, one has achieved more than merely escaping a branch of the fifty levels of בינה. [These 50 gates of בינה are perhaps identical with the 50 gates of טומאה that we are all familiar with from Midrashic literature. At any rate, they represent different levels of restraint, exposure to the pull of the material universe. Ed.] The fact that יציאת מצרים is mentioned in the Torah exactly fifty times may further reinforce the idea that after reaching level fifty freedom becomes absolute. The author suggests that the average lifespan of man of seventy years is a further reminder of this concept, allowing for the fact that man is not judged by Heaven for misdemeanours committed during the first twenty years of his life. Even the male Jewish servant who has his ear pierced, must go free not later than in the fiftieth year, יובל, which is the meaning of Exodus 21,6, "he shall serve לעולם."
  
  The Jewish servant maid leaves her employ after six years, the advent of the Jubilee year, or at the onset of puberty, whichever occurs first. We read in Deut. 22,23, כי יהיה נער בתולה, "when there will be a virgin girl, etc," and the word for maiden is spelled without the customary letter ה at the end of that word. The Zohar page 131 on פרשת בא (Sullam edition), explains that as long as a girl is a virgin, has not joined a male, she is called נער. Once she has lost her virginity through sleeping with a male, she is called נערה. Before creation G–d had been alone, solitary. Through the creation of the universe, the very universe became His throne, i.e. Isaiah 66,1, "the heaven is My throne, and the earth My footstool." The שכינה is referred to as both נער, and נערה, i.e. it is spelled נער but read as נערה. In chapter two of Pardes Rimonim, called ta-am ha-a-tzilut, this נערה is described as a very exalted concept.
  The mystical significance of שאר, כסות and עונה, is incorporated in the concept of שכינה. In the book Tomer Devorah, chapter six, this is described in the following words. "Just as G–d is pure and holy, so man has to perform these duties towards his wife in a similar spirit. After a person has achieved a certain degree of purity, he should perform on the Jewish servant maid, אמה עבריה, the commandment of שאר, כסות ועונה, i.e. the three duties a husband needs to discharge towards his wife, his companion for life." 1) He has to provide her physical needs, sustenance, generously; this means he has to be instrumental in channelling this blessing on to her from Heaven. 2) He has to protect her against the influence of negative spiritual forces; he should see to it that in their pairings there is no desire for purely physical gratification. This means he has to "cover" the opening that exists there more than anywhere for the evil urge, which is commonly known as ערוה. The meaning of kessut then is "a covering for nakedness, shame." A major tool helping one to attain this aim is to ensure that all one's actions are purely motivated to be service to G–d. Another formidable tool that helps to ward of the evil urge is the טלית ותפילין, the prayer shawl and the phylacteries. In the language of the Kabbalists the ספירה גבורה is another name for the domain of the evil urge, whereas the ספירה חסד is another name for the domain of the "good urge." Whereas the latter was created for the needs of אדם himself, the former was created to provide the needs of his wife. A third effective tool against the machinations of the evil urge is the immersion in Torah study. When man allocates different times, i.e. עונה, for all these personality building activities, he may consider himself as "dating" the שכינה, G–d's Presence.
  If it is impossible to achieve יעוד, a betrothal, then there arises the need for a release, פדיון. Since the שכינה is in exile together with the Jewish people, I have explained that that statement refers to the שכינה of the בריאה. It looks forward to redemption. Rabbi Menachem Habavli writes that we find a hint here that the Messiah will come even in a generation that is חייב, collectively guilty. This is why the Torah says אם רעה בעיני אדוניה והפדה, if she is evil in the eyes of her master he has to release her. The "master" of course, is G–d in that context.
  The Gentile slave obtains his release in the event any of 24 types of his limbs have been destroyed (Kidushin 24, Baba Kama 75). This is to remind us that man was created in the image of G–d (Genesis 1,27). Our sages explain that man's 248 limbs correspond to the number of the Torah's positive commandments. These in turn are symbolic of the 248 joints in the אדם העליון, man's spiritual counterpart in the Celestial Regions, who sits on the throne. This is why the first of the patriarchs, Abraham, was called אבר מה (the letters in his name being re-arranged). The מה, corresponds to the numerical value of the word אדם, which in turn is equivalent to the four lettered name of G–d spelled in letter form. =ה-א ,13=ו-א-ו ,6=ה-א ,20=י-ו-ד6, total=45. Abraham did not want to be associated through marriage with אליעזר, who is ארור, cursed, having been a descendant of כנען, who was cursed by Noach to remain a slave permanently (Genesis 9,25). It is not possible for ברוך and ארור, the blessed and the cursed, to be paired successfully. Abraham of course, was blessed, and so were his descendants (Genesis 12,2). Kabbalists perceive of ראשי אברים as referring to man at his moral best, i.e. אדם הפנימי, as well as a corresponding type of ראשי אברים, of the אדם החיצוני, man at his moral worst, i.e. man under the influence of Noach's curse. By destroying the ראש אבר of a Gentile slave, one releases that person from the influence of that curse. Therefore, he no longer needs to be a slave (as per Genesis 9,25). As a result, such a person can join the ranks of the free, the ones subject to G–d's blessing.
  I have explained the significance of the rule of a slave dying more than twenty four hours after having been struck by his master (Exodus 21,21), in my commentary on פרשת יתרו. The first of the Ten Commandments, אנכי, which is one of the positive commandments, includes the essence of all positive commandments, whereas the second of the Ten Commandments, לא יהיה, not to have other deities, contains the essence of all the other negative commandments. Our sages have said that the 365 negative commandments correspond to the 365 days in the solar year (Makkot 23). When the Torah says יום in our verse, it refers to all 365 days of this temporal year. A Gentile slave is obligated by Jewish law to observe all the negative commandments, whereas he only has to observe those positive commandments that Jewish women also have to observe. He is exempt from the performance of commandments which are linked to a specific time frame i.e. a certain part of the day. It follows that his sanctity is restricted to "a (full) day one," i.e. when he performs all the negative commandments. This is the deeper meaning of the Torah saying "if he survives a day or two." יום או יומים, means a "day that includes all days, a period of not less than twenty four consecutive hours."
  He who strikes a person fatally, deliberately, must be executed (21,12). The illegal killing of a human being is equivalent to diminishing G–d's visible Presence on earth, since man has been created in His image (בצלמו בדמותו). It is as if the דמות form, had become דם מות (death of blood). This idea is alluded to in the words מות ימות, i.e. that the מות, death, replaces the Divine form, דמות.
  Regarding involuntary manslaughter, discussed in 21,13, the penalty of exile to a city of refuge parallels Adam's expulsion from Eden. Adam's sin had been due to the serpent's power to seduce. This had resulted in death being introduced in the universe (Genesis 2,17). When the Torah writes here מכה איש, when a man kills, it means Adam who was the first איש, individual, to cause death. Anyone who causes death is subject to "you are dust and to dust you shall return" (Genesis 3,19). The repetition of the expression מות תמות, in Genesis 2,17, is our clue to transmigration of souls, to the concept that several re-incarnations may be necessary for man to achieve his תכלית, his allotted task on earth. However, the principal meaning of the line was never that death would occur immediately after the sin had been committed. After all, Adam was 930 years old before he died (Genesis 5,5). His sin was comparable to an inadvertently committed act since it had been due to the outright seduction by the serpent. This is the reason a person guilty of involuntary manslaughter only has to be exiled to a city of refuge.
  Murder committed deliberately, however, מעט מזבחי תקחנו למות, "you will execute him promptly, says G–d (21,14). Even Adam had been created from ה-אדמה, i.e. the altar (מזבח אדמה תעשה לי). Rashi explains on Genesis 2,7, that the dust referred to here is the site of the eventual altar in the Holy Temple, so that the eventual function of the altar, namely to atone for man's sins, should also be able to atone for Adam's error. Since nowadays the evil urge does not manifest itself in the guise of the serpent, murderers do not enjoy a stay of execution.
  The death penalty for striking father or mother, or even for only cursing them, is due to the Torah regarding father and mother as G–d's partners, since they contribute two thirds in producing a child. They deserve a degree of respect similar to that due to G–d Himself (21,15, or 17). The reason the Torah inserts the penalty for kidnapping between the penalty for striking and the penalty for cursing father or mother, is to teach us that all these three sins are closely connected; one of these sins usually is the cause for the next one. All three are due to the pollutant man has absorbed since yielding to the serpent's seduction in גן עדן. The Midrash Hagadol Genesis 3,7, says that Adam was a thief, since he ate what did not belong to him. He was גונב דעת עליון, he deceived, or better, tried to deceive G–d. Misrepresentation in order to put oneself in a better light fraudulently is the worst kind of stealing (Mechilta on Mishpatim item 13).
  
  A few words concerning the four methods of executing someone legally that are possible in Jewish law, namely סקילה, שרפה, הרג, חנק, i.e. death by stoning, burning, sword or asphyxiation. Though according to the plain meaning, פשט, these methods are listed in descending order of severity, and the Torah specified the method compatible with each respective sin for which a death penalty is mandatory as a positive commandment, the fact remains that a person's death is due to the angel of death who derives his authority from the attribute of Justice, מדת הדין, which in turn decides on a variety of methods in which to implement this authority. Execution by the sword is symbolic of the avenging sword at work; it avenges the breach of the covenant with the supreme Law-giver. Hanging, i.e. choking to death, is appropriate for rebellious acts, i.e. an unspecified method of execution, suggesting that it is the result of the מדת הדין. The sinner is to have his mouth closed so that he can no longer speak out rebelliously. Stoning, סקילה, i.e. the very use of stones, suggests that the guilty person had upset the אבן הפינה, the cornerstone of Torah, had undermined it, so to speak. Death by fire, indicates that G–d's great fire had struck the guilty person (compare Rekanati's commentary on Deut. 18,16). 
  Adam enjoyed the fruit of this world without pronouncing a benediction prior to tasting it, i.e. without thanking the Lord for what he was about to partake of. The letter ב, in the word בראשית, symbolises that G–d created the universe with a blessing, ברכה, as we know from Bereshit Rabbah 1,10. When Adam ate from the tree of knowledge without a prior benediction he removed himself from the region of blessing by listening to the curse of the serpent, and he gratified himself from the allure of the tree which appeared good to eat (Genesis 3,6). The Talmud Berachot 35, says that anyone who indulges himself in this world without benediction, i.e. without acknowledging it as a gift from G–d, steals both from G–d and from the Jewish people, since we read in Proverbs 28,24, "whoever robs his father and mother and says that this is not sinful is a companion of the destroyer."
  The linking of G–d and Israel in that Midrash is due to the fact that such theft is known in the Celestial Spheres. First man (whose father and mother was literally G–d Himself), had committed this crime of theft. The close connection in the Heavenly Regions between כנסת ישראל, and G–d is well known. It is there that Adam disturbed the equilibrium with his sin. This is why the kidnapper, גונב נפש, is mentioned in the Torah in connection with cursing or hitting mother or father.
  After this our portion discusses strife between people (21,18) to teach us the five categories of compensation applicable when physical injury has been caused as well as the fact that anyone who raises a hand against a Jew is equated with having raised a hand against G–d Himself. This is so because man was created in G–d's image, and every soul of a Jewish person originates in Heaven, the home of the שכינה. We are told in Psalms 68,27 במקהלות ברכו אלוקים, ה' ממקור ישראל, "In assemblies bless the Lord who are from the fountain of Israel." Since the letter ה in ה-אדם, is the last letter in the name of G–d (the four lettered one), it is appropriate that the penalty for inflicting personal injury is fivefold, i.e. ה.
  Concerning my discussion of the nature of Adam's sin, the Torah hints that the whole phenomenon of כי יריבון אנשים (21,18), when men quarrel, is only an outgrowth of Adam's original sin; i.e. the strife between Cain and Abel. The words that אם יקום והתהלך בחוץ, describe the fact that though Cain killed Abel, this death was not final, but he was re-incarnated in someone else's body, i.e. that of Moses. The word משענת, is a reference to Moses' staff, מטה. The words ונקה המכה, are reminiscent of G–d telling Cain that he who would kill him would be avenged שבעתים (Genesis 4,15). The Ari zal, writes that the letters in the word יקם, are simultaneously the first letters of יתרו, קין, מצרי, the three people whose bodies housed part of Cain's soul at a later period in history.
  The statement in 21,19, רק שבתו יתן, suggests that there will be a long interval, i.e. שבת, before such a killer will be finally rehabilitated. In the distant future, קרח, the third re-incarnation, will arise, as prophesied by Hannah in Samuel I, 2,6, when she said concerning him "G–d kills and revives, lowers to she-ol and raises up." השם ממית ומחיה, מוריד שאול ויעל. Another hint of this may be seen in the verse צדיק כתמר יפרח (Psalms 92,13). Using the final letters of these three words, you find that they spell קרח. This too is the meaning here of ורפא ירפא (i.e. he will be rehabilitated).
  After this the Torah explains laws about the Gentile slave. He originates from a state of ארור "cursed," and by being the slave of a Jew he is elevated to join the ranks of the "blessed," ברוך, those who qualify for blessings. I have already explained this earlier. 
  There follows the case of someone inflicting injury on a pregnant woman and what happens if her fetus dies as a result. This is due to the pollutant of the original serpent who had attacked or slept with Eve, and had contaminated her. If man wants to rehabilitate himself from this pollutant, then עין תחת עין, i.e. he can become a vehicle fit to host the Divine entourage by sanctifying the various organs of his body, as I have explained elsewhere at length. 
  Rekanati comments about this in the following words: "We know that halachically our sages understand the עין תחת עין as a demand to pay appropriate financial compensation for the organ impaired or destroyed. The same principle applies to the verse Leviticus 24,19, ואיש כי יתן מום בעמיתו, where we also find that monetary compensation is called for. The words באדם כן ינתן בו (Leviticus 19,20), mean that something that is usually passed from hand to hand is to be the means of compensation."
  You may well ask why the Torah did not state clearly what it means, instead of our needing the oral Torah for clarification? After all, wording such as this only encourages those who doubt that Torah is of Divine origin and who deny the authority of the Rabbis to interpret it! The answer is found in the statement that the written Torah has seventy facets (Bamidbar Rabbah 13,15). This is similar to יין wine which numerically adds up to seventy. This means that the halachic norm of any מצוה listed in the Torah, is based on the oral tradition. Were this not so, the written Torah could not be subject to a variety of interpretations which reveal many other concerns of Torah. According to the oral tradition the truth is, that anyone injuring his fellow man is liable for up to five kinds of compensatory payments. "עין תחת עין" is written here to reveal a profound truth. I have already hinted that man's physical structure is based on the האדם העליון, man's counterpart in the Celestial Regions. As long as man's various limbs and organs are intact, this fact reinforces the power of his celestial counterpart, prevents it from losing its viability. The reverse is true when man's body is mutilated, i.e. כי ינתן מום באדם.
  Rabbi Saadyah Gaon has written about this in his book ספר האמונות. The written Torah expresses itself usually only in general terms. A single meaning cannot comprise all the many thoughts contained in that phrase. Torah has both hidden and obvious meanings, as is written אחת דבר אלוקים, שתים זו שמעתי. "G–d has said one thing, whereas I heard two things" (Psalms 62,12). 
  
  Next, the Torah deals with שור הנסקל, the ox which is stoned because it has proven aggressive, has gored a human being. Adam had sinned originally, but he was forgiven after he had sacrificed an ox as a sin offering. This ox is reputed to have possessed only one horn (Shabbat 28). The Kabbalists see a deep significance in this, something that points at the אחדות, the secret of unity.
  When an ox gores man, the Torah says: סקול יסקל, etc." (21,28). The Torah distinguishes between a שור תם, an ox that has a history of behaving peacefully, and one that has demonstrated aggressiveness. If the normally tame ox has killed a human being, it immediately is categorised as an aggressive beast, the owner being considered as having been forewarned. I have explained these distinctions at length in my commentary on פרשת וישב, in connection with the festival of חנוכה.  אדם הראשון, first man, was considered מועד לעולם, forewarned from the outset (Baba Kama 3). This means that he was unable to make excuses for his sin, having been told by G–d directly what he must not do. יעקב on the other hand, is described as איש תם (the choicest of human beings), and only had to pay half for any sins he had committed (i.e. cost of any damage he caused), since he never died (cf. Taanit 5, that יעקב אבינו לא מת). This means that though he "died," he did not die completely as was explained in that context (see Akeydat Yitzchak chapter 32).
  הבער,מבעה,בור,שור, are the four principal causes of damage injury or death. We find in Numbers 32,38, that there was a Canaanite city called Sivmah (same letters as the first letters of the four categories of damage). The four causes of damage are related to the four kinds of קליפות "peels" mentioned in Psalms 78,28,"והוא רחום.” They are: חמה, אף, משחית, עון, names by which G–ds destructive agents are known to us. The word מבעה, meaning damage caused by the teeth, i.e. eating what does not belong to one, is something man is judged on when already in his grave, as our sages explain on Maleachi 2,3, וזריתי פרש … פרש חגיכם, that man will be judged in the grave for what he ate illegally while on earth (Shabbat 151). The category of damage known as שור, refers to the "horns" of Samael (Satan), i.e. the evil urge. The first letters of the words שור, קרן, רגל, spell שקר, lie. The fourth category, fire, i.e. אש also known as hav-er - refers to the fire of purgatory, גהינם.
  The רמז, hint, contained in the Torah's description of the four categories of שומרים, trustees, i.e. the שומר חנם, שומר שכר, שוכר, שואל, is to the parallel, opposite source, i.e the source of sanctity, קדושה. It is reminiscent of the statement that שומר מצוה לא ידע דבר רע (Kohelet 8,5), that he who "keeps" the commandments will know of no evil. These four categories are analogous to the letters in the four lettered name of G–d. Since the letter ה in that name occurs twice, the הלכות, religious rulings, in the case of the four trustees are in reality only three (The paid trustee and the person who pays for renting a utensil are treated similarly in the event they are charged with negligence).
  I have found in the book Ba-assarah ma-amorot chapter 3, an article that explains the source of this legislation. The author writes as follows, quoting Isaiah 62,6: "Upon your walls O Jerusalem, I have set watchmen." These are four watchmen corresponding to the four-lettered name of G–d, their דינים are three, since the watchmen of the "Upper World" never abandon Jerusalem, and concerning them the prophet says "all day long and all night long" (ibid.). They are never without supervision. 
  I have written more about the subject of the ארבעה שומרים in my discourse on מסכת פסחים, in connection with the four "sons" that are mentioned in the הגדה של פסח.
  מכשפה לא תחיה. Do not allow a witch to survive!" (22,17). Rabbi Yochanan in Sanhedrin 67, relates the term מכשפה to the fact that witches deny the existence and function of Divine messengers, i.e. פמליא של מעלה. The Chinuch describes the substance of such witches (whether male or female) in the following words: "At the time of creation, G–d assigned certain activities to everything that has been created; such activities are all meant to benefit the universe. This is the meaning of Genesis 1,12, that each variety of herb came into being למינהו, in its individual kind, with its individual function. Each had a spiritual counterpart assigned to it in the "higher" world. This is what Bereshit Rabbah 10,7 means when it says that every herb has its own מזל in Heaven. This מזל instructs the herb to grow. 
  Apart from the mission assigned to each herb individually, each herb performs other activities when it is merged with other species. When such mixing of species occurs there are aspects which are forbidden to man, because G–d is aware that the use by man of such mixtures will ultimately be harmful to him. For this reason, הלכה says that if a mixture of herbs is proven to possess therapeutic qualities, the use of it is not forbidden as something that is considered pagan practice (Shabbat 67). This means that though the pagans who deny G–d use this substance as a form of witchcraft, Jews are not therefore automatically forbidden therapeutic use of it. Matters forbidden under the heading of מפני דרכי אמורי, are only forbidden because of the ultimate harm this practice causes to its user. We need to appreciate also that there is another reason why such mixtures are forbidden, and that is because the power of the mixture is strong enough to neutralize, at least temporarily, the celestial agents directing and supervising their "charge" of each separate respective species which now have been combined.
  An example would be the following: When you graft one species on to another, you create a third species. This means that the power of each of the two original species that has now been combined has either been neutralised or destroyed. This is why we have been forbidden to contemplate, though we may actually carry out the deed, doing anything that appears to change what G–d in His perfection has created.
  Perhaps these considerations are at the root of the prohibition of mixing wool and linen, of pairing incompatible animals to perform certain work such as to pull a plough, or of planting different species of seeds too closely together. We will pursue this theme when discussing these various prohibitions. This is also the reason that the Talmud in Sanhedrin 67 states, that the name כשפים implies that these activities deny the agents G–d has appointed (by performing contrary activity). The expression פמליא has been chosen carefully, so as not to create the impression that witchcraft can ever supersede G–d's decree even momentarily. After all, it is G–d who has imbued such a mixture with more potency than that of its constituent parts. The sages then criticized those מזלות for allowing successful mixing of the species under their supervision. At any rate, the power of the פמליא, agency has been denied by such action. Anyone whose mind is on G–d's "wavelength," so to speak, so that the power of his own merits exceeds that of the פמליא that govern these herbs need not be afraid of the negative effects due to the mixing of such species. We find this idea supported by what is related in Shabbat 81, where the sages refused to seat a Gentile lady next to them. The lady, in her anger, invoked witchcraft in order to arrest the motion of the ship on which this incident occurred, whereas Rav Chisda invoked the name of G–d. As a result, the ship resumed its motion. The lady acknowledged G–d's superior power when dealing with Jews who observe certain modes of proper conduct, i.e. הלכות דרך ארץ.
  The Rekanati writes that knowledge of what are the circumstances when something of this nature, i.e. contending with those who perform witchcraft, is permissible, is wide spread. Do not think that מעשה כשוף and מעשה שדים are one and the same thing. The Talmud in Sanhedrin 16, is explicit in identifying the machinations of Pharaoh's magicians i.e. בלטיהם, as the acts of שדים (Exodus 7,22), whereas the Torah refers to בלהטיהם (Exodus 7,11,) when the meaning is witchcraft. This teaches that כשוף can be performed without resorting to שדים, creatures commonly known as מלאכי חבלה, destructive agents. This is the way Rashi explains the matter. On occasion even שדים perform מעשה כשוף. They are known as the מלאכי חבלה, since מעשה כשוף, is invariably used destructively. So far the quote from the Chinuch.
  אם חבול תחבול (Exodus 22,25). The plain meaning of this legislation is clear, i.e. that when the owner of the pledge needs the object taken from him as a pledge he must not be denied its use. The Rekanati explains that the reason the Torah refers to עד בא השמש, is that the attribute of Justice is especially active at night, and the lender is more likely to be subject to it if he has not returned the garment to its owner for use during that period. Our Rabbis add another important thought pertaining to the סוד, the mystical dimension, underlying this, such as considerations of when to institute a leap year. They say that the verse refers to man's soul, which is returned to G–d nightly, as we say in the אדון עולם prayer: בידו אפקיד רוחי. The Torah also contains a hint of this when it says (Deut 24,17) that the garment of a widow must not be taken as a pledge at all. This is so that she does not suffer a צרה twice (See Rekanati).
  When the latter describes this verse as speaking about man's soul, what he means is that the words שלמת רעך "the garment of your רע," refer to the elevated soul, נשמה הנאצלת that originates with G–d, which is also known as רע, seeing that it says (Proverbs 27,10) רעך as well as ורע אביך אל תעזוב, "do not abandon the רע of your "father," i.e. see to it that you return it to Him in a state of purity," i.e. when your personal sun sets (when you die). The "widow" then is perceived as having been bereft of her "husband," i.e. G–d, once already, since her soul had to return to earth to inhabit another body. The object of existence is to see to it that you do not need a second round of life on this earth. All this is alluded to when the Torah says that you have to return it to G–d "every night," i.e. after death (night is equated with death).
  The בגד אלמנה, widow's garment, in Deut. 24,17, on the other hand, is a reference to a "widowed woman," i.e. a soul which is on its second incarnation. The Rekanati says that you should be very careful to insure that such a second incarnation should not become necessary. The penalty for not restoring a pledge to the rightful owner at the time he needs it, may well be this second incarnation of the offending person. He needs to compensate for this sin by his soul being re-incarnated for a second life in a body.
  You shall be men of holy bearing to Me, and; you must not eat flesh torn by beasts in the field" (22,30). The Talmud Berachot 17 states in the name of Rabbi Yochanan סוף אדם למות, וסוף בהמה לשחיטה, והכול למיתה הם עומדים. "Man's destination is to die, the domestic beast's destiny is to be slaughtered, all are ultimately destined for death." Why is the kind of death the beast is slated for described as "slaughter?" Also, why does the statement repeat that "all are ultimately slated to die?"
  Actually, G–d created inert matter, vegetable matter, animal matter and the creature that can communicate thoughts in words, i.e. man. Vegetable matter, צומח, is fed by inert matter, דומם, whereas animal matter feeds on vegetable matter. The lower matter, by having been the instrument enabling a more advanced part of matter to grow, is elevated to the status of the level of matter it supplies nourishment for. In other words, the status of the inert is enhanced once the vegetable matter has used it to help it grow. By the same token, vegetable matter is elevated by providing food for the beasts, and the beasts are elevated in stature by having been the source sustaining man. When man eats the animal or part of it, he elevates that animal to the level of a "speaking creature," i.e. his own level. The specific "level" of man is that upon death, his soul is re-united with its holy origin. This is why David says in Psalm 116,15, יקר בעיני ה' המותה לחסידיו, that "death is precious to the Lord when it is the death of His pious ones." This is why Rabbi Yochanan describes death as the ultimate achievement, סוף, a human being is capable of. He describes the animal's ultimate achievement as being slaughtered, seeing it achieves the spiritual level of the מדבר, human being (while the latter has not yet died). Even to become like the מדבר however, is not an ultimate goal in itself. Therefore Rabbi Yochanan, by repeating that death is the ultimate objective, stresses that the animal attains the highest stature it is capable of attaining only when the מדבר i.e. human being whom it has served as food, finally dies. This elevation is due to man's death. This is the meaning of הכול למיתה עומדים, "death is everyone's ultimate destiny."
  Concerning this concept, Solomon says in Kohelet 3,21, מי יודע רוח בני אדם, העולה היא למעלה, ורוח הבהמה היורדת היא למטה לארץ, "Who knows under which conditions man's spirit rises on high, and when the animal spirit descends to the nether regions." Solomon means that there are occasions when the animal's spirit ascends, such as when man consumes בהמה טהורה, and such a בהמה is fit to eat according to the criteria of what is kasher according to Jewish dietary laws. On the other hand, when man indulges in animal food forbidden to him, his own spiritual force descends to the level of the animal instead of the spiritual level of the animal being raised to his level. All this is alluded to in our פרשה in the words לכלב תשליחון אותו, throw it to the dog; i.e. man is relegated to the "hard" קליפה. (a Kabbalistic term denoting forces in the universe not susceptible to sanctity)
  The reason eating portions of בהמות וחיות טהורות is so important is that the spiritual force which hovers over the life-force of those animals is rooted in the סטרא דקדושה, the holy part of the spiritual regions, whereas the life force that hovers over the "impure" species of animals is rooted in the סטרא אחרא, the part of the spiritual world over which Satan presides. Even the בהמות וחיות טהורות only qualify for consumption by Jews when slaughtered by human hands, by what is termed a מית יפה, a "beautiful death," by an unblemished knife. Other causes of death make such animals join the ranks of those impure to start with.
  We find that a desirable death for man is the exact opposite of what is deemed a desirable death for the animal. Whereas man prefers death at the hands of G–d, i.e. not through murder at the hands of human beings, the animal achieves its state of "holiness" only when executed by man, not when it dies from natural causes. The reason is that man's body is the sheath for his soul. Through partnership of body and soul man observes the laws of Torah and Avodah in the sense of היום לעשותה ולמחר לקבל שכרם, to perform the commandments "today" while alive on earth, and to receive the reward for such performance "tomorrow," i.e. after death of the body, in the Hereafter. This is why the day of death is described by Solomon as superior to the day a person is born, since it is the day the spirit returns to G–d and the body finds rest in the grave (Kohelet 7,6). If body and soul are separated prematurely (through murder or other violence leading to death), whoever is responsible has separated Torah and Avodah from the direction and the time frame intended by G–d for that person.
  An animal does not contain an inherent element of holiness with the exception of its life-force, רוח חיוני, at the time G–d's spirit hovers over it; the moment that spirit removes itself it no longer contains anything holy at all. Its only rehabilitation is that man slaughters it with a knife while that spirit still hovers over it, before its time had come to die of natural causes.
  This is the meaning of ובשר בשדה טרפה, "in the field," which is outside the confines of קדושה holiness, like the "field" of Esau who is described in the Torah as a man of the "field," as distinct from his brother, the איש תם (Genesis 25,27). We know of seventy categories of impurities corresponding to the seventy spiritual counterparts or "princes" of the seventy Gentile nations. This is why we must not consume any of these animals infested with "impurity," in order to maintain our destiny of אנשי קודש תהיון לי.
  I will defer discussion of the שמטה legislation, the need to make pilgrimages to Jerusalem, all of which are mentioned here briefly, but are not listed here as commandments, to the places where they are listed as commandments respectively. 
  The same applies to discussion of the ביכורים legislation.
  CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF MIXING MILK AND DAIRY PRODUCTS. The Rekanati writes that the prohibition of milk mixed with meat is part of the כלאים legislation, i.e. the need to preserve the integrity of the species, such as not sowing seeds of different categories too closely together, not to graft, not to use the beasts of burden of different capacities simultaneously. Mixing such species here on earth results in mixing matching forces in the Celestial Regions. Meat, being "red," is symbolic of the attribute of Justice, whereas milk, being white, is symbolic of the attribute of Mercy. Mixing them would dilute the attribute of Mercy. The attribute of Justice is then liable to neutralise the attribute of mercy. The Rekanati enlarges on the subject. Rabbenu Bachyah (ben Asher) comments very interestingly on the meaning of this commandment. He explains the absence of the explicit לא תאכלו, "do not eat," to mean that only in the case of כלאים and בשר וחלב is one liable to the penalty of מלקות, 39 strokes of the belt, even if one had not derived any gratification from eating the mixture. Had the Torah employed the customary לא תאכלו, such a penalty would have been applicable only if the אכילה had been a "normal" one, i.e. had given some pleasant sensation to the person eating the mixture (compare Pessachim 24).
  After the דינין and משפטים in this portion have been concluded, the Torah turns its attention to Israel's journey towards the Holy Land with (23,20,) הנה אנ כי שולח מלאך לפניך. "Here I am sending an angel ahead of you." Shemot Rabbah 32,6, quotes Psalms 34,8, חונה מלאך ה' סביב ליראיו ויחלצם, "the angel of the Lord camps around those who fear Him, and rescues them." When man performs a commandment of the Torah, G–d creates an angel to protect that person. When said person performs two commandments, G–d provides two angels to protect him, since we are told in Psalms 91,11, כי מלאכיו יצוה לך לשמרך בכל דרכיך "for He will order His angels (pl) to guard you wherever you go." If a person performs many commandments, G–d gives him half His camp as is written: "A thousand may fall on your left side, ten thousand on your right side, but it (disaster) shall not reach you" (Psalms 91,7). This half of G–ds camp is described in Psalms 68,18, i.e. that "G–d's chariots are myriads upon myriads, thousands upon thousands."
  This Midrash is difficult. Surely G–d has innumerable angels at His disposal, and even if their number were limited, who could guess at their total? Granted Psalms 68,18, does not present any difficulty when an indefinite number of thousands is referred to, since this is the manner in which G–d displays His power. Another difficulty is why the Midrash jumps from someone who performs two מצות and does not refer to a list of angels for people performing a given number of commandments over and above two. Also, why does the Midrash describe the performance of a single commandment in the present tense, i.e. עושה, whereas in the other examples given it employs the past tense, i.e. עשה? 
  Before explaining the Midrash itself, I have to demonstrate how the paragraph relates to the משפטים which form the principal subject matter of our פרשה. We have stated previously that the letter ו before the word אלה המשפטים establishes a linkage with the subject matter discussed previously. Just as the subject matter discussed in the Ten Commandments was revealed at Mount Sinai, so everything that follows in this פרשה, was revealed at Mount Sinai. This is why the number "ten" plays a significant role in דינין, at least at the mystical level. When the Hebrew number ten is spelled in writing, i.e. יוד, it equals 20 (the combined value of these three letters). In other words: "ten" spelled out is really "twenty." The Zohar points this out in connection with Numbers 7,86, where the Torah repeats עשרה, עשרה בשקל הקודש. The idea is that the "whole" שקל, equals twenty geyrah as we know from the half shekel legislation of פרשת שקלים in Exodus 30,13. It is appropriate to refer to that concept, since this portion is read on שבת פרשת שקלים, and the latter is usually read on the same שבת as our פרשת משפטים. Seeing that ten geyrah represent half a שקל הקודש, we view the legislation in פרשת יתרו as "half" a legislation that is being complemented here in our פרשה through the introductory letter ו.
  An example of how the number "ten" is relevant in דינין is the composition of the collegium of judges that can adjudicate capital crimes. The total number of judges required is twenty three. This is arrived at in the following manner. The Torah writes in Numbers 35,24, and 25, ושפטו העדה … והצילו העדה. This means that there has to be an עדה, i.e. ten people who are capable of voting innocent, whereas there also has to be a מנין who are capable of voting guilty. Since the Torah demands a minimum majority of two judges in order to make a "guilty" verdict legal, we have to add another two judges to the twenty we have just mentioned. Since we must avoid a "hung jury," a third judge is added to provide us with an odd number as the total (No judge is allowed to abstain). We have seen that the number "ten" is significant then both as "ten" and as "twenty," i.e. the "ten" spelled as יוד that we mentioned previously.
  Some introductory comments are necessary in order to comprehend the mystical dimension of the number "ten" in the context of our discussion. Once we have appreciated those, we can come back to the difficulty in understanding Shemot Rabbah 32,6. It will then also become clear how the verse הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך (23,20) fits into the whole sequence. Ten is a number that is present in all ספירות, i.e the emanations, or "downward" developments mentioned amongst the teachers of Kabbalah. Kabbalists have divided the progressive layers of the various "worlds" beginning with the region of עולם האצילות, a dimension immediately beneath the "throne" of G–d. This region contains ten sefirot "spheres," as do the various other "worlds" such as the עולם הבריאה, followed by the עולם היצירה, and lastly the עולם העשיה, the world that we inhabit. The Pardes Rimonim by Rabbi Cordovero elaborates at length on these concepts in the relevant chapter of his book. The respective composition of the "ten" elements in each of these worlds differs; suffice it to say that the number "ten" is essential in each of these "worlds." Since the עולם האצילות, and the עולם הבריאה, are always considered as inseparable (something like the idea of השם אחד ושמו אחד), and each contain "ten spheres," we view those as we did the number "ten" spelled in letters, i.e. יוד, totalling twice "ten", i.e. "twenty." The same is not the case in the other two "worlds," the עולם היצירה, and the עולם העשיה. We may view those "worlds" as if they were mere shadows, i.e. צל, of the "upper" two worlds. The number "ten" then in those "lower" worlds is only like the "half shekel," i.e. ten geyrah. Man who is made in the image of G–d, is equipped with "ten" fingers and "ten" toes," to symbolise the יחוד, union, of the עולם האצילה, and the עולם הבריאה. Our sages have said in Kidushin 30, that 3 partners share in the creation of a human being. They are: 1) G–d, 2) father, 3) mother. They state that G–d contributes ten items all of a spiritual nature, whereas father and mother together contribute another ten items all of a physical nature. The latter contribution is meant to enable man to serve the Lord, i.e. study Torah and perform the commandments recorded in the Torah.
  When the Torah was given the Ten Commandments corresponded to the ten directives G–d issued when He created the universe (Avot 5,1). You find that the numerical value of כסא, i.e. G–d's "throne," equals that of the word אנכי, the first word in the Decalogue. Both equal 81. When Moses ascended Mount Sinai, he encountered the hostility of the angels who opposed his wanting to take Torah to earth, and when he displayed fear of the angels G–d told him to hold on to His כסא (Shabbat 88). Midrash Tanchuma on Deut 33,2, views the words ואתה מרבבות קודש, as indicating that G–d descended at the time of the revelation at Mount Sinai supported by an entourage of twenty thousand angels.
  To understand the significance of that number one needs to appreciate the concept of מספר קטן, a method of arriving at numerical values by ignoring the "zero" or rather the final digit zero in a given number. If G–d arrived supported by twenty thousand angels from the regions of עולם האצילות, and עולם הבריאה, then the "shadow," צל, of those regions, the עולם היצירה, would have one tenth of that number, i.e. two thousand. This is the meaning of Psalms 68,18, that רכב אלוקים רבותיים, אלפי שנען, that "G–d's chariots are twice ten thousand, thousand upon thousand."
  Concerning man we are told in Kohelet 6,6, ואלו חיה אלף שנים פעמים, "if he had lived a thousand years twice, etc." The wording we would have expected would have been: "if he had lived two thousand years, etc." Why this peculiar wording? There are three levels at which life is lived, i.e. מעשה, דבור, מחשבה, and man has been equipped with נפש, רוח, נשמה, which can be termed as עשיה, יצירה, בריאה, to enable him to live his life at these various levels, as we know from the Zohar and the book Reyshit Chochmah, both of which explain this at length. The spiritual aspect of מעשה, deed, is related to נפש, whereas the spiritual aspect of דבור=study, is related to רוח, i.e. the world of יצירה. Finally, the spiritual aspect of מחשבה relates to the spheres of בריאה and נשמה, something still further removed from anything physical, tangible. The latter, i.e. the נשמה is destined to return to its origin under the כסא of G–d, whence it had been taken prior to entering a human body. A select few can reach the sphere of מחשבה דמחשבה, the region of נפש, רוח, נשמה of the עולם האצילות.
  When Shemot Rabbah 32,6, tells us that upon performance of "one" מצוה G–d provides "one" protective angel, it refers to the achievement most people are capable of, i.e. performance of all מצות, at the lowest or עולם העשיה level. The Midrash certainly does not refer to the performance of only a single one of the 613 commandments. The degree of spirituality granted to such people is within the realm of the angel Sandalphon.
  If someone achieves performance of "2 commandments," i.e. performance at both the מעשה and למוד level, he is granted "2 angels," i.e. the realm of Mattatron, in addition to that of Sandalphon, thereby elevating such a person to the עולם היצירה. These two angels represent the סוד, mystical dimension of the full יוד, as explained earlier, i.e. that they can be viewed as צל, shadow of the בריאה/אצילות level. The reason the Midrash said assah, instead of osseh, in the present tense, is because performance had then become the result of study, i.e. גדול תלמוד שמביא לידי מעשה (Kidushin 40).
  As soon as a person has studied how to perform the מצוה, he is deemed to have performed it. He has become an assah rather than an osseh. This is especially so since the Torah contains many commandments which are simply impossible to fulfil for the average Jew, either because he would have to be a priest in order for them to apply to him, or that he would first have to be guilty of a variety of sins in order to commence rehabilitation procedures, many of which are counted as separate commandments. In all those instances, study enables such a person to be considered as having performed the commandment in practice. I have elaborated on this theme under a different heading elsewhere.
  The "one" angel then is the one of the "thousand" that is represented by the עולם העשיה. 
  The person who is described as having performed "two" commandments, acquires "two" angels, i.e. "two thousand," as represented by the עולם היצירה. This is the meaning of the reference quoted from Psalms 68,18, quoted above.
  The third statement of the Midrash, that if one performed "many" מצות, etc., refers to the realm of מחשבה something superior to דבור/תלמוד, the mastery of the philosophy behind the מצוה, not the study of the details of its performance.  The spirituality achieved by people capable of that is unlimited, extends to the realm of the עולם הבריאה, i.e. חצי מחנהו, one of the יוד forming half of the dual יוד of בריאה/אצילות. 
  
  
  In other words, such people penetrate to one half of the ribotayim mentioned in Psalms 68,18. This is why the verse in Psalms 91,7 is quoted, since it speaks of revavah =ten thousand, instead of rivotayim, twenty thousand. The meaning of Kohelet 6,6, in which even twice a lifetime of one thousand years is described as ultimately futile, is that unless one achieves רבבה, the level of עולם הבריאה, one has failed to achieve one's goal, i.e. half the “full yud.” 
  The select few manage to penetrate to an even higher level, i.e. the level of the yud in its full sense equivalent to the שקל הקודש, as we explained earlier. The reason the Torah calls for a contribution of only half this שקל הקודש (Exodus 30,13), is that most people are not able to attain a higher level than that represented by such a half שקל. Psalms 68,18, describes this dual yud when mentioning רבותיים instead of רבבות. There was no need for the Torah in פרשת כי תשא, to describe the שקל as a half שקל and spelling out that a whole שקל contains 20 geyrah, except to remind us of the fact that G–d's input into a human being is limited to ten parts out of of twenty. This means that the "holy" component of a human being to start with is only 50%. Man can be compared to a two sided coin. The scriptural hint for this is תתהפך כחומר חותם (Job 38,14), "it turns over like clay under the seal" (which has a seal imprinted on it). The body thus is viewed like the coin, i.e. the receptacle for the imprint the soul makes upon it. In its most elevated state the soul is to be viewed like G–d's imprint on the body. This is what our sages meant when they said that the soul resembles G–d in five ways. This is also the deeper meaning of our sages in Shekalim 4, saying that G–d showed Moses a fiery coin since He Himself is compared to consuming fire (אש אוכלה, Deut. 9,3). The Jewish people purchased the daily communal sacrifices from the money raised by these contributions (half-שקל). This is perhaps why these sacrifices are described as, אשה לה' "a fire offering to G–d (Numbers 28,3). 
  I will discuss this in greater detail when explaining Parshat ויקרא. The Kabbalists have explained that the נפש/רוח/נשמה relationship is similar to the relationship of ישראל/לוי/כהן. This is also the deeper significance of the tithe, מעשה, being one tenth of the harvest, whereas the gift by the Levite to the Priest, i.e. מעשר מן המעשר, being a tenth of the resulting מעשר (also known as תרומת מעשר), is one hundredth. When the Torah calls the half-שקל in Parshat כי תשא "a gift to G–d", תרומת ה', it means it is a תרומה of the תרומת מעשר, i.e. one half of one per cent. Man's value when fully adult, (between the ages of twenty and sixty) is fifty שקל (compare the erchin legislation in Leviticus 27 ,3). One half of one per cent of those 50 שקל (or 100 times 1/2 shekel) equal the half-שקל that we are asked to present as a תרומה to G–d in Parshat שקלים. This then is like the כהן who receives one per cent of the harvest as tithe. One may view this one percent as sort of a distillation of the whole (since only the zeroes have been omitted from the number 100), and just as the כהן represents the elite of the body of Jewish people, so the נשמה represents the elite of the intangible life-force of the Jew.
  It is furthermore worth considering that the contribution of the half-שקל expresses the holiness of our bodies which were created for the Service of the Lord through studying Torah and performing its commandments. It would indeed be wonderful if it were possible for man to do without such mundane activities as eating and drinking, and thereby to be free to engage exclusively in the service of G–d. Torah however, has not been given to the ministering angels. We must at any rate endeavour to minimise the time devoted to the mundane aspects of life so as not to appear as serving the Lord only for the promised reward.
  In our Parshah we find that the standard value of a male Gentile slave is thirty שקלים. This is the amount that has to be paid to the owner as כופר נפש, "soul's ransom," if such a slave has been killed. All that G–d has asked from each Jew for His share in the cardinal sin of the golden calf is one 60th of that amount. This symbolises that we are to be prepared to make do with the equivalent of a half-שקל to sustain our needs during the 6 weekdays. The Mishnah in פאה 8,7, stipulates therefore that the gabba-im in charge of distribution of food to transients must not allocate less than the size of a loaf costing a pundian at the time when the price of grain is four sa-ah for a selah. Four sa-ah=24 kabbin, since a single sa-ah = 6 kabbin. The selah itself is equal to 48 pundians. This amount of bread is supposed to be sufficient for the number of weekdays in a month (1 kav=2200 ccm). Allowance is made for the cost of labour and baking, so that the amount of actual bread represents somewhat less than the gross amount of grain before grinding into flour. The baker, therefore, cannot sell a loaf the size of half a kav for only one pundian. The reason a month is considered the relevant unit for this calculation is that in Exodus 30,13, the Torah says זה יתנו וכו'. The word זה equals 12. In other words, there is a direct link between twelve and the מחצית השקל, the number twelve representing the months in the year (otherwise it could have stipulated that the contribution should be annual). Every month of the year is considered a separate unit. The first day of the month of אדר was the date on which the new contributions were called for. They fell due on the first day of ניסן. Having already in mind the contribution of the חצי שקל one month before it is actually made, sanctifies such a person and makes all the food he consumes as if he were consuming part of a sacrifice, i.e. something dedicated to G–d.
  Since food consumed on the Sabbath is anyways on a higher plane, having been sanctified by the very presence of the Sabbath, it need not be part of the calculations we have just outlined. The Gentile slaves, whose entire lifestyle is based on receiving material compensation for services rendered, are valued at thirty shekel each, i.e. sixty times the amount needed for minimal subsistence for the average person for the weekdays of each month. This is why the Torah sets his כופר נפש, soul's ransom, at 30 shekel as we read in Exodus 21,32 (The concept of בטול, reduction to the point of total insignificance in reverse).
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  To return to the principal subject matter of our Parshah. We have already pointed out in our commentary on Parshat Shemot under the heading of שובבים ת"ת, that this Parshah represents in the main the "pillar" of דין, see the Mishnah in אבות 1,18, that the world endures if three pillars continue to stand, i.e. אמת/דין/שלום.
  There are numerous references to this in our Midrashic literature. Shemot Rabbah 30,11, quoting Job 23,3-4, "would that I could find Him, reach His dwelling place, I would set out my case, משפט, before Him, fill my mouth with arguments," explains this in the following parable. A drunken prison guard rebelled, opened the gates to let the prisoners escape, cursed the picture of the ruler, and demanded to see the king, threatening that he would tell the king to his face what he thought true justice should be. He even went as far as stoning the king's image. He was shown the ruler sitting on a platform, dispensing punishment to a lady of aristocratic bearing, he observed the king handing down a verdict against his provincial governor, etc. At that point the palace guard became frightened and apologised, explaining that his drunken stupor had been the reason for his outrageous conduct, which included not recognising his king when he saw him. Similarly Job 23,4. When Job cursed the day he was born (Job 3,3/4) he in fact cursed the angel in charge of who will be born when and under what mazzal. This angel is called לילה. Later on Job reflected how G–d had punished Miriam for speaking out against Moses (Numbers 12,10); he further observed how G–d had punished Moses not allowing him to enter the Holy Land because he had struck the rock instead of merely speaking to it (Numbers 20,12). He also noted that G–d had blinded Isaac (for having loved the wicked Esau), see Genesis 27,1. He realised moreover that G–d had punished Abraham for having asked: "how do I know that I will inherit?" (Genesis 15,8) G–d had responded by telling Abraham that his descendants would be slaves in a foreign land for four hundred years before being liberated (Genesis 15,13). G–d had also קרב קיסין, struck at Jacob with a piece of wood, causing the latter to limp as a result of the nocturnal encounter with the שרו של עשו, the guardian angel of Esau, to use the words of the Midrash. When Job had reflected on all this, he begged G–d's forgiveness for having spoken out rebelliously, and he excused himself by having been drunk. This is why it says in Job 19,4: “ואף אמנם שגיתי, אתי תלין משוגתי,” If indeed I have erred, my error stays with me overnight." All of this, because he did not realise the power of דין. So far the Midrash.
  How does this Midrash fit in with the opening words of our portion, ואלה המשפטים? Besides, why did the Midrash bring so many (5) examples of people who were punished, and why is the order in which those people are listed so peculiar? The order Miriam, Moses, Isaac, Abraham, Jacob, certainly needs some explanation! One cannot say that the punishments listed represent some ascending or descending order of severity, since "blinding" is certainly less severe than banishing Moses from entry into the Holy Land! Most commentators are also agreed that Genesis 15,13, is a prediction of what is to come, not a punishment for Abraham whose faith had not wavered. It is rather a promise that his descendants through the experience in Egypt would qualify for liberation and possession of the Holy Land after they had experienced the revelation at Mount Sinai and had accepted the Torah. Jacob's "punishment" was certainly quite minor and brief, since Genesis 32,32, tells us that the "sun shone for him because he was limping," i.e. he was cured by Divine intervention.
  If we take this Midrash at face value, the meaning of it is that "kicking at the true judge and releasing prisoners," means that the palace guard released the guilty. "Stoning the image of the king," means rebelling against the judge who is called אלוהים by the Torah, and who has been created in the image of G–d. The word אלוהים at the very least means that the judge is the representative of the Ultimate Judge, i.e. G–d Himself, even when the term is applied to a human being. The judge, after all, represents Heavenly Justice. The reason Moses was called איש האלוהים was only because he had been delegated by G–d to be the judge of His people. Moses in turn, had conferred that authority on Joshua, who in due course conferred it on the judges.When Moses had told G–d in Exodus 17,4, עוד מעט וסקלוני, that Israel was almost at the point of stoning him who was G–d's representative, he meant that Israel was about to curse G–d by stoning him (Moses). The word שלטון, ruler, in the Midrash refers to the most distinguished judge.
  We read in our Parshah (22,27) אלוהים לא תקלל. The Midrash's connection with our Parshah is now clear.Once the rebellious palace guard in our parable, or Job in the counterpart, saw that the king, i.e. G–d, played no favourites, punished the aristocrats as well as ordinary mortals without regard to their station in life, his fear, i.e. respect for G–d, became real.
  A true judge must possess five qualities.The words ואלה המשפטים, really hinge on those five qualities a true judge must possess. The word לפניהם in that verse is best understood along the lines suggested by the author of צרור המור on Exodus 18,16, כי יהיה להם דבר בא אלי ושפטתי בין איש ובין רעהו i.e. "When they have a matter (on their mind) he comes to me and I judge between man and his fellow man." The words really should have been "they come" i.e. באו אלי instead of the singular בא. Rashi simply states that בא is the object of the word דבר. 
  The צרור המור however, makes G–d the subject, i.e. the litigant really comes to G–d, as if Moses had said "when a matter needs to be judged by G–d, the litigant comes to me (Moses) to present his arguments. When that happens, I do not listen to him, but wait until the other litigant, his opponent, is also present." This is independently confirmed in Deut. 1,16. Our Rabbis have warned insistently that judges must not hear an argument unless both sides are present; they even ruled that failure to observe this rule is equivalent to violating the commandment "לא תשא שמע שוא" (Exodus 23,1). This is the reason why the first verse in our Parshah states תשים לפניהם, "place before them." Furthermore, Moses told Yitro (18,16) that even if a similar problem as that which is now בא אלי, had been judged by him on a previous occasion, he would not simply use that precedent to hand down an identical verdict, but would consider this case on its own merits, i.e. ושפטתי בין איש ובין רעהו, because no two cases can be entirely alike. The judge must consider the respective personalities of the litigants. This too is the meaning of אשר תשים לפניהם. Another possible meaning of the word לפניהם could be that the matter should be judged forthwith, the judge should not say that he will deal with it when he gets around to it in his own good time.
  Shemot Rabbah 30,13, when explaining the verse in Proverbs 29,4, מלך במשפט יעמיד ארץ, ואיש תרומות יהרסנה, quotes Chronicles II 19,6, where Yehoshaphat tells his judges to remember that when they pronounce judgment they are not in the employ of man, but in the employ of G–d, and that G–d is with them (they need not be afraid). That same Midrash continues to explain that the meaning of the latter half of the verse quoted is that if a scholar who has mastered all the disciplines of Torah learning should be approached by a widow or orphan to adjudge their grievances and refuses, citing his pre-occupation with his studies, he is in fact destroying the fabric of G–ds world, instead of becoming a partner to G–d in His creation. The word תרומות then is understood to mean aloofness (derived from the heave offering which has to be "removed," or separated from the main body).
  To come back to the five qualities that a judge must possess; two of these five qualities are part of the makeup of the judge's character, whereas two others have to do with the respective litigants he deals with.
  1) He must be of what the Talmud in Baba Metzia 107, describes as the קשוט עצמך, ואל קשוט אחרים type, i.e. "straighten yourself out before you try to straighten out others." 2) He must be naturally courageous, even if his decisions are apt to offend some important people and cause him to fall into disfavour with such people.
  3) He must be aware that an honest decision makes him a partner of G–d in His creation of the universe, whereas a dishonest decision would cause G–d's Presence to depart from Israel, G–d's people. Any judge who illegally deprives a litigant of material things, giving them to the guilty party, will be punished by G–d in that נפשות, lives, will be cut short among members of his family. Should the judge, on the other hand, refuse to preside over litigation for fear of exposing himself to these dangers, the verse in Chronicles II 19,6 ועמכם בדבר משפט is to reassure such a judge that G–d will be with him (compare Shabbat 10, Sanhedrin 7). A judge is only held responsible for matters his eyes could see (Sanhedrin 6). He is not required to be omniscient. 4) There are occasions which call for the application of a judge's common sense, i.e. weighing probabilities. (Details of such occasions are spelled out in Tur Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat section 15, based on Maimonides). This applies particularly when the judge is convinced that the claimant is a swindler, but is unable to prove it, or is unable to prove that the witnesses lied. The witnesses may even be telling the truth and the claim may still be false. In such a case the judge must disqualify himself, possibly even suggest that other judges should not entertain such a claim. He must not say to himself that any miscarriage of justice will be due to the witnesses' testimony and is not his responsibility. In such cases the name for the judge, אלוהים, is especially appropriate, since the Torah says כי המשפט לאלוהים הוא, that in the final analysis justice is G–d's business (Deut 1,17). The rule mentioned applies only when in the estimation of the judge it is the claimant who appears to be a swindler. When the defendant appears to be the rogue, the judge must on no account disqualify himself from sitting in judgment, but must make every endeavour to unmask the defendant who tries to swindle the claimant. Our sages have said in Baba Metzia 30 that Jerusalem was destroyed because [among other things Ed.] the judges "based themselves only on דברי תורה," i.e. the letter of the law instead of also considering the spirit of the law. The judges must take emergencies into consideration,such as the spiritual level of the generation during which the judge lives. I have explained this in detail on the relevant verse [see Parshat Shoftim, page 201 in the edition used by me. Ed.]. 
  The beginning of Chronicles II 19,6, which we have quoted, reads "the king said: ראו מה אתם עושים i.e. "see that what you are doing is judging as the representative of G–d, not as the representative of man." The reason the king said ראו, is A) that he wanted the judges to refer to a written text, i.e. to look in the שולחן ערוך, B) that he also wanted them to use their common sense, i.e. "see."
  5) The fifth qualification that a judge has to possess is that he must explain the reasons that prompted him to hand down a particular verdict to the party he found guilty so as to prevent such a party from complaining about the system claiming he had been the victim of an injustice. Although the latter is not a legal requirement, the author states that his own father had taught him that this was based on the Talmudic statement that מאן דאזיל מבית דינא ליזמר וליזל. "He that leaves the Court should feel like making music upon his departure." This can only be so if the judge made the convicted party see that true justice had been done. In such a case the judge became a partner with G–d in creating the universe, since when G–d had completed the universe, every creature was not only content with having been created as such, but the donkey was glad not to have been created as a human being, i.e. he appreciated his particular function in the scheme of things. Similarly man was happy not to have been created as a planet, and the planets were happy not to have been created angels.
  Concerning the first of the five qualities of judges, that of "קשוט עצמך," i.e. "straighten yourself out, etc.," we find in Exodus 18,21 that Yitro gave certain guidelines to Moses regarding these qualities. Beginning with the first one, i.e. "you shall look for אנשי חיל," "you shall look for men of courage," these are a list of qualities which the judge expects those facing him to possess. Courage in this context would be the preparedness to give testimony regardless of unpleasant social or financial consequences for the witness. For this very reason, the very same steadfastness of character is expected of the judge himself, who must not be influenced by flattery, attempts to bribe, etc.When the judge expects a witness to be ירא אלוקים, G–d fearing (the next qualification in that list), the practical meaning is that a witness must not swear to something he is not absolutely sure of (i.e. something that only G–d can be sure of). Similarly the judge must be certain in his own conscience that he has no ulterior motive when arriving at his decision (seeing only G–d can evaluate his conscience).
  The four requirements listed by Yitro in that verse, apply to the other four qualifications judges must possess. The term אנשי חיל, is meant in the sense that we find in Samuel I 18,17 when Saul told David to be brave, courageous. A different order of these four qualities. The words אשר תשים לפניהם at the beginning of our Parshah, are meant to tell the judges that it is not sufficient to hand down a verdict, but one must first explain the reason for such a verdict.
  The requirement in (18,21) of יראי אלוקים, refers to the third of the qualities a judge must possess, namely that he must not be dogmatic in his approach. We have a tradition that under normal circumstances, i.e. חזקה, a debtor does not repay a loan before a due date [especially since he has nothing to gain, not paying interest on the loan. Ed.]. A case may come before the judge when the debtor claims to have prepaid, the judge believes him, but the debtor is unable to prove his claim. Another situation that may involve the יראי אלוקים requirement may be one when the accepted practice of המוציא מחברו עליו הראיה, that he who wants to be paid from his fellow man must produce proof, cannot be applied, since the nature of the case makes it unlikely that the claimant has proof. In either case, if the judge is convinced of the honesty of the litigant, the Torah tells him to act like אלוקים, i.e. G–d who is omniscient. He may have to explain why he hands down a verdict without the necessary legal requirements having been met. This is one aspect of what is called הוראת שעה, emergency situation. This is what king Yehoshaphat had in mind in Chronicles II 19,6, when he assured the judges that G–d was with them, i.e. would assist them in arriving at a true verdict. Under such circumstances it is, of course, even more important for the judge to explain the reason he handed down a certain verdict.
  Now to the third of Yitro's requirements, that there be אנשי אמת. It is obvious that he did not need to mention that people should tell the truth, rather he referred to the outlook of a person, i.e. whether he always strives to arrive at the truth. It is this latter quality that the judge must possess.
  The fourth of Yitro's requirements, that they be שונאי בצע, abhor unjust gain, refers to a quality such as demonstrated by David who is described as performing "justice and charity simultaneously." (Samuel II 8,15) It says there: ויהי דוד עושה משפט וצדקה, and the Talmud in Sanhedrin 6 on that verse explains that David first handed down a verdict based on justice. When he found the convicted party too poor to pay the judgment he would pay the judgment out of his own pocket. The reason he did so was that he was afraid that he might have erred and then the convicted litigant would certainly not be able to walk away happy from Court, as we had stated earlier that he should. Midrash Shemuel, commenting on Psalms 119,121, in which David is reported as having prayed: “עשיתי משפט וצדקה, אל תניחני לעושק," "I have performed justice and charity, do not hand me over to the oppressor," explains that David prayed that his charitable nature should not be taken advantage of by those wicked ones who knew him.
  The Midrash which we quoted above, and in which five people close to G–d were each reported as having been punished by G–d, concerned itself also with the five qualities which must be possessed by a judge, and demonstrated how G–d possessed and demonstrated these five qualities in dealing with Miriam, Moses, Isaac, Abraham and Jacob. G–d did not show favoritism even to people as close to Him as Miriam and Aaron. If Miriam, Aaron and Moses had not displayed fear in dealing with people, litigants, etc., and acted like אנשי חיל, certainly no less could be expected of G–d Himself. The fact that Moses was of the calibre of אנשי אמת, is testified to by G–d Himself, when He said of Moses בכל ביתי נאמן הוא (Numbers 12,7). The quality of שונא בצע is hinted at in the judgment executed on Miriam. On the one hand Miriam was punished for her error, on the other hand, seeing she was such a deserving person, the people delayed their departure until she could join them again (verses 15,16).
  Some commentators even claim that the tribe of Yehudah had already begun its journey, but was forced to return in her honour. The author of צרור המור writes at the end of Parshat Beha-alotcha, that there was an element of מדה כנגד מדה in this, since it was Yehudah who had exclaimed at the time the brothers wanted to kill Joseph "מה בצע כי נהרוג את אחינו … לכו ונמכרנו" "what profit is there in killing our brother, let us rather sell him!" This comment was held against him (Genesis 37,26). Miriam, by her very nature ignored material gains, as is evident from the danger she put herself in when defying Pharaoh's instructions to kill all male Jewish babies. On the contrary, she actively helped them survive. The repetition of the statement ותחיינה את הילדים in Exodus 1,18, suggests that she provided victuals for them out of her personal funds. This is why she experienced the honour of the tribe of Yehudah returning to wait for her until she had been healed of her צרעת.
  Isaac was legally correct in wanting to bless Esau his older son, but he erred, since when the judge's eyes tell him differently from what he reads in his law books he is supposed to act in accordance with what he sees, as we have explained earlier. After all, Isaac must have been well aware that Jacob was more righteous than Esau, and he should have acted accordingly. However, he refused to see.
  Concerning Abraham: It is well known that Israel's enslavement in Egypt was not a punishment by G–d for sins committed but an emergency they found themselves in. G–d wanted to demonstrate His existence, His power, etc. Israel had become the means for G–d to do so and to bring about a new world order, i.e. חדוש העולם. We have explained this at length in our commentary on Parshat Shemot, שובבים ת"ת. All of this was demonstrated by Israel's exile and subsequent redemption.
  The denial of Moses' plea to be allowed to cross the Jordan and to have the decree to die outside the Holy Land annulled, was a demonstration of courage and steadfastness, the quality of אנשי חיל.
  Jacob, on the other hand, had gracefully accepted his injury without protest, and as a result Israel was given an additional מצוה, not to eat the גיד הנשה, to commemorate Jacob's quality of cheerfully accepting a rebuke. He is the prime example of how to walk away from a guilty verdict in a happy frame of mind. 
  To sum up: The merit of cheerfully accepting G–ds judgment, may help us to experience the redemption sooner.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  On Exodus 21,7, כי ימכור איש את בתו לאמה, the Zohar, Sullam edition page 17, explains the entire paragraph as referring to the soul. The איש in the paragraph represents G–d, since G–d is also known as איש מלחמה, as we know from Exodus 15,3. The words "his daughter," refer to the soul. The exhortation תצא כצאת העבדים, means that she must not leave the body sullied, i.e. full of debts (sins) like the male slaves, but as a free (sinless) being. ואם לא יעדה, if the body (her master) that she inhabited did not "wed” her, i.e. has not matched her in sanctity and holiness, that body will be lost, i.e. והפדה, has to release her. Only when the body does penitence, תשובה, can the soul act as a release for it from purgatory. The body is not at liberty to consign the soul to purgatory, since אם אחרת יקח לו, the sinner may have to undergo transmigration, have to live another life on earth in order to rehabilitate itself. This process may repeat itself up to three times, i.e. שלוש אלה. The basis for the approach that we are talking about גלגול נשמות, may be the use of the word אחרת in our paragraph which is similar to Leviticus 14,42, ועפר אחר יקח.
  Another place where the idea that the Torah has the soul in mind (also) could be the Midrash we discussed earlier in which Job is cited. The "king's image” mentioned in that Midrash may be the עולם היצירה, whereas the “prison” referred to would be the עולם העשיה. The שלטון ruler, mentioned in that Midrash, refers to the mind, the עולם הבריאה, the higher world, the world of the righteous who are governed by their יצר טוב "good urge."
  Acquisiton of מעשים טובים, may not be something independent of the performance of so called מצות, rather it may be the manner in which the commandments are performed. There are 5 levels of performing the various commandments, which may elevate such performance into מעשים טובים, "good deeds." The five people mentioned in our Midrash may personify those five levels of "mitzvah performance." 1) "Ordinary הדור מצוה," i.e. Miriam's allowing the children to live; 1b) the additional dimension she displayed by financing the survival of these children herself. This made Miriam a paragon of the virtue of הדור מצוה, a level described by G–d elsewhere as בקרובי אקדש, "I will be sanctified through those that are close to Me" (when the sons of Aaron died, Leviticus 10,2-3).
  2) זרוז מצוה a display of eagerness to perform the commandment. That this is a higher level of performance is based on the verse אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם, "that man should do them and live (come to life) thereby," (Lev. 18,5). It means that performance should be joyful in order that a person may qualify for this level. One way of proving this is to perform the part of the מצוה one is capable of fulfilling even if one is fully aware that one will never be able to perform the מצוה in its entirety. An example of such זרוז was Moses establishing three cities of refuge on the East Bank of the Jordan, though these would not become operative until they would be matched by three more such cities on the West Bank. Moses could have left even the first three such cities to be set aside by his successor since he was aware that he would not be alive when they would begin to fulfil their designated purpose. Compare the Torah on this in Numbers 35,14-15, and Deut. 4,41.
  3) The third method of acquiring that status of doing מעשים טובים, is performance of the commandment when it involves various degrees of self sacrifice, מסירת נפש. The Mechilta explains this in connection with Exodus 20,6, where G–d promises reward for the next two thousand generations to people who have performed His commandments, whereas in Deut 7,9, the reward is promised for one thousand generations. The difference is due to whether the commandments have been performed out of love for G–d or out of fear of G–d. Isaac is reported to have replied to Ishmael who had boasted of his מסירת נפש when undergoing circumcision at the age of thirteen, a deed Isaac could not match since he had been only eight days old at his own circumcision. He told his half-brother Ishmael that he would offer up all his organs at the עקדה, thus proving even greater self-sacrifice.
  4) A fourth level of מצוה performance is performance of the commandment for the sake of G–d, not for the securing of any kind of advantage on this earth. Abraham was a prime example of this when he risked his life to liberate Lot and incidentally all the people of Sodom, etc, and refused as much as a shoelace of the loot which was legally his (Genesis 14,22).
  5) A fifth level of performance is one which shows disdain for the comforts of life, as demonstrated by Jacob, who asked G–d only for minimal necessities such as food, clothing and shelter (Genesis 28,20).
  סקול יסקל השור ולא יאכל את בשרו. The ox must be stoned, and its meat must not be eaten." Rabbi Menachem Habavli explains that the reason for this injunction is that once the verdict on the ox has been pronounced, i.e. that it is to be executed, its flesh is automatically forbidden, just as we have the rule that כל שעתיד להשרף כשרוף דמי, that anything that is to be burned, is considered for legal purposes as if it had already been burned. Anyone who has become the instrument of harm or death to a third party becomes detested and one must not derive any benefit from such person or thing. Such a person's fate is to be "consumed" by others. A שליח לדבר עברה, someone designated to perform a transgression, can no longer serve as עץ מאכל, a fruit-bearing tree.
  ובעל השור נקי, the owner of that ox is "free." G–d the Creator says to the owner that unfortunately his negligence has brought him to this sorry state. If he repents however, his sin will be forgiven, i.e. "his flesh will not be consumed."
  
  כי תצא אש ומצאה קוצים. When fire escapes and feeds on thistles, etc." The reason the Torah had to include this piece of legislation is that whereas one would have thought that if someone makes a fire within the confines of his own home, he is not responsible if his neighbours' property is accidentally damaged by this fire, the Torah imposes the duty to see to it that any hazardous activity, even within one's own house, must be accompanied by precautions to safeguard one's environment. This is a general rule, non-observance of which interferes with a person's principal aim in life, i.e. to attain a level of holiness.
  
  על כל דבר פשע אשר יאמר כי הוא זה. This is the injunction to deal with claims and counterclaims of people to whom animals or objects have been entrusted for safekeeping. The Torah states that if the accused denies owing anything, he is believed, since people do not possess the effrontery to deny that they have had any dealings with the claimant (Baba Metzia 3).
  כי יתן איש אל רעהו וכו, When the trustee is paid for his work, he is liable even if the items have been stolen, etc. as long as his life was not endangered in protecting the goods entrusted to him. We see in this a wonderful hint that we have been entrusted by G–d to keep His commandments, and that we are held accountable if non-performance was due to negligence, laziness, etc. The words "if they have been stolen from him, he has to make restitution to their owner," refer to the restitution we have to make to G–d for not having taken care of the tasks entrusted to us.
  אם חבול תחבול שלמת רעך, Rashi explains that the subject matter is a garment worn by day. This is difficult, since the Torah continues "when he lies down at night, what will he (the indigent debtor) cover himself with?" From this it seems obvious that the Torah must have referred to a cover the debtor needs at night! Perhaps the bed the Torah has in mind is one which is used as a "table" at meal times. The verse may however contain a meaning in the mystical realm. Sometimes a person "grabs" the מצות, i.e. the reward for them which should by rights have accrued to someone else. The Zohar illustrates this in connection with כסוי חטאה in Psalms 32,1, and it is dealt with in Pardes Rimonim, in the seventh chapter dealing with the soul. The upshot is that even if a person has committed so many sins, i.e. is so indebted to G–d that his "clothing" (i.e. body) is pledged in payment, it is never too late to repent and to reverse the process of indebtedness to G–d. G–d says to the person who has sinned almost till the end of his life i.e. עד בא השמש, that his garment will be restored if he repents. The garment is a euphemism for the body. Were the person not to repent, his soul would be exposed, return "naked" to G–d once the body dies it had inhabited. The words והיה כי יצעק אלי ושמעתי כי חנון אני, "when he will cry out I will listen, for I am gracious," is a reference to the prayer for forgiveness of the repentant sinner.
  מלאתך ודמעך לא תאחר. Do not delay to offer the fullness of your harvest." Rabbi Menachem Habavli explains that the Torah here tells us that when prayer is accompanied by tears, is the result of a broken heart, then G–d's response will not be delayed. It is our tradition that the "gates of tears," are never locked (Berachot 32).
  לא תשא שמע שוא. A judge must not listen to the arguments of one litigant when his opposite number is absent. Rabbi Menachem Habavli writes that we may view the body and the soul as two litigants before the judge, i.e. G–d. As long as they both approach G–d simultaneously, G–d judges them. If, however, the body has already died, become decomposed, etc., the sinner, i.e the soul, remains a litigant who cannot be dealt with since his partner in crime is missing. This is why the Torah has to say elsewhere וכפר אדמתו עמו, (Deut 32,41) that the red looking body i.e. אדמדם (while full of blood) is the other litigant. If it has departed there is nothing else for the soul to do but return to its origin, the place below G–d's throne.
  ודל לא תהדר בריבו. Do not favour the poor when he is involved in litigation." If someone is "poor" in Torah knowledge he does not deserve any special consideration by the judges. When he is "rich" in Torah knowledge, however, he does deserve special consideration, such as his case being dealt with by the judges ahead of others.
  שלוש פעמים בשנה יראה כל זכורך וכו. Rabbi Menachem Habavli explains that ordinarily a person who is full of sins (as we all are) would not have the audacity to appear before His King three times a year wearing these sins around his neck as if they were jewelry. Since we are commanded to make such appearance, it is clear we must see to it that we are free from sin. The word פעמים is reminiscent of פעמון ,bell. In other words, the commandments are to serve as an alarm bell that we should cleanse ourselves from sin before undertaking the pilgrimage and appearing in the Presence of G'd in the holy Temple.
  
  Terumah
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Commandment 96 of the 613 commandments stipulates the building of a Temple as per Exodus 25,8: "They shall make for Me a Temple." The Tabernacle is also called "Temple," and the Temple is on occasion referred to as "Tabernacle."
  Commandment 97 forbids removal of the staves used to carry the Holy Ark from the rings they were placed in as per Exodus 25,15: "The staves must not be removed from them."
  Commandment 98 enjoins the priests to place showbreads inside the Holy Temple on a permanent basis as per Exodus 25,30: "And on the table you shall set the bread of display, to be before Me always."
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Let me first quote some words of the saintly author of Shaarey Or on the subject of the Holy Temple. The following is a quotation from the first chapter of his book entitled Shechinah: After the erection of the Tabernacle the שכינה, manifestation of G–d's Presence, was visible at all times over the camp of the Israelites. We derive this from the verse: "They shall make a Temple for Me so that I may dwell in their midst" (25,8). You need to appreciate an important rule. G–d's principal residence was in our world when He first created the universe and man. Although the "upper" regions had been allocated to the creatures of those regions and the "lower" regions to the creatures of the terrestrial universe, because G–d had His principal residence on earth, He thereby provided the unification of heaven and earth, allowed for unimpeded communication and transfer to our world of sources of blessing from the inexhaustible pools of the upper regions. All this is alluded to in the verse: "And the heavens and the earth were completed together with all their hosts" (Genesis 2,1). This means that each part of the "lower" universe was also a part of the "higher" universe and thus contributed to the other's existence. The conduits supplying sources from one region to the other worked perfectly without hindrance. This is what the prophet referred to in Isaiah 66,1: "The heaven is My throne and the earth is My footstool." G–d is perceived as halfway between the earth and heaven, or, between terrestrial and celestial beings.
  Adam came along and through his sin ruined this balance. This resulted in the conduits between heaven and earth being broken; the sources of supply to earth were interrupted and G–d's Presence withdrew from Earth thus creating a separation between the Celestial and Terrestrial Regions. With the advent of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Presence of G–d was once more drawn towards Earth step by step. The patriarchs are perceived as having established three thrones for G–d in our world. They made their own bodies carriers, i.e. thrones, for G–d to reside on, but this did not result in G–d's Presence having a permanent abode in our world. The temporary nature of G–d's Presence in our world during the lives of the patriarchs is alluded to in such statements as Genesis 17,22: ויעל אלוקים מעל אברהם, "G–d 'rose' from above Abraham." Concerning such occurrences our sages have said that the patriarchs acted as G–d's מרכבה, carrier. We therefore view the שכינה as "flying" in the air, having no permanent resting place in those days, unlike the time when Earth and Man had first been created.
  Then came Moses and the Jewish people and built the Tabernacle with its furnishings and repaired the break in the conduits between Heaven and Earth, and restored the connection to the pools of blessings interrupted through Adam's sin. They succeeded in drawing down מים חיים, "life-giving" waters, from the Celestial Regions. The Jewish people succeeded in having G–d reside on earth again, but not on earth, only within the "Tent," i.e. the Tabernacle. This is the mystical dimension of the words: "They shall make for Me a Temple so that I can dwell in their midst." As a result of this development G–d's Presence can be viewed as like that of a guest who travels from place to place. The choice of the words "I shall dwell amongst them," as distinct from "I shall dwell down on earth," is a reference to the fact that G–d's Presence travelled with the Jewish people wherever they went. G–d did not take up residence in a fixed abode then, and this is alluded to in the verse: ויהי בנסוע הארון, "Whenever the Holy Ark would start travelling, etc." (Numbers 10,35).
  David was troubled by this condition of the שכינה, Divine Presence; he wanted G–d to have a permanent abode on earth in a fixed place. This is why he wanted to build a Temple, as opposed to the Tabernacle which by definition was a temporary structure, (cf. Samuel II 7,2) He could not abide the fact that whereas he, David, dwelled in a solid house, G–d should be content with a structure the ceiling of which consisted merely of hides and carpets. This is also the mystical dimension of Psalms 132,2: "When he swore to G–d, vowed to the Mighty One of Jacob: 'I will not enter my house, nor will I mount my bed, I will not give sleep to my eyes, nor slumber to my eyelids until I find a place for the Lord, an abode for the Mighty one of Jacob.'" In addition we read in Psalms 132,13: "For the Lord has chosen Zion, He has desired it for His seat. This is My resting-place for all time; here I will dwell, for I desire it." 
  Because David wished to establish a permanent residence for G–d's Presence and said: קומה ה' למנוחתך אתה וארון עוזך, "Advance, O Lord, to Your resting-place, You and Your mighty Ark!" (Psalms 132,8), his thoughts found favour in the eyes of G–d and He sent him a message through the prophet Nathan. In Samuel II 7,5, Nathan is instructed to go to David and tell him: "Thus says the Lord: 'Are you the one to build a house for Me to dwell in? From the day I brought the people of Israel out of Egypt to this day I have not dwelt in a house, but have moved about in Tent and Tabernacle. As I moved about wherever the Israelites went, did I ever reproach one of the tribal leaders whom I appointed to care for My people Israel: Why have you not built me a house of cedar?"' In Chronicles II 6,9 Solomon quotes G–d as having said to David his father: "However, you shall not build the House; your son, the issue of your loins, he shall build the House for My Name." What did King David do? He assembled and prepared the silver, gold, and all other building materials required to execute construction of the Temple. Details of all this are recorded in Chronicles I ch. 29. All of David's preparations were divinely inspired. David knew all the correct sizes, measurements and weights required for every detail of the construction of the Temple that was to be built by his son Solomon. The Holy Spirit had informed him of all these details. He planned the entire blueprint of the building, including all the offices for the priests, etc., described in the book of Kings. All that Solomon had to do was to execute the plans his father David had drawn up. When the construction was completed, the שכינה descended to take up permanent residence on earth.
  This is what Solomon referred to in his prayer in Kings 18,12: "Then Solomon declared: 'The Lord has chosen to abide in a thick cloud. I have now built for You a stately House, a place where You may dwell forever'" It is further written as part of Solomon's prayer in Kings I 8,26: "Now, therefore, O G–d of Israel, let the promise that You made to Your servant my father David be fulfilled. But will G–d really dwell on earth? Even the heavens to their uttermost reaches cannot contain You, how much less this House that I have built!" At this point David's prayer in Psalms 132,8-11 is invoked by Solomon in Chronicles II 6,40-41. When Solomon completed his prayer, fire descended from heaven and consumed the total offering and the meal offerings; the glory of G–d filled the House (Chronicles II 7,1). It was then that the relationship between G–d and earth (Man) was restored to the level prior to Adam's sin. The conduits from heaven poured their blessing on mankind via the Holy Temple. This is the true meaning of Psalms 133,3: "Like the dew of Hermon that falls upon the mountains of Zion. There the Lord ordained blessing, everlasting life." It is also written in Psalms 50,2: "From Zion, perfect in beauty, G–d appeared."
  The Temple was the focus where all G–d's blessings were first received; thence they were distributed to the seventy nations of the world corresponding to the seventy "princes" in the Celestial Regions. All these nations received a "reward" from Jerusalem, i.e. all mankind benefited from the Temple of the Jewish people. This was a promise G–d had already made to Abraham in Genesis 12,3: "And all the families of the earth shall bless themselves through you." Solomon knew how G–d directed these blessings via various conduits, and this is why he made gardens, planted orchards and trees etc. as described in Kohelet 2,5. It was patently impossible for Solomon to have planted all these various plants in a single location, [many require different climates in order to grow properly. Ed.] Solomon knew which of the various conduits led to which part of the earth. He therefore strategically placed the various plants near these different conduits so that their seeds would be carried to those areas of the earth where they could flourish best. This is the deeper meaning of Psalms 50,2 quoted earlier. Zion is perceived as the foundation of the earth. The שכינה dispatches blessings to various parts of the earth, to each in accordance with the deserts of its inhabitants.
  The שכינה itself resides exclusively amongst Israel, and this is the reason the Torah says "They shall make a Temple for Me so that I may reside amongst them." The Torah is also on record as: "whom I have taken out of the land of Egypt in order to dwell amongst them" (Exodus 29,46), and the Torah says: "I shall place My residence amongst them" (Leviticus 26,11). This is the residence in which the Ineffable Name of G–d is at home. G–d said to the Jewish people: "Take My residence, the one which I dwell in, for yourselves, and I will never depart from you." Even though on occasion you are bound to become ritually defiled (the antithesis to sanctity) My Presence will not depart from you. This is the meaning of: "who dwells amongst them in the midst of their defilement" (Leviticus 16,16). When G–d gave Israel this gift, and His Presence resided amongst them, Israel became the recipient of all of G–d's bounty. G–d entrusted Israel with the keys to all His treasure-chambers so that they had access to and could receive every conceivable kind of blessing from the שכינה. This is the true meaning of the verse: ונתתי משכני בתוככם והתהלכתי בתוככם והייתי לכם לאלוקים, "I make My residence amongst you….and I walk amongst you and I shall be your G–d" (Leviticus 26, 11-12). This verse almost portrays the שכינה as similar to the pledge held by a creditor, as if G–d were Israel's debtor. 
  When Israel sinned and as a result the Temple was destroyed, the שכינה went into exile with the Jewish people, seeing that it was a pledge G–d had entrusted to them. This is the mystical dimension of the verse: אלה פקודי המשכן, משכן העדות, "These are the "pledges" of the Tabernacle, the "pledges" of the "Testimony" (Exodus 38,21). This is the basis for the Rabbinic statement in Megillah 29 that Israel is beloved (by G–d) since wherever the people of Israel are exiled, the שכינה is exiled with them. When they were exiled to Egypt the שכינה was with them, as we know from Genesis 46,4, where G–d told Jacob: "I shall go down to Egypt with you." When the Jewish people went into exile in Babylonia the שכינה accompanied them, as we know from Isaiah 43,14: "For your sake I sent to Babylon." When Israel was exiled in Elam the שכינה accompanied them, as we know from Jeremiah 49,38: "I will set My throne in Elam." When the Jewish people went into the Roman exile the שכינה also went with them, as we know from Isaiah 63,1: "Who is this coming from Edom,…..it is I who contend victoriously, powerful to give triumph." When the people of Israel return to their land from exile the שכינה will also accompany them as we know from Deut. 23,35: ושב ה' אלוקיכם את שבותך ורחמך, "G–d will come back with your imprisoned ones and have mercy on you." We would have expected the Torah to say: והשיב, "He will bring back," instead of "He will come back." We also have a verse in Song of Songs 4,8: "With Me from Lebanon O bride, come with Me!" Rabbi Meir explains this as a parable: It is like a king saying to his servant "if you need to seek me out, I shall be with my son." This is the meaning of "who dwells with them in their defilement," which we have quoted earlier. All this although G–d had warned Israel not to defile their encampments or the land they would live on, for it is the land G–d Himself has His abode in. 
  The terms מקדש, and משכן, Temple or Tabernacle, are used interchangeably at all times. What holds true for the one holds true for the other. The mystical dimension of the Tabernacle is something very exalted and elusive indeed. There is a Midrash quoting Rabbi Yoshia from Sakinin according to which G–d told Moses to make garments decorated with costly gems. When Moses questioned where he was expected to find all these gems, G–d told him that if he, Moses, were to make on earth things which symbolised the splendour of Heaven, i.e. the manner in which G–d appeared dressed in precious gems, then He in turn could be persuaded to leave His palace in Heaven and to reduce Himself so that He could take up residence on earth [in the Tabernacle]. 
  This Midrash illustrates that the appearance of the Tabernacle was designed to reflect and symbolise matters that form G–d's מרכבה, chariot in the Celestial Regions, such as the concept of Torah and אדם העליון, Man as an abstract concept. Once such symbols exist in our world, the ground is prepared for the שכינה to take up residence in our domain. This is a description of the process in general terms.
  It remains for us to understand how the various parts of the Tabernacle and its the furnishings symbolise what exists in Heaven. Such details have been revealed only to very few exalted human beings such as Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai and his colleagues.
  Nonetheless several scholars of the Kabbalah have attempted to comprehend at least part of these mysteries, each one in accordance with his intellectual capacity. Although I am deeply conscious of my limitations, and would not presume to be more competent in this area than my predecessors, each one of us has the ספר תורה in front of him, and it is our duty to try and understand as much of it as we are able. It does not matter whether we unravel a lot or only a little of the Torah's mysteries as long as our motivation is לשם שמים, to further the intent of Heaven. I therefore wish to add merely a few words to what has already been written about this subject by our sages and commentators.
  All our sages agree that the Tabernacle was a microcosm of the macrocosm, that it reflected to the extent possible, structures and concepts and their development prevalent in the Celestial Regions, though those "structures" and concepts are, of course, abstract. Midrash Rabbah Terumah 33,4 commenting on Chronicles I 29,11: "Yours, O Lord are greatness, might, splendour, triumph, and majesty-- yes all that is in Heaven and earth," quotes Rabbi Berechyah; he sees this as proof that G–d transferred His residence to the Tabernacle. There is also a Midrash Tanchuma on Parshat Pekudey which quotes Psalms 26,8: "O Lord, I love Your temple abode, the dwelling-place of Your glory," as proof that the residence of G–d on earth corresponds to the one He has in the Celestial Regions. Its construction was also a repetition of the process of creation. This is derived from the text of the Bible in Genesis 1,1: "At the beginning G–d created the heaven and the earth," whereas we read in Psalms 104,2: "You spread the heavens like a tent cloth." The Tabernacle was also covered by tent cloth as per Exodus 26,1: "You shall make the Tabernacle from ten strips of tent cloth." When describing what happened on the second day of creation, the Torah speaks about a firmament which is to separate the "upper" waters from the "lower" waters (Genesis 1,6), whereas when giving the instructions for building the Tabernacle the Torah directs that the "curtain shall divide between the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies" (Exodus 26,33). The Torah, relating the work G–d performed on the third day of creation, mentions that the waters are to be gathered into one area (Genesis 1,9), whereas during the construction of the Tabernacle the Torah commands the construction of a copper basin into which all the water is to be poured (Exodus 30,18). On the fourth day of creation the Torah reports the construction of the great luminaries (Genesis 1,14), whereas the Torah commands the construction of a lampstand as part of the furnishings of the Tabernacle (Exodus 25,31). On the fifth day of creation G–d created the birds, etc. (Genesis 1,20), whereas in the Tabernacle the Torah commands that the cherubs on the lid of the Holy Ark be equipped with wings, bird-like (Exodus 25,20). Sacrifices of birds are also prescribed to be offered up in the Tabernacle. On the sixth day of creation G–d created man in His own image to reflect the glory of his Creator (Genesis 1,27), whereas in the Tabernacle a human being, the High Priest, was to be anointed and consecrated to parallel in this microcosm the function of man in the macrocosm in this microcosm. On the seventh day of creation, the universe is described as having been completed (Genesis 2,1); we find a similar expression when the Torah describes the construction of the Tabernacle as having been completed (Exodus 39,32). When the universe was completed G–d blessed it (Genesis 1,28-2,3), whereas when the Tabernacle was completed Moses blessed it (Exodus 39,43). When the universe was completed the Torah uses the term ויכל to describe the completion (Genesis 2,2); when the Tabernacle was completed the Torah uses the same expression (Exodus 40,33 and Numbers 7,1). When the universe was completed G–d sanctified it (Genesis 2,3); when the construction of the Tabernacle was completed the Torah also relates that Moses anointed and sanctified it (Numbers 7,1).
  Why was it important for the Tabernacle to be equal in significance to heaven and earth? Just as heaven and earth have been cited as witnesses against Israel when the latter did not observe Torah (Deut.30,19), so the Tabernacle acts as witness on behalf of Israel as per the first verse in Parshat Pekudey "These are the "pledges" of the Tabernacle, the Tabernacle of Testimony" (Exodus 38,21). This is the reason Psalms 26,8 speaks of "I love Your temple abode, the dwelling- place of Your glory."
  Rabbenu Bachyah comments on the verse in Exodus 25,9: את תבנית המשכן ואת תבנית כל כליו, "The pattern of the Tabernacle and the; pattern of its furnishings." It is a well known fact that the Tabernacle and its furnishings are physical illustrations designed to help us understand their counterparts in the Celestial Regions. One important factor is the fact that the Tabernacle was divided into three separate areas, each with a different level of sanctity. The innermost part was the site of the Holy Ark with the cherubs on its lid, the Holy of Holies. Beyond the dividing curtain was the Sanctuary known as אהל מועד. Beyond that was the courtyard containing the copper altar on which most sacrifices were offered. These three areas correspond to the three parts of the universe: the world of the angels, the world of the planets and our world. That most important element in creation, man himself, is similarly composed of three distinct parts. He represents the very existence on earth known as עולם הקטן, microcosm. Existence on earth is similarly divided into three parts: The עולם הדבור, the creatures who can freely communicate with one another, there is the עולם החיות, the other living creatures, and there is the עולם הטבע, inanimate nature. The first part of the Tabernacle is the section beyond the dividing curtain containing the Holy Ark, the tablets and the cherubs, all of which are interior vessels concealed from inspection. These represent the מרכבה. Ezekiel 10,19 describes this first part in the words: "and the Glory of Israel's G–d was upon them, above." We also have a verse in Psalms 80,2 describing the Shepherd of Israel, as "sitting on the cherubs." This is a reference to the world of the angels who are intangible, invisible intellectual beings who serve as throne and carrier of G–d. The corresponding manifestation in our world is the עולם הדבור, the head, seat of the brain and wisdom. The intellect is perceived as pouring out wisdom to the brain. A truly righteous person serves as מרכבה, a carrier of G–d's Presence, as did the patriarchs of old; we can similarly serve as the מרכבה by fulfilling the commandment of wearing phylacteries on the head, symbol of the brain, and on the arm opposite our hearts. These two organs correspond to the two cherubs. By keeping this in mind we can understand the powerful effect of laying and wearing the Tefillin.
  The second part of the Tabernacle, the one outside the Holy of Holies, contained the altar for the incense (golden altar), the table, and the lampstand, מנורה. These are highly distinguished interior furnishings, though not of the highest order. These furnishings correspond to the world of the planets in our universe. The planets are considered as highly honoured, conveying the glory of the Creator by their very existence and regular orbits. They are responsible for the continued existence of an orderly universe. The world of the beasts and other living creatures performs a function on earth comparable to that of the planets in space. The organ in man corresponding to that world of beast in man is the heart, an interior organ upon which life itself is dependent. Our entire body remains functional only by the heart pumping blood through it on an ongoing basis.
  The third part of the Tabernacle is the courtyard in front of the Tabernacle, the site of the copper altar, the altar on which the public total offering, עולה, was offered up each morning and each evening. As a result of this, the בעלי חיים, animals being sacrificed, sustained losses, i.e. they lost their lives. This part of the Tabernacle corresponds to our "lower" world, which constantly undergoes birth and death, i.e. sustains losses. The parallel part in man is עולם הטבע, the merely functional nature, the parts from the navel downwards. It is this region from which man's existence develops first. This is also the reason it is the region whence the eventual death of the body commences. We must regard the loss of life as the cause of renewed existence; if there were no losses in our world there would not be a need for new life [be it human, animal or merely botanical, Ed.] to come into existence.
  We have now learned that the three parts of the Tabernacle correspond to the three parts of the universe concerning which King David said in Psalms 103,20: "Bless the Lord, O, His angels, mighty creatures who do His bidding, ever obedient to His bidding. Bless the Lord all His hosts, His servants who do His will; bless the Lord all His works, through the length and breadth of His realm." David's son Solomon also adopted his father's outlook when he alluded to this in three consecutive verses in Song of Songs 5,13-15. Three different parts of the human body form the subject of those verses, each one representing a different aspect of the universe and how man's composition reflects this division of the universe into three constituent parts. I (Rabbenu Bachyah) have explained this in detail when I discussed Jacob's dream of the ladder." Thus far the quotation from Rabbenu Bachyah.
  The subject deserves further analysis. We need to understand why, if something corresponds to certain parts of the universe, it should at the same time serve as a model for the universe as a whole.
  Let us approach the subject by means of a parable. If an artisan constructed some valuable piece of art using gold and silver in its construction and giving it the shape and appearance of a human being, making it look as though alive and performing some task normally performed by human beings, such a piece of art is bound to be beloved by all those who behold it. This love in the eye of the beholder would arise in spite of the fact that such an object possesses a mouth that cannot speak, eyes that cannot see, etc. The same beholder, when he sees human beings able to see, speak and able to go about their work, etc., is not thereby motivated to love these nor to hold them in high esteem; yet they are the product of the supreme Artisan [of human beings]. One reason may be that the use of precious metals in the construction of the inanimate replica of a human being, coupled with the exquisite shape of this work of art, combine to arouse a feeling of love for such an artifact in its beholder.
  The Tabernacle represented the living universe; the reason for its construction should be viewed on similar lines. Approaching the subject from a mystical dimension, we must remember that the very creation of the universe is testimony to the existence of G–d preceding the universe. Maimonides explained this in his Moreh Nevuchim, and I have elaborated on it elsewhere. The coming into being of the universe teaches the primacy of G–d and His absolute Unity, the fact that G–d is the root cause of all causes. 
  This is the reason that we recite the paragraphs dealing with G–d having created the universe both in the mornings and in the evenings immediately prior to reciting the Kriyat Shema declaration. In those paragraphs we mention G–d as having created both night and day in order to demonstrate our conviction that they are part of the same whole and do not represent different domains presided over by different deities. This is why the Torah, when describing the process of creation, keeps saying ויהי ערב ויהי בוקר, "it was evening it was morning." Night is part of the unit called day and vice versa. Rashi explains on Exodus 10,21: וימש חשך, "that the darkness was tangible," that this was a phenomenon that intensified the normal darkness of the night. The night is darkest immediately before dawn. Before the sun sets in the evening, we observe the sun assuming a reddish colour in preparation for evening and night; the same process happens in reverse prior to sunrise. All this proves the basic unity of night and day. G–d is eternal, without beginning or end, without limitation of His powers, etc., as I have explained on other occasions. When G–d created the universe, He created "limits," as distinct from Himself who is limitless. In order to do this G–d imposed some restrictions, צמצום, upon Himself. The universe itself represents an act of G–d's self-restriction. 
  The building of the Tabernacle similarly represented an act of self-restriction by G–d by the very fact that He limited His Presence to the confines of the Tabernacle, whereas prior to that G–d's Presence ranged all over earth without any kind of restriction or limitation. Once the Holy Ark had been placed inside the Holy of Holies, G–d's Presence was -so to speak- restricted to the space between the staves by which the Holy Ark was carried. All of this in spite of the fact -as Solomon had pointed out in his prayer in Kings I Chapter 8- that "neither the heavens nor the heaven of heavens are large enough to contain G–d."
  The construction of the Tabernacle may be compared to the construction of the universe itself of which it is written: ה' בחכמה יסד ארץ, כונן שמים בתבונה, בדעתו תהומות נבקעו, "The Lord founded the earth with wisdom; He established the heavens with understanding. By His knowledge the depths were broken up" (Proverbs 3,19-20). We find a parallel statement when the Torah describes the appointment of Betzalel as the architect in charge of building the Tabernacle. Exodus 31,3 tells us that G–d endowed Betzalel with "a divine spirit of skill, ability, and knowledge in every kind of craft; to make designs for work in gold, silver, and copper, to cut stones, etc." Our sages in Berachot 55 say that Betzalel knew how to combine the letters of the Torah, the method by which the universe had been created by G–d. It follows that the Tabernacle was in effect the creation of a microcosm, a duplication of מעשה בראשית. [except that this creation did not start ex nihilo. Ed.] We expect to come back to this in detail when explaining the פרשיות of ויקהל and פקודי.
  Prior to the creation of the universe there existed only G–d and His name in total and absolute secrecy, a concept which I have explained elsewhere at length. Once it had become His will to bring into existence a universe, the Torah firsts speaks about בראשית ברא אלוקים (Genesis 1,1), and afterwards the Torah refers to: ביום עשות ה' אלוקים (Genesis 2,4). This shows that the four-lettered name of G–d remained secret and only the name אל-הים which has the same numerical value as the word for nature, i.e. הטבע (86), was revealed. I have already mentioned that the creation of the universe proved that G–d existed before the universe. G–d's existence is manifest only through His activities. The essence of G–d, by definition, remains hidden. Anything revealed must by definition have previously been concealed.  The very name of G–d, which alludes to היה, הוה ויהיה, "something that was, is, and will forever be," is the cause of any existence and enables all that exists to continue doing so. This is why the verse quoted from Genesis 2,4 does not merely describe G–d as having created the universe in the past, עשה, but also as an ongoing process, עשות.
  When the Tabernacle was completed the glory of G–d was again revealed, just as after the completion of the universe. The Torah (Exodus 40,38) says: כי ענן ה' על המשכן יומם, ואש תהיה לילה בו לעיני כל ישראל, "For over the Tabernacle a cloud of the Lord rested by day, and fire would appear in it by night, in the view of all the house of Israel." In contrast to this, in the interior of the Tabernacle G–d remained concealed. Within the Tabernacle G–d remained in His capacity as the Ineffable four-lettered Name. 
  When we keep this in mind we can understand the Midrash Rabbah 3,1 on Song of Songs 3,9 אפריון עשה לו המלך שלמה, that "King Solomon made for himself a canopy," as referring to the construction of the Tabernacle. Rabbi Yehudah bar Ulla explains this by means of the following parable: A king had a young daughter. As long as she did not reach the age of puberty, he would meet her in public and speak with her both in public and private. Once she reached the age of puberty the king said to himself that it was no longer seemly that he should converse with his daughter in public. He therefore constructed a pavilion for her so that whenever he felt the need to converse with his daughter he could do so within this pavilion. We find an allusion to this in Hoseah 11,1: "For when Israel was still a child I fell in love with Israel." As long as the people of Israel were in their national infancy in Egypt, they saw manifestations of G–d all around them such as when G–d smote the Egyptians both in Egypt and later on when He drowned them in the sea. This was a public manifestation as testified to in Exodus 14,31: "Israel saw the great hand of the Lord and what He did to Egypt". Even infants would point with their fingers declaring "This is my G–d I shall glorify Him" (Exodus 15,2). At Sinai they beheld G–d "face to face," as we know from Deuteronomy 33,2: "He (Moses) said The Lord came from Sinai, He shone upon them from Se-ir; He appeared from Mount Paran." At that point Israel received the Torah and declared כל אשר דבר ה' נעשה ונשמע, "All that the Lord has said, we shall do and hear." As a consequence Israel became G–d's nation in the fullest meaning of the word. G–d next said Himself that it was no longer seemly that He should speak to them in public, without the benefit of privacy, so He instructed them to build a Tabernacle so that whenever He wished to speak to them, He would do so from the interior of the Tabernacle. This is the meaning of Numbers 7,89: "Whenever Moses went into the Tent of Meeting to speak with Him, he would hear the voice of G–d addressing him from above the cover that was on top of the Ark of the Covenant between the two cherubim; thus He spoke to him." Thus far the statement of Rabbi Yehudah bar Ulla.
  This Midrash is extremely difficult. Seeing that in earlier times Israel had been found worthy to behold G–d, i.e. His manifestations, publicly, how can we cite G–d hiding Himself from public view as a proof of Israel's spiritual maturity? Would the righteous perish just because he became righteous? Have not our sages taught us that as the righteous keep getting older they constantly acquire deeper insights i.e. they will experience the very reverse of perishing (Shabbat 152)? We can understand the first part of the parable- that a king, who wished to speak to his daughter (who was a minor) on general matters would do so in public, whereas when he had to discuss matters of state with her he would prefer to do so in the privacy of the pavilion after she had become old enough for him to confide in her. We have more difficulty with the נמשל, moral part of the parable, for here the comparison does not seem to apply. In view of what I have explained previously we are able to comprehend how the moral of the parable applies to the relationship between G–d and the Jewish people.
  I have already written about G–d sometimes revealing Himself, other times remaining totally concealed. I had defined the very Being of G–d as manifested by His actions and, in contrast, His remaining concealed as part of His Essence. This is why G–d does not operate in public in His capacity as the Ineffable Name. In the Temple, however, an area which is holy, i.e. separate, secluded, G–d does operate in His capacity as the Ineffable Name, י-ה-ו-ה. Just as one can sometimes smell the fragrance of some flower or spice without actually seeing the source of the fragrance, so G–d's Ineffable Name operates within the confines of the Tabernacle and we become aware of this through its "fragrance." There is a Midrash which says that the words in 25,2: ויקחו לי תרומה, "They shall take a contribution for Me,” are to be understood as a metaphorical gift to G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name, the concealed. This had to be mentioned, since, when it comes to the Tabernacle, we deal with the revealed as well as with the concealed. The construction of the Tabernacle, its furnishings, all in accordance with G–d's instructions to Moses, represented the revealed dimension of the Tabernacle. The concealed dimension involved the planning, i.e. מחשבות that Betzalel had to have in order to be able to carry out all G–d's instructions. We referred to this earlier when we explained that Betzalel was able to manipulate the letters in the Torah in a manner similar to the way they had been used when the universe was created. We may therefore perceive of the Tabernacle as קודש, holy, in its visible dimension, and as קודש קדשים, holiest of holy, in its invisible dimension.
  Keeping this in mind, we can understand why the Torah writes: ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם, "They shall make a Sanctuary for Me and I shall dwell in them." We would have expected the Torah to write ושכנתי בתוכו, "I shall dwell in it." The true meaning of the verse, however, is that G–d would dwell within the מחשבותן, thoughts of the people constructing the Sanctuary. This was the concealed, inner dimension of the Tabernacle.
  Let us now return to the way the Tabernacle corresponded to the act of creation. We know from Avot 5,1 that G–d created the universe with 10 directives. The deeper meaning of the ten directives is well known. When the Tabernacle was constructed we also find the number 10 prominent both when describing part of the walls as well as when describing the coverings forming the ceiling of the Tabernacle. Exodus 26,1 commences with the instruction to make the Tabernacle of ten strips of cloth. Similarly each of the boards used for the walls was to be ten cubits high. The Holy Ark was ten handbreadths high, including one cubit for the thickness of its lid. This may be the reason that in the reference to the Holy Ark in Psalms 132,8: אתה וארון עוזיך the word עוזך is spelled with the extra letter י. [Our texts do not have the extra letter י, neither here nor in Chronicles II 6,41. Ed.] The Talmud Yuma 21 states that the site on which the Holy Ark stood was not included in the measurements of the Temple or Tabernacle. This too is an allusion to the concealed nature of the Ineffable Name of G–d which was present within the Holy of Holies between the wings of the cherubs on the lid of the altar. We allude to this in the קדושה prayer when we recite: ברוך ה' ממקומו, "Blessed the glory of the Lord from its abode." [its invisible site Ed.] The table was also 9 handbreadths high, above which was a golden frame 1 handbreadth high. So here too the number ten was prominent. The candlestick with its seven arms and a knob, cup, and flower on each arm again featured the number ten. Here too we find that the Torah refers to: תיעשה המנורה "the candlestick shall be constructed" (Exodus 26,31) the word תיעשה being unaccountably spelled with an extra letter י. The golden altar was twelve handbreadths high, corresponding to the twelve permutations in which the Ineffable Name can be spelled. The copper altar was square, five cubits long and five cubits deep. This corresponded to the number five mentioned in the ספר היצירה. Its height, however, was ten cubits. 
  The entire construction of the Tabernacle was to be funded by free-will offerings of the entire nation, each individual in accordance with his personal sense of generosity (25,2). On the virtues of charity, a manifestation of one's generosity, the seventh of the eight virtues which characterise the first 8 portions in the Book of Exodus, commonly known as שובבים ת"ת as outlined in my introduction to פרשת שמות. By displaying the sense of generosity required when making a contribution towards the building of the Tabernacle the donor became a partner of G–d in His work of Creation. G–d's creation of the universe was an act of charity, generosity, because He did not need a universe and the whole act of creation was performed for the sake of the creatures that inhabit the universe. I have read that we may also view this as working in reverse; when one donated for the materials to be used in the construction of the Tabernacle, G–d, so to speak, joined the donor of materials to be used in the construction of the Tabernacle as a partner. 
  This comment is based on the wording of Exodus 25,2: ויקחו לי תרומה מאת כל איש, "They will take a donation for Me from every person." Immediately afterwards the Torah refers to this same donation as תקחו את תרומתי, "You will take My donation." Why did the Torah first refer to this gift as being the donor's and immediately afterwards as being G–d's? The answer is that the requirements for the building of the Tabernacle were very great and in many instances the materials exceeded what the Jewish people possessed at that time. The gold had to be pure, something the Israelites did not possess. The same applied to other components required. In spite of all this the Torah reported that the sum total of the donations exceeded what was needed so that Moses was forced to call a halt to further contributions (36,6). This was due to the blessing G–d bestowed on all the donations so that small amounts grew into larger amounts. The cause of this blessing was the generous impulses of the donors at the time they made their contributions. Any person who donated, say, one ounce of gold, felt sorry that he was not able to contribute two ounces. Since G–d knew the thoughts of every donor, He translated the good intention of the donor into an actual and increased the amount in accordance with what the donor would have given had he been able to. Thus the excess was G–d's contribution, and thus G–d became man's partner. This is why the Torah speaks about "take My contribution." Since the Tabernacle, as we have explained, represented a re-enactment of the work of creation, all those who had contributed generously had become partners in the work of creation.
  When G–d said: "They shall make a Sanctuary for Me and I shall dwell within them," בתוכם, this referred also to the fact that much of the Tabernacle was due to the תוכם, the innermost feelings of the donors. The Tabernacle could not have been completed if the people donating all these materials had not been motivated by a spirit of generosity. The word בתוכם is therefore essentially not much different from the word בתוכו, which we would have expected the Torah to use. There is another dimension to the verse ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם. The word בתוכם, refers to the innermost part of the Tabernacle. It is there that the שכינה resided and merged with the people of Israel. This is the mystical dimension of Exodus 26,24: ויהיו תאמים מלמטה ויחדו יהיו תמים על ראשו אל הטבעת האחת, "They shall match at the bottom and be perfectly aligned at the top inside one ring." It is a reference to the uniqueness of G–d and the uniqueness of the Jewish people respectively. G–d will never abandon His people for the sake of His great Name; the uniqueness of each i.e. אחד=13, i.e. 26 when combined. This equals the numerical value of G–d's "great" Name י-ה-ו-ה =26. The verse is a reference to the mystical union between קודשא בריכיה and כנסת ישראל, between the well known concepts of the holiness of G–d and the spiritual unity of the Jewish people. This is the reason why we find the מקדש described as היכל ה' on occasion. The numerical value of the word היכל equals the numerical value of א-ד-נ-י, a term for G–d which includes the souls of the people of Israel, as in Psalms 68,27: במקהלות ברכו אלוקים, (י-ה-ו-ה) א-ד-נ-י ממקור ישראל. "In assemblies bless G–d, the Lord, O You who are the fountain of Israel." To signify this dual meaning, the name of G–d is spelled as the Ineffable Name but pronounced (read) as א-ד-נ-י. There were one hundred silver sockets (אדנים) for the boards forming the walls of the Tabernacle which are symbolised by our reciting one hundred benedictions daily, which all mention the name of G–d (א-ד-נ-י). The עמודים, columns, each one within a socket, אדני, were an allusion to the emanation תפארת, the Ineffable Name which is found within the name א-ד-נ-י. The ווי העמודים, hooks attached to the columns, allude to the number 6=ו, the sixth emanation, i.e. תפארת, which is the mystical dimension of the letter ו in the Ineffable Name. That letter also represents the mystical dimension of the word אחד as we know from Genesis 1,5: ויהי ערב ויהי בוקר יום אחד. We have explained earlier in this chapter how day and night are part of a single unit. Night has 12 hours, the first six of which until midnight are under the domain of the attribute of Justice, whereas the last 6 hours are under the domain of the attribute of Mercy. The day, too, is divided into these two periods of 6 hours each, the first six hours under the domain of the attribute of Mercy, the last six under the domain of the attribute of Justice. As long as the light intensifies, the attribute of Mercy is in the ascendancy; once it diminishes, the attribute of Justice comes into its own. Since they have both been created by the same Creator, they appear linked together in the story of creation. This is the deeper meaning then of "evening and morning being one day." When you spell the letter ו as a word, thus: ואו, you have an allusion to the respective 6 hour periods during which each attribute exercises its dominance; the letter אלף in the middle alludes to the One and Only Creator who has created both day and night, both the attribute of Justice and the attribute of Mercy. You will also observe that the numerical value of such spelling of the letter ואו=13, the same numerical value as that of the word אחד. When the Torah in 26,6 describes the Tabernacle as becoming אחד, one, this is merely a confirmation of how the various components all combined to create this unified microcosm.
  To get back to our main subject, that of "they shall take for Me," i.e. for My Name, which we described earlier as being a reference to G–d in His capacity as His Essence. This holds true for the instructions given by G–d to Moses. When Moses relayed these instructions to the Jewish people in Exodus 35,1 where he assembled the whole nation, he used somewhat different language. The words כל עדת בני ישראל, were an allusion to the concept of כנסת ישראל. Since G–d had told Moses that He wanted the contributions to be dedicated to His Ineffable Name, and that in that capacity He remains concealed, the only way a union between the people's gifts and G–d in His capacity as His Essence could be achieved was by interposing the כנסת ישראל. This concept was represented by the word ויקהל, alluding as it does to the verse from Psalms 68,27 the meaning of which we have discussed earlier. 
  This was also the secret which enabled the Tabernacle to be erected, as reported in Exodus 40,17. The word הוקם used there to describe the erecting of the Tabernacle is another way of saying that the Tabernacle was given קומה, "substance." The dimensions of this קומה and its significance are discussed in a book called Sefer Heychalot The author, quoting Psalms 132,8: קומה ה' למנוחתיך אתה וארון עוזך writes about the subject of קומה. In order to comprehend the whole subject matter one needs to preface his remarks with a definition of the meaning שיעור קומה as employed by Kabbalists. 
  In a book called Sefer Hama-arechet chapter Ha-adam the author writes: Now that you are aware of the reasons for the manner in which the human body is constructed, you are able to understand whether you have received communication via the "mouth to mouth" method, a true prophetic insight such as our prophets used to receive, or not. The sages used to call such prophetic insights שיעור קומה, a way of saying that someone had some insight into the gateway of the Creator. The Torah referred to this when it describes G–d as saying "Let us make man in Our image and in Our likeness." Concerning such visions it is written: ואנכי חזון הרבתי וביד הנביאים אדמה "I have granted many visions and made plain My word through appearances to the prophets." Thus far the author of Sefer Hama-arechet.
  The Chayat describes the same reference to receiving prophetic insights in his book folio 181b in these introductory words: "If you have received a valid prophetic insight via the mouth to mouth method, etc." Receiving confirmation of one's spiritual level is possible in five different ways. The most advanced of these ways is the one called by the Torah 'תמונת ה which we may call עטרה, crown. It is called thus because it represents the most unimpeded of the various kinds of (window-panes) i.e. visions, that different categories of prophets are able to receive. One perceives G–d [the source of the vision. Ed.] as inside seven Sanctuaries, one within the other. Each Sanctuary affords a category of prophets the kind of vision they are capable of absorbing without being harmed. Moses, of course, had access to the innermost Sanctuary accessible to any human being. 
  If a prophet of a lower spiritual level than Moses were to be exposed to the innermost of these "window panes" he would be burned by the intensity of the spiritual light radiating from there, much as a person on a snow-capped mountain in brilliant sunshine wearing low-grade sun-glasses would have his eyesight hurt were he not to change these glasses for stronger ones. 
  Moses did not need to be separated from the source of his visions by any window-pane, as it is said of him (Numbers 12,8): ותמונת ה' יביט, "He is able to behold a picture drawn by G–d." Daniel 8,2 on the other hand, described himself as seeing himself in Shushan, though in his vision he actually stood on the banks of the river Ulai. Hoseah 12,11 may have referred to the difference between these two kinds of prophetic visions when he said: ודברתי על הנביאים ואנכי חזון הרביתי, "And I (G–d), spoke to the prophets, having granted many visions." Surely the verse should have said עם הנביאים instead of על הנביאים if the meaning is that G–d spoke with or to other prophets. [Kittel brings a version which has the word אל instead of על (as in our texts). The author may have had such a version of the Bible since he dwells on the meaning of the word אל as opposed to על. Ed.] When you understand the meaning of the word אל, you will understand that we are dealing here with a type of prophecy which exceeds in clarity of vision all other types of prophecy and which is referred to in our literature as אספקלריא דנהרא, clear vision. This kind of prophecy was granted to none other than Moses, the father-figure for all subsequent prophets. The Torah (Numbers 12,8) says of him: "I speak to him mouth to mouth, etc." The very word חזון is a reminder of the expression הוגד לי חזות קשה, "a harsh prophecy has been revealed to me "(Isaiah 21,2). We also find this expression used in the type of prophecy Abraham received before he was circumcised, such as in Genesis 15,1.
  The second type of prophetic visions which G–d employed to communicate with other prophets, חידות, riddles, are mentioned to indicate that the visions were not as clear. G–d also employed parables and images. All this was required because the prophets in question needed to be separated from the origin of the Divine vision by one or several layers of screens. It is this latter type of prophetic insights that G–d refers to in the verse quoted from Hoseah. When G–d added (Hoseah 12,11) וביד הנביאים אדמה, "I would appear in different guises to the prophets," the meaning is that each prophet was granted the level of communication he could absorb without suffering harm from exposure to G–d's proximity. The reason G–d (the prophet) employs the word יד, is an allusion to אם לא תמצא ידה, "If she (the mother who has just given birth and is required to bring an offering) cannot afford it." (Leviticus 12,8).
  The second of the five ways of examining one's spiritual level has to do with the name concept of האדם, a term used for the abstract spiritual world as such. This אדם is also viewed as the principal carrier of G–d's Presence. אדם, i.e. Man in our "lower" world, serves as the throne for the אדם in the Celestial Regions. Our respective limbs and organs are allusions to concepts prevailing in the spiritual world. They are all forces of the Divine. When G–d said: "Let Us make man in Our image," this was not just an empty phrase, but it conveyed the message that physical man would possess some Divine properties [as opposed to all other living creatures. Ed.] The תמונה, image, revealed to the prophet when he experiences a prophetic vision is the תמונה of the אדם העליון, Man as a spiritual concept. When the physical counterpart of this "man," i.e. the prophet, experiences such a vision, his own physical characteristics are temporarily elevated to be of almost spiritual dimensions. The image he sees is similar to someone who looks in a top quality mirror and sees himself reflected in it. Not every prophet saw a reflection of the same clarity, since this depended on the spiritual qualities he possessed. Thus far the words of the Chayat.
  When the Tziyoni in his commentary on Parshat Noach deals with the generation of the Tower of Babel, he discusses the subject of שיעור הקומה at length. Kabbalists interpret Psalms 147,5: גדול אדוננו ורב כח לתבונתו אין מספר, "Great is our Lord and full of power; His wisdom is beyond reckoning." They see in the numerical value of the words ורב כח (236) an allusion to 236 times 10 million פרסאות as the distance spanned by the Celestial Regions. The פרסה equals מילין 4, the מיל equals 2000 cubits. The cubit consists of 6 handbreadths, which in turn consist of 4 זרתות each. The זרת of the Celestial Regions is the distance covered by a person in 500 years' walking, as we know from Isaiah 40,12: ושמים בזרת תכן, He gauged the Heavens with a span. From the above and other slightly divergent commentaries on the same subject it emerges that when we talk about שיעור הקומה we mean the dimension of certain manifestations in the spiritual world. There is general agreement amongst the Kabbalists that all these so-called measurements apply only to Mattatron. Any spiritual force in the Celestial Regions which is on a higher level than Mattatron is beyond the realm of measurement, even symbolically. Concerning more highly placed spiritual beings we apply Isaiah 40,18: "To whom do you want to compare Him (G–d)?"  Any Celestial Region beyond the one in which Mattaron functions is "forbidden territory," beyond our right to investigate. This means that the שער, gateway is closed to us. שיעור is thus related to שער. The term שיעור הקומה is a reference to and more precise definition of the 7 emanations which between them executed the בנין, the actualisation of G–d's directives to bring this physical universe into existence. The mind-boggling measurements referred to are beyond man's ability to comprehend. They have been cited by Kabbalists to drive home this very point.[The people who built the Tower, or at least their leaders, possessed some knowledge of these matters and wanted to establish something on earth which would reflect what existed in heaven, albeit in miniature. Their endeavour was similar to that of the Israelites when they built the Tabernacle, except that they had not been bidden to do so and wanted to rival G–d rather than draw Him into their midst, (cf. Bereshit Rabbah 38,6) Ed.]
  On the day the Tabernacle was erected in our world, the נער, i.e. Mattatron, was established in the corresponding Celestial Regions. We have explained on a different occasion that the angel Mattaron is called נער in connection with his function. Just as Joshua -even at the age of 56 years- is still referred to by the Torah as נער because of the duties he performed for his master Moses, so Mattatron performs a similar function in Heaven.
  When commenting on the שיעור הקומה, Pardes Rimonim explains it as follows (Chapter 23 of Erchey Kinnuyim): The קומה is the length of the spinal cord which extends from the neck downwards. It alludes to the concept of בנין with which we are familiar. It extends to the lower end of the hips. It is called the קומה of the emanation תפארת, connecting the צדיק to the higher emanation בינה, while being rooted in the lowest emanation מלכות. In other words it extends from one end of Heaven to another, מקצה השמים עד קצה השמים.
  We know that man has been granted the right to try and understand what exists מקצה השמים עד קצה השמים, i.e. the "lower" בנין. Anything beyond is out of bounds to our enquiry and study, as we know from Chagigah 11: "You might have thought that man's enquiries can range to matters preceding the creation of man on earth; to prevent you from doing so the Torah said: למן היום אשר ברא אלוקים אדם על הארץ, 'From the day the Lord created man on earth' (Deut 4,32). This in turn would have led you to believe that it is forbidden to enquire into the process of the six days of creation. To assure you that such enquiries are legitimate, the Torah adds: לימים ראשונים אשר היו לפניך, 'From the early days which preceded your existence.' I now might have thought that matters in the Heavens above and in regions "below" the earth form a legitimate subject for our enquiries. The Torah therefore adds: למקצה השמים עד קצה השמים, "From one end of Heaven to another end of Heaven." These are the parameters within which you may legitimately conduct your research. What is beyond them you must not concern yourself with. This means that both our intellectual accomplishments as well as our additional insights secured through prophetic visions will only concern matters within the framework outlined by the Torah. Anything pertaining to the Ineffable Name, inasmuch as it is the name of G–d's Essence, remains concealed.
  The מנורה, candlestick in the Tabernacle alluded to all this. Rekanati comments on the מנורה in the following words: "The wisdom concealed in the knobs, flowers and cups which formed part of the candlestick is very exalted and inaccessible. This is why our sages (Menachot 29) described Moses as having had difficulty understanding the way the candlestick was to be constructed. G–d showed him a model made of fire (based on Numbers 8,4 which states: זה מעשה המנורה). The candlestick consisted of six arms, three on either side of the centre-shaft. The lamps on top of the six arms all faced in the direction of the centre-shaft. This was an allusion to the overall unity of the concepts they represented, though each of the seven lamps represented its own concept of holiness and had its own holy site. Moses could not understand how these two apparently contradictory concepts functioned." Thus far the Rekanati.
  We therefore perceive that the candlestick symbolised the seven emanations which form the בנין, all of which in turn are nourished from a higher source. When the Torah speaks of אל מול פני המנורה יאירו שבעת הנרות, "The seven lamps shall give light opposite the face of the candlestick" (Numbers 8,2), this means that the candlestick in the Tabernacle corresponded to and was "opposite" its counterpart in the Celestial Sanctuary. We view the candlestick as symbolising man. There are three arms or pipes on either side. The lower ones are longer than the middle ones, and the middle ones are longer than the upper ones which are nearer the centre-shaft. The lights all burned on the same level. The centre-shaft represented the גוף, torso or body of the candlestick. Man is like the candlestick. He has three projections on either side of him, the arms, the legs and the ears. The legs are longer than the arms, and the arms are longer than the ears, just as the lower arms of the candlestick were longer than the middle ones and the upper ones, respectively. The overall height of the candlestick was 18 handbreadths, the equivalent of three cubits, the height of an average-sized man from the ground to the shoulder (Tossaphot Shabbat 92).
  Let us now explain some of the mystical dimensions of the other furnishings of the Tabernacle, the Holy Ark, the Table and the Golden Altar. All of these had a golden border or "crown" around them. Our sages in Avot 4,13 said that there are three crowns; The crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood and the crown of monarchy. These crowns are superseded by the crown of the good name. The Holy Ark, containing the tablets with the Ten Commandments, symbolises the crown of Torah; the Table, representing economic welfare, symbolises the crown of monarchy. The Golden Altar, representing service to G–d, symbolises the crown of priesthood.
  It is difficult to understand the statement of the sages that the crown of the good name supersedes the other crowns. Surely the other crowns were to be worn by people of a good name! It seems, therefore, that the Mishnah meant that the three crowns in our world are subject to decisions made in a "higher" world by someone wearing the crown of the good name, i.e. by G–d, whose name is טוב, the "Good One." We know this from Psalms 145,9: "The Lord is good to all."
  The crown of Torah, known as תפארת, refers to the written Torah which was deposited in the Holy Ark, otherwise known as ארון הברית אדון כל הארץ, "the ark of the covenant with the Lord of the whole earth. This name is a reference to the שכינה, i.e. the ark containing תפארת, and is concealed therein as explained by the Zohar. The border or crown around the Holy Ark is an allusion to the אשת חיל עטרת בעלה, "The woman of valour, crown of her husband" (Proverbs 12,4). When the Torah (Exodus 25,12) commands: "You shall cast for it (the golden altar) four rings of gold," this is an allusion to the four legs of the מרכבה, chariot, which carries the presence of the שכינה. The dimensions of the tablets, -2 tablets each of 6 handbreadths by 6 handbreadths by 3 handbreadths each,- add up to 72 handbreadths cubed, i.e. 216. The number 216 is reminiscent of the Ineffable name of G–d spelled as words, using the letter י in such a spelling. [Example: יוד-הי-ויו-הי. This gives you 72. When you cube this number, as we did with the measurements of the tablets, you obtain the number 216. Ed.] The written Torah is the foundation, יסוד, of the Ineffable Name, and it reposed within the Holy Ark, as hinted at when G–d said: כי שמי בקרבו, "For My Name is within it" (Exodus 23,21). This means that G–d's Ineffable Name is in the Sanctuary, that G–d is found within His Torah. This is where you find the crown of the good name. From that source Israel [potentially any Israelite. Ed.] was crowned with the crown of Torah.
  The Table is a clear allusion to the "table of kings,” something hidden, a reference to the Kingdom of Heaven, another place where the crown of the good name is found. It is here that the kingdom of the dynasty of David has its roots. Our sages in Sanhedrin 110, regard anyone who disputes the authority of the kingdom of David as if he disputed the authority of G–d Himself. The Table alludes to another dimension in the Celestial Regions, i.e. the table in the presence of G–d in the World to Come, a table of kings. Since all Israelites are considered princes, descendants of kings, they all have a share in this World to Come. The placing of the Table in the northern part of the Sanctuary, צפון, is alluded to in Psalms 32,20: מה רב טובך אשר צפנת ליראיך, "How abundant is the good that You have in store for those who fear You". 
  Rekanati comments that the gallery, מסגרת, which was attached to the surface of the Table all around (Exodus 25,25), was so called because it alludes to something סגור, closed, shut away, as implied in the word צפון which David used in Psalms 31,20 for describing the location where G–d stores His abundant good. It includes a reference to the primordial light which remains hidden. As to the four rings of the Table, they were to be fastened לעומת המסגרת, next to the frame, since their purpose was to exert the influence they symbolised on that מסגרת. 
  When the Torah instructed that these rings were to serve as housings, בתים, by means of which the Table was transported (25,28), it alluded to an additional mystical dimension. It is an allusion to the four חיות described in Ezekiel 1,10 as the carriers of G–d's מרכבה. They became carriers by means of the "rings." [The meaning of these "rings" in Kabbalistic parlance -according to Pardes Rimonim- is that they symbolise superior wisdom. Ed.]
  
  
  The Altar alludes to the crown of priesthood. Its mystical dimension directly relates the sacrifices offered by the priests on the altar in our world to the offering of the souls of the righteous by the High Priest Michael on the altar in the Celestial Sanctuary. Those Kabbalists who specialise in exegesis of רשומות use Leviticus 9,4: כי היום נראה אליכם, as an allusion that such sacrifices are offered up on an Altar in Heaven by showing that the letters in the words נראה אליכם are the same as in the two names אהרן and מיכאל. 
  There is yet another altar above the one on which the archangel Michael offers the souls of the righteous, just as there were two altars in the Tabernacle on earth. There is an outer and an inner altar. When the Torah gives the measurements of these two altars we are told that they should be square (Exodus 27,1 and 30,1). This is strange since the Torah had already given the measurements of both the front and the sides of these altars, i.e we know that they were to be square. The extra words רבוע, square, may therefore be understood as an allusion to the corresponding altars in the Heavenly Sanctuary. The "outer" altar in the Heavens corresponds to the encampment of the Israelites in the desert which was square and which was guarded by the four angels Michael, Gabriel, Uriel and Raphael. The "upper" altar in the Heavens was supported by the four חיות which Ezekiel saw in his vision in which he was shown the מרכבה (Ezekiel chapter 1). This is where the crown of the good name is at home. The crown of priesthood is immediately below. The border or crown around the Altar represents the righteous in the World to Come who sit around the table wearing their crowns and enjoying the splendour of G–d's presence. 
  Anyone who has paid close attention to what I have written will note that the three gifts G–d has given the Jewish people are also represented here. These gifts are: Torah, the land of Israel, and the World to Come. The Torah is represented by the crown of Torah; The land of Israel is the name of the air which the souls in the Celestial Region opposite the site of the altar breathe. The Hight Priest Michael sacrifices the crown of priesthood. The World to Come is synonymous with the crown of Royalty, the table before G–d, as I have described. 
  When we consider all this we can understand a Midrash on the words: ועשו לי מקדש, which otherwise is difficult to understand. The Midrash quotes G–d as saying to Israel: "You are My flock, and I am your shepherd." This is based on Psalms 80,2: "Give ear, O shepherd of Israel." Construct a dwelling for the shepherd so that he can come and guard you. This is why the Torah says: "They shall make a Temple for Me and I shall dwell amongst them." G–d said to Israel: You are a vineyard, since we have a verse "For the house of Israel is a vineyard of the Lord of Hosts" (Isaiah 5,7). I am the guard (of the vineyard) says G–d, for we have a verse telling us "the guardian of Israel neither sleeps nor slumbers" (Psalms 121,4). G–d said: "Make a hut for the watchman so that he will watch over you." G–d also said: "You are children and I am your father." We have a verse in Deut. 14,1: "You are children of the Lord your G–d." We also have a verse showing that G–d is our father, in Jeremiah 31,8: "For I have been a father to Israel." It is an honour for the father to be found near his children, and it is an honour for the children to be near their father, as we know from Proverbs 17,6: "Grandchildren are the crown of their elders. G–d said: "Make a Temple for Me!" Thus far the Midrash.
  There are several difficulties in this Midrash. Firstly, why does the Midrash quote the whole of the verse (25,8) "They shall make a Sanctuary for Me so that I can dwell amongst them" at the beginning, whereas later on the Midrash only quotes part of this verse, namely "They shall make a Sanctuary for Me?" In the middle part of this Midrash no part of this verse is quoted at all. We also need to understand why G–d is portrayed in the Midrash as requesting different kinds of abode on each occasion, such as "dwelling," דיר, hut, סוכה, and house, בית. Furthermore, once the Midrash had quoted the verse from Deut. 14,1 showing that the Jewish people are G–d's children, what need was there to quote another verse showing that G–d is our father? 
  The best way to explain the Midrash is by reference to the three different kinds of crowns. When G–d describes Israel as a flock and Himself as its shepherd, this is an allusion to the crown of Torah. We have a verse in Ezekiel 34,31: "Now you My flock, flock of My pasture—you are Adam. I am your G–d, says the Lord G–d." The meaning of this verse is that though, at this time, Torah knowledge amongst the Jewish people is only at the level of sheep, there will come a time when the Jewish people will once more be comparable to Adam, a time at which the whole earth will be full of the knowledge of G–d. David Kimchi explains the verse by saying that even when we are in exile the Torah will not be forgotten, since we have an assurance כי לא נשכח מזרעו, "it will not be forgotten by his descendants" (Deut. 31,21). We are only called צאן. Our sages have used similar terminology for Jews who have studied little Torah whom they describe them as גדיים, rather than as תישים, young goats instead of mature billy-goats (Berachot 63). Solomon, referring to such immature Jewish people, says in Song of Songs 1,8: צאי לך בעקבי הצאן, "Go out and follow the tracks of the sheep "
  The Holy Ark containing the tablets which form the crown of Torah need not be presumed lost; it has only been concealed but continues to exist. When the Midrash quotes G–d as saying: "Make for Me a דיר, dwelling, this is an allusion to the continued existence of the Holy Ark. We are taught in Shekalim 6,3 that there were 13 spots in the courtyard of the Temple where one prostrated oneself, and that the number of such areas corresponded to the number of gates leading to the Temple. Rabbi Gamliel and the members of the house of Chananyah, the stand-in for the High Priest, however, prostrated themselves in fourteen areas. The additional spot was opposite the chamber in which the fire-wood for the altar was stored. They had a tradition that this was the area beneath which the Holy Ark had been hidden. In view of our tradition that ever since the destruction of the Holy Temple G–d has only the ארבע אמות של הלכה, "four cubits of religious law" on this earth (Berachot 8), the Midrash here quotes the full verse including the words "they shall make for Me a Sanctuary so that I may dwell in their midst." Were it not for this, the first half of the verse would not have corresponded to the latter part; in the first half the subject matter was the Sanctuary, whereas in the latter part the subject matter was Israel, i.e. בתוכם instead of בתוכו. The meaning of the verse is: "They shall make a Sanctuary for Me in order to place within it the Holy Ark which contains the tablets of testimony. This Holy Ark will continue in existence, i.e. I will continue to dwell amongst them even when the Temple itself is in ruins. My four cubits of הלכה will be present though buried." This is the crown of Torah.
  When the Midrash describes G–d as saying: "You are the vineyard and I am the watchman," this is a reference to the crown of monarchy as I have explained above. It is a reference to the gift of the World to Come, as I have already mentioned. Our sages are on record as saying: "All the prophets have prophesied only about the days of the Messiah (in this world); only G–d Himself has an idea of what the World to Come will be like" (Berachot 34). What has been reserved for revelation at that future time is called the יין המשומר, the wine which has been preserved (within its grapes) since the days before Adam was expelled from גן עדן. It is concerning this wine that G–d is portrayed as saying: "You are the vineyard and I am the keeper." The word שומר, refers to the wine which was preserved since the idyllic times when man was still at home in Gan Eden. When the time comes to partake from this wine, ביום ההוא אקים את סוכת דוד הנופלת, "On that day I will re-establish the broken down hut of David" (Amos 9,11). This is why G–d is quoted in the Midrash as asking Israel to build a hut for Him. When Israel erects a hut in our domain, the hut of David which has collapsed can be rebuilt in the corresponding Celestial Regions. It will then advance spiritually ever higher until the mystical level of the emanation בינה, the root of עולם הבא, the World to Come, where the יין המשומר is carefully stored to prevent any Gentile touching it. The Gentiles' claim, if at all, to this עולם הבא does not extend beyond the domain of בנין, i.e. the emanations below בינה. The Gentiles' claim to any share in עולם הבא is based on Ishmael's descent from Abraham, whose outstanding characteristic was חסד, loving kindness. Esau's claim to any share in עולם הבא is similarly based only on the fact that he was the issue of patriarch Isaac. The reason that the Midrash did not bother to quote a verse confirming its claim is that the subject matter is עולם הבא, a subject scriptures have nothing to say about.
  When the Midrash quotes Deut 14,1 "You are sons of the Lord your G–d," this is a reference to the crown of priesthood, the gift of the land of Israel, the air breathed by the righteous in the World to Come, seeing that the soul is part of the Divine. Souls are "born," as a result of the merging of the emanation תפארת with the emanation מלכות. G–d may therefore quite properly be perceived as the father of the Jewish people and we as His real children. Simple logic tells us that if there is a biological father-son relationship although the bodies of father and son respectively have been totally separate at all times, then there certainly exists such a relationship between souls and their Divine origin from which they have never been totally separated. Our attachment to G–d through our souls is documented in the Torah by the words: ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים כולכם היום, "You who have cleaved to the Lord your G–d are all alive this day" (Deut. 4,4). Nowadays, during the ongoing period of exile, when the only souls released into this world are גלגולים souls needing transmigration, the Midrash bemoans a state of exile from the table of our Father. Yet, because He, G–d, remains our Father, there will come a time when we will again be allowed to sit at His table. 
  The Midrash quotes two verses to prove the relationship of the Jewish people as children of G–d as valid also during those times when these children are in exile and have been expelled by their Father from His table. Had the Midrash only quoted the first verse in which the Jewish people are described as G–d's children, we would have understood this as being merely an allegory, a term of endearment such as people are in the habit of applying to one another. If only the last verse in Jeremiah 31,8, in which G–d describes Himself as our Father, had been quoted, we would have thought that the meaning is that G–d watches over us and has pity on us just as a real father watches over his children and on occasion pities them. Still, if this is correct, we would have expected Jeremiah to say: כי הייתי לישראל אב instead of כי הייתי לישראל לאב. If the meaning of אב is that of an actual father, and the meaning of בנים in Deut. 14,1 is that Israel are actual children of G–d and He is their actual father, based on the Divine origin of our souls, then the expression לאב seems justified, for G–d was an actual father to us. Ever since we have gone into exile, however, we have become orphans without a real father. This would correspond to what we said before, that the children have been barred from the table of their father. In the future, however, G–d will again be a proper father, a role which G–d declares Himself as ready to assume as soon as His children return to Him as penitents. This is similar to the reply Elijah is quoted to have given the person who questioned him about the date of the redemption. He told his questioner: היום, אם בקולו תשמעו, "This very day, if you will hearken to His voice" (Psalms 95,6). This is the sentiment G–d expresses through Jeremiah 31,8 when He describes Himself as הייתי לישראל לאב, "I am always prepared to be a true father of Israel, just as I used to be." 
  This is the reason the Midrash quotes only the half of the verse which speaks about Israel building a Sanctuary for G–d, i.e. hearkening to His voice. The remaining difficulty is that since this verse speaks about the construction of the Tabernacle, why does the Torah not describe it as such and prefers to call it מקדש? We know that our sages (Eyruvin 2) have said that the terms משכן and מקדש are used interchangeably. We are nonetheless entitled to know why this is so. In view of what we have said the interchangeable nature of these two terms is now quite easily apparent. The sanctity of the people of Israel is dependent upon the construction of the Temple. When it exists, the sanctity of the pairing of G–d's uniqueness and Israel's uniqueness as symbolised by the two cherubs who face each other on the lid of the Holy Ark, and who assume a position of mutual love similar to that of man and woman, is preserved (cf. Baba Batra 99 on the significance of the positions of the cherubs). Originally, the Sanctuary was called משכן because it was only a temporary, collapsible structure. Even the so-called permanent Temple built by Solomon was still referred to as משכן, because it was subject to being destroyed sooner or later. At that time, G–d's children, Israel, were expelled from their father's table. In the future, when the Temple will be rebuilt, it will be known only as מקדש, to signify that it will be an enduring structure, never again to be destroyed.
  We have now explained the symbolisms of the three furnishings the Holy Ark, the table and the altar of incense. The candlestick symbolised man, the human being within whom the Divine light forms the soul of man. The lamps on the candlestick burned towards the centre, upwards, a total of seven lamps, as we have mentioned earlier.
  Man was crowned with three crowns, i.e. three of the furnishings mentioned earlier, all of which were constructed from the free-will offerings of the Jewish people. There are three kinds of perfections, שלמיות. There is the concept of the perfection of the soul, the perfection of the body, and the perfection of one's material wealth, ממון. We have explained in פרשת משפטים that body and soul can achieve a very close attachment to G–d for the body is the sheath of the soul. Even apart from this consideration, the body attains a degree of sanctity through the good deeds it performs. In the future the body will be so refined that what are now כתנות עור, garments made of leather, will be exchanged for כותנות אור, garments made of pure light. However, the problem is how can money or its equivalent achieve its perfection? How can it cleave to G–d, seeing it never was part of Him? The perfection of such wordly goods is achieved through the generosity of the heart of its owners. When man resists the natural inclination to be hard-hearted and instead trains himself to be generous, of a giving nature, he endows the material goods he possesses with a degree of sanctity capable of achieving an attachment to the Divine.
  When we discussed the special significance of the first eight portions of the Book of Exodus, שובבי"ם ת"ת, we already mentioned that in this portion we learn about how one's money can achieve perfection through a spirit of generosity. Once this has been accomplished, i.e. that man has achieved perfection on all three levels of his existence, the Tabernacle can be considered as having been completed, i.e. והיה המשכן אחד (26,6). The Tabernacle, too, symbolises the shape of man as we have mentioned earlier in the name of Rabbenu Bachyah. Man's heart, his innermost organ, is symbolised by the בריח התיכון, "the centre bolt" (Exodus 36,33), which ran the length of all the boards forming the walls of the Tabernacle, joining each to the other. This was a way of creating perfection. In order to achieve perfection of one's Torah learning, one needs an understanding and intelligent heart. In order to achieve the perfection of one's body to carry out the actions the body has been designed for, one needs courage like a lion. This is a function of the heart, as stated by the famous halachic authority, the טור. In order to elevate one's financial resources to a level of perfection, one must certainly possess a generous heart. Once all this has been accomplished man can be viewed as perfect on all three levels, i.e. שלם בגופו, שלם בממונו ושלם בתורתו. Concerning such perfection, David prayed when he said in Psalms 51,12: "Fashion a pure heart for me, O G–d; create in me a steadfast spirit." This condition will exist in the future when G–d will remove our hearts of stone and replace them with hearts made of flesh, as we know from Ezekiel 36,26: "I shall give you a new heart and a new spirit I will put within you; I shall remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh, etc."
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ויקחו לי תרומה The Torah contains 40 letters [I suppose this means when we consider the various vowels and semi-vowels in addition to the 27 consonants including the five final letters. Even Shoshan lists 13 vowels in his abbreviated grammar. Ed.] This is because the Torah was given over a period of forty days. The Torah is alluded to in the construction of the Tabernacle, since the purpose of building the Tabernacle was to house the Holy Ark which in turn contained the tablets inscribed by G–d Himself. Study of the Torah is something equivalent to all other virtues. Just as the 22 basic letters of the Torah are divided into three groups as explained in the ספר יצירה, namely the three letters א,מ,ש, and seven כפולות, i.e. ב,ג,ד,כ,פ,ר,ת, and 12 פשוטות, i.e. ה,ו,ז,ח,ט,י,ל,נ,ס,ע,צ,ק, so you will find during the construction of the Tabernacle that the holy vessels were made of three kinds of metal; they were made of gold, silver, and copper, corresponding to the three letters א,מ,ש. The seven lamps of the candlestick corresponded to the seven letters ב,ג,ד,כ,פ,ר,ת.
  I have found the following in the book called גנת אגוז. Gold, silver, and copper respectively symbolise the elements fire, wind (air), and water. The first letters of these elements אש, אויר, מים are the same as the first three letters listed in the ספר יצירה. Gold is compared to fire, כסף חי, mercury, to air, copper to water. Mercury is also a medium, just like the wind; it does not usually perform a function in its own right. The seven lamps of the candlestick which give their light facing the centre-shaft symbolise the seven planets [a system believed in by astronomers in earlier days. Ed.]. They symbolise the 7 letters which we called כפולות, because they occur on different occasions both with and without a dot, דגש. On a still higher level, they symbolise the attributes of Justice and Mercy respectively. The 12 gemstones contained in the breastplate worn by the High Priest symbolise the remaining 12 consonants. It is evident that all the major parts of the Tabernacle symbolised the letters of the alphabet, of Torah. The universe was created for the sake of Torah, so that Torah could be observed.
  We usually speak of four basic elements: air, water, fire and dust, (earth). The element earth is included in the other three elements since it is the result of interaction of the other three elements, as I have explained elsewhere. The number seven symbolises the number of the principal planets. The number twelve symbolises the twelve leaders in the physical universe, the twelve signs of the zodiac. On a still higher plane, they allude to the twelve permutations in which the letters of the Ineffable Name can be written. This name contains three letters, י-ה-ו. When you add the name itself, i.e. י-ה-ו-ה, you get the number seven. When you consider the different ways that name can be written you have twelve. 
  This symbolism is also found in connection with the people of Israel, the recipients of Torah. We have three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Israel has seven בתי אבות, different levels of nobility. There is the ordinary Israelite, the Levite, the ordinary priest, the High Priest, the president of the Supreme Court, the נשיא, leader of the nation in the absence of a king, and the king himself. The number twelve symbolises the twelve tribes. Together this adds up to 22, i.e. the number of letters in the basic alphabet of the Torah. This is the meaning of: "the study of Torah is the equivalent of them all."
  The details of the construction of the Holy Ark, allude to one's pre-occupation with Torah and those who study it, and how they should conduct themselves. All the measurements given for the Holy Ark are expressed in terms of fractions of cubits. Its length is two and one half cubits, its width one and one half cubits, and its height one and one half cubits. This is a hint that those who study Torah should practise modesty, humility, and that they should relate to it with a broken heart. They must not brag about their accomplishments as scholars. The combined length and depth of the Ark was four cubits, its height including the lid was ten handbreadths. This alludes to the Ineffable Name which is 4 (letters) wide; when you spell the name as words: יוד-הא-ואו-הא, you have ten letters. Our sages (Sukkah 5) have said that the שכינה does not descend to a within closer than ten handbreadths from earth. When it has descended to that level it can be presumed to rest over Israel. The mystical dimension of 4 cubits, is the four cubits of הלכה which are what G–d retains on this earth since the destruction of the Temple.
  From the inside and the outside you shall overlay it." This is an allusion to the Torah student whose interior should match his exterior, i.e. he should not pretend to be pious when in truth he is not. 
  The staves by means of which the Ark was carried were not to be removed from the rings they sat in. These staves are symbolic of heads of households (non-scholars) who financially support those who study Torah. Our sages said אלמלא עליא, לא אתקיימו אתכליא, "without leaves the trunk could not continue to exist" (Chullin 92). Concerning this proverb the Torah says in Deut. 33,18: שמח זבולון בצאתך ויששכר באהלך, "Rejoice Zevulun when you depart (on your voyage to make a livelihood) and you Issachar within your tent." This means that those who support the ones who study Torah receive as much reward as those who study. This is the reason the staves were not to be removed from the Ark. Our sages went even further when they said that the reason Zevulun is mentioned first in the verse quoted, though he was the younger, is that it was he who enabled Issachar his brother to devote himself to Torah study on a full-time basis..
  The cherubs which covered the Ark with their wings had the faces of children. This symbolised that they were sin-free, just as the young children in Torah schools are free from sin. It applies to older as well as younger children. This may be the reason the Torah speaks about שנים כרובים, rather than about שני כרובים as we would have expected.
  ופניהם איש אל אחיו, "their faces facing each other." This is an allusion to the saying that one should face one's teacher. 
  The carpets which comprised the roofing of the Tabernacle were sewn together in 5 strips each, to allude to the two tablets containing five of the Ten Commandments each. The oral Torah consists of 6 sections. These are arranged so that they correspond to each other; the cherubs therefore also symbolise this correspondence.
  There were three "crowns" as we mentioned earlier. The reason they are referred to as זרים rather than as כתרים, is to reflect the statement of our sages who have said that "he who merits a crown, זר, spelled with the vowel Tzeyreh, does not need to worry about the זר spelled with the vowel kametz. Of the latter the Torah has written: והזר הקרב יומת, "The stranger who approaches will be executed" (Numbers 1,51). What our sages meant was that he who studies Torah in order to observe its precepts, is fortunate and will be crowned with the crown of Torah. If, however, someone is a Torah scholar, preaching Torah values but personally not practising them, he will eventually become totally estranged and his punishment will be twice that of people who do not have Torah knowledge. The reason is that the Torah scholar used to be קרוב, close, whereas now he has become זר, estranged.
  השלחן. Our sages have said that in the absence of the Table in the Sanctuary, seeing that to-day there is no Sanctuary, our own individual tables are the instruments for our atonement (Chagigah 27) when they serve as vehicles to feed the poor, i.e. when one is hospitable. I have elaborated on this theme in my article on קדושה. 
  When the Torah stipulates that the showbreads are to be on this Table on a constant basis (25,30), this is an allusion to the requirement to feed the needy at all times in a generous and friendly manner. Such hospitality must also bear in mind the dignity of the recipient. One should always remember that G–d provides food for all His creatures in a friendly spirit.
  Rabbi Menachem Habavli has this to say on the subject: "You shall always place on the Table the showbreads before Me." The reason for this commandment is that even though bread is the food of the living creatures, it is not the actual bread which provides the nutrients but the blessing with which G–d has endowed it. Keep in mind that the priest who received as litle as the size of a bean as his share of this bread [on the Sabbath when all the בתי אבות shared in it equally. Ed.] emerged well satisfied after eating from it. His face glowed in satisfaction even when the rest of the world suffered from famine. This shows that the element which provided the nourishment was that this bread was לפני תמיד, "constantly in My presence."
  המנורה. I have earlier described how the shape of the candlestick had much in common with the shape of man. It had to be of a single piece, not joined together. This alludes to the need that man's heart should be Heaven-oriented. At the same time a Jew's heart should also be oriented towards his people. The additional words in (25,31) "its base, its stem, etc,” all point out the lesson that a Jew must feel at one with all parts of his people, be they rich or poor, well learned or not. This same thought is also alluded to in the Torah's description of how the boards forming the walls of the Tabernacle are to be joined. The Torah speaks about ויהיו תואמים מלמטה, "they shall be joined at the bottom;" when this is the case there will also occur יחדיו יהיו תמים למעלה, that the Jewish people, i.e. the concept of כנסת ישראל in the Heavenly Regions will be whole.
  והבריח התיכון מבריח מן הקצה אל הקצה, "The central bolt will extend from one end to the other end" This is an allusion to what Maimonides in his booklet שמונה פרקים, an introduction to Avot, has described in the fourth chapter under the heading of "good deeds." Good deeds are those which do not bear a characteristic of being extreme, fanatical, intolerant. They are what we call the "golden mean." Maimonides also explains there that if a person tends to extremity in one direction and wishes to compensate for this error he should not adopt a centrist position but rather make up for the former error by exaggerating the direction he had previously spurned. After a suitable period he must then adopt a middle-of-the-road path.
  ועשית פרוכת והיה מבדיל בין הקודש ובין קודש הקדשים, "You shall make a curtain which will divide between the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies." We have a lesson here on how man must proceed in order to advance towards higher levels of sanctity. When physical man on earth begins to sanctify himself, G–d will assist by helping him to perfect himself and contribute twice as much as man had already contributed towards this goal. One must never be satisfied and think that one has achieved as much as possible in this respect, but forever strive to advance towards still higher levels of sanctity.
  
  Tetzaveh
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Commandment 99 enjoins the priests to clean and make ready the lamps on the candlestick on a permanent basis, for the Torah says: "Aaron and his sons shall set it up from evening to morning before the Lord" (27,21). This is what the Talmud calls the הטבת הנרות.
  Commandment 100 is the requirement of the priests to wear special garments when performing their duties. The Torah says: "Make sacred vestments for Aaron your brother, etc," (28,2).
  Commandment 101 forbids the removal of the breastplate from the ephod. The Torah says: "The breastplate shall not come loose from the ephod" (28,28).
  Commandment 102 forbids tearing up the Me-il, robe that the High Priest is to wear. The Torah sys: "It shall not tear" (28,32).
  Commandment 103 commands the priests to eat part of the flesh of certain offerings such as various kinds of sin-offerings. The Torah says: "They shall eat of the meat which has served as their atonement" (29,33). Our sages comment on this that the atonement for the owners of these offerings becomes only complete once the priests who have performed the sacrificial service have eaten from them (Pesachim 59).
  Commandment 104 commands the priests to offer incense twice a day, daily, for the Torah says: "On it Aaron shall burn incense; he shall burn it mornings and at twilight" (30,7).
  Commandment 105 prohibits the offering of "alien" incense, i.e. incense not made of the components and quantities prescribed. The Torah says: "You must not offer upon it (the golden altar) alien incense" (30,9).
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  I have explained in my introduction to the eight portions שובבי"ם ת"ת that this portion deals with the attribute of חסד, loving-kindness.
  I have already explained at length in Parshat Terumah how the Tabernacle was a re-enactment of the work of creation, i.e. a microcosm, and that it served as man's rehabilitation for the damage to G–d's universe brought about by Adam's sin. We have also explained that there was a parallel Tabernacle in the Celestial Regions. Aaron, as High Priest, symbolised the rehabilitation of man who had become distant from G–d as a result of Adam's sin. Concerning Aaron, the Torah writes: ואתה הקרב אליך את אהרון אחיך, "As for you (Moses), bring close Aaron your brother etc." (28,1) Here the Torah expresses a mystical dimension of the verse in Leviticus 16,17: וכל אדם לא יהיה באהל, "No man shall be inside the tent." This is a reference to original Adam. The universe was created under the aegis of חסד, loving-kindness, as we know from עולם חסד יבנה, "The universe was built with loving-kindness" (Psalms 89,3). The בנין של מעלה, "The structure corresponding to the physical universe in the Celestial Regions," contains the secret of the seven days of creation and commences with the emanation חסד down to the emanation מלכות, i.e. seven emanations. We find that in connection with Aaron, the Torah (Deut. 33,8) speaks about תומיך ואוריך לאיש חסידך, that Aaron represented the attribute of חסד. We have explained that the three groups of Israelites, i.e. the כהנים, לוים, ישראלים, corresponded to the three emanations חסד, גבורה, תפארת, respectively.
  The original "jewelry" had been taken from Man due to the powerful impact of Adam's sin. At that time Man's original vestments were exchanged from כתנות אור, garments made of light, for כתנות עור, garments made of hide (Genesis 3,21). The Torah, in our portion, orders that כתנות, tunics, be made for Aaron's sons (28,40) who had to be dressed in sacred vestments. They put on שמן משחת קודש, holy anointing oil, on their bodies before they dressed in the sacred vestments. By following this procedure, the priests ceased being זרים, strangers or "outsiders," before putting on garments which could not be worn by non-priests. When Adam became a זר, outsider, this was due to the pollutant with which the serpent had infected him. It was this pollutant from which he had to be purified. Aaron was the human being through whom this rehabilitation of Man was achieved. He had to be separate to sanctify his body. He thereafter dressed in the sacred vestments which conferred upon him כבוד ותפארת, the very kind of visible distinction that Adam enjoyed while dressed in garments made of light. The pollutant present in Man because of the serpent's infection was converted into something positive by means of the breastplate Aaron wore on his heart. The Ineffable name of G–d was engraved on the stones of the breastplate The names of the 12 tribes as well as the names of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were engraved between the 12 gemstones set in it. The latter represented the מרכבה, whereas the former represented the twelve possible ways of arranging the letters of the Ineffable Name. 
  While Aaron and his sons were thus sanctified, the people were sanctified by restrictions in their diet as outlined in Leviticus chapter 11. This was parallel to G–d telling Adam in גן עדן that Man was allowed to eat from all the trees in that garden except from the tree of knowledge. Concepts such as פיגול, נותר, and טמא, [various types of disqualifications of sacrificial matter] all derive from the tree of knowledge from which Adam ate. Just as the priests were separate in sanctity, their clothing was separate and their food and drink were separate. In order to enable them to eat and drink some of the things that had been sanctified and offered on the altar, the place where such service was performed also had to be separate and sanctified so as to lend an additional level of sanctity to the service they performed. This element of sanctity of the site applied both to the general area of the Tabernacle, i.e. the courtyard surrounding it, the Sanctuary, the Holy of Holies, as well as to different levels of sanctity of the different types of sacrifices. Sacrifices offered on the "outer" copper altar possessed a different degree of holiness from the incense which was offered on the golden altar within the Sanctuary. The latter was the offering dearest to G–d and drew G–d's goodwill down to His creatures on earth. The Aramaic word for קשר, connection, is the same as the Hebrew word for קטר, smoke, incense. The smoke created the connection. Since the essence of the incense offering consisted of the fragrance it exuded, something that is closest to רוח, spirit, i.e. a spiritual concept, it was especially close to G–d Who is pure spirit. It can be appreciated only by the soul, not by the body. It was therefore uniquely designed to establish close communion with the שכינה. This is why it was offered inside the Sanctuary. Most animal offerings could not be offered inside the Sanctuary; even incense could only be offered inside the Sanctuary when it was the incense of the public. Private incense offerings were not offered there. It was considered קטורת זרה, incense of an alien nature. Even Aaron only had the right to enter the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement, once a year, as stated by the Torah: ואל יבא בכל עת אל הקודש, "He must not enter at will into the Shrine behind the curtain, in front of the cover which is upon the Ark, lest he die" (Leviticus 16,2). Our sages comment on this that it was only Aaron who was not allowed into the Holy of Holies whenever he wanted; Moses, however, was allowed to enter at will (Sifra on Leviticus 16,2). We must understand that Moses was not a זר, stranger, alien, because the raw-material he was made of had been so refined that it was itself pure and holy, similar to being garbed in garments of light. This is why according to Sotah 12, at his birth, the house of his parents was filled with light. The material Aaron's body was made of did contain some parts tainted by the residue of the pollutant of the original serpent; it was incumbent upon him to rid himself of that element, something that he was able to do only with the help of the holy oil of anointing. Even with the help of that holy oil he did not attain the level of Moses [and required the advent of the Day of Atonement so that he might be free, at least temporarily, of foreign elements. Ed].
  Keeping this in mind we can answer the question how Moses could have performed service in the Sanctuary during the seven days preceding the eighth day of Nissan mentioned in Leviticus 9,1. Our sages answered this question saying that Moses went in wearing a white shirt (Taanit 11). At first glance the question does not seem to fit the answer. If the questioner wanted to know whence Moses had taken the sacred vestments to enable him to perform the service in the Sanctuary -because he presumed that such service could not be performed without the sacred vestments- then the answer simply skirts the issue. If, on the other hand, the questioner did not consider the wearing of the sacred vestments as an absolute prerequisite before such service in the Tabernacle could be performed, what was the point of the question? 
  We therefore have to assume that the questioner presumed that the sacred vestments were an absolute prerequisite for such service to be performed. This is why he wanted to know where Moses took such garments from, seeing the Torah had not mentioned anything about sacred vestments at that point in time. He was told that Moses performed the service wearing a white shirt because there was no requirement for him to wear sacred vestments. The reason Moses did not need them was because he had never been a זר, had never been alienated from his original level of sanctity as had all the other human beings including his brother Aaron. The "white shirt" mentioned by the Talmud is an allusion to the garments of light worn by Adam prior to his sin. Since Moses personally was of distinguished material, כבוד ותפארת, he did not need sacred garments to achieve such an image.
  To return to the main issue that Aaron, the man of חסד, rehabilitated original Adam and that the universe is built on חסד. Since the world was constructed during the seven days of Creation, which in turn paralleled the seven emanations employed in its construction, seven days of inauguration of the Tabernacle were required before it commenced functioning as a microcosm in the fullest sense of the word. The Zohar quotes Rabbi Yitzchak on Isaiah 30,26: "The light of the moon will equal the light of the sun in brilliance, and the brilliance of the light of the sun will be seven times greater than during the seven days of creation." Rabbi Yuda said that the prophet referred to the seven days during which the Tabernacle was inaugurated. The world had been plunged in darkness so that it might re-emerge bathed in light on the occasion of the inauguration of the Tabernacle. On that occasion the moon shone brilliantly as it had done before it was diminished so as not to embarass it at a time when the universe had been rehabilitated. Rabbi Yuda based himself on the verse: ונרגן מפריד אלוף, "A quarrelsome one alienates a friend" (Proverbs 16,28).
  Aaron was anointed with the anointing oil which alludes to the mystical dimension of the holy oil in the Celestial Regions which has its roots in the emanation בינה. Pardes Rimonim in the chapter dealing with the meaning of various terms has this to say on the definition שמן, oil: "There are many different kinds of oil. The anointing oil is an expression denoting שפע, abundance, otherwise known as שמן, as we will explain. When Royalty is anointed by the oil it originates in the emanation חסד and is called שמן המשחה, anointing oil. The reason is that it is called משחא דרבותא, oil of greatness in Aramaic. This is an allusion to חסד. When this oil originates in the emanation תפארת, however, it is called שמן המאור, oil for lighting. The reason for this is that the emanation תפארת symbolises the "great luminary." The שכינה employs this light when shining. The oil is called שמן משחת קודש, "holy oil of anointing," when it originates in the emanation גבורה. This is why the Torah speaks of וקדשת את הלוים, "You shall sanctify the Levites." [I have not found this verse. Maybe the verse in Numbers 3,12 is meant. Ed.] When G–d's שפע is absorbed through the emanation גבורה and therefore also includes an element of the emanation חסד, the Torah reflects this by describing such oil as שמן משחת קודש. This indicates that such oil is not derived exclusively from the emanation גבורה. The word קודש is a hint of the emanation גבורה, whereas the word משחת alludes to the emanation חסד. 
  When the source of the oil is the emanation יסוד, it is called שמן כתית. This is the domain in which the olives are "pounded" into fragments from which the oil is extracted and in turn is channelled to the emanation מלכות. Two different stages of "pounding," i.e. כתת and כתש are required to produce the required type of oil for the מנורה. When human beings mate the process is one of כתישה, as is well known. This process eventually results in the formation of a new life, a baby. When the parallel process occurs in the Celestial Regions the result is the שפע we enjoy at the hands of G–d. When the oil is the product of the emanation יסוד, i.e. שמן זית זך כתית, this is equivalent to שמן רענן (cf. Psalms 92,11) because the emanation יסוד is also known as the region of רענן. The שפע by itself is known as זית אחת, a single olive. שמן without any adjectives describing it is an allusion to the שפע which is provided by the emanation בינה, having originated in the emanation חכמה which is part of the "right" side of the scheme of emanations, the side from which G–d's goodness is revealed. The emanation בינה is also known as the seat of G–d's name א-ה-י-ה. We find this word repeated in Exodus 3,14, where G–d refers to the abundance He will supply. When the three basic letters י-ה-ו are used it does not matter in which order they are spelled. The letters י-ה-ו are also alluded to in the word בינה, because the word בינה is a combination of בן and י-ה. The letter ו alludes to "combination," i.e. when you place it together with the letters י-ה, you have י-ה-ו. When you apply the system of exchanging letters in the alphabet known as א-ת, ב-ש, the result is ב-י-ט as the alternative spelling of the שמן. This word ביט is a sacred name of G–d and in numerical value equals the holy Name א-ה-י-ה or י-ה-ו. This is what I have heard." Thus far the quotation from the Pardes Rimonim.
  These vestments were garments of distinction, reminiscent of the garments made of light worn by Adam prior to his sin. They were made לכבוד ולתפארת, in order to reflect the תפארת extant in the emanation תפארת, abode of G–d's שכינה, which radiates from there in all six possible directions. It exerts its influence on the emanation מלכות, uniting with that emanation.
  Nachmanides has this to say on the expression of לכבוד ולתפארת, in 28,2: "As far as the mystical dimension of these instructions, i. e. ועל דרך האמת, is concerned: They should make prestigious garments for Aaron so that he could perform service in them to the G–d who represents true glory and splendour and who dwells amongst the Israelites. The might and glory of the Jewish people is their G–d, as we know from Psalms 89,18: כי תפארת עוזמו אתה, "For You are their strength in which they glory." We also know this from Isaiah 64,10 בית קדשנו ותפארתנו אשר הללוך אבותינו, "Our Holy Temple and the site of our glory where our forefathers praised You." The word קדשנו refers to our כבוד, honour, the word תפארתנו to the glory of Israel. We also have a verse in Psalms 96,6: עוז ותפארת במקדשו, "Strength and glory in His Sanctuary." Isaiah 60,13 speaks of לפאר מקום מקדשי ומקום רגלי אכבד, "To glorify the site of My Sanctuary and the place where My feet rest." The prophet evidently describes that the site of the Temple is to reflect G–d's splendour and honour. G–d is glorified through Israel viz: Isaiah 49,3: ישראל אשר בך אתפאר, "I glory in you Israel." 
  What applies to the vestments of the High Priest also applies in some measure to the vestments of Aaron's sons as we read in 28,40. Isaiah also uses this expression when referring to the value of the sacrifices offered up by Israel, such as Isaiah 60,7: יעלו לרצון על מזבחי ובית תפארתי אפאר, "They will be welcome offerings on My Altar, and I will add glory to My glorious House." The Altar represents G–d's goodwill, the Sanctuary His glory. These vestments had to be made for the express purpose of serving as the priests' garments. This is why G–d prefaced His instructions with the words: "You shall instruct all those whose heart is endowed with wisdom and whom I have endowed with a spirit of wisdom, etc." (28,3). All those participating in the weaving, sewing, etc. of these garments should be aware of what they were doing and why they were doing it. We have already been told in Yuma 69 that an image of the High Priest Shimon Hatzadik dressed in his sacred vestments appeared to Alexander the Great when the latter engaged in battle. Alexander was convinced that he had had a vision of a holy angel. Thus far Nachmanides.
  We have stated earlier that G–d's name appears in connection with the Sanctuary both as the Ineffable four-lettered Name, and in the form of the name א-ד-נ-י. Perhaps this concept is also reflected in the fact that there were four garments made of gold, and four garments made of white linen. The white garments symbolised the Ineffable Name, the mystical dimension of the attribute of Mercy, whereas the four golden garments represented the mystical dimension of the name א-ד-נ-י. We find the expression ממשבצות זהב לבושה, "her dress embroidered with golden mountings" in Psalms 45,14. The Psalmist uses the name א-ד-נ-י for the name of G–d in that chapter.
  [At this point the author launches into a speculation he has found in a book called תיקון השם about how the various garments which -according to our tradition- each contributed to the attainment of atonement by the High Priest for the Jewish people's sins, paralleled a specific letter of the 2 times four letters in the two names of G–d. It is too lengthy to copy these speculations in detail. Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Rekanati sees the following allusions in the composition of the breastplate and the ephod respectively. "You must appreciate that the breastplate symbolises the splendour which is Israel, whereas the ephod reflects the presence of G–d's might. This is the reason the breastplate was not to be loosened from the ephod. Seeing that the breastplate symbolised Israel's splendour, it is only logical that it had two golden rings on it. They alluded to the זרועות עולם, the arms supporting the universe, parallel to the cherubs on top of the lid of the Holy Ark. You are also aware that some of the priests' garments were made of gold and some of silver. [Surely the author uses the word silver in lieu of white. Ed.]. This too referred to the two "arms" supporting the universe. Different vestments were worn for the performance of different kinds of duties in the Tabernacle. 
  The reason for the bells on the rim of the robe of the High Priest is specifically spelled out in the Torah. His voice (approach) should be heard when he entered the Sanctuary. This was in the nature of securing permission before entering the Sanctuary. Anyone entering suddenly, i.e. unannounced, was guilty of death. We know of something similar in the palace of Ahasverus (Esther 4,11). I shall explain this in greater detail when I deal with Leviticus 16,17: "No one is to be in the Tent of Meeting when Aaron enters to obtain atonement in the Sanctuary." This is why the Torah commanded that he had to announce his arrival. It is not unlike the time Joseph revealed himself to his brothers. He had instructed that everyone present in the palace had to be removed first, except for himself and his brothers (Genesis 45,1). Service to the King has to be performed with no one else present. When one leaves the king one must also be granted permission so that the king's servants will know when to re-enter the king's presence. An additional dimension which is important when dealing with the presence before the King of Kings is that unless permission has been obtained both before entering and before leaving, G–d's angels are apt to kill the person who acts without permission. The Torah warns Aaron so that we may appreciate that if even a person of the exalted stature of Aaron is subject to such restrictions, anyone on a lower level does not even have to be warned specifically. When the Torah adds the words לפני ה', in 28,39, it adds stature to Aaron who is compared to an angel of the Lord of Hosts. According to our sages the reason there must not be a tear in the robe (28,31), i.e. that it should be constructed in such a way that it is not liable to be torn, is because Satan is jealous of the High Priests's stature and tries to pull him by his robe as warriors do.
  I have already alluded earlier to the reason the High Priest has to eat part of the meat of the sacrifices. I will here add another mystical dimension to this requirement. It is all connected with the first statement in the Book of Leviticus about the nature of animal sacrifice, i.e. אדם כי יקריב מכם, that the soul of a person is transferred to the animal he offers as a sacrifice or has the priest offer on his behalf. When the priests eat, they absorb the souls of the owners of the sacrifices for whom they seek atonement. This is achieved through eating of the animals which had been appointed as a substitute for the person offering the animal to G–d.
  I have already given a reason for the importance and nature of the incense offering earlier. Rekanati comments on this as follows: "Incense is an allusion to the attribute of Justice, as we know from Deut. 33,10: ישימו קטורה באפיך וכליל על מזבחך, 'They place incense (on the Golden Altar) when You are angry, and total offferings on Your (copper) Altar.' Aaron did this and succeeded in arresting the plague that was consuming the lives of the Israelites (Numbers 17,12-14). We know from Psalms 45,14 that Aaron offered that incense on the Golden Altar: ממשבצות זהב לבושה. To assure the effectiveness of such an offering of incense he had to concentrate on the Ineffable Name while doing so, wishing the incense to become ריח ניחוח, a fragrance pleasing to G–d. We also have a tradition based on Proverbs 27,9: "Oil and incense gladdens the heart." This is because the incense offering as a rule, does not represent an effort to achieve forgiveness for some sin committed, but is an expression of man trying to place a crown on the head of its rightful owner, G–d in this instance. It is an attempt to insure that G–d relates to us in a constantly happy frame of mind. The emanation מלכות is regarded as the heart, לב, of heaven. The Torah writes in Exodus 30,8: "When Aaron lights up the lamps he shall burn it, an incense offering before the Lord." It is interesting that the offering up of the incense offering is made dependent on the performance of the lighting-up ceremony of the candlestick. This is in order to achieve the mystical union with the emanations representing the בנין. We have pointed out in our commentary on פרשת תרומה that the candlestick with its seven lamps symbolised the process of creation, or בנין. At the same time it symbolised the original light which illuminated the universe during the first seven days of its existence, as I demonstrated when I described how everything in connection with the construction of the Tabernacle was a re-enactment of the work of creation. Aaron was the rehabilitation of Adam. All existence is bound up with this תקון, rehabilitation. The incense offering is the clearest indication that the rehabilitation has indeed been completed. The lighting of the candlestick symbolises that the rehabilitation will endure, i.e. that the universe will endure, that the seven days of creation have been found justified.
  When commenting on 27,2: ויקחו אליך שמן זית זך, "They shall take for you pure olive oil," the Talmud in Menachot 86 points out that the Torah emphasises the word "for you," not "for Me." The message is that G–d does not need the light of the Candlestick. When the Tabernacle is lit up, however, this reflects glory for the Jewish people. The Table stood in the North, the Candlestick in the South of the Sanctuary. G–d needs neither the bread offered on the Table nor the light of the Candlestick. We read in Kings I 6,4 that Solomon made windows for the House (Temple) שקופים אטומים. This means that the windows were narrower on the inside of the walls than on the outside, emitting light rather than allowing light to come in from the outside. This architectural anomaly reflected the message that whereas G–d does not need our light, we are very much in need of His light, the one that is emitted from the Sanctuary.
  The words מחוץ לפרוכת העדות, "outside the curtain of testimony" (27,21) tell us that it was a testimony to the whole world that G–d's Presence rested over Israel. Should anyone assume that G–d needs the light inside the Tabernacle one only had to demonstrate that for the entire forty years that the Israelites marched through the desert they were guided by His light (the pillar of fire) and not vice versa. Rava opined that the "testimony" referred to in our verse is the נר מערבי, the most western, "eternal" flame which, though not filled with more oil than any of the other lamps on the מנורה, burned a whole twenty-four hour period at a time. The other lamps were lit from this lamp and in spite of this it burned the longest (Menachot 86).
  The same subject matter is raised in the Talmud Shabbat 22 where the same question is raised and Tossaphot query why the Talmud claims that the proof comes from the forty years the Israelites marched in the desert. Surely, Tossaphot ask, we also require G–d's light in all our lives ever since? Some answer that Aaron needed the light of the מנורה when he entered the Sanctuary because the pillar of light did not light up the windowless inside of the Tabernacle. This seems to contradict the tradition that during all of the forty years the Israelites were in the desert the pillar of cloud illuminated every last pot in the camp so that nobody ever needed any other source of light. If one merely looked at the outside of a pitcher of water one could see the water-level inside the pitcher! Tossaphot conclude that the principal message of this verse is to tell us that the Tabernacle and the candlestick in it provided proof that G–d's Presence rested over the Jewish people. The Tossaphot in Menachot leave the question of why restrict the fact that G–d provided light for us instead of the other way around open. 
  I believe that we must on no account leave the impression that there is no answer to this question. After all, not providing an adequate answer is equivalent to diminishing the honour of G–d in the eyes of the reader! I believe that Rashi and also Tossaphot have left me some room to approach the subject. At the beginning of the discussion in Menachot 86 the Talmud mentions that the Table was situated in the northern part of the Sanctuary and the Candlestick was situated in the southern part. This had to be so because the Golden Altar was between them. The Talmud adds that the words מחוץ לפרוכת העדות, "Outside the curtain of testimony," indicate that the שכינה resided amongst the Israelites. Rashi comments that the fact that the Altar was in between the Table and the Candlestick proved that G–d needed neither the food nor the light provided by the priests. One of the problems with this explanation is that the most important ingredient in this explanation, i.e. the Altar is not even mentioned in the text of the Talmud here. Another difficulty is that the altar did not actually stand exactly between the Table and the Candlestick; if you drew a line between the Table, the Altar and the Candlestick you would get a triangle, as is clear from the Mishnah in Midot.
  G–d has granted me the insight to find the answer to this problem with the help of a Midrash Tanchuma on our verse. It is customary in civilised countries that when a king places a divan and table in his room that he places the candlestick to the left of the table. In the Holy Temple, however, this was not so. The Candlestick was placed on the right side of the Table to make it plain that G–d is not in need of any light supplied by us. The purpose of the Candlestick is to light the way for you to the World to Come at the time when darkness will sweep the Gentiles, for we know from Isaiah 60,2 that at that time החשך יכסה ארץ וערפל לאומים ועליך יזרח ה' וכבודו עליך יראה, "The darkness will envelop the earth, and thick clouds the nations; but upon you the Lord will shine and His Presence will be seen over you." Thus far the Midrash.
  It is spelled out then that the Table stood in the North and the Candlestick in the South, which proved that the Candlestick was not needed for the sake of its light nor the table for the bread it provided. Had they been needed for mundane purposes their positions should have been reversed. 
  Having in mind the words of this Midrash, we can answer the question raised by Tossaphot of what need there was for the Candlestick, seeing that G–d did not need its light, nor did He need the Table because of the food offered on it. The Talmud had answered that in view of this the Torah indicated that the provision of such furnishings in the Tabernacle was evidence that G–d's Presence rested above Israel. [Why would furnishings be provided for an absentee resident? Ed.] The Tanchuma answered the question by saying that it was an acknowledgment of Israel's merit. The presence of these furnishings was designed to help Israel during the interval between the onset of the coming of the Messiah and the eventual emergence of the new world-order called עולם הבא, the World to Come. 
  Both the Talmud and the Midrash have provided legitimate answers. Both answers reflect similar ideas. Let me first say a few words of introduction. The mutual and intimate connection between Israel and G–d is a well known fact. We are the cause of this great attachment between us and G–d through our "awakening down here," i.e. through our initiating this relationship. G–d reciprocates, pouring out over us His abundance from the Celestial Regions. This fact answers a difficulty in Rashi on Exodus 23,20: ולהביאך אל המקום אשר הכינותי, "and to bring you to the place that I have prepared." Rashi- in his Midrashic commentary- says that it means that 'My place' is already visible opposite this place. This is one of the verses from which we can learn that there is a Celestial Sanctuary opposite the Sanctuary on earth." This poses the question as to what is primary and what is secondary? Does the Celestial Sanctuary have to await the building of a terrestrial Sanctuary by Israel, or vice versa? Under normal circumstances the junior partner is always dependent on the senior partner. In accordance with that rule Rashi should have described the terrestrial Sanctuary as dependent on the existence of the Celestial Sanctuary. The site of the Sanctuary on earth should have been described as opposite the Celestial Sanctuary! Another difficulty is the wording of Rashi in the first half of his comment. He says: "its place was already recognisable." Afterwards Rashi speaks of the terrestrial Sanctuary having already existed before the Celestial Sanctuary came into being!
  The answer is simply that the Sanctuary in the Celestial Regions preceded the Tabernacle on earth. G–d commanded the Sanctuary on earth to be built in such a way that it would correspond to the Celestial Sanctuary. The performance of the service in the Tabernacle would prepare it to absorb G–d's bounty from the Celestial Sanctuary. This bounty is unable to descend from Heaven until there is evidence of our rousing ourselves in an effort to ascend spiritually. Once Man or Israel has demonstrated such a spiritual intiative, i.e. has prepared a throne for G–d in our world, then G–d in His turn can rest His Presence over us.
  Our sages conveyed the same message when they explained that although the sacrifices on the Altar were consumed by Heavenly fire, yet the priests had to prepare the fire on the Altar on an ongoing basis. When man prepares the fire, G–d's fire will descend and consume the offerings, a sign of goodwill from G–d. The fire on earth "awakens" the Heavenly fire (Eyruvin 63). This is a rule which applied to everything in the Sanctuary with the exception of the Table and the Candlestick. The Candlestick with its seven lamps alludes to the ongoing existence of the universe which was created in seven days and alludes to the super-natural light that the universe was bathed in during those days and until Adam's sin. The Table teaches that G–d provides bread for all creatures, for His kindness is everlasting. The Table was not placed in the location which we would have expected in order to show that G–d neither needs our light nor our bread. What this means is that whereas in spiritual matters man must make the first move to come closer to G–d, G–d will make the first move when it comes to providing our physical needs such as food and light. We see that G–d continues to provide the universe and its creatures with its needs even though the Sanctuary is in ruins. We acknowledge this daily when we say grace after our meals. This is what the sages meant when they quoted G–d as saying: "I do not need the terrestrial Sanctuary either to enable light to be dispensed from Heaven or for food to be provided by My grace. If G–d nonetheless commanded the construction of a Candlestick and a Table, and commanded how they were to function, this was to attest that G–d's שכינה rested over Israel. It was an an assurance that even if there no longer were a Sanctuary this would not mean that G–d would withdraw His Presence, as we know from השוכן אתם בתוך טומאותם, "Who dwells amongst them in their state of defilement" (Lev. 16,16).
  The testimony consisted of the נר המערבי, i.e. G–d's decree that the Western (wailing) Wall should never be destroyed even when the rest of the Temple was laid waste. In this way we retain a glimmer of our former glory and an indication that G–d has not abandoned us even at a time when the lights of the Candlestick no longer burn and we dwell in relative darkness. It serves as encouragement that light will emerge from the darkness that we find ourselves in during exile, and this light will outshine any that existed in former times. The "darkness," the persecutions we suffer during exile act as the catalyst that triggers penitence and spiritual rebirth. I have already explained the positive aspects of exile on several occasions. 
  Suffice it to say that this is what the Midrash Tanchuma had in mind when it said that the function of the Candlestick is to light up for us the period of darkness preceding the ultimate redemption. "When that time arrives it will be those who have darkened our lives who will experience darkness whereas Israel will experience an abundance of light and the universe will undergo a complete rejuvenation. This eventual rejuvenation of the universe was already hinted at in the first words of the Torah's report about מעשה בראשית, the work of Creation, where the Torah speaks about , תהו, ובהו, חושך, על פני תהום, and our sages see in this an allusion to the four exiles the Jewish people would experience before there would be an ideal type of universe (Bereshit Rabbah 2,4). The Table also alludes to the future as indicated in Isaiah 65,13: "Here My servants will eat whereas you will starve; My servants will drink and you will thirst." 
  This then is the meaning of "I do not need its light, etc.," that nowadays, when the Tabernacle is standing, you have to make preparations concerning a more distant future after the destruction of the Temple when these symbols will become of crucial importance to us.
  Rabbi Avin the Levite is quoted in the Midrash Tanchuma as saying that when people make windows they make them wide on the inside of the wall and narrow on the outside so that they will bring as much light as possible into the house. All the windows in Solomon's Temple were built according to the opposite pattern, narrow on the inside of the walls and much wider on the outside. This was to illustrate that the Temple is a source of light for the outside world and not vice versa. The deeper meaning is that the light which originated inside the Temple and illuminated the world outside would remain in the universe also after the destruction of its source, the Temple, in order to eventually light the way for a better world. 
  The "light" which will be preserved in the universe at large after shining forth from the Temple is the light of Torah learning, as already explained in Bereshit Rabbah 3,5: "Rabbi Symon said that the word אור, light, occurs five times in the report of the first day of creation (Genesis 1,3-5). This corresponds to the five books of the Torah."
  The construction of the Tabernacle, first reported in Parshat Terumah, commences with the Torah's instruction to make the Holy Ark, the repository of the Tablets, symbol of the light of Torah. When you invert the letters in the word ארון, Ark, you have אורן, "their light." This alludes to the fact that the Torah in the Ark is the source of light for all of us. Parshat Tetzaveh, on the other hand, commences with the commandment to provide the oil for lighting up the lamps of the Candlestick. When we look at the adjective used by the Torah for the olive oil to be used, i.e. זך, we note that the word זך has a numerical value of 27, i.e. the number of different letters used in the written Torah when we include the five "final" letters as separate letters. The word כתית which describes the pounding the olives have to undergo before they yield the oil, is an allusion to the way in which a potential Torah student has to "pound himself" in order to study with the proper kind of dedication. We find an allusion to this in Esther 8,16: ליהודים היתה אורה ושמחה וששון ויקר, "The Jews enjoyed light and gladness, happiness and honour." The word אורה is a reference to Torah. They emerged from the darkness caused by Haman into a great light, the light of Torah." 
  This Midrash requires further analysis. I have explained it in various sermons delivered on the occasion of פרשת זכור on different occasions during my younger days. In most years we read פרשת זכור on the same Sabbath as we read the portion תצוה. I will append here some of the material I used in such sermons.
  
  ואתה תצוה את בני ישראל. The word ואתה, occurs four times in connection with the construction of the Tabernacle and in each instance it appears to be superfluous. In Exodus 27,20, the word could have been omitted without changing the meaning of G–d's instructions to Moses. In 28,1 the Torah could have simply written: Karev! In 28,3 the Torah could have written: Dabber, and in 30,23 the Torah could have written: Kach lecha. We will concede that on the fifth occasion the Torah uses the word אתה, i.e. in connection with the commandment not to build the Tabernacle on the Sabbath (Exodus 31,13), there is some justification for use of the word אתה. G–d referred to the fact that Moses had a special standing relative to the Sabbath because it had been he who had chosen the Sabbath legislation while the Israelites were still in Egypt, something we mention every Sabbath morning in our liturgy when we recite: ישמח משה במתנת חלקו, "Moses rejoiced when he received his share, etc." The other four occasions when the Torah writes ואתה, present a serious difficulty.
  Rabbi Shemuel bar Nachmeni tells us in Menachot 86 that the reason the Torah emphasises the word אליך, for you, in 27,20 is that otherwise the impression would have been created that the light of the מנורה serves G–d's needs. We have already quoted this passage earlier and explained that this was the meaning of ליהודים היתה אורה ושמחה וששון ויקר, as discussed in the Talmud Megillah 16. [In that connection the presumption is that after being saved from the threat of annihilation at the hands of Haman, the Jews accepted upon themselves the commandments alluded to in these words. Ed.] 
  The word אורה is understood to refer to the spiritual illumination provided by Torah; the word שמחה to יום טוב, a holiday; the word ששון to circumcision, whereas the word ויקר is a reference to the phylacteries. The scriptural proof for the latter statement is derived from Deut. 28,10: "All mankind will see that the name of the Lord is on you and they will be in awe of you." Rabbi Eliezer the Great said that this is a reference to the phylacteries worn on the head.
  We have a problem with these statements: Why did the Book of Esther single out these four commandments from all the others, seeing all would have been nullified if Haman had been able to achieve his aim in wiping out all the Jews? Rashi comments that Haman specifically wanted to ensure that these commandments would no longer be practised [and this is why he had to wipe out the Jews to attain his end. Ed.] What is Rashi's source? Another problem is that according to a tradition quoted in a book called Manot Ha-Levi, Mordechai and twenty-two thousand students were engaged in Torah study prior to Haman's decree! There was therefore hardly anything new in the Jewish people accepting the principle of Torah study!
  I therefore believe that the Jews re-dedicated themselves to the practice of these four commandments as something they would place more emphasis on than before Haman's decree. Our sages (Shabbat 85) comment on Exodus 19,17: "They stood underneath the Mountain," that G–d had threatened that if the Jewish people would not accept the Torah the Mountain would crush them to death. This proved that acceptance of the Torah by the Jewish people at Mount Sinai was an act performed under duress. Not until after the decree of Haman was cancelled did the Jewish people accept the Torah on an entirely voluntary basis. This is what is meant when the Book of Esther describes that תורה had now become אורה, that what had previously been a burden now became like a ray of light for them. An allusion to this revolutionary change in the Jewish attitude to Torah is found in the words והדת נתנה בשושן הבירה, "and the law (religion) was really given in Shushan the capital" (Esther 3,15).
  When the Talmud explains that the word שמחה in the Book of Esther refers to יום טוב, a holiday, festival, this is obviously a reference to the holiday of Purim which was established as part of the Jewish calendar as a result of the Haman episode. Our sages have stated that this holiday is such a fixture in our calendar that even if all the other holidays were to be cancelled Purim would never be cancelled (Esther 9,28). It follows that the kind of holiday the Jews received as a result of the cancellation of Haman's decree was on a higher spiritual plateau than the previously existing holidays.
  The Talmud described the word ששון in our verse from the Book of Esther as a reference to circumcision. This was a commandment which had not been practised joyfully prior to the cancellation of Haman's decree. It could now be celebrated again. According to a view expressed at the beginning of chapter 19 in Shabbat 130, all commandments which the Jewish people accepted joyfully continue to enjoy popularity amongst the Jewish people One such commandment was the rite of circumcision because it was performed to the accompaniment of a feast. As a source for this statement Tossaphot quote the verse describing Abraham making a feast on the day Isaac was weaned. The extra letters ה and ג in the word הגמל serve as the basis that it was on the eighth day after Isaac was born that this feast took place (cf. Genesis 21,8). When Haman's decree was published Esther and Mordechai had decreed a three-day (72 hour) fast on the entire Jewish population of Shushan. Presumably there were many thousands of circumcisions during those days without a feast being prepared honouring performance of this commandment. Now that Haman's decree had been cancelled this commandment could again be performed amid a joyous celebration. 
  The Talmud had described the word יקר as alluding to the wearing of the phylacteries. On the 14th of Nissan, the first day of the fast, the Jews did not put on their phylacteries since they observed mourning. Anyone who is of disturbed mind is not allowed to put on phylacteries. Now that the decree had been cancelled the Jews were again able to put on their phylacteries. I believe that this is the plain meaning of the Talmud's comment on our verse.
  Perhaps the four expressions of joy mentioned in our verse have a bearing on the disagreement between four scholars as to from where one starts reading the מגילה in order to have fulfilled one's duty. The opinions range from the requirement to start at the beginning, in order to demonstrate the full extent of Ahasverus's power, and an opinion that we must only read from the paragraph describing the night the king could not sleep and had the book of Chronicles read before him, i.e. the description of Mordechai saving his life. It is quite unlikely that the reason a scholar demands that the מגילה be read from start to finish is to enhance the reputation of Ahasverus. The exact wording in the Talmud is תוקפו של אחשורש. I do not think we err if we understand this to mean that the whole era of Ahasverus was one during which Jews accepted the Torah voluntarily. Since the Talmud indulges in a variety of attempts to prove that all that happened was alluded to in various hints in the Torah thousands of years previously, such exegesis is not far fetched. I have listed some of these allusions in my treatise on פרשת שקלים.
  [The author connects four questions raised in Chulin 139 concerning where the Torah had alluded to future events as corresponding in some way to the four expressions used in Esther 8,16. He also draws parallels with the expressions used in the Torah for G–d's relationship with the Jewish people such as חשק, חפץ, דבק, i.e. different levels of liking for the Jewish people. The expression דבקות is used as applying to the Israel/G–d relationship in a reciprocal manner, thus creating a fourth expression of G–d's relationship with Israel. Those who are interested in studying these allusions in greater detail are referred to the original text. The author uses statements in the Talmud such as that we have an allusion to Mordechai in the Torah because the Torah says in Exodus 30,23 מר דרור, as his justification for finding similar allusions to the Purim i.e. Amalek episode in our portion. I will continue quoting his commentary concerning such allusions. Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  We are told in 28,12 that Aaron was to wear the two gemstones on which the names of the twelve tribes were engraved on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod לפני ה' על שתי כתיפיו לזכרון, "on the two shoulder-pieces for remembrance before the Lord." This is an allusion to the events surrounding Purim of which we read in Esther 9,28 that "these days will be remembered and celebrated." This is a clear reference to the commandment to remember and never to forget what Amalek did to the Jewish people after they had crossed the sea and found themselves in the desert. The reason that the verse speaks both about נזכרים and נעשים is that the commemoration must precede the celebration. Even when Purim, i.e. the 14th of Adar, occurs on a Friday, so that the cities such as Jerusalem who celebrate Purim on the 15th of Adar celebrate it on the Sabbath, we cannot read פרשת זכות on that day, but must read it on the Sabbath preceding the 14th of Adar in order to comply with the sequence indicated in the Book of Esther. There is a dispute about this in Megillah 30 between Rav and Shmuel. The former holds that the paragraph commemorating the attack of Amalek on the Jewish people must be read in the Synagogue on the Sabbath prior to Purim, whereas Shmuel is of the opinion that it may be read even after Purim (i.e. the 14th). He reasons that since there are people who observe Purim on the 15th of Adar, in such an event the remembrance and celebration would coincide. In view of the fact that we accept the view of Rav, we need to understand why it is important to read פרשת זכור before the 14th of Adar. 
  In this connection I find the words of Rabbi Yitzchak Arama, the author of עקדת יצחק, most astonishing. The author of this book [chapter 90, see my translation. Ed.] questions how the Torah can command us to remember something at all; after all, man is subject to lapses of memory, and therefore such a commandment is beyond his control to observe! How can the Torah command us to perform acts beyond our control? Torah precepts involving vision do not apply to the blind because they cannot see, neither do Torah precepts involving hearing apply to the deaf since they cannot hear! The same rule should apply to precepts involving memory. Rabbi Arama answers this question saying that every remembrance has been preceded by an actual happening. It is the happening which triggers one's memory, and therefore the Torah is entitled to command us to use our memory. He quotes as an example the remembrance of the Sabbath legislation in the Kiddush. The mere fact that one observes the commandment of שמירת שבת, abstains from work, etc., acts as a memory jogger. It is therefore not true to say that the Torah commands only our memory. When we put on the phylacteries, that very act helps us to remember what the phylacteries stand for, as demanded by the Torah (Deut. 6,8); the same is true when we wear the ציצית, another commandment which the Torah has linked to memory (Numbers 15,39-40). The sages of the Great Assembly acted in consonance with this principle when they wanted to insure that the miracle which occurred in the days of Mordechai and Esther should be commemorated for all times. Since the Torah had not fixed a specific day for remembering Amalek, they decided to anchor this remembrance by some easily recognisable act and they instituted the reading of פרשת זכור in conjunction with the holiday of Purim. As long as the commandment was not connected with the anniversary of an anti-Jewish act committed by a descendant of Amalek, the commandment itself was in danger of being forgotten. According to the explanation by the Baal Akeydah the question is why the sages of the Great Assembly did not arrange to have the reading of פרשת זכור after Purim, after we had all remembered what the evil Haman had planned?
  In Megillah 19 we find an argument as to how much of the Megillah has to be read. Four views are mentioned as we have already stated earlier. The views are based on whether תקפו של אחשורוש, or תקפו של מרדכי, or תקפו של המן, or תקפו של נס i.e. the power of Ahasverus, Haman, Mordechai or the extent of the miracle, determines from which point the story has to be read in order to fulfil the commandment. The view mentioned last, that of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, states that the extent of the miracle is what determines from which part of the Megillah one has to start reading. Why would his colleagues of the Mishnah disagree with such a viewpoint?
  
  We know that the cause of Haman's decree was that the Jewish people at that time were guilty of two sins. One was a sin committed with their bodies, the other sin was committed with their souls. The sin committed with their souls was that they prostrated themselves before the image Nebuchadnezzar had constructed. The sin of committing idolatry is always considered as committed with one's soul, though one's body may have demonstrated it. As soon as one has made a conscious decision to make an obeisance to the idol, one's soul has already become guilty as if one had physically perpetrated the act. This is the only instance known in which G–d holds us culpable for the intention even though the act has not yet been committed. Our sages have derived this from למען תפוש את בית ישראל בלבם, "In order to take hold of the Family of Israel in their heart, etc." (Ezekiel 14,5). No such principle operates concerning any other kind of sins. Idol-worship is something that is committed primarily by the heart accepting an alien deity.
  The sin the Jews committed with their bodies at that time was their free-will participation in the feast Ahasverus had prepared in Shushan. The two sins combined were of sufficient gravity to prompt G–d to bring about the decree of Haman to wipe out all the Jews. Rashi spells this out in his commentary on Esther 4,1 "Mordechai knew all that had taken place." He was shown in a dream that Haman's decree enjoyed Heavenly approval. We are told in Megillah 12 that Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai's students asked him why the Jews during the time of Mordechai had all become guilty of death. The Rabbi suggested to the students that they themselves should come up with the answer. The students attributed the decree to the Jews having enjoyed the feast to which Ahasverus had invited them. Their teacher immediately demurred saying that if this were so only the Jews of Shushan would have been guilty! Thereupon the students asked Rabbi Shimon to provide the answer. He told them that it was because they had prostrated themselves to the idol. The students wanted to know if an obeisance which was only for show carried such a severe penalty? Rabbi Shimon told them that just as the Jews had not really worshipped that idol in their hearts so G–d had not really intended for them to be annihilated. The author of Manot Halevi writes in his introduction that we can learn from the principle espoused by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai that the decree was indeed due to the two sins committed by the Jewish people, but that there is a difference between decrees which have been sealed with a seal of blood and those which have been sealed with a seal of clay. The question had also arisen as to which of the two sins had brought about the sealing of the decree.
  When the Talmud asked how we know from the Torah that there would be a Moses, a Haman, a Mordechai and an Esther, these are not idle questions. From the answer the Talmud gives it is evident that there must be a deeper reason for such enquiries. In the case of Moses, the Talmud cites Genesis 6,3 בשגם הוא בשר, that G–d indicated that He made an allowance for the spiritual inadequacies of man inasmuch as part of man is physical. The letters in the word בשגם have a numerical value of 345, the same as the numerical value of the name משה. The Torah alludes to an eventual Haman with the words המן העץ in Genesis 3,11. The letters of Haman are the same as the word Ha-min. When answering the question where Esther is alluded to in the Torah, the Talmud cites ואנכי הסתר אסתיר את פני, "I will keep My face hidden" (Deut 31,18). We have an allusion to Mordechai in the Torah, as we mentioned earlier, based on Exodus 30,23 ואתה קח לך בשמים ראש מר דרור, "And you, take yourself choice spices Mor deror." The translation of this spice in Aramaic is מירא דכיא.
  We know that Moses played a crucial part in rehabilitating the Jewish people who had served the golden calf by standing up single-handedly against 600,000 people and judging them. The forty days and forty nights that Moses went without food and drink when he was on Mount Sinai were part of the rehabilitation process; he abstained from that which was permitted in order to atone for the partaking of that which was prohibited If someone were to say that because Moses possessed exceptional spiritual powers as documented by the Torah, and therefore was able to do what he did in bringing about the rehabilitation of his people and that ordinary people whose raw material dominates their personality could not do this, the Torah answers him by alluding to the fact that Moses was also made of flesh and blood as per the verse cited from Genesis. Therefore ordinary people can also accomplish what Moses accomplished if they want to live to be 120 years old like Moses. Moses achieved this because he spent three times 40 days on the Mountain, i.e. a total of 120 days. During all those 120 days he abstained even from basic physical needs that are perfectly permissible for one to enjoy.
  It is significant that the allusion of the Torah to Haman quoted by the Talmud is found in connection with the eating of forbidden food. This is exactly what happened during the days of Haman when the Jews participated and enjoyed the feast given by Ahasverus. Although the Jews were the guilty party, it was Haman who wound up on the gallows. The allusion of the Torah draws our attention to this anomaly.
  The verse in which Esther is alluded to, i.e. הסתר אסתיר פני, deals with the sin of idol worship as the cause for G–d withdrawing His benevolent Presence from the Jewish people. It is therefore not only the letters but also the context in which they appear that prompted the Talmud to see in them a forecast of the role Esther would play in Jewish history. Although the Jews of her era had bowed to Nebuchadnezzar's image she became the instrument used by G–d to save the Jewish people.
  The Talmud's discovery of an allusion to Mordechai in the Torah can also be viewed in this light. The passage in the Torah dealing with the various ingredients of the incense offering is written after the tax of the half shekel was imposed which every male Jew above the age of culpability, i.e. the age of 20, had to give to the Temple treasury as part of the expiation for his share in the sin of the golden calf. The Torah anticipated that Haman would offer an amount of 10,000 talents of silver (600,000 half shekels) to Ahasverus to secure permission to kill the Jews. The amount that Haman offered equalled the amount contributed by the Jewish people in Moses' time in expiation of their sin. There is therefore a conceptual bridge between the place in the Torah where we find a reference to Mordechai, and to the happenings during his lifetime. The whole subject of the half-shekel the Jewish males had to contribute to the building of the sockets of the Tabernacle as a symbol of their expiation could be explained in terms of the Mazzalot, the signs of the zodiac. The system of the zodiac signs presupposes that history is predetermined, i.e. הכל קצוב, שקול לומדוד ומנוי, "everything has been pre-cut, weighed, measured and counted." Haman drew lots in order to find out under what zodiac sign the Jews were most vulnerable. He miscalculated, for he did not know that if someone had paid כופר נפש, the name used by the Torah for this half-shekel payment of atonement, he would be immune to the horoscopic constellations governing his fate. Isaiah 43,4 refers to this ואתן אדם תחתיך ולאומים תחת נפשך, "I give men in exchange for you and peoples in your stead." The prophet continues by telling us not to be afraid since G–d is near us, etc. We have proof of G–d's protection during the Haman period from Psalms 124,2: לולא ה' שהיה לנו בקום עלינו אדם, "Were it not for G–d who was on our side when man assailed us." The verse does not mention persecution by a king or kingdom but by אדם, in this case Haman who was not a king. Here we have the mystical dimension of how the כופר נפש, the soul's ransom paid by the Jewish people frees them from the influence on their fate exerted by the signs of the zodiac. Instead of Haman governing our fate, a "king," i.e. G–d, took our fate in hand. This is why the legislation of the half-shekel contribution had to precede Haman chronologically. The Mishnah Shekalim 1,1 tells us that on the first of Adar each year people were reminded to contribute the shekels. The plural of the word shekel used here is indicative of the fact that these contributions covered both of the sins the people were guilty of during the reign of Ahasverus. 
  The rehabilitation also required two instruments i.e. Mordechai and Esther. Mordechai symbolised atonement for the sin, by refusing to bow to Haman's image, symbolised atonement for the sin of idol worship; Esther, by frightening Israel who were watching her inviting their arch-enemy to a feast with her husband-king, expiated the sin of partaking of forbidden food and enjoying it. Our sages (Megillah 15) cite several reasons why Esther did this, Rabbi Nechemyah saying that she wanted the Jews to do תשובה, repentance. The Jews did not turn to G–d and repent as long as they felt that a Jewish queen would protect their political interests. Esther wanted the fear generated among the Jewish people by her invitation of Haman to the meal to foster feelings of penitence amongst them. This is why she demanded that Mordechai decree a three-day fast for all the Jews of Shushan and asked that they assemble i.e. pray in their synagogues. The word כנוס, assemble, was the opposite of the characterisation of the Jews Haman had used when he described them to the king as מפוזר ומפורד, "scattered and dispersed." Haman counted on the dispersal and fragmentation of the Jewish people to help him defeat them. 
  Esther realised that the Jews were more fragmented than they had ever been in their history, and she considered this a major cause of the disaster facing them. This is why she counteracted Haman by calling for the unification of her people. She was certain that the fragmentation of the Jewish people stemmed from their laxity in religious observance. We are told in the Midrash Esther Rabbah 7,18 that eighteen thousand five hundred Jews of Shushan participated in the feast king Ahasverus gave for the population of Shushan. According to this Midrash, Mordechai had warned the Jews not to attend the feast, and had told them that they had only been invited in order that their free-will participation would be used by Satan as an accusation against them before the Celestial Tribunal. The Jews did not heed Mordechai's warning, however. This demonstrated that whereas the Jews were fragmented in their relations with G–d and the Torah, they were united when seeking rapprochement with their Gentile rulers and neighbours. We know from Sanhedrin 103 that eating and drinking creates separation between those who had been close prior to their feast, whereas it brings together people who had previously been strangers. This is why the sin of the Jews who attended the feast was many times greater than it had been before when they were estranged from G–d without having become particularly close to the Gentiles. The only way to rehabilitate themselves was by means of another meal, the one Esther prepared for Ahasverus and Haman, which aimed at reversing the process of becoming close with the Gentiles. This is why the miracle of Haman being hanged occurred during the meal. 
  This is also why we are commanded to have a festive meal on Purim. This meal is not to be understood as merely a commandment to indulge our bodies. The mystical dimension of this commandment concerns the attachment of body to soul. Israel had sinned separately with body and soul; the festive meal on Purim is to bring together body and soul in the performance of G–d's commandment and thus to atone for the sins which led to our almost being destroyed by Haman.
  If you wish to understand the deeper meaning of the דבקות, attachment of body and soul and how this is achieved through the meal, examine what I have written in my treatise on the significance of the various letters in the Aleph Bet under the heading of the letter ק, where I have dealt with the קדושה, sanctity, element of eating. The meal is also somewhat reminiscent of the meal G–d is reputed to pepare for the righteous in the World to Come, when He will serve the Leviathan. I have also written about this in connection with the reason why Isaac  was ready to bless his son Esau. I have written about the deeper meaning of the statement in Avodah Zarah 11 that the tables of Antoninus (the Roman Governor of Palestine) and Rabbi Yehudah Ha-Nassi did not lack certain kinds of legumes either in summer or winter [although they were out of season and unobtainable to the population at large Ed.]. I have also written about the deeper significance of the Mitzvah of sending food-gifts to one's friends and of giving alms to the poor on Purim. I have devoted considerable space to discussing the question of how drunk one may or should get on Purim. On the one hand we have many statements of our sages warning against getting drunk and the dangers of excessive drinking, whereas on the other hand the Talmud seems to invite drunkenness on Purim when it says: חייב אינש לבסומי בפוריא עד דלא ידע בין ארור המן ובין ברוך מרדכי, "one needs to get intoxicated sufficiently so that one does not longer know the difference between 'cursed be Haman,' and 'blessed be Mordechai" (Megillah 7). I have commented on this at the end of the next sermon delivered on the occasion of פרשת זכור, where I indulged in a more jocular explanation of that statement.
  Basically, we are confronted here with two difficulties. 1) How is it possible that the sages have not only permitted but have encouraged indulgence in the evil practice of getting drunk? 2) Tossaphot wonder how it is possible for a Jew to become so drunk that he forgets the difference between cursing Haman and blessing Mordechai? We have quoted the entire line from the Talmud because of this question of Tossaphot. We also need to examine the language used in the Talmud to describe this degree of drunkenness. Real drunkenness is never referred to as בסומי, but rather as מבוסם (an expression describing the feeling of exhilaration resulting from drinking alcoholic beverages). It follows that a person who is not really drunk is called בסומי. I therefore believe that the sages -rather than encouraging excessive drinking- encouraged a minimal intake of wine or other alcoholic beverage. Since it is impossible for a Jew to fulfil the condition that he should forget the distinction between "cursed be Haman,” and "blessed be Mordechai,” the entire statement of the sages regarding the amount of drink on Purim becomes null and void. Nonetheless there remains the commandment to drink some intoxicating beverage.
  The purpose of our joy on Purim is to achieve harmony of body and soul, as we have mentioned. Our sages read this into the words ליהודים היתה אורה i.e. Torah, and ששון, i.e. joy that we have accepted Torah voluntarily in the fullest sense of the word. Torah is good for both body and soul, it has revealed as well as hidden meanings. The Torah contains elements that address themselves to the sphere of action and elements that address themselves to the sphere of meditation. Haman intended to wipe out the Jews bodily as well as spiritually. This is why the Book of Esther describes his plan as a dual one, i.e. להשמיד ולהרוג. The word להשמיד with its connotation of Shemad, alludes to the destruction of the Jews as a spiritual force, whereas the word ולהרוג, refers to the physical destruction of the Jews. This is the way the author of Manot Ha-Levi explains these words.
  To come back to the statement of our sages that the Jewish people accepted the Torah voluntarily only because of their miraculous salvation from Haman's decree. I can think of three reasons why this acceptance occurred at that particular time in Jewish history. The sin they had committed at the time when they went to participate in the feast given by king Ahasverus was one committed totally voluntarily. The Jews had not been under any physical or political pressure to attend that feast and eat forbidden foods. The Book of Esther 1,8 goes to some length to stress that there was no religious compulsion regarding the drinking of non-kosher wine, nor was there any compulsion to eat treif: on the contrary, the Megillah emphasises that the king had given orders לעשות כרצון איש ואיש, to comply with every guest's wishes" (ibid.). Our sages (Megillah 12) comment on this that the king had given orders to comply both with the wishes of Mordechai and those of Haman; this is the meaning of איש ואיש in the verse. The Jews, having sinned voluntarily, now resolved to accept Torah voluntarily as an act of rehabilitating themselves.
  A second reason may be the revolutionary change in the political configurations of the Persian Empire as a result of the toppling of Haman. Details of this are described in a book called Ma-amatz Koach in which the author examined the nature of the miracle in connection with his commentary on פרשת זכור. He comes to the conclusion that the miracle consisted of the extraordinary political revolution which resulted in the Torah-true Jew Mordechai becoming Prime Minister. The Jews realised that G–d could have performed a miracle on a much smaller scale in order to save them. There certainly had been no need to allow the Jews (with Royal assent) to kill antisemites to the tune of 75,800 people. When the Jewish people realised that they were no longer under anyone's rule except G–d's, it was certainly appropriate for them to reciprocate by accepting the yoke of Heaven without reservation. 
  You could counter that when the Jews left Egypt they found themselves beholden only to G–d and to no other political power. They therefore had every reason to accept the Torah without any mental reservation! They were not in exile as were the Jews of Persia even after Mordechai's becoming Prime Minister. In fact the very fact that we do not recite the Hallel prayer on Purim is proof that we remained in exile. The remarkable thing about the political reversal during the Purim episode was that although the Jews were subjects of a foreign nation, G–d demonstrated that He did not forsake His people even in exile, and that even the mightiest king who ruled over the greatest empire was forced against his will to appoint Mordechai and reverse the decree against the Jews he himself had signed. While Ahasverus was worried about how many more antisemites the Jews had killed in various provinces of his Empire (Esther 9,16), he was forced to acceed to Esther's request to allow the Jews of Shushan to seek out their enemies and kill them on the morrow of the 13th of Adar. 
  Another remarkable thing which did not escape the notice of the Jews was that Haman's decree had been promulgated after a careful astrological analysis of when the Jews would be most vulnerable, and after his drawing of lots that seemed to have confirmed that on that day the fate of the Jews would be sealed, yet there came this astounding reversal. All of these realisations contributed to the total change of heart of the Jews at that time and their enthusiastic acceptance of G–d and His Torah. I have found most of these remarks in Manot Ha-Levi. The author of that book draws some interesting comparisons with the astrological signs prevailing at the time of the Exodus.
  A third reason why the Jews accepted the Torah with alacrity after the fall of Haman will become clear after we first explain some of the differences between acting under compulsion and acting without any kind of duress. The author of Kliy Chemdah writing in the name of his father in his commentary on פרשת יתרו describes the acceptance of the Torah by the Jewish people at Sinai as an act of compulsion since it was an act of gratitude for all the supernatural miracles G–d had performed for them. He defines a voluntary acceptance of the Torah as an appropriate description of Jews embracing the Torah because they find themselves in dire straits. This is alluded to in Song of Songs 2,5: חולת אהבה אני, "For I am sick with love (when bereft of Your Presence)." Israel loves G–d and holds on to the Torah even when sick, i.e. when in distress such as in exile. This is in direct contrast to the Canaanites of whom it is recorded that they curse their deities when in trouble, as we know from Isaiah 8,21: "and he curses his god." I have seen this interpretation in a book called Shoshanat Amukim on the above quoted verse from Song of Songs. In view of this it is perfectly understandable that, due to their extreme distress the Jews under threat of annihilation from Haman embraced the Torah more than they ever had in their entire history. When such acceptance is contrasted with the normal human reaction of resentment and rebellion against protective powers which have failed one, one can truly describe such acceptance of the Torah as being totally voluntary.
  Having said all this, we can better understand the disagreement between the first three sages in the Mishnah Megillah 19 dealing with which parts of the Megillah a person must have heard or read in order to have discharged his minimal duty to hear the Purim story. All three sages are agreed that the part in which G–d's goodness is displayed after the Jews had embraced the Torah voluntarily is an essential part of such a reading. This is why none of these three sages accepts the view of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai that it suffices to read from the point where the king could not sleep (Esther 6,1), an event which took place after the first feast Esther gave for the King and Haman, i.e. after the Jews did תשובה. The view that the Megillah has to be read from the very beginning, i.e. describing the power of Ahasverus, is easy to understand. It points out that the treatment of the Jews by Ahasverus at that meal contrasted sharply with his treatment of his queen whom he had tried to force to display herself in front of his ministers. The king displayed self-control in his dealings with the Jews at the time, i.e. his תקף, consisted of what our sages have described in Avot 4,1: "Who is a hero? He who can control his passions." Since the king had displayed the ability to conquer his natural urges, the Jews likewise could do no less but overcome their reluctance to accept the yoke of the Torah and embrace the Torah voluntarily, joyfully. The sage who believes that it suffices to read the Megillah from the point where the outstanding personality of Mordechai is described, i.e. from where the text introduces Mordechai in Esther 2,5, appears to hold that the reason the Jews accepted the Torah voluntarily at that time is similar to the second reason I have listed, the revolutionary change that occurred in the political constellation and which brought Mordechai the Torah-true Jew, member of an exiled nation, to a position of such great power. We are to appreciate that the half-shekel contribution which is described in the Torah in connection with the allusion to the name Mordechai was the key to Haman's failure and Israel's survival. Once they realised this, the Jews naturally embraced Torah enthusiastically. The third view, which holds that it is sufficient to read from the part in which Haman's rise to power, i.e. the troubles he caused the Jews, is described (Esther 3,1), considers the failure of the Jews to offer to change their religion as tantamount to accepting the Torah voluntarily. Rabbi Yossi, the sage who held this view, assumed that wholesale conversion by the Jews would have saved them from Haman's decree.
  We note that all these sages were alert to the remarkable phenomenon of the free-will acceptance of the Torah by the Jewish people at that time. We therefore understand the nature of the joy we are commanded to experience on Purim. When the Megillah 9,15 describes the royal vestments Mordechai wore after he had been appointed Prime Minister, this was an expression of joy that the Jews had been saved, and has nothing to do with the need to serve G–d in fancy clothing. I have explained at length that the laws of שעטנז, the prohibition of wearing a mixture of wool and linen, may include an exhortation not to indulge in fancy dress, that a modest person refrains from wearing such attire.
  Although the salvation from Amalek in the days of Mordechai was great, it does not compare to the extent of the salvation in the future when the messianic age will be ushered in. As a result of this future battle between the forces of Amalek and G–d, G–d's name will emerge restored to its full glory, i.e. not י-ה, but י-ה-ו-ה. According to Manot ha-Levi this is the reason that the name of G–d is not mentioned at all in the Megillah. The absence of G–d's name is meant to bring home to us how incomplete the salvation of Purim was compared to what will occur in the future. We have to read פרשת זכור before Purim. This is equivalent to praying for the annihilation of Amalek, reminding ourselves that, all other evidence notwithstanding, the forces of Amalek are still around. One normally is asked to first think about what one hopes to accomplish before launching a project, in this case the final extinction of Amalek. 
  When Aaron was told to wear the gemstones on the two shoulder-pieces of the ephod לזכרון, "as a remembrance before G–d," this is an allusion to the last two letters in the Ineffable Name, the letters ו-ה. At a time when Haman, a powerful descendant of Amalek, was utterly defeated, we must remember before celebrating this defeat that a still greater defeat of Amalek is needed to usher in the messianic age.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  להעלות נר תמיד. The Torah here indicates that we will never be without the eternal light, even though the Temple may be in ruins due to our many sins. It remains a duty for us to kindle a symbolic eternal light in our synagogues which are called miniature sanctuaries in the parlance of our sages. This light is to burn from evening to morning and during the times when prayers are being recited. Nowadays prayers take the place of animal sacrifices. I believe that this Rabbinic commandment to light an eternal flame in the synagogue is mentioned in the famous book Menorat Ha-Maor. Rabbi Menachem Ha-Bavli wrote that the reason for this commandment is that since the sacrificial service had to be performed with particular intents, and the vestments were worn exclusively for such service, wearing them would jog the priest's memory ensuring he would have the correct thoughts when he performed his part of the service.
  ועשו בגדי קודש. Just as proper clothing bestows honour and dignity on the body of the wearer, so a body in proper condition bestows honour on the soul that inhabits it. This is the meaning of the words: בגדי קודש לאהרון אחיך לכבוד ולתפארת, "sacred vestments for your brother Aaron for dignity and adornment." According to this the word לכבוד alludes to Psalms 57,9: עורה כבודי, "Awake O my dignity!" It was in such a context that the famous Rabbi Yochanan described his clothes as מכבדותי, "that which bestows dignity upon me" (Shabbat 113). Whenever a person gets dressed he should train himself to think that he covers not only the nakedness of his body but also that of his soul.
  ולא יזח החושן מעל האפוד. Rabbi Menachem Ha-Bavli writes about this verse that the reason for this commandment is analogous to the principle that anyone who appoints a judge who is unworthy of the position is as though he had built an אשרה, a grove for idol worship (Sanhedrin 7). The Choshen is an instrument to obtain forgiveness for the sin of perverted justice, whereas the ephod is meant to obtain forgiveness for the sin of idol worship. We know this from Hoseah 3,4 who describes the absence of properly constituted authority in Israel in the same breath as he bemoans the absence of ephod and teraphim. Such absence was due to the sin of idol worship committed by Israel. The חושן, breastplate, was permanently attached to the ephod in order to discipline the sinners who passed by, since the Torah legislates that people have to be reminded by hearing about public execution for this crime in order that they should become afraid (Deut. 13,12 et al). We have a principle that if an object must be destroyed for legal reasons, then even if it still exists in an undamaged form it is legally considered as having been destroyed and must not be used for the pupose it had once been designed (Chullin 89). Being afraid of the penalty of idol worship has the desired effect. The exposure to the sight of the High Priest wearing the ephod on his back and the חושן in front over his heart, there would be a constant reminder of this warning to all who saw the High Priest.
  שלא לקרוע המעיל. Rabbi Menachem Ha-Bavli comments on this too. He sees allegorical meaning in the words לפיו סביב in the same verse. The rim, פיו, of the robe which must not be torn is a symbol for the High Priest's mouth. In view of the High Priest's function of restoring harmony between G–d and His people, he, more than anyone else, must be sure not to say anything that could impair the unity or innocence of the people. Every individual who claims to be a servant of the Lord must in this regard conduct himself on the same level as did the High Priest.
  
  Ki Tisa
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Commandment 106 stipulates that every male Jew above the age of 20 contribute a half-shekel every year to the Temple treasury.
  Commandment 107 requires the priests to sanctify themselves by washing their hands and feet prior to performing service in the Tabernacle or Temple.
  Commandment 108 states that the High Priest must be anointed with the special oil of anointing.
  Commandments 109 and 110 forbid the use of this oil for anointing a non-priest, and also forbid the making up of the same mixture for a purpose other than the one described here in the Torah.
  Commandment 111 forbids the making up of the mixture of spices for the incense offering by using the same ingredients or the same quantities as those prescribed in the Torah. Such a mixture must not be used for private purposes. The very intention to use such a mixture, even if one is only making it for oneself, is already culpable.
  Commandment 112 forbids the partaking by way of eating or drinking of the proceeds of any meal tendered by anyone for another deity. The Torah states (34,15): "Lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land (Canaan), for they will lust after their gods and sacrifice to their gods and invite you and you will eat of their sacrifices."
  Commandment 113 forbids the performance of work in the field during the Shmittah year; the Torah states (34,21): "You must abstain from work during ploughing time and during harvesting time."
  Commandment 114 forbids the eating together of meat and milk; the Torah (34,26) states: "Do not boil the kid in the milk of its mother."
  The author of the Chinuch has this to say on the subject: This verse prohibits the eating and other enjoyment of a mixture of meat and milk. Do not bother to ask why the Torah did not spell this prohibition out specifically by stating 'you must not eat, etc.,’ instead of prohibiting the boiling of this mixture. The answer is that this particular prohibition is unlike any other concerning forbidden food. When one partakes of other forbidden foods one does not become culpable unless one has enjoyed the eating of such food. In this instance the mere swallowing of the mixture, even if it does not afford one any enjoyment, is culpable. Such culpability occurs even if one swallowed such a hot mixture that instead of enjoying it one scalded one's palate. One is subject to the penalty of 39 lashes although one has suffered harm through the intake of the mixture. Our sages have stated this explicitly in Pesachim 28. This is the reason the Torah did not use the expression אכילה, eating, in connection with this commandment. Nonetheless the penalty of 39 lashes is applied only if the mixture was consumed boiled, the manner in which the Torah expressed the prohibition.
  Although our sages say in Chulin 115 that the repetition of this prohibition in the Torah on three separate occasions teaches that the mixture is forbidden to be eaten, to be boiled, and to be otherwise enjoyed, we count this prohibition in the list of prohibitions only as two (not three). The reason for this is that the prohibition to eat the mixture includes the prohibition to enjoy it in some other way. Our sages have stated in Pesachim 21 that wherever we find the wording לא תאכל, do not eat, this includes the prohibition of eating and enjoying it in another way. This is why the prohibition to benefit from something forbidden in any form is always couched in the expression "do not eat!" Eating is the most common form of enjoying or benefiting from forbidden food. It is also a necessary form of enjoying something. When the Torah speaks of the nobles of the Children of Israel "seeing a vision of G–d, and eating and drinking" (Exodus 24,11), the Torah compares their pleasurable experience of having such a vision to eating and drinking. 
  You might counter that if this is so, why does the Torah trouble itself to write this prohibition on three separate occasions when two would have sufficed. There is a simple answer. Clearly, if the Torah had written "do not boil, etc." only once, and would have written the second time "do not eat," I would have included the prohibition of other forms of enjoyment from the combined meaning of the two verses. In view of the fact that the Torah saw fit not to specifically mention "eating" at all, we could not have known that any kind of enjoyment or benefit from a mixture of meat and milk is forbidden. You must not ask why the Torah did not mention "do not eat," and save itself the third mention of this prohibition; I have already explained that the Torah had to indicate that the penalty of thirty-nine lashes applies even if the offender had not enjoyed the intake of this mixture. The Talmud's statement that the three repetitions serve to teach us the prohibition of 1) eating; 2) other kind of enjoyment, and 3) the prohibition to boil such a mixture, does not mean that the third mention of the prohibition in the Torah adds a new prohibition, but that we must learn from this that enjoyment of any kind from such a mixture is indeed forbidden, (though the word "eating" does not appear at all). Thus far the Chinuch.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  We know from Deut. 4,4: ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים כולכם היום, "And you who have cleaved to the Lord your G–d are all alive this day," that G–d has chosen us from all other nations and elevated us beyond all other languages, i.e. He brought us close to His great Name, something which is the innermost secret of Torah. This is the true meaning of תורת ה' תמימה, that G–d's Torah is perfect. Our attachment, דבקות, to G–d finds its expression in our performance of the commandments contained in the Torah. When we fulfil Torah precepts we serve as G–d's throne, we honour Him. Due to our sins, unfortunately, we have been exiled and the name of G–d is no longer "whole," as our sages have told us. 
  The subject of דבקות to the Ineffable Name can be approached from two directions. One approach is by pointing out how G–d employed His Ineffable Name to be active in the emanations which initiated the בנין, i.e. the work of the six days of creation commencing from the emanation תפארת "downwards," up to and including מלכות, the seventh emanation, the Sabbath. Israel's connection with the emanation תפארת through the choicest of the patriarchs -Jacob- in his capacity as ישראל, i.e. the major part of the מרכבה, (although the other patriarchs also serve as part of the מרכבה) because מטתו שלמה, his demonstrated ability to raise all his children loyal to G–d's precepts, has already been discussed elsewhere.
  Another way of looking at the דבקות which exists between Israel and G–d as the Ineffable Name has to do with the way Kabbalists view the width of the letters in that Name as alluding to the "four cubits" which play a role in the prohibition of carrying in the public domain on the Sabbath, and the "10 handbreadths" which play a similar role in the definition of what constitutes a private domain on the Sabbath. This number ten is represented in the Ineffable Name when it is spelled as words instead of as letters so that the total number of letters in the Ineffable Name becomes 10, such as י=יוד, ה=הא, ו=ואו, ה=הא. 
  This letter י=10, is an allusion to the 10 emanations which G–d in His Essence employed in order to be able to relate to a physical universe. The first letter of each of these ten emanations כתר, חכמה, בינה, תפארת, גדולה, גבורה, נצח, הוד, יסוד, מלכות, have the combined numerical value of the word ישראל, i.e. 541. [According to Pardes Rimonim, in his chapter dealing with definitons of certain terms, the name גדולה is used as a substitute for the emanation חסד, so that we may accept the numerical value of 541 for the combined ראשי תיבות. Ed.] When accepting this relationship between Israel and the emanations, the number of 600,000 Israelites at the time the Tabernacle was built assumes added significance because -according to Pardes Rimonim chapter 5 of his article on שער הצנורות, -there are a total of 600,000 such conduits, צנורות which originate in these emanations.
  We have previously demonstrated Israel's relationship to the Tabernacle; here we may add Israel's specific relationship to the Sabbath legislation. Seeing that the Tabernacle was a re-enactment of the work of creation, and Israel, as the carrier of the מרכבה, is closely intertwined with the forces represented in the construction of the Tabernacle, we can understand why the 39 kinds of work prohibited on the Sabbath are the ones which were employed in the construction of the Tabernacle. [In the interest of preventing confusion, I have taken the liberty of considerably abbreviating the intricate series of allusions used by the author in this presentation. I trust that I have preserved the thrust of his argument intact. Ed.] Because the Sabbath represents a mystical element of the Ineffable Name, we have been forbidden to carry items from the "private domain," i.e. the domain represented by the Ineffable Name as י, as we showed earlier, to the public domain (which represents the number 4, as cubits) as we described. In a nutshell, before G–d created the physical universe, there was only a single domain, G–d's domain, the private domain; since G–d created a universe, there is an additional domain, the public domain, since G–d- by having created the universe- "shared" part of His previously exclusive private domain with His creatures. The principle of private and public domain thus became part of the creation, and is reflected in restrictions placed on the interaction of these domains on the Sabbath. Israel is described in numerous Midrashim as the בת זוג, mate of the Sabbath; this is because both Israel and the Sabbath are holy. In this portion Betzalel and the other divinely inspired artisans are commanded to observe the Sabbath regulations even during such a holy endeavour as the construction of the Tabernacle, because the Torah (31,13) says: אך את שבתותי תשמורו, "But you must observe My Sabbath days." We will come back to this subject in our discussion of פרשת ויקהל and פקודי. 
  There is a general concensus among our sages that the Torah was given to the Jewish people on the Sabbath. Torah originated in Heaven, (i.e. the domain of תפארת,) the domain in which the concept of Israel is at home. This domain radiates spiritual values in all six directions. Moses told the Israelites in Deut. 4,36: מן השמים השמיעך את קולו ליסרך, ועל הארץ הראך את אשו הגדולה, ודבריו שמעת מתוך האש. "G–d made you hear His voice from Heaven in order to discipline you, and on the earth He showed you His great fire, and you heard His words out of the fire." The "earth" referred to here is the emanation מלכות. G–d told us that the emanations from תפארת up to and including the emanation מלכות, i.e. 7 emanations, were part of the revelation at Mount Sinai. These are the seven קולות, voices, that David refers to in Psalm 29 which we recite every Friday evening when ushering in the Sabbath. They are also an allusion to the tradition that this universe will continue for 6,000 years before it will experience a metamorphosis of 1,000 years after which the עולם הבא will be ushered in. The 1,000-year interval symbolises the concept of the Sabbath. We have discussed the dimension of "Time" on pages 208-209. When calculating the number of Sabbath days in the 6,000 years and adding the fact that the 1,000-year interval before the advent of עולם הבא is composed only of Sabbath days we get a total of 600,000 Sabbath days, or the same number as the number of the Jewish souls which experienced the Revelation and the building of the Tabernacle. This number also equals the number of letters the Torah is made up of.
  The author explains the prohibition of a private individual making anointing oil or incense, or even authorised people making up such incense in the amounts and proportions described here but intended for mundane purposes, as stemming from the fact that G–d has equipped the forces of the סטרא אחרא, the "left" side of the table of emanations, the side under the influence of Satan, with powers representing the equivalent or opposite of the powers of קדושה, holiness. We must therefore on no account provide those forces with additional ammunition by putting the tools of קדושה at their disposal. 
  
  The prohibition of eating from meals part of which had been used by the Gentile as an offering to his deity is similarly understood as accomplishing the reverse, namely of transferring elements of the סטרא אחרא to the right side of the emanations, thus undermining their holiness. By absorbing such food, the forces of קדושה active within the Jew would be weakened. The prohibition of social dinners with idol worshippers is compared to the prohibition mentioned in Shabbat 13 that a Nazirite should not even set foot in a vineyard because proximity to forbidden matters increases the chance of violation. The violator of the prohibition of eating from תקרובת עבודה זרה must observe a 7-day quarantine period during which he recovers his status of purity; this is comparable to the law relating to the woman after menstruation. This is an allusion to the superior spiritual status of Israel which derives from Israel's close link to the seven days of בנין. In order to be fit to again enter the sphere of these emanations one must free onseself of any residue of negative influences experienced as a result of partaking of the remains of such a תקרובת עכו"ם. 
  The Torah here appends a summary of the שמטה legislation as a reminder of the seven-year cycle and of the various levels of sanctity inherent in the number seven. All of this is, of course, part of the mystical dimension of the Sabbath, the seventh day. 
  The number six in the six hundred thousand reflects the six directions in which the forces of the emanation תפארת radiate their influence. Israel, as the root cause and purpose of the creative process, acquired so much importance that each Israelite had to be individually counted. The number six and multiples thereof are so significant that the Torah was given on the sixth day of Sivan (or according to some on the seventh day of Sivan). In either event, the date alludes to a similar concept. The difference is only whether we consider the emanation מלכות in which the process which had taken place during the prior six emanations became visible, as included in the symbolism. Our sages, in commenting on the word יום הששי in Genesis 1,31 have described the six days of creation as a period during which all the matter which G–d created remained in a state of suspended animation until, with the advent of the giving of the Torah and its acceptance by 600,000 Israelites, the universe really qualified to become enduring (Shabbat 88). When Moses appeared in the Celestial Regions in order to take the Torah to the Jewish people and the angels challenged him, G–d told Moses to take hold of His throne, as reported in Shabbat 88. This was possible only because by acceptance of the Torah (i.e. the Ten Commandments) by the Jewish people which made them carriers of G–d's מרכבה. Israel itself had become G–d's throne. When the Torah speaks about כי תשא את ראש בני ישראל, "When you elevate the Children of Israel,” the Torah wishes to tell us that the "counting" is proof of the Jewish people having been elevated spiritually.
  The above is similar to what I have written about elsewhere when I explained Genesis 4,7. There G–d explained to Cain that if he were to be good i.e. אם תיטיב, he could achieve a higher spiritual plateau, שאת. G–d told Cain that the alternative would be לפתח חטאת רובץ, that the חיות described in Ezekiel 1 which are carriers of G–d's throne perspire from their load, and that this perspiration is the river poured over the wicked people in purgatory, (cf. Chagigah 13). The word for perspiration is זיעה, the word G–d used when He told Adam that he would have to earn his livelihood the hard way (Genesis 3,19). [The poisonous nature of perspiration is also described in Bereshit Rabbah 78,1. Ed.] When Israel are free from sin, they act as the carriers of the throne of G–d; in fact they have been created to do just that. They are to occupy an exalted position as personified by the patriarchs who became carriers of G–d's מרכבה. When this idyllic state will have been achieved there will no longer be a purgatory since there will not be any perspiration by the חיות which were described in Ezekiel's vision as the carriers of the מרכבה. This is the vision or promise held out by G–d to Cain, that man has the potential of elevating himself to such a spiritual level. If man fails to achieve this level, the מרכבה will have to be carried by other creatures whose poisonous sweat creates גהנם.
  The word ראש, head, in 30,11, tells us that if we manage to become the "head," then we can achieve this spiritual elevation. This word ראש also contains the mystical element of the Sabbath within it, since it alludes to the completion of the בנין, the creative process in the Celestial Regions, i.e. the ראש, "head." The Sabbath, as stated, is the בת זוג, mate, of the Jewish people. The expression זוג של ראש, mate of ראש, alludes to the letters in the alphabet following (i.e. being the mate) the letters in the word ר-א-ש. These letters are ש-ב-ת. 
  As far as the half-shekel contribution was concerned every Jew being counted, i.e. every ראש was equal. Since the word תרומה appears three times in this paragraph, it is clear that the Torah alludes to three distinct contributions to be made. One of these contributions is a voluntary one, described by the Torah as given to G–d, i.e. לי, "for Me," such as when the Torah described the donations made for building the Tabernacle in 25,2. When you combine the word לי there, with the word ראש used by the Torah here, you have the word ישראל. When all the Jews have made both their mandatory and their voluntary contributions the result is שבת קודש לישראל, meaning that the 600,000 Israelites have each joined their mate, the holy Sabbath, i.e. the seventh day. Tragically, when the Israelites sinned by worshipping the golden calf, an episode introduced by the Torah (32,1) with the words וירא העם כי בשש משה, normally translated as "the people noticed that Moses was late," the word Boshesh can be read as ba-shesh that the people regressed to the spiritual level of six instead of seven. Our sages all refer to the word meaning that Moses was six hours overdue or something to this effect, as mentioned already by Rashi. Israel's conduct discredited both the name of G–d and His throne. Their action was the equivalent of unhitching one of the four animals pulling G–d's chariot. This is the meaning of ופני שור מן השמאל לארבעתן, "the face of an ox to the left of the four" (Ezekiel 1,10). The ox is one of the four חיות described in the vision as pulling the chariot. [You are aware that the connotation of "left" is one that symbolises the domain of Satan. Ed] 
  At the time when the Israelites were to rehabilitate themselves for the sin of the golden calf, 600,000 Jews each gave a half-shekel which alluded to the number 10, (a half-shekel contained 10 geyrah,) a number reminiscent of spelling the Ineffable Name fully, as words, making a total number of 10 letters. The following deals with an analysis of the mysticism contained in the legislation of the half-shekel, which the Torah also described as a whole shekel, though not a whole "sacred" shekel. The author quotes from the Zohar on the beginning of our portion, page 2 in the Sullam edition. The Zohar in turn quotes from a paragraph in the ספר יצירה which deals with the meaning of "Ten and not nine, Ten and not eleven," 
  a subject to which Pardes Rimonim devotes many chapters. He discusses the statement of this Zohar in chapter six of his שער עשר ולא תשע. [I shall endeavour to present a brief summary. Ed] Although we speak of ten emanations, the fact is that these emanations are to be viewed as radiations from above to a point below ending in the emanation מלכות. Just as the sun's rays are effective only when they are reflected by some solid object- something that our astronauts found out on their first trip into space so the spiritual value of the emanations would be totally incomplete unless what I may call the spiritual input, i.e. the radiation from Celestial Regions earthwards, are reflected- i.e. have evoked a response- by radiations travelling heavenwards. As a result we may speak of not ten emanations but twenty. The shape of the letter א comprising a letter י at the bottom, a letter ו in the centre, and again a letter י at the top symbolises what the Zohar has to say on our subject.
  
  Our author demonstrates by means of a number of allusions based on numerical values that by serving the golden calf the common numerical factors in the words Israel-Moses and Sinai were invalidated. These allusions depended on the use of the number 10 derived from the Ten Commandments which Israel violated when making and serving the golden calf. This relationship had to be restored after Israel repented of its errors. Counting the half-shekels helped restore the numerical equation which signalled Israel's and Moses' profound connection with Sinai and Torah which were expressed in numerical equations.
  Yalkut Shimoni, item 386, quotes Rabbi Yoshia son of Nachman the priest saying that G–d said to Moses: "go and count the Jewish people." Moses replied: "It is written (Hoseah 2,1) that the Jewish people will be as the sand on the beaches of the sea which is not subject to count; so how can You ask me to count the Jewish people?" G–d answered Moses that he had misunderstood the verse he quoted. If he wanted to know the number of Israelites all he had to do was to take the first letter of the name of each tribe, i.e. the ר from ראובן, the ש from שמעון, the ל from לוי, etc., and he would get the number of Israelites. This is to be understood as a parable. A money-changer had a junior assistant whom he told to count a certain number of coins. [These coins were apparently stacked in a number of rows of different denominations. Ed.] The assistant did not know how to go about counting these coins. His employer explained to him that all he had to do was to count the denomination of each row and then he would have no difficulty arriving at the total amount of money in the various rows. This is why G–d said to Moses to take the first letter in the name of each tribe as his point of reference. The letter ר of the name ראובן represents 200,000. The letter נ in נפתלי represents 50,000. The letter ש in שמעון represents 300,000. The letter י in יוסף stands for 10,000, the letter י in יששכר also stands for 10,000. The letter י in יהודה also stands for 10,000. The ז in זבולון stands for 7,000, whereas the ד in דן stands for 4,000. the ג in גד stands for 3000, whereas the ב in בנימין stands for 2000. The letter א in אשר stands for 1000. So far you have a total of 597,000 (from 11 tribes excluding Levi, using Joseph instead of Menashe and Ephrayim). The reason the total does not amount to 600,000 is because 3000 Jews were killed during the episode of the golden calf, when the Levites were instructed to execute those who actively worshipped the calf. G–d wanted Moses to make a fast count, so he would know how many Jews were executed by the Levites (or died at the hand of G–d when there was no evidence upon which a Court could have acted). Thus far the Yalkut Shimoni.
  There are numerous difficulties with this commentary. How could Moses say to G–d that he was unable to count the Jewish people, when the fact is that he did count them? Firstly, does not the Torah report that the count was 603,550 Israelites of the ages that were to be counted (Numbers 2,32)? Secondly, What did G–d mean when He told Moses that he had misunderstood the verse in Hoseah as meaning that the Jewish people were not capable of being counted? This implied that G–d did not intend them to be counted! Thirdly, The verse in Hoseah speaks about a prophecy intended for the distant future. This proves that at the present time the Jewish people were not so numerous that they could not be counted; there would come a time in the future, however, when they would be too numerous to be counted! 
  According to which yardstick are the tribes listed in this Midrash? They appear neither in order of birth nor in the groupings in which they camped around the Tabernacle The interruption of the list by the name of Naftali in between Reuben and Shimon seems altogether baffling? In a parallel version of the same Midrash in the Tanchuma the name of Naftali is actually listed immediately preceding that of Zevulun. We may answer that actually the list of their birth is used when it comes to the sequence of Reuben, Shimon. The same applies to the list of Yehudah, Issachar, Joseph. The reason that Joseph is appended at this point is that the author wanted to lump together all the names that represented the number 10,000. The name of Naftali would be justified to follow next, as set out in the Tanchuma; the sequence in the Yalkut is difficult. The sequence in the Yalkut cannot even be justified on the basis of a scale of reducing numbers, i.e. 300000, 200,000, 50,000, 10,000 etc. 
  What was the point of lumping together the three tribes whose names each begin with the letter א? Why, according to the version in the Yalkut, did G–d first mention the letter ל as an example for the tribe of Levi, whereas in the actual count the tribe of Levi is not even mentioned? Besides, once G–d had told Moses how to arrive at the number, what need was there to count them individually? Another difficulty in the Yalkut is the very number 597,000; we know that the correct number was 603,550! This last question may be solved by remembering that the actual count took place after the Day of Atonement, when G–d had forgiven the Jewish people for the sin of the golden calf. We have to simply assume that between the 17th of Tammuz, the date Moses descended from Mount Sinai, and the Day of Atonement some 80 days later, an additional 6,550 young men had attained the age of 20. The cut-off date for birthdays was the first of Tishrey, as explained by Rashi.
  In order to solve the various remaining difficulties, let me first explain the meaning of the Yalkut as well as the statement that Moses had deducted 3,000 who had been killed by the Levites during the operation referred to in Exodus 32,27-28. These three thousand people were the ones against whom there were valid witnesses, and who had been warned of the consequences if they persisted in what they were doing or were about to do. Further there was a number of people who died through a plague at the hands of G–d, because they could not be brought to trial legally. The Torah refers to these people in 32,35 without specifying their number. In view of this why did Rabbi Hoshiya in the Yalkut say that only 3,000 had died? Why does he give us the impression that only 3,000 were missing from the number of eligible young men prior to the sin of the golden calf? It certainly seems unlikely that those who died from the plague were all under twenty years of age, or that they were all part of the mixed multitude. It seems certain therefore that a number of thousands of young men of the age of 20 and over, all of whom belonged to the twelve tribes, died as a result of that plague. We must assume that the number of young men who reached their 20th birthday before the first of Tishrey in that year made up for those who had died as a result of the plague. Hence, once Moses knew the number of Jewish men of military age prior to the sin of the golden calf, he was able to account for the number who had died during this episode.
  Let us now take a closer look at the meaning of the Yalkut. When Moses received the instructions from G–d to count the Jewish people by means of their half-shekel contributions, he was not certain whether this was a command that applied to future generations on an annual basis and would form the basis of each Jew's annual contribution to the public offerings brought on their behalf by the priests, or whether it was a command that applied only this once. If the Torah wanted an annual census of the Jews to be undertaken in this fashion this could account for the command that the rich should not contribute more nor the poor less, so that the count would reflect the true number of people. If, on the other hand, the command was to be performed once only, then the reason for requiring exactly one half-shekel from both rich and poor could have been so as to enable Moses to know how many of the people had died as a result of the episode of the golden calf. In subsequent years, however, each Jew would be allowed to contribute his half-shekel for the purchase of animals for the public offerings without a count being made. The latter explanation happened to be the correct one. The only reason for not allowing the rich to contribute more (and the poor less), was so that the rich could not boast of having had his sins expiated because he was wealthy and contributed more to these public offerings.
  Moses understood that this commandment was for all time, an error on his part. He asked himself that if the commandment were a one-time commandment in order to let him know how many Jews had died as a result of the golden calf, he would not be able to see how such a count would provide proof positive for there had not been a previous census to compare the new figures with. While it is true that the Torah (Exodus 12,37) had given a round figure of 600,000 men of military age at the time of the Exodus, Moses did not know about this because the Torah had not yet been written down. Moses' question then was: "How can this commandment be performed in the future when the promise that the Jewish people will be so numerous that they cannot be counted will have become true?" Moses did not have a problem with the commandment as it applied at that time. G–d informed him that his difficulty was due to the faulty premise that there would be an annual census. The Israelites had to be counted now so that the number who had died during the tragic golden calf episode could be established. 
  Concerning the difficulty that Moses did not know how many there had been previously, G–d offered to help him by asking him to consider the first letters in the names of the respective tribal heads to serve as a guide. This left Rabbi Hoshiya with the problem of how to account for the missing number 3,000 from the total of 600,000 reported as having left Egypt. These missing 3,000 men were the ones who had been executed by the Levites as reported in the Torah. The reason they had never been alluded to in the number arrived at by combining the first letters of the names of the 11 tribes excluding Levi is that they had already been guilty of death when they came out of Egypt. Their death sentence had only been suspended temporarily. Presumably, their guilt had been that they had already then harboured thoughts of an idolatrous nature, but had only found an outlet for these thoughts during the episode of the golden calf. When Moses added up the total from the eleven letters of the respective tribal heads and saw that they amounted to 597,000 he realised what had happened to the missing 3,000; there was no good reason that such people should have been included in the number of true Israelites in the first place. Once Moses had found out that 600,000 male Jews of military age had left Egypt he knew how to account for the missing number. He also knew how many had turned 20 between the Exodus and the first of Tishrey.
  Israel are so beloved of G–d and vice versa that just because there is no intermediary between us and G–d, once we have sinned we are no longer called עם ה'. This theme is elaborated on in the Yalkut item 391 where Rabbi Berechyah is quoted as saying in the name of Rabbi Levi that we must understand this relationship by means of a parable. A king who owned a vineyard entrusted the vineyard to a leaseholder. As long as the leaseholder produced good wine the owner described the wine as his. When the leaseholder produced inferior wine, the owner referred to the inferior wine as that of the leaseholder. When the leaseholder became aware of this, he said to the king: "My lord king, why is the wine yours when it is is good, whereas when it is inferior it is mine? After all, it is yours regardless of whether it is good or inferior?" Something similar describes the relationship between the Jewish people and G–d and Moses their leader. When G–d first appointed Moses as the leader of the Jewish people (Exodus 3,10) He said to him: "Come, I shall send you to Pharaoh to free MY people the Children of Israel from Egypt." After the Jewish people made the golden calf, G–d said to Moses: "Go and descend, for YOUR people whom you have brought out of Egypt have become corrupted." Thereupon Moses said to G–d: "When they are sinful they are MY people, and when they are meritorious they are YOUR people? They are Your people and Your inheritance regardless of whether they are sinful or whether they are full of merits. Do not let Your anger blaze forth against them, etc,” Rabbi Symon added that Moses refused to budge until G–d had again called them "MY people." We know this from Exodus 32,14: "G–d renounced the punishment He had planned to bring upon HIS people."
  A slightly different version in Shemot Rabbah 42,6 attributes the reason that G–d used the term "your people" when speaking to Moses to the fact that it was the mixed multitude who initiated the sin of the golden calf. Moses had taken those people out of Egypt without having consulted G–d. When G–d spoke about wiping out the people in 32,10, He had these people in mind. Thereupon Moses began pleading with G–d in 32,11 asking G–d why He would be angry at the people of Israel, i.e. "Your people whom You have taken out of Egypt?" Moses implied that G–d did indeed have reason to be extremely angry at the mixed multitude, i.e. Moses' people. G–d then admitted that Moses had a point, and this is the meaning of 32,14 that G–d renounced His plans to punish His own people so severely. After reading both versions of the Midrashim it is clear that the Jewish people were still regarded as G–d's people even after they had participated in the sin of the golden calf. Not only that, but they bear the imprint of G–d's "seal" upon themselves as did their patriarch Jacob whom G–d had called “א-ל אלוקי ישראל, "the Lord of Israel called him א-ל." Moses, by contrast, was called א-לוהים. This whole reciprocal attachment, דבקות, is due to the intermediary Torah. It was the Torah which cleansed Israel from the residual pollutant of the original serpent when the Israelites stood at Mount Sinai.
  This residual pollutant returned to infect Israel as soon as they had made the golden calf. Whatever negative influences were found in the serpent were present also in the golden calf. This applies to the overall influence of the serpent or the golden calf respectively, and to some specific manifestations. To illustrate: Our sages say that most of mankind is guilty of robbery whereas a minority is guilty of sexual aberrations. All of mankind is guilty of אבק לשון הרע, different shades of slander.  The truth of this statement is demonstrated when we look at what happened during the episode of the golden calf. The slander became manifest when the perpetrators described the golden calf as "these are your gods, O Israel" (32,4). The sin of sexual excesses is alluded to in 32,6 where the Torah tells us: ויקומו לצחק, "they rose to dance" (the implication is an erotic one, compare Rashi). Regarding the sin of robbery, the Talmud tells us in Berachot 35 that anyone who enjoys the pleasures of this world without first reciting a benediction acknowledging and thanking G–d as the Provider of these pleasures is considered as having robbed both G–d and Israel (alternate version: father and mother). We also have a verse in Proverbs 28,24, which describes a person who robs father and mother -while claiming that such action is no sin- as a companion to a destroyer. The Talmud goes on to describe G–d as our "father," and the כנסת ישראל, "the spiritual concept of the people of Israel," as the mother. As a practical example of such a destroyer the Talmud cites king Jerobam who destroyed the affinity of the people of Israel with their Heavenly Father by placing golden calves on the way to Jerusalem, preventing the pilgrims from making the pilgrimage to the Temple without first making an obeisance to these calves. We therefore see that the construction of the golden calf was an act of robbery vis-a-vis G–d. It robbed Israel of the abundance that G–d used to shower upon them. Expressed differently; The שפע, abundance from on high, was withheld because of פשע, sin. Our failure to acknowledge G–d's gifts would make us guilty of a similar sin. As a result of such considerations Moses explained to the Levites who were charged with carrying out the executions of the idol worshippers that by killing the guilty they were actually the cause of G–d bestowing His blessing on them (32,29). We therefore notice that the three sins we mentioned were all part of the episode of the golden calf. We find an allusion to this in the text in the very letters of the word עגל as acronyms for the three types of sin, i.e. עריות, גזל, לשון הרע. When our sages stated that there is no sin for which the penalty does not include some part of the punishment for the sin of the golden calf (Sanhedrin 102), they simply meant that since every sinner belongs to the ones guilty of either the sins most people are guilty of, or to the ones a minority are guilty of, such a person has once again become guilty of part of the sin committed by the Jews during the episode of the golden calf. We find the same in the story of the encounter between the serpent and man in גן עדן. Adam and Eve took fruit which did not belong to them; they were guilty of robbery. Eve was guilty of a sexual offence because the serpent mated with her. The serpent was guilty of slander and seduction, a sin which is irreversible.
  The sin of the golden calf involved three distinct kinds of death penalty. Those who had been warned by reliable witnesses were executed by the Levites. Those who worshipped the golden calf but could not be executed judicially because although there were witnesses against them they had not been properly warned, were killed by a dragon; those who were guilty but against whom there were no valid witnesses died by the plague. Something similar happened in the case of the seduction by the serpent. Adam had been warned not to eat, the penalty spelled out. G–d Himself was the witness in his case. Eve was guilty because G–d had stated in Genesis 2,24: "Therefore man leaves the home of his parents and cleaves to his wife." Rashi sees in this the prohibition of the different kinds of incest that apply to all of mankind. However, she had not been warned that the penalty for contravening this law was death. The serpent's sin was committed with neither forewarning nor the testimony of an independent witness against it. We have a halachic rule that one does not use any argument that can serve as an extenuating circumstance on behalf of a seducer (Sanhedrin 29). Adam rehabilitated himself by offering an ox, as explained by our sages (Shabbat 28). When the Jewish people made the golden calf they reversed what Adam had done by exchanging the true G–d for the image of an ox.
  Yalkut Shimoni item 386 at the beginning of our פרשה points out that the last paragraph in the previous פרשה mentions that Aaron used the corners קרנות of the altar to perform the rites of atonement on the Day of Atonement (30,10). The Hebrew word for corners is קרן, horn, the same as the "horn" of the ox. G–d told Moses to use this method of atonement because Israel had sinned with the golden calf. Moses queried that the Torah had stated that this method was effective only "once a year," i.e. on the Day of Atonement (ibid.) G–d replied that Moses should erect it (the altar) immediately, as soon as he had performed the counting of the Children of Israel. Rabbi Joshua son of Nachman said that G–d told Moses: "Go and count the Children of Israel!" Moses replied that we have two verses. In one of them the Israelites are compared to the dust of the earth, and in the other they are compared to the sand on the beaches of the sea. Both verses point out that one cannot count all the Israelites. In view of this, how could he be expected to carry out such a command? G–d told Moses that he was mistaken, that if he wanted to find out the number all he had to do was to use the first letters of each of the tribal heads' names etc., as we pointed out earlier. All G–d had intended was to find out how many of the Israelites had died as a result of the episode of the golden calf. Those who survived were to give a ransom for their souls (lives, 30,11). When Moses heard this he became afraid and said: עור בעד עור וכל אשר לאיש יתן בעד נפשו (Job 2,4), "Skin for skin; all that man has he will give up for his life." [Moses did not yet realise that G–d required only a half-shekel from each person as the ransom for his life. Ed.]
  Rabbi Yehudah son of lla-i said that Moses originally thought that the ransom for a person's life was one talent of silver since it is written in Kings I 20,39: "it will be your life for his, or you will have to pay a talent of silver." Rabbi Yossi believes that the amount of ransom appropriate is the amount of 100 pieces of silver, and that we compare this to the case of a groom who accused his bride of not having been a virgin (Deut. 22,19). The sin of the Jewish people at the time was comparable to that of the מוציא שם רע, because the people proclaimed "These are your gods O Israel, which have taken you out of Egypt," a clear defamation of G–d's reputation. Thus, every Jew should have been required to pay 100 shekels. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish felt, that the amount of the ransom payment should be compared to the person who has raped a young woman in Deut. 22,29 who is required to pay a ransom of 50 shekels to the father of the rape-victim. The sin of the Jewish people at the episode of the golden calf was akin to that of the rapist. We, who have been told "You shall not have any other G–d," have subjected G–d to the pain of our making another god for ourselves. It is therefore appropriate for each Jew to ransom himself to the tune of 50 shekels. Rabbi Yehudah bar Symon said that the appropriate ransom payment should be derived from the Torah's legislation dealing with the ox which has gored someone's slave and the owner of which has to pay 30 shekels to the owner of the slave who was killed (Exodus 21,32). The comparison is fitting because the Israelites demeaned themselves to be no better than the image of the ox which they worshipped. They had devalued themselves, so to speak, so that their lives were no longer worth more than 30 shekel.
  G–d realised what was in Moses' heart and reassured him by saying that not a talent of silver, not 100 shekels, etc. would be required but only one half shekel. 
  How did our Rabbis know what was in Moses' mind at the time? Another difficulty is that originally the Torah had said that a life cannot be ransomed at all, whereas later we hear about four different amounts as appropriate in different circumstances! Besides, how did G–d answer Moses' problem of knowing what the half-shekel was by showing him a coin of fire, as our sages say in Shemot Rabbah? 
  Why did G–d not simply say: "they shall give a ransom for their lives in the amount of a half-shekel each?" Furthermore, the word איש in the verse also seems totally superfluous! Actually, G–d wanted Moses to have a chance to reflect in order that the process of atonement could begin. If the Torah had simply said: ונתנו איש, "They shall give a person," I would have concluded that there is no such thing as ransom-money to redeem a capital crime. G–d added: זה יתנו, "This they shall give" (there is such a thing as monetary ransom). I have explained elsewhere that when G–d imposes a punishment this must not be viewed as something that represents Him, the One who gave the commandment, but it should be seen as the natural consequence if the person who was commanded to do something failed to carry out that commandment. The reason this is so is to limit the scope of the punishment. Just as there is a גבול, limit, to our lives, so the punishment is limited in duration. When we speak about the reward for commandments performed, however, the process is reversed. The reward originates with the Law-giver. Just as He is not bound by any restrictions, so the scope of the reward for observing His commandments is unlimited. All this is hinted at in the word איש. If the penalty were directly related to the Law-giver, it would have to be unlimited in scope, i.e. it would consume the guilty person איש totally; he would have to die. Allowing the person in question to expiate his sin by a ransom payment demonstrates that the penalty is related directly only to the person who has committed the sin, not to G–d.
  We have shown earlier that the sin of the golden calf comprised four sins, i.e. idol worship, robbery, sexual licentiousness and slander. The four different teachers of the Talmud who are quoted in the Midrash as holding different views concerning the amount of the ransom payment simply address themselves to a different one of the four sins which formed part of the episode of the golden calf and which are alluded to in the respective letters of the word עגל. 
  We need not assume that the sages disagree. The ransom payment for someone guilty of slander is derived from the example of the groom who slandered the reputation of his bride; the ransom payment for sexual licentiousness is derived from the amount listed as due from the rapist. The ransom payment for robbery is derived from the example of the owner who allowed his ox to gore the slave of his neighbour. The ox which Adam sacrificed corresponded to the lesson learned at the beginning of the Book of Leviticus that when one offers a sacrifice it must be מכם, must belong to you, cannot be something stolen (Leviticus 1,2). G–d told Moses: "I am very merciful;" He showed him a coin of fire as a symbol that an offering burned up on the altar is ריח ניחוח, acceptable to G–d as a sweet-smelling fragrance. In other words, the half-shekel contribution by each Israelite was to be used for the purchase of animals to be offered as sacrifices, as Adam had done at the time he expiated for his sin.
  To get back to the subject of דבקות, the affinity between us and G–d and the reciprocal relationship between Israel and G–d as portrayed by the ten, respectively 20 emanations we mentioned on page 638. Whereas the plain meaning of this statement in the Zohar remains unaffected, the story in the Yalkut adds a number of additional allusions to the mystical meaning of this דבקות. The numbers 200,000, 300,000, and 50,000 allude to three of the names of G–d i.e. א-ל, א-להים, י-ה-ו-ה. The word א-להים when spelled as follows: א-ל, א-לה, א-להי, א-להים, totals 199 plus the name itself =200. When you write א-להים using the word method you obtain the number 300, i.e. אלף, למד, הי, יוד, מם. You also obtain the equivalent of 300 when you apply the system of א"ת, ב"ש to the way you write the Ineffable four-lettered Name, thus: מצפץ=300. Since we are not allowed to even contemplate G–d as Essence, an alternate method of writing His name indicates the difference between G–d as Essence and G–d as a symbol of a concept that we may contemplate. The number 50 alludes to the letters י-ה of the Ineffable Name which we are allowed to contemplate. You view this name as a combination of the two letters i.e. 10 times 5=50. The Ineffable Name also includes within it the name א-ל, such as when you write the Ineffable name as the name that amounts to 63 instead of 72. The spelling then is 15=הי, 13=ואו, 15=הי, 20=יוד, total=63. The other letters of the heads of the 11 tribes in the Yalkut Shimoni also allude to concepts of G–d's management of our history, such as the letter ז which alludes to the mystical dimension of בנין, and the fact that G–d's “seven eyes” sweep the universe the letter ד to the four חיות supporting the throne of G–d, the letter ב, to the concept of ברכה, the letter ג to the three classes of angels who sing G–d's praises in the Celestial Regions. The three letters י and the letter א together account for the name א-ל.   דביקות ה',  close affinity to G–d, is the reverse of idol worship. The angels singing G–d's praises in the Holy Tongue are the opposite of לשון הרע, slander. The letter ב stands for ברכה, blessing, which is the opposite of גזל, robbery, and is the reason the Torah does not start with the letter א which is short for ארור, "cursed." The letter א symbolises the union of man and wife, i.e. והיו לבשר אחד, "They shall become one flesh" (Genesis 2,24). This union is the opposite of גלוי עריות, indiscriminate mating between men and women. The reason that the names of the tribal heads are used for this parable is that they represent a strong affinity to G–d.
  This subject matter is alluded to further in the paragraph (33,12) beginning with the words: "See, You have said to me: 'Lead this people forward, but You have not made known to me whom You will send with me.'" Why does the Torah begin this paragraph with the word ראה? Rashi comments that the word is to be understood as "concentrate your eyes and heart on your words." We still need to understand what exactly Moses was meant to concentrate on. Moses' statement that G–d had not informed him whom He would send with him is also difficult. The Torah had already mentioned in 33,2 that G–d would send along an angel who would expel the Canaanites, etc. Rashi uses the word לא הודעתני in verse 12 as meaning that Moses was not satisfied with the angel G–d had mentioned in 23,20 as accompanying the Jewish people on their journey. This seems a forced explanation. Another difficulty is the meaning of ידעתיך בשם וגם מצאת חן בעיני in our verse. Besides, what is the connection between the words: "for this is Your people" at the end of 33,13, and G–d's reply: "My Presence will go, and I will lighten your burden?" Why does Moses demur saying: "if Your Presence does not go" in 33,15, when G–d had already promised that His Presence would go with the people? The plural used for G–d's Presence in both instances, i.e. ילכו, and הולכים is also unusual! The cumbersome verse 16 ובמה יודע אפוא וגו' is also difficult.
  I have already written in my introduction that we are G–d's people and that we cleave to His Ineffable Name; I have also used the parable by Rabbi Berechyah showing that we remain G–d's people even when we have sinned and that Moses refused to budge until G–d again referred to Israel as "My people." Moses objected to G–d suddenly saying to him in 33,12: "Lead up this people," which implied that the Jewish people were no longer G–d's people. By using the expression "Look here, i.e. concentrate on what you have said, Moses referred to a previous occasion when G–d had said to Moses: "go and descend, for your people have become corrupted." Now, when G–d is supposed to have forgiven, He did not say: "Go and lead My people, etc.,” but all He said was "go and lead up this people!" We have learned that the stature of the prophet is closely intertwined with the spiritual level of his people. When the Jewish people's moral level declined, G–d told Moses to reduce his own stature in accordance with the reduced stature of his people. Now that G–d signalled that Moses' standing had again risen, Moses could not understand why something parallel had not occurred with the standing of his people. Moses therefore wondered whether he had misunderstood the meaning of the words העל את העם הזה, as an expression of G–d's forgiveness, and that all it meant was what the Torah said in connection with 33,1 לך עלה מזה אתה והעם, which Rashi explains as a call to go up to the land of Canaan which is topographically on a higher level than all other countries. The statement in 33,2 certainly indicated that G–d's personal Presence was henceforth not going to be with the Jewish people in their journey and that this is why He said in 23,30: "I shall send My angel ahead of you to protect you on the way, etc."
  Moses therefore had good reason to complain that G–d had not indicated whom exactly He was going to send with him now -since the promise in 23,20 referred to the angel who would accompany Joshua when he invaded the land of Canaan. When the angel arrived in Joshua's time he identified himself as the angel G–d had spoken about in 23,20 saying "now I have come" (Joshua 5,14). He implied that he had not had permission to come during the lifetime of Moses. Although Moses had not yet been told that Joshua would lead the Jewish people in the conquest of the Holy Land and still thought that he himself would conduct that campaign, he did realise that the statement by G–d that He would send an angel presaged a sin on the part of the Jewish people and that as a result the שכינה would announce that G–d's direct Presence would not accompany them, just as Rashi explains. At that time Moses thought that the sin referred to would be something Israel would become guilty of in a far distant era, a time when the Temple would be destroyed and would subsequently be rebuilt and that at the time of this future redemption an angel would accompany the people of Israel back out of exile. He was certain, however, that as far as the present was concerned, G–d personally would lead the Jewish people in their ascent to the land of Canaan. This is why he was non-plussed saying: "You have not informed me," because he was not willing to accept the promise in 32,2 as, adequate. He explained the reason for his dissatisfaction with the words: "You have told me that I am persona grata." You might ask why it should have mattered so much whether an angel or G–d's personal presence would accompany the Jewish people on this journey. Moses reiterated that G–d had told him that he had become close enough to His Ineffable Name, i.e. ידעתיך בשם. This expression reflected the דבקות, affinity with G–d, which had been achieved. When the people left Egypt the plan had been to march to the land of Canaan without delay, a land in which the Ineffable Name is at home. 
  When Moses added the words וגם מצאתי חן בעיניך, the word וגם suggested that the Presence of the Ineffable Name extended not only to the Holy Land itself but also to the journey of the Jewish people in the direction of the Holy Land. Moses felt entitled to the דבקות ה' which would earmark the relationship between G–d and Israel in the Holy Land to earmark their relationship already at this time. The practical proof of that relationship would be that G–d personally would accompany the Jewish people on their journey. Moses asked for a revelation assuring him that such דבקות ה' would become manifest as of now when he said: הודיעני נא את דרכיך ואדעך בשם, "please let me know Your ways that I may know Your Ineffable Name (even when You go with with us now)" [combination of parts of verses 13 and 16. Ed.] Moses added: "In this way You will demonstrate that this nation is Your people."
  G–d responded: "Indeed My Presence will go." To the request that this should occur already at this time, G–d said this will occur at a time והניחותי לך, "when I will will grant rest, i.e. in the land of Israel itself, not on the journey." A parallel meaning of the word והניחותי may be found in Deut. 25,19, in conjunction with the duty to wipe out Amalek after G–d has given the Jewish people rest, i.e. בהניח from all their enemies becomes operative. You might ask that if G–d had already told Moses that His Presence in the form of the Ineffable Name would be revealed once the Jewish people were in the land of Israel, what would have been the advantage if Moses had been allowed to bring the Jewish people to the land of Israel? In either event there would be a manifestation of the Ineffable Name in the land of Israel? Under the leadership of the angel who accompanied Joshua G–d's Presence as the Ineffable Name became manifest only within the precincts of the Holy Temple. Had Moses been allowed to bring the Jewish people into the Holy Land, such a presence of the Ineffable Name would have been manifest throughout the Holy Land, not only within the precincts of the Holy Temple. 
  It was concerning this that Moses pleaded that if G–d was not prepared to accompany the Jewish people immediately in His manifestation of the Ineffable Name, as evident by the fact that G–d had employed the future tense פני ילכו, "My Presence will go," how would he, Moses, know that he indeed enjoyed G–d's full measure of confidence if G–d did not already go with the Jewish people now, i.e. אם אין פניך הולכים, "If Your Presence does not go now? 
  G–d responded to this last request of Moses by saying in verse 17: גם את הדבר אשר דברת אעשה, "I shall also comply with the matter you have mentioned." On the one hand G–d would go with the Jewish people now, and He would prove that He had granted Moses a superior degree of intimacy; this would become manifest once the Jewish people would be in the land of Israel. In verse 17 Moses first mentioned the fact that he had found favour, חן in the eyes of G–d, i.e. on the way to the Holy Land, before he mentioned that he had been found worthy of intimacy with G–d on the basis of His Ineffable Name, ואדעך בשם, i.e. in ארץ ישראל. He did so because, chronologically speaking, the journey preceded Israel's arrival in the Holy Land. Earlier, when he prayed (verse 12), he had first asked for a sign in ארץ ישראל, something not to be granted immediately; once G–d would have obliged, he would have asked for more, i.e. a display of grace already now while the Jewish people were still in the desert. This is what he meant when he said ונפלינו אני ועמך מכל העם, "so I and Your people will be distinguished over and beyond any other nation on earth." 
  He prayed for the דבקות to become manifest already before the conquest of the land of Canaan. As long as Israel carries out G–d's wishes this affinity exists, and the name of G–d as well as the throne of G–d is complete. When Israel sinned with the golden calf, one of the four supports of G–d's throne, i.e. the פני השור, "slipped," causing G–d's throne and His name to become impaired. As long as Israel carry out G–d's desires, they are the carriers of the Presence of G–d, they serve as the throne. As long as such a situation continues they are called אדם, i.e. they represent the פני אדם mentioned in Ezekiel's vision as one of the four carriers of G–d's throne (Ezekiel 1,10). The study of the Torah is one leg of the four legs supporting G–d's throne, the one called פני השור. This is based on ורב תבואות בכח השור (Proverbs 14,4). Our sages have said that one should apply oneself to Torah study as an ox applies himself to the yoke (Avodah Zarah 5). When it comes to the practical performance of what is written in the Torah one should behave like a lion and an eagle, as we know from Rabbi Yehudah ben Teyma in Avot 5,20. The Rabbi refers to the sharp eye possessed by the eagle and the courage possessed by the lion, a function of the heart. The Torah itself warns us not to allow our eyes and our hearts to make us stray from the path of Torah (Numbers 15,39), evidence that these two organs are of prime importance in carrying out G–d's commandments. Should Israel fail to live up to these obligations, also these two legs of G–d's throne would collapse.
  We will deal with the significance of the שור in connection with פרשת פרה, which is usually read on the Sabbath we read פרשת כי תשא. Due to our being in exile on account of our many sins, our preoccupation with Torah is unfortunately greatly reduced; this situation will not be drastically changed until the time of the final redemption when the whole world will become filled with the knowledge of G–d (Isaiah 11,9). Our sages state that though generally speaking the Torah is referred to as masculine, when the Torah is spoken of in connection with exile it is referred to as feminine such as in Deut. 31,21 כי לא תשכח מפי זרעו, “For she will not be forgotten by its descendants." When Torah is thus "weakened," it assumes the image of a feminine שור, i.e. a cow. This is the mystical dimension of the פרה אדומה, the red heifer and of the legislation concerning its treatment. We view the red heifer as the instrument that is to expiate for the fact that the Torah has been downgraded from the image of the male (ox), to the female (cow). The ash of the red heifer purifies a person who has been ritually contaminated by contact with a dead body or exposure to the enclosed airspace harbouring a dead body. 
  At the time the Jewish people accepted the Torah they were freed from the need to die, i.e. from the influence of Satan. They had become totally free from the influence of other nations as alluded to in Psalms 82,6: "I had taken you for divine beings, sons of the Most High, all of you; but you shall die as men do, fall like any prince." This is an allusion to death and exile. This sin of the golden calf is the reason that even when we experienced redemptions at a later stage, such redemption is always characterised as being feminine, incomplete. When we give thanks for such a redemption we sing שירה חדשה, a new song (feminine gender) as distinct from when we received the Torah where the Torah was referred to as masculine. An example for the dual function of the פרה is found in Samuel 16,12 where the cows are described as וישרנה, "they walked straight (masculine form). Kimchi points out that the grammar here is a combination of the masculine and the feminine gender, i.e. the ending is feminine, whereas the first half of the word is masculine. This is an allusion to the שיר, song, which is sometimes masculine and sometimes feminine as the situation requires. We have written more about this both in our treatise on פרשת פרה, on פרשת ויקהל-פקודי, as well as on פרשת חוקת.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ראה קראתי בשם בצלאל בן אורי בן חור. Anyone who is a leader of the Jewish people has to be endowed with superior wisdom and needs to be approved for his task by both G–d and the people whom he represents. Rabbi Yochanan made the appointment of communal leaders subject to a referendum (Berachot 55). He based this ruling on the verse quoted above (31,2). If the leader has found G–d's approval, why would he also need the people's approval? The Talmud describes there that G–d asked Moses if Betzalel was acceptable to him to which Moses replied "If he is acceptable to You how can he not be acceptable to me?" G–d explained that Betzalel must also have his approval. When Moses subsequently asked the Israelites if Betzalel was acceptable to them they answered that if he was the choice of both G–d and Moses he must certainly be their choice also. Israel's response seemed to lack logic, especially the statement that if a leader was acceptable to G–d he must be even more acceptable to them!
  Actually, when we speak about a person being הגון, suitable for a certain task, such suitability consists of three aspects. Firstly, a person's performance must meet the standards expected of him. Secondly, sometimes a person performs a task in a manner totally satisfactory to G–d, but the people who observe the work performed are not satisfied that the work meets the specifications (because they are not sufficiently expert). Our sages have already taught us that there are occasions when a violation of one of G–d's commandments which was motivated by lofty ideals may rank ethically higher than a performance of a commandment in an off-handed manner (Horiyot 10). These two aspects of suitability are visible to all. There is a third aspect, namely the intention of the person carrying out the task as a representative of the community which is not visible to anyone except G–d. When Moses said to G–d that if Betzalel was acceptable to Him he would be acceptable to him, Moses, he referred to that part of acceptability which only G–d knows about, namely, whether Betzalel was properly motivated. A man free from defect in areas which are not subject to human scrutiny will certainly take care to be free from defects in matters subject to scrutiny by his peers. 
  The Israelites told Moses that if Betzalel's suitability had passed G–d's standards in areas that only G–d was competent to judge, and had passed Moses's standards in an area which Moses was competent to judge, then they were prepared to accept him even if in their own judgment he committed errors. They were willing to concede that in such a case their own judgment must be at fault. 
  On the same folio of the Talmud as that mentioned above, Rabbi Yochanan said that there are three fateful events which G–d announces personally. They are: "famine, good harvests, and the name of a good economic leader of the people." He brings scriptural proof for each one of these three. The verse cited to support the announcement by G–d of a suitable economic leader is our verse appointing Betzalel.
  Why does G–d make a point of making these three announcements personally? We understand that the provision of a good harvest is something that G–d announces personally, because He did not entrust the key to rain to an intermediary, [it is one of three keys that G–d did not hand over to an intermediary Taanit 2 Ed.] The reason is that providing a livelihood for all creatures is as difficult a task as that of splitting the sea of reeds, something that could not be entrusted to an intermediary. Why did G–d reserve the right for Himself not to entrust such announcements as who would be leader, or that there would be a famine to an intermediary such as a prophet? I believe the reason is that if such events were to be announced by an intermediary the people would have such difficulty in justifying these choices that they would be deprived of their moral value. We find something analogous in Sanhedrin 26 where public announcements are to be made about who is unfit as a witness according to Rabbinic strictures, though according to Mosaic law such a person's testimony would be acceptable. Rabbi Alexandri in Megillah 17 interprets Psalms 10,15: שבור זרוע רשע, "break the arm of the wicked," as a reference to the price gouging that occurs during famine. G–d personally announced that the world's sustenance was due to the merit of Chanina who personally lived on the most frugal diet possible. People do not always understand why certain persons have achieved economic distinction and others have not. It is therefore necessary for G–d to announce that those persons who have achieved such wealth have done so because of G–d's own considerations and not because of their own innate ability. 
  We find that Moses was most insistent that G–d personally proclaim who would look after Israel's temporal needs; the Torah quotes Moses as using strong language in this regard in Numbers 27,15. Moses' request is introduced with the most unusual wording: וידבר משה אל ה' לאמור, Both the word וידבר, and the word לאמור are unusual. To whom did Moses expect G–d to relay his words? The Ari zal suggests that Moses was adamant that all the various layers of the heavens be informed who Israel's פרנס, economic leader would be.
  לחשוב מחשבות לעשות. There is a hint here that one should contemplate the deeper significance of the commandment one is in the process of performing.
  ויתאבלו ולא שתו איש עדיו עליו. The fact that the Israelites took off their jewelry while in morning teaches all of us that at a time when we contemplate our general conduct and examine our sins we should go into mourning, cry, sit on the ground, and in exchange for sackcloth remove costly garments, all in sorrow for having killed our soul through sin. Perhaps this will cause G–d to have pity on us.
  והיה כל מבקש ה' יצא. The famous commentator Baal Haturim sees in these words a hint that in order to study Torah one must be willing to leave one's home and exile oneself. Another hint is the frequently recorded saying of our sages: צא ולמד, "leave and study!" 
  I have explained the meaning of the thirteen facets of G–d's relationship with errant man in a different context. I wish to add only that when man adopts the virtues G–d showed Moses, the chances are that G–d will respond in kind.
  ויראו מגשת אליו. Our sages comment on the debilitating power of sin evident from this verse. Before the sin the Jewish people were able to face the שכינה without flinching. Now, after having sinned, they were afraid to even approach Moses who, after all, was only an intermediary. We must learn from this how important it is to purify ourselves, to sanctify ourselves so that all residues of impurities due to sin are expunged. Once we have removed all traces of sin, the good we do will have its desired impact.
  
  Vayakhel, Pekudei
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Commandment 115 prohibits the kindling of fire on the Sabbath, based on לא תבערו אש בכל מושבותיכם ביום השבת, which our sages (Yevamot 6) understand to mean that the penalty of death by burning must not be carried out on the Sabbath. The same ruling applies to all other kinds of death penalties. The מכילתא justifies the derivation of this ruling from our verse in the following words: "Making a fire on the Sabbath was included in the general prohibiton of work on the Sabbath and was singled out to teach that just as burning is one of the categories of death penalties which the Torah has legislated but which does not override the Sabbath, so also the other types of death penalties do not override the Sabbath."
  Our sages also add to that an additional rule: We learn from the singling out of a particular work-prohibition that if a person violates more than one of the 39 work-prohibitions on the Sabbath he is liable for a separate penalty for each one of such transgressions. The Yerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin 4,6 derives from the words "in all your dwellings," that no Court is to sit on the Sabbath.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The Sabbath in our world is a reminder of a world which is totally Sabbath-oriented, a world in which the souls rest and receive their eternal reward. This is the region in which the Heavenly Sanctuary houses the glory of G–d, a region "opposite" the site of the Sanctuary on earth. Because every single Jew has a share in the World to Come, Moses assembled the entire Jewish people when he made this pronouncement. 
  We have discussed the kabbalistic concept of שיעור קומה in our commentary on פרשת תרומה; the deeper significance of these allusions is bound up with what the משכן represents, the word קומה being a re-arrangement of the word הוקם in Exodus 40,17: הוקם המשכן. We discussed there the 236 thousand פרסאות, and that the measurements mentioned in the ספר היכלות referred only to a region in which Mattatron was at home. Any higher regions cannot be measured even symbolically, as they are spiritually too far removed from our physical universe. The Ari zal finds an allusion to this number 236 in Exodus 40,34: וכבוד ה' מלא את המשכן. When you spell the word משכן using words instead of letters, i.e. מ"ם, שי"ן, כ"ף, נו"ן, the differential between the regular spelling and the expanded spelling is 236, i.e. 410 and 646 respectively. The משכן povides the link between the Sabbath which is essentially part of the עולם הבא, and the ששת ימי המעשה, the six days of the week during which work is to be performed, i.e. during which all the commandments of the Torah are to be performed. Our sages (Eyruvin 22) have already expounded on the verse “היום לעשותם "ולמחר לקבל שכרם that the reward for the performance of the commandments will be received on the morrow, i.e. in the World to Come. The Sabbath is the reward for the work performed during the six days of work. In view of this it is appropriate that also the Courts in our world should refrain from making any decisions on the Sabbath, even when such decisions involve the performance of Divine Commandments.
  I will now present a treatise I wrote in my younger days in which I not only dealt with the connection between משכן and שבת, but in which I also demonstrated the place of פרשת פרה which is usually read on the Sabbath on which we read פרשת ויקהל-פקודי.
  ויקהל משה את כל עדת בני ישראל. Why are all the members of the nation included here, whereas when the donations are discussed in chapter 25 Moses was content to receive gifts from כל איש, every man? The Zohar Sullam edition Vayakhel page 3 asks and adds a further question. Why did Moses describe the donations for the building of the Tabernacle (35,5) as קחו מאתכם, "take from you," whereas when Moses was commanded about this in Exodus 25,2 G–d described the donations ויקחו לי תרומה, as "a donation for Me?" The answer given is that Moses first received this commandment prior to the sin of the golden calf. At that time G–d included the mixed multitude in the list of people from whom He would accept these donations, hence the emphasis on מאת כל איש, from everybody. Moses relayed this instruction to the Jewish people on the morrow of the Day of Atonement, after the episode of the golden calf. That whole episode was caused by the mixed multitude. This is why the Torah emphasised that Moses assembled "the whole congregation of the Children of Israel," thereby excluding those converts who were not descended from Jacob. In order to emphasise this further, Moses instructed: "take from you, not from the mixed multitude."
  Rashi disagrees with the words of the Zohar in פרשת כי תשא on 31,18 stating that the fact that the donations for the Tabernacle are not reported in the Torah until after the episode of the golden calf does not mean that Moses had not collected the donations already prior to it. The Torah is not obligated to report matters in a chronological order. [In our editions of Rashi there is a bracket which quotes another Zohar which specifically includes the mixed multitude in the donations for the Tabernacle basing itself on the words "from everybody;" Ed.] this statement is also found in the Midrash Tanchuma on פרשת תרומה. It is very puzzling why Rashi makes such an effort to use the verses in פרשת תרומה and פרשת ויקהל respectively to prove the principle that the Torah does not need to report events in chronological order. Whereas Rashi is quite correct in claiming that Moses communicated the instructions to bring donations for the building of the Tabernacle on the morrow of the Day of Atonement, but how do we know that he had withheld this information from the Jewish people since before they made the golden calf, i.e. for several months? Perhaps he himself had not been told about it until then?
  Although we are all familiar with the comments of our sages who designated all those categories of work which had to be performed in the construction of the Tabernacle as the basic list of forbidden activities on the Sabbath, we must find a better reason why these activities are forbidden on pain of death. Why did they have to draw a parallel with the construction of the Tabernacle? Would it not have sufficed for the Torah to say: "Six days you shall perform work and on the seventh day you must rest?" The Mechilta on 35,2 claims that if we observe the Sabbath legislation the various items on the list are apt to be performed for us by Gentiles. This is the reason the word "you will perform" is expressed in this verse passively, i.e. "will be performed." We may find historical evidence for the truth of this interpretation in the statement in Berachot that the pious people of earlier generations were able to pursue their Torah study without interruption because others attended to their mundane needs. The sages wanted to point out that even in our time such a state of affairs was possible, i.e. that the work to be performed during the six days could be performed by others for those who devoted themselves to Torah in the proper manner. Another difficulty in the wording of our text is that we would have expected the Torah to use the indefinite article U-veyom hashvii instead of Uvayom hashvii when referring to the seventh day. 
  The latter two questions may be adequately answered by the halachic ruling in Shabbat 69 that a person who is lost in the desert and has lost track of time should observe six days of work and rest on the seventh day, starting his count from the moment he does not remember which day of the week it is. The reasons for this ruling are explained by Kley Chemdah on פרשת כי תשא.
  זה הדבר אשר צוה ה' לאמר. This is the word G–d commanded to say." Why does Moses here more than anywhere else have to stress that it was G–d who commanded what he was about to tell the people? It is understandable that, when Moses appointed his brother Aaron as High Priest, he made a point of stating that the appointment was made at the behest of G–d so that he would not be accused of showing special favour to members of his family, but here there seems no apparent reason for Moses' concern?
  Rabbenu Bachyah comments on the repeated use of the word משכן in 38,21, that this is a hint that the Tabernacle in our world stood "opposite" the Sanctuary in the Celestial Regions. We know this also from Exodus 15,17: מכון לשבתך פעלת ה', "You have made a place for You to dwell in." The word מכון should be read as מכוון, "corresponding" to the Sanctuary in Heaven. This places the importance of the Tabernacle on earth on a par with the creation of the universe. In connection with the universe, Isaiah 40,22, speaks about G–d "who spread out the skies like gauze, stretched them out like a tent to dwell in," whereas in connection with the Tabernacle on earth the Torah says: "You shall make cloths of goats' hair for a tent over the Tabernacle." In connection with the creation of the universe the Psalmist (Psalms 104,2) speaks about נוטה שמים כיריעה, "He stretches the heavens like a tent-doth." During the process of creation we read (Genesis 1,9) "Let the waters concentrate in one place," whereas in connection with the construction of the Tabernacle the Torah instructs the making of a copper basin to contain all the water used in the Tabernacle by the priests. During the creation the Torah speaks about the creation of luminaries, whereas during the construction of the Tabernacle the making of a candlestick is commanded. The winged creatures mentioned during the process of creation are matched in the Tabernacle by the cherubs spreading their wings over the Holy Ark. Whereas the creation of Adam represented the highlight of the act of creation, the highlight of the construction of the Tabernacle was reached when G–d told Moses to appoint Aaron as High Priest (Exodus 28,1). The completion of the work of creation was announced by the words: ויכלו השמים והארץ, whereas the completion of the work on the Tabernacle was described by the Torah as ותכל כל עבודת משכן (39,32). Whereas the Torah reported that G–d blessed the seventh day (Genesis 2,3), Moses blessed the Tabernacle and sanctified it and all its utensils (39,43). The Torah reported G–d as resting on the seventh day, (Genesis 2,3), whereas in connection with the Tabernacle the Torah stated: "You shall perform your work during six days and the seventh day shall be holy" (35,2). After all this the Torah said: "Take from yourselves a donation" Thus far the comment of Rabbenu Bachyah. 
  We must try and understand why Rabbenu Bachyah was so selective in his comparison of the creation with the construction of the Tabernacle. He could have cited additional parallels. A look at a lengthy Midrash in Shemot Rabbah 33,4 quotes Rabbi Berechyah as presenting a long list of parallels between the Tabernacle and מעשה בראשית. The list includes many items found in the heavens such as ערפל, זבול, עצי שטים, כרובים, אופנים and many others. In each case Rabbi Berechyah demonstrates that the Tabernacle contained something parallel. 
  He goes on to say that G–d preferred the parallel items in the Tabernacle over the original ones in the Celestial Regions. We know this because G–d was prepared to abandon His Heavenly Residence in favour of the one established by man for Him on earth. G–d said (25,8): "When they will make a Sanctuary for me, I shall dwell amongst them" (instead of in Heaven).
  
  The common denominator of the concepts of שבת and משכן are that they both are symbols of עולם הבא, the World to Come. There is a baffling story in the Talmud Beytzah 16 describing that Shammai bought and ate only food intended to honour the Sabbath. Should he find a good looking animal, he would purchase it intending to eat it on the Sabbath. Should he find a superior one later, he would abandon the first one and eat it during the week so as to preserve the better one for serving on the Sabbath. The Talmud contrasts Shammai's conduct with that of his colleague Hillel whose every action is described as being לשם שמים, "Heaven oriented." Are we to infer from this that Shammai's actions were not "Heaven oriented?" What then was the difference of opinion between Hillel and Shammai which caused them to have different approaches to their daily routines? They disagreed on whether it was permissible to serve G–d in order to accumulate rewards payable in the World to Come. (This is elaborated on in Midrash Shemuel Avot 1,3.) Shammai considered serving G–d for material rewards in this world as forbidden, whereas he considered serving G–d in order to accumulate reward in the Hereafter as perfectly permissible. His colleague Hillel considered serving G–d in order to receive a reward either in this world or in the next as equally forbidden. This is what the Talmud means when describing Hillel's actions as "Heaven oriented," i.e. without thought of any reward.
  The Tabernacle, which was a reflection of all the various stages of creation, one of which was the Sabbath, alludes to a world which is totally Sabbath oriented. We have numerous Midrashim all of which quote G–d as saying that in return for having provided Him with a Tabernacle of goats' skins He would act as our protector in the future. The statements are based on Isaiah 4,5: וברא ה' על כל מכון הר ציון ועל מקראה ענן יומם ועשן, ונגה אש להבה לילה, כי על כל כבוד חפה; וסוכה תהיה לצל יומם מחורב, ולמחסה ולמסתור מזרם וממטר. "The Lord will create over the whole shrine and meeting place of Mount Zion a cloud by day and smoke with a glow of flaming fire by night. Indeed, over all the glory shall hang a canopy which shall serve as a pavilion for shade from heat by day and as a shelter for protection against drenching rain." These Midrashim continue to quote G–d as promising atonement for our sins in return for the Jewish people having made the lid on the Holy Ark, quoting scripture to support such claims. 
  Similar promises by G–d are quoted as rewards for our having constructed the table in the Tabernacle, as a reward for which Israel is told it would neither suffer hunger nor thirst. As a reward for making the candlestick, G–d is quoted as promising to ensure that we shall not lack light in the future, that the original light which illuminated the earth at the time Adam was created would be restored. Finally, in return for having constructed the Holy Ark to house the Torah, G–d promises all His goodness.
  While the Sabbath with its gift of the נשמה יתירה, the additional soul which inhabits every Jew on that day, represents one sixtieth of what the Sabbath in the future will hold, the Tabernacle too is conceived of as affording us a glimpse of one sixtieth of what the World to Come will be like. This is the deeper meaning of the statement in Shabbat 10 where G–d is quoted as telling Moses that He had a wonderful gift for him and the Jewish people called Sabbath. This is the reason for Exodus 31,13. G–d announced that He was going to bestow that gift. From this Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel derived the rule that one must inform the mother of a child if one wishes to give the child some bread (ibid.). The Talmud challenges this deduction, citing Rabbi Chama who wants to prove that one does not need to inform the recipient of a gift he will receive. He points out that upon his descent from Mount Sinai Moses was unaware of G–d's gift and only covered his forehead -which by then was emitting rays of light- after he became aware that the people had become afraid to approach him (34,29 32). The Talmud does not recognise a contradiction here, saying that matters which become common knowledge need not be announced by the donor beforehand. This argument is challenged by a scholar who asks: "Is not also the Sabbath something that becomes common knowledge, and yet the prohibition of work had to be announced?" The answer given to this is that the reward for observing the Sabbath is certainly not something that becomes common knowledge without being announced. [Rashi assumes that the reward, though not spelled out in the text, was announced by Moses orally. Ed.]
  This answer seems difficult since we still do not know exactly what is the nature of the reward for Sabbath observance. One can answer this difficulty only by referring to the many statements of our sages equating Sabbath observance with total מצות observance. This is so in spite of the fact that the observance of the Sabbath legislation involves many more pleasant aspects as opposed to the efforts and sometimes deprivations involved in the performance of other commandments. I have enlarged on this subject in my commentary on Song of Songs 7,7: "How beautiful and pleasant are you, befitting the pleasures of love in delights." This aspect of the reward for Sabbath observance has thus been revealed to us.
  
  In order to understand why the Talmud feels that self-evident gifts need not be announced by the giver beforehand, we may simply say that the nature of such gifts makes it clear who the donor is as soon as the gift is received. When the reward for observing the Sabbath will be received, the party concerned will also immediately realise what that particular reward is for. In our case the principal reward G–d spoke about as something He keeps in His treasure chamber is that in the World to Come a total Sabbath atmosphere will prevail. In order that the Jewish people may have a glimpse of this reward for Torah observance, G–d gave us the gift of a נשמה יתירה, additional spiritual perceptive powers, so that we could appreciate that the Sabbath was indeed a most precious gift. Moses had to prepare the people for the receipt of this gift; it was not something that fell into the lap of people who had not made advance preparations for the Sabbath, had not sanctified themselves, etc. There is little doubt that he who does prepare himself to receive the Sabbath will benefit from the נשמה יתירה; not only that, but anyone who sanctifies himself even a little on an ordinary weekday will find that he will enjoy a Heavenly assist and reach a much higher level of sanctity than is possible merely by his own unassisted efforts. The Sabbath is particularly suited for the attainment of such higher spiritual levels. It is a fact that the person who has made some preparation for the Sabbath and as a result experiences a tremendous spiritual uplift thinks it is all due to his own efforts. Little does he realise that if it were not for the Heavenly assist received, his spiritual accomplishment would have been far more modest. The reward for the effort to observe the Sabbath in the proper spirit then is this additional spiritual power granted him by G–d which the Talmud describes as a reward that is not self-evident!
  
  
  We are taught in Beytzah 16 by Rabbi Yochanan quoting Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, that G–d gave us all the commandments publicly, except the commandment to observe the Sabbath. We derive this from Exodus 31,17: "Between Me and the Children of Israel it is a sign forever." If indeed this is so, why would the Gentiles be liable to the death penalty for observing the Sabbath even if they did not know it was for Jews only? The answer is that the legislation to observe the Sabbath was certainly given publicly. It was the nature of the reward for this observance that remained a secret between G–d and the Jewish people. Another answer is that the nature of the reward was also public knowledge; it was the possession of a נשמה יתירה on that day by the Sabbath-observing Jew that remained a secret between us and G–d, for Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish stated that G–d equipped the Jew with an additional soul on the Sabbath eve, which is taken from him after the conclusion of the Sabbath. All of this is based on Exodus 31,17: וינפש, meaning כיון ששבת, וי אבדה נפש, "woe to the soul that was lost because it rested." Thus far the Talmud.
  I will now try and enlarge on this statement and explain its meaning. We would have expected the statement to say that "woe to the soul that will be lost because it rested." The meaning of the statement as quoted is therefore to be understood differently, namely that anyone who becomes aware of the "additional soul" entering him on the Sabbath Eve thereby realises the loss he experienced at the end of the preceding Sabbath when that soul had departed from him.
  Let us return to the concept of the basic equality of the concepts of משכן and שבת. It is logical therefore that all the forbidden work-activities on the Sabbath are derived from activities performed in constructing the Tabernacle. This is also why in order to be culpable for transgressing these prohibitions they must have been performed intentionally. The Torah states that the construction of the Tabernacle involved לחשוב מחשבות, thoughtful planning (35,32). This means that everything that was made for use in the Tabernacle was designated to perform its function already when it was merely being processed, long before it became an integral part of the Tabernacle. The various artisans involved had to be familiar with the true significance of the parts they were fashioning, possibly even their mystical aspects. The author proceeds to point out the significance in the wording of the opening משנה of the tractate שבת, (which describes different elements of the act of transferring property from one domain to another), as applicable to the comparison between work performed on the Sabbath and work performed for the construction of the משכן. The work is described as , שתים שהן ארבע בפנים, ושתים שהן ארבע בחוץ, "two categories which are really four, internally, and two categories which are really four, externally." The expression חוץ, outside, is a reference to the negative prohibitions whose purpose is to keep the קליפות, negative, Satan-inspired, influences outside. The expression פנים refers to the positive commandments and their function to bring additional sanctity into our personality. This is also the reason the sages refer to the two different "headlines" of the Sabbath, i.e. זכור ושמור, as having been said בדבור אחד, "in one word." They view the observance of the negative commandments of the Sabbath legislation as no more than the other side of the coin called Sabbath, the first side symbolising the positive commandment זכור את יום השבת לקדשו. [compare Exodus 20,8 and Deuteronomy 5,12 respectively.] Matters concerning the performance of positive commandments are two-fold, i.e. they involve body and soul respectively. Both body and soul consist of hidden as well as revealed aspects. Thus we see that there are a total of four categories. The revealed aspect of the soul is the Torah. Our sages phrased this by stating לא איברי שבתות אלא לגירסא, "The only reason the Sabbath days were created is to enable Torah study to be pursued on those days." The Zohar elaborates that upon its return to the Celestial Regions after the Sabbath, the נשמה יתירה is asked what new Torah insights it had gained during its stay on earth on the Sabbath. By coming up with such new insights the soul is considered as having created new heavens. This is why the Midrash we quoted earlier compared Isaiah 40,22 to the construction of the tent-cloths for the Tabernacle in Exodus 26,1. The message in both statements is that man is able to perform creative acts.
  The next stage of comparison between the building of the Tabernacle and the creation of the universe as mentioned in the Midrash, and quoted by Rabbi Bachyah (page 661) was the comparison of G–d's directive: "Let all the waters be gathered to one place," to the instruction of making a copper basin from the waters of which the priests would wash their hands. This stage is one that involves the body rather than the soul which is involved in Torah study. The aspect of physical Sabbath observance by the body which is closest to the observance by the soul, is the preparation for the Sabbath such as bathing the body. Scripture discusses the washing away by G–d of the filth of the daughters of Zion, (Isaiah 4,4). This is presumably the source used by Rabbi Yehudah bar llai-i, who bathed himself and dressed in sheets every Sabbath Eve, and who, when dressed for the Sabbath, evoked the feeling in those who looked at him that they were seeing an angel of the Lord (Shabbat 25). The mystical dimension of the "sheets" no doubt was that he used something akin to the coverings of the Tabernacle, the יריעות. There is an interesting Mishnah in Demai 4,1 that, if someone who is not trusted to have tithed his produce before selling it has sold some produce to a customer and the customer forgot to tithe it before the Sabbath, this customer may accept the assurance of the seller that it was tithed prior to the sale if such an assurance is given on the Sabbath. The reason given for the ruling is that the seller experiences the holiness of the Sabbath and is afraid to desecrate it.
  The next item that Rabbi Bachyah listed in his comparison between the acts of creation when the universe came into being and the construction of the Tabernacle was the creation of the luminaries during the six days of creation and the construction of the candlestick in the Tabernacle. The hidden parts of the soul are alluded to here. A person observing the Sabbath properly prepares himself spiritually before joining his wife in order to fulfil the commandment of "be fruitful and multiply." His soul is elevated and influenced by the symbolism represented by the cherubs on the Holy Ark. I have explained elsewhere why the cherubs appeared like man and wife joining, and how the mystical element of the union between husband and wife is related to the זכור aspect of the Sabbath legislation, the performance of the positive commandment of Sabbath observance. When speaking about the negative commandments of the Sabbath, the שמור aspect, we also find two, respectively four categories. The visible aspect of the performance or non-performance of such negative commandments by the soul is the דבור, the articulation of the thought. Certain kinds of speech are forbidden on the Sabbath. One is not supposed to discuss mundane matters relating to one's business, etc. Rabbenu Bachyah alluded to this when he referried to the creation of man. i.e. a talking spirit. When speech is employed constructively it is called דבור and makes a positive impact in the Celestial Regions. When speech is not employed constructively it is called הבל פה, "vain mouthings," reminding us of הבל הבלים of Solomon in Kohelet. The Midrash mentioned the appointment of Aaron as High Priest during the construction of the Tabernacle as the activity which corresponded to the creation of man during the six days of creation. Aaron knew when to speak, (Exodus 4,14,) and he knew when to keep silent (Leviticus 10,3).
  The Torah described the completion of the work of creation with the words ויכולו השמים והארץ, and the completion of the construction of the Tabernacle with the words ותכל כל עבודת המשכן. In our פרשה we are dealing with work-prohibitions that apply to the body. One needs to guard one's body not to transgress any of these commandments. Both of the expressions ויברך, ויקדש, which we find in connection with the Sabbath in Genesis and also with the blessing bestowed by Moses on the Tabernacle, relate to the hidden aspects of the soul, i.e. the formulation of thoughts and ideas before they have been articulated. The principal realm of sanctity is found in one's thought processes. This subject is discussed in a book ראשית חכמה, in the chapter called שער הקדושה. From a strictly halachic point of view, only the articulation of certain thoughts is prohibited on the Sabbath, not the actual thought itself; a person who strives for sanctity will do so by imposing on himself additional restrictions, קדש עצמך במותר לך (Yevamot 20), in this case by refraining from entertaining forbidden thoughts.
  Whereas the abstention from work on the Sabbath is described as כי בו שבת, at the conclusion of the story of the creation, at the construction of the Tabernacle we find the sentence ששת ימים תיעשה מלאכה, "during six days work may be performed; this is deliberately phrased in the third person to underline the hidden aspect of the work performed by the body. In practical terms this means that in addition to a person being aware that with the arrival of the Sabbath he must cease forbidden activities, he should also consider all his unfinished work as having been completed prior to the onset of the Sabbath.
  When we look at the Sabbath from this vantage point, we can understand the phrase ששת ימים תעשה מלאכה וביום השביעי יהיה לכם קודש שבת שבתון. If the meaning of this verse had been that the seventh day should serve as Sabbath, the Torah should have written: ששת ימים תעשה מלאכה ויום השביעי וגו', "Six days work shall be performed and the seventh day shall be holy, etc.," instead of "and on the seventh day, etc." As it is the Torah wishes to tell us that "on the seventh day everything, including unfinished tasks from the sixth day should be considered as completed." The repetition of the words שבת שבתון together with the emphasis on the word יום also suggests that even if work is being performed the holy character of the Sabbath day itself does not cease. It is clear that this occurred immediately after the Day of Atonement, which is also known as שבת שבתון (Leviticus 23,32). The element of קדושה on the Sabbath comes from above יהיה לכם קודש (35,2), i.e. you receive the נשמה יתירה. 
  When we read in 31,16: לעשות את השבת, the extra word את suggests that we should add a little from the weekday to the Sabbath, i.e. commence the Sabbath before sunset. The words: לא תבערו אש, "Do not make a fire" in 35,3, also hint at the statement in the Talmud that wherever we find that the Sabbath is also being desecrated, we are liable to find a conflagration (Midrash Hagadol based on Jeremiah 17,27). Observance of the Sabbath on the other hand, will lead to the redemption and the rebuilding of the Holy Temple. G–d will then be as a wall of fire for Zion, as we know from Zachariah 2,9.
  [At this point the author compiles a lengthy sermon combining allusions found in these two portions with those found in פרשת חוקת dealing with the red heifer. He introduces this sermon here as פרשת פרה is usually read on the week we read פרשת פקודי. There is a great deal of repetition of material which has already been discussed or is again discussed in פרשת חוקת, and I have therefore decided to omit it. Ed.] The following is a sermon suitable for פרשת החודש, which is also often read on one of the weeks we read one or both the above portions from the Torah.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Yalkut Shimoni item 191 on Exodus 12,1 has this to say: "You (Israel) count according to the lunar calendar, whereas the Canaanites do not count according to the lunar calendar. Rabbi, quoting Rabbi Yehudah bar llai-i, said it is good manners that the "senior" counts according to the great luminary whereas the "junior" counts according to the lesser luminary. Seeing that Esau was senior to Jacob, he counts according to the solar calendar, whereas Jacob counts according to the lunar calendar. Rabbi Nachman added that it is a good omen that the senior rules by day and not by night; as a result the wicked Esau's rule extends only during the present world whereas the rule of the junior Jacob will extend to both the present world and the Hereafter. He added that while the light of the senior is still shining brightly, the light of the junior cannot be noticed widely; as soon as the light of the senior has set, the light of the junior will become manifest and widespread. We have scriptural proof for this from Isaiah 60,1: קומי אורי כי בא אורך, "Arise, shine, for your light has arrived." Thus far the quote from the Yalkut.
  What is the difference betwen the statement of Rabbi and the statement of Rabbi Nachman? How does the statement flatter Jacob? Besides, we have a statement in Baba Metzia 83 in the name of Rabbi Yossi that the verse תשת חשך ויהי לילה, "You bring on darkness and it is night" (Psalms 104,20), is a reference to the present world which is comparable to night, whereas Rabbi Nachman, in his statement compares the World to Come to night. Which is it? What did Rabbi Nachman have in mind when he referred to "a good omen?"
  In the הפטרה of פרשת החודש in Ezekiel 46,1 we read: "The gate of the inner court which faces East shall be closed on the six working days; it shall be opened on the Sabbath, and it shall be opened on the day of the New Moon. The prophet says that the holiness of the Sanctuary is open on both the Sabbath and the New Moon, whereas no mention is made of it being open on such festivals as Pessach, Shavuot or Sukkot. We have a simliar anomaly in Kings II 4,24 where the husband of the Shunamit asks her why she is going to see the prophet Elisha, seeing its is neither the Sabbath nor the New Moon? Some commentators believe there is no need to mention the festival days separately since they are included by simple logic. If even the lesser sanctity of the days of the New Moon qualified for such special opening of the gates, then the festivals would certainly qualify. If that were so, then the question is why the prophet bothered to mention the Sabbath, seeing that the sanctity of the Sabbath is of a higher order than that of the festivals or New Moons. There is a quote by the Mordechai in the name of the Pessikta commenting on Exodus 12, that the "light" [I presume heat Ed.] of the Gehinom ceases on both the Sabbath and the New Moon. In recognition of this we do not recite the prayer צדקתך צדק, during the afternoon Service on the Sabbath. The reason we do recite this prayer when the Sabbath occurs on a date which coincides with one of the festivals is that the wicked people in Gehinom do not experience this relief from their suffering on the festival days. If nonetheless we have the practice not to recite צדקתך צדק on a Sabbath immediately preceding a festival, this is in honour of the festival, and not to publicise the plight of the wicked who are returning to Gehinom at that time. The puzzling aspect of the whole matter is that the New Moon seems to be of greater significance than the Sabbath itself, why else is the prayer צדקתך צדק recited on the Sabbath at all?
  קדושים תהיו כי קדוש אני ה' אלהיכם. (Leviticus 19,2) "Be holy for I the Lord your G–d am holy;" Basing themselves on this verse, the prophets and sages drew a comparison between G–d and the Exodus experience of כנסת ישראל as being similar to the relationship between groom and bride. The entire book of Song of Songs is based on this concept. Most of the liturgical poetry in our prayer-books deals with this concept extolling this relationship between Israel and G–d. It is spelled out more clearly in Deuteronomy 26,17-18: את ה' האמרת היום להיות לך לאלוקים … וה' האמירך היום להיות לו לעם סגולה.. "You have affirmed this day that the Lord is your G–d…and the Lord affirmed this day that you are His treasured people." The relationship is mutual.
  The legislation of sanctifying the New Moon which is found in Exodus chapter 12, is the first of the commandments addressed to the Jewish people as a people and was given to them prior to the Exodus. Most of the other commandments were given to the people on the festival of Shavuot at Mount Sinai, seven weeks after the Exodus. There is a general concensus that the revelation at Mount Sinai took place on a Sabbath. On that occasion the three principal pillars of our faith became public knowledge; 1) The existence of an Eternal G–d, 2) The fact that the Torah was legislated in Heaven and 3) the principle of reward and punishment. The Sabbath testifies to the renewal of the universe. The renewal of the universe testifies to the existence of its Creator who will reveal Himself in due course at a time which is כולו שבת, totally under the aegis of the concept of the Sabbath. Of that period in the future, the prophet says: הנה אלוקינו זה (Isaiah 25,9) "This is our G–d." At such a time the everlasting reward for keeping the Torah's commandments will become due. The commandment to be מקדש אשה, to become betrothed to one's bride prior to one's actually going through the ceremony of marrying her, is similar to the performance of the commandment to sanctify the New Moon.
  We have learned in Kidushin 41: The commandment to be מקדש את האשה devolves first and foremost on the actual groom, though it may be performed by anyone he designates. When the Jewish people left Egypt, G–d (the groom) personally performed the act of קדושין: The Torah says of G–d: ועברתי בארץ מצרים (Exodus 12,12). The ceremony was, however, also performed by a messenger whom G–d had designated, viz: וישלח מלאך ויוציאני, "He sent an angel (messenger) and took me out" (Numbers 20,16). The actual wedding ceremony, the נישואין, must be carried out by the groom personally, not a stand-in. The giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai symbolised this wedding ceremony between G–d and the Jewish people. This wedding took place on the Sabbath, an occasion when G–d spoke to Israel פנים בפנים דבר ה' עמכם, "Face to face did G–d speak with you" (Deut. 5,4). The usual time for man and his wife to join conjugally is on the Sabbath. This is part of the mystical aspect of marriage.
  Now to a more detailed examination of the subject of betrothal and wedding. The sanctification of the moon is an expression of Israel's sanctification. This is alluded to in the words: החודש הזה לכם, "This month belongs to you." The Jewish Court has been given authority by G–d to declare when the New Moon officially commences, i.e. whether the month just concluded will have twenty-nine or thirty days. The Court similarly enjoys the authority to declare an extra month when this is necessary to ensure that Passover falls in spring, etc. (Rosh Hashanah 22). This is a mystical aspect of the betrothal. It is written here "This month is yours,” and it is written in Genesis 48,9: אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה, "which the Lord had given me here." On this latter verse Rashi comments that Joseph showed his father the documents testifying to his traditional betrothal and marriage. The sanctity of the Sabbath testifies to the existence of G–d as the Creator. The sanctity of the Sabbath belongs to G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name and is eternal. All our sages are agreed that on the festival of Shavuot (which commemorates the giving of the Torah) the element of לכם is essential [just as in the verse announcing that the New Moon is given over to the Jewish people, Ed.], since G–d spoke to us directly on that occasion.
  Shemot Rabbah 15,31 describes Exodus 12,1 in a parable. A king betrothed himself to a girl, promising her a few gifts in writing. When the time arrived for the wedding, he guaranteed her many gifts, as is the custom for a husband. One must view this present world and the Hereafter in a similar light. In this world only few gifts are guaranteed. Our existence in this world is comparable to that of a bride who, though betrothed, is still awaiting the wedding. We are reminded of this by the formula we recite whenever we put on the phylacteries on our arm: וארשתיך לי לעולם, I will be betrothed to you forever" (Hoseah 2,21-22). It is an allegory that in this world Israel has only been given the moon, as we know from our verse in Exodus 12,1. In Messianic times, however, there will be a real wedding (between Israel and G–d) as we know from Isaiah 54,5: "For He who has made you will be your spouse." When that time arrives, G–d will hand over all His treasures to the Jewish people as is recorded in Daniel 12,3: "And the wise will shine like the brightness of the sky, and they that turn the many to righteousness will be as stars forever and ever." Thus far the Midrash. The meaning of the parable is clear. Israel is the bride; the mystical aspect of the betrothal is the gift of the moon, whereas the Torah represents the gift to be received at the time of the wedding. It is the wedding document popularly known as the כתובה, which spells out the obligations the groom assumes when marrying a bride. The obligations spelled out in the document can only be claimed in the Hereafter.
  We need to say a few words in introducing the subject of the significance of the moon. The sanctity with which we sanctify G–d when blessing the New Moon is of a dual nature. Similarly, the sanctity which G–d bestows upon us is also of a dual nature. We therefore have two sanctities which are in reality four. How does this work in practice? We sanctify G–d by devoting both our body and our soul to Him when there arises the need to sanctify His holy Name. In such situations we are considered like sheep ready to be slaughtered; we do this joyfully as mentioned in Song of Songs 2,5: "for I am sick with love." This means that I, the כנסת ישראל, love You, G–d when I am sick, i.e. when I accept your afflictions with love. This is totally different from the way the Gentiles react to afflictions. Their reaction to afflictions is described in Isaiah 8,21: "When he is hungry, he shall rage and revolt against his king and his divine beings." This is why most kings divest themselves of their crowns in the first three hours of the day and pray to the sun, as pointed out in the Talmud Avodah Zarah 53. They keep up this practice because the sun, unlike the moon, never wanes and thereby convinces them of its power. Israel, on the other hand, counts according to the lunar calendar which wanes every month. This is what the Midrash quoted above had in mind.
  Another quote (from this Midrash 15,24) on the words החודש הזה לכם: When someone observes the moon, how does he have to recite the benediction? During periods when the Jewish people would determine the date of the New Moon by visual observation, some Rabbis held that the benediction concluded with the words מחדש חדשים, whereas others held that the correct conclusion was ברוך מקדש חדשים. A third group of scholars held that the correct formula was ברוך מקדש ישראל, their reasoning being that if Israel does not sanctify the moon its sanctity amounts to nil. You must not be surprised that G–d sanctified Israel since the Torah has said: והייתם קדושים כי קדוש אני ה', "For you shall be holy since I the Lord am holy" (Leviticus 11,44). The various opinions expressed are all valid at different times. When the moon is full the benediction concluding with the words מחדש חדשים is a fitting expression of thanks to G–d for the bright light of the moon. The formula ברוך מקדש חדשים addresses itself to the regular waning of the moon and acknowledges G–d even when the fortunes of the Jewish people as symbolised by a waning moon are at a low ebb. We express the fervent conviction שלא ישנה את תפקידה, that the moon's function has not undergone a change. The formula ברוך מקדש ישראל expresses the nature of the Jewish people who are able and willing to bless G–d whether they receive bad news or good news. (cf. Yerushalmi Berachot 9,2; Sanhedrin 42) In an earlier part of Shemot Rabba 15 quoted above we find the statement: "you are counting according to the lunar calendar whereas the Gentiles do not count according to the lunar calendar."
  Sanctification of the body, i.e. refining the body is a preliminary for attaining sanctity of the spirit, for coming close to G–d. This is achieved through separating oneself from physically pleasurable experiences even when these are permissible, as we know from the statement of our sages קדש עצמך במותר לך, "if you wish to sanctify yourself do it by refraining from that which is permissible" (Yevamot 20). There are different kinds of "holiness;" all of them refine the body, prevent it from being something gross, and enable the person who is so sanctified to achieve mastery of mind over matter. When carried to the maximum extent possible, the body becomes an insignificant part of the total personality. When the Torah (Deut. 7,7) describes the reason G–d liked the Jewish people as כי אתם המעט מכל העמים "For you are the smallest of all the nations," the word המעט refers to the relative insignificance of the body of the Jew when compared to his mind, his soul. This is also the reason Amos 7,2 describes Jacob as קטן, small. Compared to Esau the part the body plays in Jacob's total personality is insignificant, small. When Esau first emerged from his mother's womb, his body was full of the pollutants of the original serpent. By that time this pollutant had left the body of Rebeccah and Jacob emerged; he was predominantly spiritual and only marginally tainted with the remaining pollutant. The impurity of the menstruating woman is none other than the residual pollutant first absorbed by Eve when the serpent mated with her. Esau's being אדמוני, reddish looking, is a reflection of the quantity of the blood of menstruation. The liver is all blood. Pursuing one's physical desires, giving in to the "fire" of one's passions originates in the liver. "Fire" is synonymous with destruction. The reason such an unrefined person cannot come close to G–d is that the state of his body makes his contact with fire an experience that consumes him rather than one which "warms" him. 
  When the Gentiles count according to the solar calendar, the sun represents this "fire." At some state in the future G–d will denude the sun of its sheath [remove its potentially destructive force. Ed.] (Kohelet Rabbah 1,5), something He does not have to do with the moon because the moon is only אור, light, has no potentially lethal side-effects. We find this fact mentioned in this same Midrash. Just as the sun is made of fire, so the Gentiles will be judged in fire in the future as we know from Maleachi 3,19: "For lo! the day is at hand, burning like an oven. All the arrogant and all the doers of evil shall be straw, etc." Just as the moon is made up of light, so Israel will inherit light, as we know from Psalms 97,11: "Light is sown for the righteous, joy for the upright." Isaiah 60,1 also says: "Rise and shine, for your light has arrived." Now we understand the second part of the Midrash which described the "big one" as counting according to the big luminary. The "big one" is none other than the firstborn Esau. He is not referred to as the "firstborn" since the sanctity belonging to the firstborn belongs to Jacob. Esau can only be referred to as the "big one," not as the "firstborn." The bigness of Esau refers to the preponderance of the body in his personality. When the body is burned the result is חושך, darkness, the very opposite of אור, light. The holiness of Israel by comparison is twofold, predominance of mind and soul, and light. There is a similar twofold sanctity which G–d has granted us through the gift of the Torah; it is described by our sages as אחת דיבר ושתים זו שמענו, "G–d spoke one thing whereas we heard two." One element of such sanctity is the individual commandment described by Solomon as נר מצוה, the other is תורה אור, the comprehensive understanding of the totality of Torah, something which will be granted us in Messianic times. At that time the vision of Isaiah 30,20: "Your eyes will behold your Guide," will be fulfilled.
   This is the mystical aspect of what the sages in Avot 4,2 described as שכר מצוה מצוה, that the reward of fulfilling a commandment is a commandment." The fulfilling of a commandment will bring about a deeper understanding of all the spiritual values associated with its performance; this in turn will will deepen one's attachment to G–d and Torah. This is truly what Solomon meant when he described the Torah as אור, "spiritual enlightenment of the highest order" (Proverbs 6,23). I have already outlined that when the Torah said החודש הזה לכם, Israel was granted sanctity, whereas when the Sabbath was given to them the sanctity of G–d in His aspect of the Ineffable Name was granted to them. In the future there would be an attachment between G–d and Israel as described in Deut. 4,4; "You who are deeply attached to G–d are all alive this day." This dual concept of אחת דיבר ושתים שמענו, is also present in connection with Israel's counting according to the lunar calendar. 
  The comment by Rabbi Nachman in the text of the Yalkut quoted on page 670, is introduced by the words: אמר רבי נחמן, and not רבי נחמן אמר. This is because a new element is introduced by Rabbi Nachman. He refers to the sanctity of the Sabbath, as opposed to the sanctity of the moon which was discussed previously. The סימן טוב, "good omen," which Rabbi Nachman spoke of is the Torah. 
  We have a statement in Avodah Zarah 2 by Rabbi Chanina bar Pappa that in the future G–d personally will appear with a Torah scroll in His lap announcing that anyone who has studied and observed the Torah should come and get his reward. Thereupon the Gentiles would assemble in a disorderly fashion and claim their reward. G–d would tell them to appear in an orderly fashion, each nation separately headed by their scribes, etc. [Scriptural proof is provided for all this in the relevant passage in the Talmud. Ed.] The first nation laying claim to reward would be the Romans who would extol their contributions to civilisation, pointing out the public baths, highways, etc., they had built. They would claim to have done all this in order to enable Israel to devote itself to Torah study. G–d is described as rejecting the claim as foolish, telling them they had done all this for their own sakes. As an example, G–d cites the market-places as having served merely immoral purposes. G–d would ask them if there was none amongst them who could יגיד זאת, i.e. who had devoted himself to Torah (based on Isaiah 43,9 where the word זאת is understood to apply to Torah)? Upon hearing this the Romans would be deeply disappointed, etc." The whole paragraph in the Talmud seems very long-winded. The Talmud could simply have said: זאת=תורה, without listing all the Romans' so-called accomplishments, and G–d's describing them as the very reverse.
  This paragraph of the Talmud is explained elsewhere as telling us that G–d has given us both a written and an oral Torah. The reason He did not write down the oral Torah was to provide the Jewish people with a סימן. Whereas the Gentiles copied the written Torah, G–d gave the Jewish people the oral Torah as a sign of distinction. This Torah is also called "Torat Moshe," since Moses handed it down to the Jewish people as הלכה למשה מסיני, as is, not subject to a variety of interpretations. When Maleachi, the last of the prophets, exhorts the Jewish people (Maleachi 3,22): "Remember the Torah of My servant Moses, which I have commanded to him at Chorev, statutes and social laws," he needed to exhort Israel to commit this to memory because it had not been recorded in writing. 
  The written and the oral Torah are called זה and זאת respectively, because they relate to one another just like the male and the female. When G–d is said to have asked the Romans: "Who amongst you can claim זאת, He meant: "Who amongst you can claim to have studied the oral Torah?" We read in Deut. 4,44: וזאת התורה אשר שם משה לפני בני ישראל, "And this is the Torah Moses placed in front of the Children of Israel;" this is a reference to the oral Torah. Furthermore, the scholars of the Kabbalah are aware of the written and oral Torah as also being referred to as חמה and לבנה, sun and moon, respectively. This is the reason that the Jewish people count according to the moon, i.e. the lunar calendar, whereas the Gentiles count according to the sun, i.e. the solar calendar.
  As to the fourth comment in the Yalkut by Rabbi Nachman, that as long as the light of the "senior" (Esau) shines the light of the "junior" (Jacob) cannot be widely noticed, we can understand this better if we remember that the secrets of the Torah will be revealed with the help of the light which G–d concealed after the sin of Adam. The Zohar explains that there are two kinds of darkness. One is regular, an absence of light. The other results from an excess of light, i.e. a blinding light. The righteous Gentiles who will benefit from light, will only benefit from the kind of light which does not originate in darkness, and which is subject to being extinguished. The light they benefit from is not of an eternal nature. The moon, on the other hand, shines, although it itself is dark. This very phenomenon alludes to the fact that in the future the moon's light will originate in darkness. It will be an extremely powerful light. May it be G–d's will that we shall soon experience this light.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ויקהל משה את כל עדת בני ישראל. The Zohar on this verse, Sullam edition Vayakhel page 10, deals at length with the rule that women should not mix with the men during a funeral procession. We are quoting only excerpts. Rabbi Shimon begins by saying that most people do not die before their allotted time unless they did not take care of themselves. The angel of death is present amongst the women during a funeral. At that time he has the opportunity to seduce the women, an ability he has already demonstrated when he seduced the first woman in גן עדן. There is an ancient custom to try and confuse Satan (the angel of death) by blowing the shofar when somebody dies or during a funeral. During the procession permission is granted to Satan to be active and, having examined their faces, to select his victims. The Zohar goes on to explain how to arrange funeral processions so that men and women should not face each other, and so that the men should not walk where the women had walked before, all this so as to neutralise the power of the angel of death. During the episode of the golden calf, the angel of death danced amongst the Jewish people, having a field day. When Moses observed this he assembled all the men by themselves so as to neutralise the power of the angel of death. The men were prohibited from mingling with the women until the donations for the Tabernacle were collected. This is the meaning of 35,22: "The men came with the women." It is significant that the Torah does not say: "The men brought (donations) with the women." The Torah wanted to point out that from the episode of the golden calf until the building of the Tabernacle the men were kept aloof from the women. Only then did the angel of death depart from the camp.
  לא תבערו אש בכל מושבותיכם ביום השבת. The word "fire" here is an allusion to the destructive fire engendered by strife and anger. One needs to be careful not to allow oneself to become angry so that the fire of that hatred should not consume one. The "fire" is an allusion to the fire of purgatory that one would suffer from as a result..
  אלה פקודי המשכן ואת האלף ושבע מאות וגו'. Midrash Tanchuma section 7 comments on this verse that Moses rendered an accounting to the Jewish people for all the gold, silver and copper received, explaining how it had all been used; he even accounted for the hooks which were not visible once the Tabernacle was assembled. Moses was concerned, that because these hooks on the columns were not visible, he could be subjected to the suspicion by some Israelites of having appropriated the silver for himself. When G–d showed Moses where the silver had gone, Moses in turn immediately made a point of publicly accounting for the use that had been made of the silver which was over and above what had been used for the sockets for the boards and the pillars. The Israelites were satisfied upon hearing this. 
  We learn from this that if even a Moses, of whom G–d Himself had testified that "he is trusted in My entire House" (Numbers 12,7), felt it incumbent to render an account to the people, no Jewish trustee, however well reputed, should feel it below his dignity to offer an accounting of how he spent the public funds entrusted to him.
  We have stated that just as the Tabernacle serves to assure us of the Presence of G–d's שכינה in our midst, so man's physical stature is meant to be the receptacle for G–d's Presence within him. In order to attain this goal, he must strive to purify his entire body from head to toe. If he succeeds in doing this he will experience the fulfilment of ושכנתי בתוכם, "I shall dwell amongst them."
  
  Sefer Vayikra
  
  Introduction
  
  This section is named תורת כהנים, תיקון האדם.
  Remember that if Adam had not sinned the whole concept of areas that are sanctified and areas that are not would not have existed. The whole earth would have been like גן עדן, and every place on earth would have enjoyed the status of sanctity. A return to such a situation is forecast in Jeremiah 3,16-17 where the prophet says: "In those days -declares the Lord- men shall no longer speak of the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, nor shall it come to mind. They shall not mention it nor miss it, or make another." Rashi comments on this that this means that G–d promises that "all your entrances will be holy and I shall dwell therein as though it were the Ark of the Covenant." There similarly would not have been people specially selected to perform the service in the Sanctuary since the whole of mankind would have been a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. Neither would certain times have been singled out as especially suitable for festivals or as times for atonement, etc.. Every single day would have enjoyed the same high status of holiness. Every day would have exuded the atmosphere of the Sabbath as promised for the future after the arrival of the messianic age. A סימן for you to remember this by are the words עולם, שנה, נפש, which are mentioned in the Sefer Yetzirah. This means that the holiness of a particular place and the sanctity of a particular time are tied up with the concept "year." The sanctity of a specific person as distinct from people generally is connected to the concept of נפש. Man would not have been required to bring himself close to G–d by means of an animal sacrifice; he himself would have been the sacrifice, much as is described by our sages when they tell of the archangel Michael offering the souls of the departed righteous on the Heavenly Altar (Chagiga 12). For the above-mentioned reasons this book commences with אדם; this is why the Torah writes: אדם כי יקריב, an allusion to אדם הראשון, first man. We can therefore view the whole of this book, תורת כהנים, as the תיקון האדם, the rehabilitation of Adam=mankind. 
  The entire laws pertaining to sacrifices as well as those pertaining to rehabilitation from נגעי אדם, different skin diseases people are afflicted with from time to time, are all reminders of the first sin committed by Adam and the resultant diminution of man's stature in the universe. Seminal flux, i.e. vaginal discharges resulting in ritual impurity, skin eczemas, menstrual bleeding, seminal emissions both voluntary and involuntary, and how to purify people experiencing these phenomena are all part of the legislation in this book. These laws are followed by the report of the death of two of Aaron's sons whose experience served as atonement for the failure of original man, as will be explained in its proper place. As a result of all the above a special day of the year had to be set aside to afford man an opportunity to obtain forgiveness and cleanse himself of his sins. This too is an allusion to what happened when death was decreed on Adam, i.e. mankind; G–d's day is reputed to be equivalent to one thousand years of our calendar, hence one day compensates for the penalty decreed on Adam that he would die on the "day" he would eat from the tree of knowledge (Genesis 2,17). Once this part of rehabilitation of man has been achieved, i.e. that man has succeeded in the סור מרע, "distancing himself from evil" part, he can strive for positive rehabilitation, the attainment of קדושה, sanctity. The second part of the book of Leviticus commences with the imperative to become holy, an ideal to be striven for because G–d Himself is holy. There follows the part of the book in which the sanctification of certain times of the year is legislated in פרשת אמור. This is followed by the legislation pertaining to sanctity of the land itself in the שמטה year as set out in פרשת בהר. The seven times seven year cycle described by the Torah in connection with this legislation is an allusion to the seven days of creation as will be explained in its place. This legislation is followed by promises of blessings if we observe the commandments and warnings of progressively more severe punishments if we fail to heed G–d's warnings and persist in our contrary and obstinate ways. The promises held out for proper observance of the commandments have not yet all been fulfilled, for we have not yet lived up to the premise which would enable G–d to shower us with all His goodness. It is only in the messianic future that all of these promises with their beneficial impact on both our bodies and our souls can be fulfilled. At that time our bodies will achieve the same deathlessness as our souls. I have written extensively on this in the introduction to my treatise תולדות אדם.
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Vayikra
  
  Commandment 116 of the 613 commandments legislates the daily total-offering called עולה in accordance with all the details described.
  Commandment 117 deals with the offering called מנחה, and all its details.
  Commandment 118 forbids the burning of incense containing honey or leavened matter.
  Commandment 119 demands that every offering contain some salt.
  Commandment 120 provides for the meat of the animal offerings, and the flour of the gift offerings to be salted.
  Commandment 121 provides for the members of the High Court to offer a sacrifice if it turns out that they committed an error of judgment.
  Commandment 122 provides that private individuals bring a sin offering if they have inadvertently become guilty of an offence for which the penalty is כרת if it had been committed intentionally.
  Commandment 123 provides that someone who has witnessed a misdemeanour must testify as to what he has observed.
  Commandment 124 provides for offerings that are graded in value according to the ability of the party liable for the offering to pay for same..
  Commandment 125 forbids severing the head of a bird when the bird is offered as a sin offering.
  Commandments 126 and 127 forbid the adding of oil or frankincense to the offering of a sinner.
  Commandment 128 provides that if someone makes restitution for having inadvertently made use of Temple treasury property he must add 25% to the value of the original.
  Commandment 129 legislates that if someone is not certain if he has been guilty of a certain offence he has to bring an אשם תלוי, a sin-offering of a temporary nature.
  Commandment 130 legislates that stolen property must be returned in its original form.
  Commandment 131 provides for sin offerings for certain specified offences.
  
  Tzav
  
  Commandments 132 and 133 deal with the removal of the ashes from the altar and the lighting of the fire on the altar on a daily basis.
  Commandment 134 prohibits the extinguishing of the pile of burning wood on the altar.
  Commandment 135 instructs the priests to eat that part of the מנחה offering that is not burned up on the altar.
  Commandment 136 warns that the ingredients of the מנחה offering must not be allowed to become leavened.
  Commandment 137 instructs the High Priest to offer a daily מנחה offering.
  Commandment 138 prohibits the consumption of said offering by the High Priest or any other priest.
  Commandment 139 deals with the details of the sin offering.
  Commandment 140 prohibits consumption of those sin offerings which have to be offered on the golden altar inside the Sanctuary.
  Commandment 141 deals with details of the offering called אשם.
  Commandment 142 deals with the group of offerings called שלמים, peace-offerings.
  Commandments 143 and 144 prohibit the leaving over of the meat of the various offerings past a certain designated time-limit. Left-overs must be burned.
  Commandments 145, 146 and 147 prohibit the consumption of פגול, offerings not designated properly at the time the sacrifice was prepared. The Torah prohibits consumption of any part of an offering which has become ritually unclean, and provides for such parts to be burned.
  Commandment 148 prohibits the consumption of certain fatty tissue called חלב belonging to any animal that is offered on the altar as a sacrifice.
  Commandment 149 prohits the eating of blood.
  
  Shmini
  
  Commandment 150 and 151 enjoins the priests not to enter the precincts of the Tabernacle with excess hair nor with torn clothing.
  Commandment 152 prohibits the priests from leaving the precincts of the Tabernacle during the time sacrificial rites are being performed.
  Commandment 153 enjoins the priests not to enter the precincts of the Tabernacle when drunk.
  Commandment 154 provides for the examination of certain identifying marks of domestic or free-roaming animals to determine whether the animals in question qualify for consumption by Jews.
  Commandment 155 prohibits consumption by Jews of "impure" animals, i.e. animals lacking certain identifying marks making them fit for consumption by Jews.
  Commandment 156 lists identifying marks on fish which determine whether the fish in question may be eaten by Jews.
  Commandments 157 and 158 detail certain creatures of the sea which may not be eaten by Jews. They also prohibit the consumption of "impure" fish.
  Commandment 159 prohibits the eating of "impure" birds by Jews.
  Commandment 160 enjoins us to examine whether grasshoppers have certain identifying marks which would make them fit for consumption by Jews.
  Commandment 161 deals with ritual impurity conferred upon Jews who come into contact with the dead bodies of 8 categories of שרצים, reptiles, mice, etc.
  Commandment 162 deals with certain foods and drinks that once they have become unlcean further transmit their impurity to those who come into contact with them.
  Commandment 163 details that the carcass of an animal which died from causes other than ritual slaughter confers impurity on those touching or carrying same.
  Commandments 164,165 and 166 prohibit the eating of certain things which creep on the ground as well as insects and worms that infest fruit or produce. Insects which develop out of mould or compost are also prohibited.
  
  Tazria
  
  Commandment 167 states that a woman who has given birth confers ritual impurity on contact.
  Commandment 168 forbids a ritually unclean person to eat any part of the sacrifices or other hallowed matter that may otherwise be eaten by someone who is ritually clean. The operative verse is "she must not touch anything that is holy" (12,4). Our sages in Makkot 14 view this as a prohibition directed at the person eating such "holy" things.
  Commandment 169 provides for the woman who has given birth to offer an appropriate sacrifice after her confinement.
  Commandment 170 deals with various aspects of people afflicted with Tzora-at, certain skin diseases.
  Commandment 171 forbids the shaving off of hair sprouting from the infected area of the skin of a person suffering said affliction.
  Commandment 172 instructs such a person how to conduct himself during the purifying period such as tearing his clothing and letting his hair grow wild so as to identify himself as stricken.
  Commandment 173 deals with similar afflictions if they appear in one's clothing instead of on one's skin.
  
  Metzora
  
  Commandment 174 lists the items needed for the purifying procedure of someone struck with Tzora-at, such as cedar wood, and two bird sacrifices.
  Commandment 175 requires the victim of such a disease to undergo total shaving of body hair as part of the purifying process.
  Commandment 176 requires the immersion in a ritual bath for any unlean person who wishes to purify himself.
  Commandment 177 deals with the details of the special offerings to be brought by the מצורע at the time of his purification.
  Commandment 178 deals with the laws pertaining to houses that have developed certain stains and thereby have become ritually unclean.
  Commandment 179 deals with ritual impurity caused by male seminal discharge due to a biological abnormality.
  Commandment 180 describes the offering to be brought by the victim of such an abnormality.
  Commandment 181 deals with ritual impurity as a result of seminal emission.
  Commandment 182 deals with the impurity incurred by a menstruating woman.
  Commandment 183 deals with the impurity of a woman who experiences vaginal discharge at times other than her period.
  Commandment 184 deals with the sacrifice to be offered by such a woman after she has been healed and purifies herself.
  
  Achrei Mot
  
  Commandment 185 prohibits the High Priest from entering the Holy of Holies at will.
  Commandment 186 deals with the details of the sacrificial service on the Day of Atonement.
  Commandment 187 prohibits the slaughtering of animals designated as sacrifices outside the precincts of the Tabernacle.
  Commandment 188 requires the covering of the blood of a free-roaming beast or of a bird slaughtered for consumption.
  Commandment 189 prohibits marriage with partners prohibited because of incest.
  Commandments 190, 191 and 192 prohibit sexual relations with one's father, i.e. not to sleep with him as one sleeps with a woman. The operative verse is ערות אביך לא תגלה (18,7). A son must not have sexual relations with his mother; the Torah says: אמך היא לא תגלה ערותה (ibid.) One must not have sexual relations with one's father's wife, even if she is not one's mother; the operative verse is: ערות אשת אביך לא תגלה (18,8)
  Commandment 193 prohibits sexual relations with one's sister regardless of whether she is only a half-sister on the father's side or on the mother's, or even whether she is the child of someone raped by one's father or some other forbidden relationship entered into by either one's father or mother. The operative verse is: מולדת בית או מולדת חוץ (18,9). In view of this verse you may question the need for the entire verse. If one is guilty of transgressing the law not to sleep with one's sister, why did the Torah mention the words "daughter of your father or of your mother?" In fact, the verse is needed only to record a separate prohibition when the daughter of one's parent's marriage is slept with. This counts as an additional transgression, and one becomes culpable on two counts.
  Commandment 194 prohibits sexual relations with a granddaughter from one's son based on: ערות בת בנך לא תגלה (18,10). It appears that this law applies regardless of whether one's son was from a permitted marriage or from one which is inadmissible under Jewish law. It is similarly irrelevant whether the granddaughter in question is the issue of a permitted union or not.
  Commandment 195 prohibits sexual relations with a granddaughter when she is the daughter of one's daughter. We are told in 18,10: או בת בתך לא תגלה. The rules that apply here are identical with those that apply to one's granddaughter through one's son.
  Commandment 196 prohibits sexual relations with one's daughter. This prohibition is not spelled out in the text because it is derived from the prohibition of sexual relations with one's granddaughter, a blood-relation more distant than one's daughter. Our sages have also derived this prohibition from the similarity in expressions used by the Torah (גזרה שוה). This is necessary because we have a rule that one may not punish someone for transgressing a prohibition which is derived merely by application of logic.
  Commandment 197 prohibits sexual relations with the daughter of one's father's wife when said daughter is one's sister, i.e. a half-sister through one's father only. Had the Torah meant the unrelated daughter of one's father's wife, this would be contradictory, seeing the daughter of one's father's wife from a previous marriage is perfectly permissible. The Torah only appears to repeat itself in order to tell us that if one's sister is also the issue of one father's legitimate wife one is liable on two counts, just as one is liable on two counts when sleeping with one's mother who is one's father's wife.
  Commandment 198 prohibits sexual relations with one's father's sister. The operative verse is: ערות אחות אביך לא תגלה (18,12).
  Commandment 199 prohibits sleeping with one's maternal aunt, the operative verse being: ערות אחות אמך לא תגלה (18,13).
  Commandment 200 prohibits sexual relations with one's father's brother or half-brother. It appears that this commandment applies regardless of whether such an uncle is the result of a legitimate or illegitimate union. The operative verse is: ערות אחי אביך לא תגלה (18,14).
  Commandment 201 prohibits sexual relations with the wife of one's father's brother. This is the woman which the Torah describes as דודתך, "your aunt," because she is the wife of your uncle (18,14). Sexual relations with this woman are prohibited regardless of the status of the union betwen the uncle and his wife, i.e. whether she is merely betrothed to one's uncle, or is his widow or even divorced from his uncle.
  Commandment 202 prohibits sexual relations with the wife of one's son, one's daughter-in law, regardless whether the woman in question is merely betrothed to, divorced, or widowed from one's son.
  Commandment 203 prohibits sexual relations with one's sister-in- law even if she is the wife of a half-brother from one's father or a half-brother from one's mother. It does not matter whether one's brother lives with her in a permissible or in a prohibited union.
  Commandment 204 prohibits simultaneous sexual relationships with one's wife and her daughter, [though a man may have more than one wife, Ed.] The operative verse is: ערות אשה ובתה לא תגלה (18,17).
  Commandment 205 prohibits sexual relations with a woman and her granddaughter by her son, based on 18,17.
  Commandment 206 prohibits sexual relations with a woman and her granddaughter by her daughter, based on the continuation of 18,17.
  Commandment 207 prohibits marrying both a woman and her sister while both are alive. The operative verse is: ואשה אל אחותה לא תקח לצרור (18,18).
  Commandment 208 prohibits sexual relations with a woman while she is menstruating. The operative verse is: ואל אשה בנדת טומאתה לא תקרב (18,19).
  Commandment 209 forbids sacrificing one's issue to the fire-god Moloch.
  Commandment 210 prohibits homosexuality.
  Commandment 211 prohibits a male from having sexual relations with beasts.
  Commandment 212 prohibits sexual relations between a woman and an animal.
  
  Kedoshim
  
  Commandment 213 legislates that one must respect mother and father, since the Torah says: איש אמו ואביו תיראו.
  Commandment 214 prohibits having idolatrous thoughts, articulating same, or even merely looking at idolatrous images. The operative verse is: אל תפנו אל האלילים (19,4).
  Commandment 215 prohibits construction of idols, whether because one plans to worship them oneself or whether they are intended for someone else to worship, even if the person who would worship them is a pagan anyways. The Torah says: ואלהי מסכה לא תעשו לכם (19,4). We must understand this line as "do not make them either for yourself or for someone else."
  Commandment 216 prohibits consumption of sacrificial remains after the time allocated for eating same has expired. The Torah says: והנותר עד יום השלישי באש ישרף (19,6).
  Commandment 217 prohibits harvesting the last corner of one's field.
  Commandment 218 prohibits the farmer from picking up the gleanings of his harvest. He must leave them behind for the poor. The Torah commands: ולקט קצירך לא תלקט לעני ולגר תעזוב אותם (19,9-10).
  Commandment 219 forbids the farmer from harvesting the last corner of his vineyard; the Torah enjoins: וכרמך לא תעולל (19,10).
  Commandment 220 enjoins the farmer from collecting the gleanings in his vineyard. The operative verse is: ופרט כרמך לא תלקט (19,10).
  Commandment 221 is an instruction to the farmer to leave a corner of his field or vineyard for the poor or the stranger.
  Commandment 222 is an instruction to leave gleanings of the field for the poor or the stranger.
  Commandment 223 is an instruction to leave a corner of the vineyard for the poor or the stranger.
  Commandment 224 instructs the farmer to leave gleanings of the vineyard for the poor.
  Commandment 225 prohibits the stealing of money, etc, as the Torah says: לא תגנובו (19,11).
  Commandment 226 is an injunction against denying that one has been entrusted with someone's valuables for safe-keeping. The Torah says: לא תכחשו (19,11).
  Commandment 227 forbids a person to swear to such a denial. In the event he does swear he is guilty of two transgressions.
  Commandment 228 forbids perjury. The verse in question deals with שבועת בטוי, the uttering of the name of G–d in an unnecessary oath.
  Commandment 229 forbids an employer to oppress his employees, such as not paying them on time and by stalling for extra time.
  Commandment 230 prohibits robbery.
  Commandment 231 prohibits holding day-labourers' pay overnight.
  Commandment 232 forbids one to curse a Jew even if the Jew in question does not hear the curse. The operative verse is: לא תקלל חרש, "Do not curse the deaf" (19,14).
  Commandment 233 prohibits misleading someone deliberately, such as giving an advice to a blind person which is likely to cause him a mishap. The operative verse is: ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול, "Do not place an obstacle in the path of a blind person" (19,14).
  Commandment 234 forbids the judge to pronounce an unjust verdict.
  Commandment 235 forbids a judge to favour one litigant over another because the litigant in question is a man of repute.
  Commandment 236 is the instruction to the judge to exercise his authority fairly.
  Commandment 237 forbids the practice of libelling or slandering people.
  Commandment 238 forbids one to stand by when someone else's blood is being shed without attempting to help the victim.
  Commandment 239 enjoins us from carrying hatred in our heart against a fellow-Jew [without attempting to resolve any presumed insult suffered Ed.].
  Commandment 240 instructs us to call to order people who are observed committing sins. The operative verse is: הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך, "You shall surely rebuke your neighbour" (19,17).
  Commandment 241 forbids putting a fellow-Jew to shame.. The operative verse is: ולא תשא עליו חטא, "Do not bear sin because of him" (19,17).
  Commandment 242 forbids the taking of revenge.
  Commandment 243 forbids the bearing of grudges.
  Commandment 244 commands us to "love your neighbour as yourself."
  Commandment 245 prohibits the pairing of different species of animals.
  Commandment 246 prohibits the sowing together of different species of plants.
  Commandment 247 prohibits the eating of fruit from a tree which is not yet three years old.
  Commandment 248 provides for the fruit of such a tree to be sanctified in the fourth year.
  Commandment 249 prohibits eating and drinking in the manner of gluttons and drunkards.
  Commandment 250 forbids the practice of divination.
  Commandment 251 forbids soothsaying.
  Commandment 252 forbids one to "round the corners of one's head," [a haircut practiced by pagan clergy. Ed.]
  Commandment 253 enjoins us not to destroy [by a razor] the corners of one's beard.
  Commandment 254 forbids making incisions in one's flesh [as a sign of mourning].
  Commandment 255 instructs us to relate to the Holy Temple with reverence. The operative verse is: ואת מקדשי תיראו, "Display reverence for My Sanctuary" (19,30).
  Commandments 256 and 257 prohibit consulting with ghosts and other kinds of spirits.
  Commandment 258 instructs us to honour the sages. The operative verse is: מפני שיבה תקום, "Rise in the presence of a hoary head" (19,32).
  Commandment 259 enjoins us not to use false measures.
  Commandment 260 instructs us to use fair scales, weights and measures.
  Commandment 261 instructs the High Court to execute by burning someone who has been found guilty of such punishment. One such case would involve a person who has had sexual relations with a mother and her daughter.
  Commandment 262 prohibits imitating pagan practices. The Torah says: ולא תלכו בחקות הגוי אשר אני משלח מפניכם, "You shall not walk in the customs of the nation which I cast out on your account" (20,23). Examples of such practices are the establishment of theaters, circuses, etc.
  
  Emor
  
  Commandment 263 instructs a priest not to defile himself by contact with the dead.
  Commandment 264 regulates at which relatives' funeral a priest must not defile himself ritually.
  Commandment 265 forbids a priest who has purified himself -but still awaits sunset after ritual immersion- to perform sacrificial service. At that point he is still in the state of a secondary degree of ritual impurity. Concerning this the Torah writes: ולא יחללו שם אלוקיהם (21,6). Sanhedrin 83 explains that as the verse is not needed, because the information contained in it is already known, it is available to derive additional laws of a related matter, in this case the continued טומאה status of someone awaiting the sun to set after he has completed the ritual of purification. The similarity of the expressions חילול on both occasions lends weight to the validity of this rule.
  Commandments 266,267 and 268 prohibit priests from marrying a harlot, a woman who is the daughter of a union forbidden to a priest, and a divorcee.
  Commandment 269 instructs the Jewish people to accord honour to the priests; the Torah says: וקדשתו כי את לחם אלוקיך הוא מקריב, "You shall sanctify him, for he offers the bread of your G–d" (21,8).
  Commandments 270 and 271 forbid the High Priest to enter an enclosed space in which a dead body is kept. The Torah writes: ועל כל נפשות מת לא יבא, "He must not enter any place containing a dead body" (21,11). He must not defile himself even when his father or mother die.
  Commandment 272 instructs the High Priest to marry a virgin.
  Commandment 273 forbids the High Priest to marry a widow.
  Commandment 274 forbids the High Priest to have sexual relations with a widow even outside the bounds of wedlock since the Torah writes: ולא יחלל זרעו "He must not defile his seed" (21,15).
  Commandments 275 and 276 prohibit a priest who suffers from a permanent physical blemish to perform service in the Temple. Temporary blemishes also prevent a priest from performing such service while he suffers from such blemishes. The relevant verse is: כל איש אשר בו מום לא יקרב "Every priest suffering from a blemish must not draw near" (21,17).
  Commandment 277 prohibits a priest suffering from a temporary blemish or disfigurement from entering the Sanctuary. The operative verse is: אך אל הפרוכת לא יבא ואל המזבח לא יגש, "But he must not approach the dividing curtain nor come near the altar" (21,23).
  Commandment 278 prohibits a priest from performing his service while in a state of ritual defilement. The Torah says: ולא יחללו את שם קדשי, "They must not defile My Holy Name" (22,2).
  Commandment 279 prohibits a priest who is ritually unclean from eating תרומה. The Torah says: איש איש … בקדשים לא יאכל "He must not eat of the sacred things" (22,4).
  Commandment 280 prohibits non-priests from eating sacred things such as parts of the meat of the offerings. The Torah states: וכל זר לא יאכל קודש, "No stranger must eat something holy" (22,10). Tradition says that what is meant is תרומה.
  Commandment 281 prohibits people who are in the employ of the priest from eating תרומה, seeing they are not the physical property of the priest. The operative verse is: תושב ושכיר לא יאכל, "A resident stranger or a hired hand must not eat [from it]" (22,10).
  Commandment 282 forbids an uncircumcised priest to eat תרומה. The Talmud Yevamot 70 derives this law by association with the law prohibiting any non-circumcised Jew to eat from the Passover sacrifice. Since that prohibition extends to the resident stranger and the hired hand, so does this prohibition extend to the hired hand of a priest.
  Commandment 283 forbids the daughter of a priest who married a non-priest to eat תרומה. The operative verse is: היא בתרומת הקדשים לא תאכל, "She must not eat of the Terumah of holy things" (22,12).
  Commandment 284 forbids both the Israelite and the priest to eat untithed produce. The operative verse is: ולא יחללו את קדשי בני ישראל את אשר ירימו לה' "They shall not profane the sacred donations which the Israelites will set aside for the Lord" (22,15). The traditional explanation is that the verse discusses the eating of untithed produce. The future tense of the word ירימו alludes to produce which is still to be set aside as sacred and meanwhile has not yet been set aside.
  Commandment 285 determines that blemished animals must not be offered as sacrifices. The Torah writes: כל אשר בו מום לא תקריבו, "Do not offer as a sacrifice anything blemished" (22,20).
  Commandment 286 is a positive commandment demanding that every animal sacrificed be healthy and unblemished. The operative verse is: תמים יהיה לרצון, "when perfect it will be acceptable" (22,21).
  Commandment 287 warns against deliberately inflicting a blemish on an animal designated as a sacrifice. The Torah says: כל מום לא יהיה בו, "It must not be blemished" (22,21).
  Commandment 288 prohibits blemished animals being slaughtered as potential sacrifices. The Torah says: לא תקריבו אלה לה', "Do not offer such to G–d" (22,22).
  Commandment 289 forbids the burning up on the altar of the remains of such blemished animals. The Torah says: ואשה לא תתנו מהם על המזבח, "Do not put them on the altar as fire-offerings" (22,22).
  Commandment 290 prohibits the sprinkling of the blood of blemished animals on the altar, based on the first half of verse 22.
  Commandment 291 prohibits the neutering by castration of any living creature -human, animal, or bird. The operative verse is: ומעוך וכתות ונתוק וכרות לא תקריבו לה' ובארצכם לא תעשו, "The bruised and the crushed you must not offer …and in your land you must not cause such mutilations" (22,24).
  Commandment 292 prohibits the sacrificing of blemished animals on behalf of the Gentiles. The Torah says: "Do not accept such from non-Jews" (22,25).
  Commandment 293 stipulates that an animal offered as a sacrifice must be at least eight days old. The Torah says: ומיום השמיני ירצה, "It will be acceptable from the eighth day on" (22,27).
  Commandment 294 prohibits the slaughtering of the mother animal and its young on the same day.
  Commandments 295 and 296 enjoin us not to do anything which results in a public desecration of G–d's name, as well as the need in extreme cases to sanctify G–d's' name by one's own life. The Torah writes: לא תחללו את שם קדשי ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל, "Do not
  cause My name to be desecrated; I want to be sanctified amongst the Children of Israel" (22,32).
  Commandments 297, 298, 299, 300 and 301 deal with the positive commandment to observe rest from work on the first and last day of Passover, the additional public offerings on the entire seven days of this holiday, the work-prohibitions on its first and seventh day.
  Commandment 302 instructs us to offer the Omer offering of the new barley crop.
  Commandment 303 prohibits the eating of that new crop until the seventeenth [nowadays] of Nissan, after the Omer has been brought on the altar. The operative verse is: ולחם וקלי וכרמל לא תאכלו עד עצם היום הזה, "You must not eat bread or roasted corn until this very day, etc" (23,14).
  Commandment 305 prohibits eating of כרמל, "parched grain" (barley) before the same date.
  Commandment 306 instructs us to count the days between Passover and Shavuot.
  Commandment 307 provides for a special offering on Shavuot of two loaves of bread from the new wheat harvest.
  Commandments 308 and 309 are the positive commandment to rest on Shavuot, and the negative commandment not to engage in forbidden work.
  Commandments 310, 311, and 312 provide for rest on Rosh Hashanah, the special offering to be brought on that day, and the work-prohibition applying to that day.
  Commandments 313, 314 and 315 instruct us to observe a fast on Yom Kippur, neither to eat nor to drink, and to offer a special offering on that day.
  Commandments 316 and 317 prohibit work on Yom Kippur, and instruct us to observe it as a day of rest.
  Commandments 318,319,320,321,322, 323 deal with the need to observe rest on the first and eighth days of Sukkot, not to engage in forbidden categories of work on either the first or the eight day; it also deals with the different מוסף-offerings to be presented in the Temple on each of these days. There is also provision for a different type of מוסף-offering on the eighth day.
  Commandment 324 deals with the need to acquire a לולב and the other 3 species of plants.
  Commandment 325 instructs us to dwell in huts during the seven days of the festival of Sukkot.
  
  Behar
  
  Commandments 326, 327, 328 and 329 prohibit work in the fields and the orchards in the שמטה year, the ingathering of uncultivated crops or the harvesting of the fruit of the trees.
  Commandments 330, 331 and 332 instruct us to count the number of years in each Jubilee cycle, i.e. seven times seven years. It legislates the blowing of the שופר in the Jubilee year and the need to sanctify it in a manner similar to the sanctification of the שמטה year by abstaining from work in the fields. The operative verse is: וקדשתם את שנת החמישים, "Sanctify the fiftieth year" (25,10).
  Commandments 333, 334, and 335 prohibit work in the fields in the Jubilee year. The Torah says concerning this year: לא תשרעו, ולא תקצרו את ספיחיה ולא תבצרו את גזיריה, “You shall not sow, neither shall you reap the aftergrowth nor harvest the untrimmed vines" (25,11). This includes a prohibition not to gather in the fruit of the trees.
  Commandment 336 regulates business dealings such as sales and purchases as recorded in 25,14.
  Commandments 337 and 338 forbid unfair business practices.
  Commandment 339 prohibits selling any piece of land in the land of Israel for an indefinite period of time, i.e. permanently.
  Commandment 340 legislates that land sold must revert to the original owner or his heirs in the Jubilee year.
  Commandment 341 requires the family of a person who had to sell a house in a walled city for economic reasons to redeem it for the seller.
  Commandment 342 forbids the sale of the plots of land allocated to the Levites around their cities.
  Commandment 343 prohibits lending from or to Jews at interest.
  Commandment 344 prohibits the employer of a Jewish servant from giving such a servant demeaning tasks to perform. The Torah says: "You must not let him do the work performed by a slave" (25,39).
  Commandment 345 forbids the selling of a Jewish servant.
  Commandment 346 forbids imposing heavy labours on a Jewish servant.
  Commandment 347 permits owning a Canaanite slave permanently.
  Commandment 348 instructs us not to allow a fellow-Jew to be treated as a slave by a Gentile owner.
  Commandment 349 prohibits the prostrating of oneself on an אבן משכית, figured stone/ even if one uses it to prostrate oneself before the Lord.
  
  Bechukotai
  
  Commandment 350 assesses the monetary value placed on the future labour of a human being.
  Commandment 351 forbids the exchange of an animal for others once the first one has been designated as sacred.
  Commandment 352 declares that the animal intended as the exchange also becomes subject to the restrictions of animals designated for a sacred purpose.
  Commandments 353, 354 and 355 deal with the respective monetary values of animals, houses, or fields when they have become subject to a vow to the Temple treasury, such value to be determined by the priest.
  Commandment 356 stipulates that animals designated as an offering of one sort must not be re-designated as a different type of offering.
  Commandment 357 stipulates that when someone declares certain of his properties as חרם the property goes to the priests.
  Commandments 358 and 359 disallow the sale or redemption of lands declared as חרם.
  Commandments 360 and 361 stipulate the annual tithing of the new-born animals, and forbid the owner to sell these new born animals prior to determination if they are the ones that serve as the tithe.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Vayikra
  
  ויקרא אל משה ... אדם כי יקריב מכם  . Rashi alludes to the rhetorical question of the sages why the Torah here used the term אדם instead of איש or something similar. They conclude that since the sequence of the words is not אדם מכם יקריב קרבן, but אדם כי יקריב מכם, that the Torah refers to an offering volunteered by man, as distinct from one that man is obligated to bring. This is why the Torah also added the word כי, which indicates something that is subject to choice. Rashi also says that the type of offering the Torah speaks of is the עולת נדבה, an animal which is burned up completely, the owner or priest not eating any part thereof, an offering which is volunteered by its owner.
  This still leaves open the question why the Torah chose the word אדם instead of איש. Granted that, had the Torah spoken about a mandatory עולה offering (which Gentiles are not allowed to bring), I would have thought that the designation אדם was chosen in order to emphasize that only Israelites are included because the title אדם does not apply to Gentiles. We further know from the use by the Torah of the term איש איש (Leviticus 22,18), in connection with קרבן נדבה, that our sages rule that such offerings by Gentiles are acceptable (Menachot 73). Because the Torah in our verse speaks about free-will offerings why would the word איש instead of אדם not have been appropriate?
  Our sages answer this by saying that the term אדם was selected to remind us that just as Adam did not bring an offering from something that had been stolen, since he owned everything on earth, so any man must never bring an offering to G–d using something that was stolen. We need to understand this statement. It is simply not natural to refer to something one has not done as an act unless one had been at liberty to perform such an act. Since Adam had been unable to steal, how could the Torah use him as a model for telling us not to steal when making an offering to G–d? Adam could not claim credit for offering what was his since there was nothing that was not his!
  Adam had been created and placed in Gan Eden in order לעבדה ולשמרה "to work and preserve it" (Genesis 2,15). The mystical dimension of the word לעבדה, is עבודה service of the Lord. He himself was meant to be the "service" or, as we expressed this later the "offering." He was a "living sacrifice." While alive in a body, he was supposed to be what the souls of the righteous are nowadays after they have left this earth and their bodies behind and when the archangel Michael offers their souls on the Celestial Altar. In an ideal world the attachment to G–d expressed by the word קרב would have existed during man's lifetime. Man is supposed to be close to this image of himself since man on this earth was created in the image of the אדם who sits on the "throne" in the Celestial Regions, the mystical dimension of אצילות. The domain of the אצילות is the domain from which unification with the אין סוף is possible. I have explained this process in my introduction to the chapter תולדות האדם.
  Originally, man's body and soul were so close to one another that they could almost be considered one. This relationship paralleled the relationship between אדם העליון and G–d Himself in the Celestial Regions. Man was therefore considered a קרבן, and placed in גן עדן, the most refined place in the physical universe. He was meant to live indefinitely. When the Torah describes man as becoming נפש חיה, in Genesis 2,7, the meaning is that his soul comprised all other souls in the universe, as our sages have described this. 
  As a result Adam was the most perfect of all human beings, the place he lived was the most perfect in the world, and he was meant to live indefinitely. In the words of the Sefer Yetzirah he possessed three kinds of perfections: 1) that of עולם, i.e. he lived in a perfect universe, 2) that of שנה, i.e. unlimited time of existence, 3) that of נפש, i.e. he had a perfect soul-body alignment. Under such conditions he represented the closest one could come to G–d, i.e. the objective of the very concept of קרבן, offering, self-sacrifice. If he was described as קרוב לעצמו, "close to his own essence," this merely meant that man himself was the קרבן. He personified what the Torah encourages imperfect man to achieve when it speaks about: אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לה', because whereas the Torah nowadays can only speak about מכם, בכם, i.e. that part of man which comes close to G–d. At that time all of man was close to G–d.
  The mystical dimension of "eating" which G–d commanded Adam to do in גן עדן when He said to him מכל עץ הגן אכול תאכל, "You shall surely eat from all the trees of the garden" (Genesis 2,16), is tied up with the concept of קרבן and was entirely a sacred activity. Man's "table" is in the nature of an altar for sacrifice.
  Man's diminution after his seduction by the serpent ended only when the Jewish people received the Torah. At that time the Jewish people finally excreted any residue of the pollutant absorbed by him by way of the original serpent. Man (Jews) was then fit to resume his original stature. We find an allusion to this in the words: והר סיני עשן (Exodus 19,18). The word עשן is an acronym for the three "perfections" עולם, שנה, נפש, which we described as having been possessed by Adam prior to his sin.
   Alas, Israel again lost this lofty status through its sin with the golden calf, and as a result the universe (man) once more returned to a state of imperfection never again to be totally rehabilitated until the advent of the Messiah.
  Nonetheless, there was a partial rehabilitation through the construction of the Tabernacle called מקדש, Sanctuary, which served as an illustration of how the material and spiritual worlds are inter-related, as I have explained on פרשת תרומה and on פרשת ויקהל-פקודי. It was equivalent to a new act of creation, a rejuvenation of the universe as it were. In that rejuvenated universe Aaron took the place of Adam. Of Aaron the Torah writes specifically that he should be brought "close," i.e. that he should personify what Adam had personified prior to the latter's sin. (cf. Exodus 28,1 and the Midrash I have quoted in connection with that verse). In our physical universe Aaron's function as High Priest corresponds to the function of the High Priest in the Celestial Region who offers the souls of the righteous on an altar (Chagigah 12). We have illustrated this by quoting כי היום ה' נראה אליכם (Leviticus 9,4) and showing that the words נראה אליכם nhna comprise the same letters as אהרן , מיכאל. This is an allusion to Aaron's function here on earth being similar to that of the archangel Michael in Heaven. Aaron was to bring about the closest rapprochement possible between man and G–d Instead of offering the souls of the righteous, Aaron could only offer animal sacrifices i.e. from the domesticated beasts such as the cattle and the sheep. This was basically no different from what Adam himself had done after he had sinned, when he sacrificed the ox which is reputed to have had a single horn on its forehead (Shabbat 28). Noach offered animal sacrifices in expiation for a corrupt human society which had been punished. Abraham did likewise in order to obtain forgiveness for the sin of the generation of the Tower of Babel. It is written of him ויבן שם מזבח לה' ויקרא בשם ה', "He built there an altar for the Lord, and proclaimed the name of the Lord" (Genesis 12,8). Not only did Abraham offer animal sacrifices, but he even offered his only beloved son Isaac as a sacrifice. 
  A total rehabilitation of mankind (Israel) occurred at the time of the giving of the Torah, prior to the second relapse when Israel worshiped the golden calf. The next rehabilitation that took place was the construction of the Tabernacle, a microscope of the perfect universe. The sacrifices, עבודה, are one of the pillars which ensure the continued existence of the universe. We see therefore how the word עשן, which we described as representing the three kinds of perfections Adam had possessed prior to his sin, became the symbol of rehabilitation after G–d legislated that man can come close to Him by presenting sacrifices whose smoke (עשן) rises up from the altar in the Tabernacle (Sanctuary). Evil influences in the world were unable to overcome or infect this smoke which comprised three sanctities, including the sanctity of the Tabernacle which was called מקדש. Whereas Adam enjoyed being in the choicest place of the world, גן עדן, Aaron now had both a Sanctuary and a Holy of Holies symbolizing the choicest place on earth.
  The "perfection" of שנה, or the concept of time, i.e. unlimited time enjoyed by Adam before his sin, was symbolized in the Temple by the various sacrifices all of which were to be offered at certain times. An animal was not fit to be offered until it was eight days old; the daily public offerings -mornings and evenings- were tied to a time frame. The additional public offerings on the Sabbaths and the festivals were also tied to a time frame. Offerings by individuals, to help them purify themselves from ritual impurity, had to be offered after a certain amount of time had elapsed after their owners had become defiled. Offerings to help individuals expiate certain sins were linked to the time the respective sins they were meant to atone for had been committed.
  Now to the third "perfection" enjoyed by Adam, that of the נפש, the soul. The priest offering the sacrifice enjoys a higher level of נפש. Any non-priest who arrogated to himself priestly functions was guilty of death by execution (Numbers 1,51). We note that the priest offered sacrifices at a place appointed by G–d at a time designated by G–d. This is the mystical dimension of the עשן.
  When we look at certain individuals who lived prior to the time the Tabernacle was erected, we find that נח, אדם and אברהם respectively personified the concept of עשן, i.e. שנה,עולם , and נפש. Adam represented עולם, seeing he was the product for whose sake G–d had undertaken to create the universe. Noach personified the concept of שנה, seeing that during his lifetime the world underwent cataclysmic changes. He witnessed a world which functioned; he then witnessed a world that was destroyed; finally he witnessed a world rebuilt. Our patriarch Abraham, inasmuch as he personified absolute faith in G–d, comprised within himself all the spiritual powers connected with the soul. The Torah testifies that while still in Charan he and Sarah "made" souls, created people who possessed spiritual values, i.e. a soul (Genesis 12,5). Vayikra Rabbah 1,9 comments on Leviticus 1,1 ויקרא אל משה, "He called upon Moses," that whereas G–d called upon Moses, He did not call upon Adam. This seems peculiar in view of ויקרא ה' אלוקים אל האדם, in Genesis 3, 9! Obviously G–d did call upon Adam! We must answer by stating that it is not a disgrace for the king to speak to his tenant. The Midrash goes on: G–d spoke to Moses, i.e. וידבר ה' אליו, whereas he did not speak to Noach. How are we to understand this in view of Genesis 8,15: וידבר אלוקים אל נח! We must answer that it is no disgrace for a king to speak to his herder. 
  The Midrash continues: G–d called to Moses whereas G–d did not call to Abraham. How are we to understand this in view of Genesis 22,15: ויקרא מלאך ה' אל אברהם; Clearly G–d did call to Abraham. We must answer that it is no disgrace for the king to speak with his innkeeper. When G–d spoke to Moses He did not do as He did when He spoke to Abraham, but the angel first called to Abraham (to tell him G–d was about to speak to him). Rabbi Avin says that G–d said: "I am the caller and it is I who is speaking." We know this from Isaiah 48,15: אני אני דברתי אף קראתיו והביאותיו והצליח דרכו, "I, I have spoken, I called him; I have brought him and make him successful in his mission." Thus far the Midrash.
  Let me explain the plain meaning of this section of the Midrash before concentrating on the allusions contained therein. One can ask why does the Midrash raise the problem of G–d also speaking to Adam, Noach and Abraham? Why should this bother us? Our verse in Leviticus did not state that Moses had an exclusive on being called upon by G–d? Furthermore, why did the Midrash quote a verse in which Abraham was addressed by G–d through an angel instead of bringing a verse from an earlier incident (Genesis 22,11) when the angel is specifically mentioned as calling from Heaven? Another difficulty is that the statements seem self-contradictory. First the Midrash says that G–d did not call upon Abraham, whereas immediately afterwards it qualifies the manner in which G–d called upon Abraham! If G–d never called upon Abraham, how can the Midrash qualify the nature of such a call?
  In order to understand the Midrash we must keep in mind that the verses mentioned speak of four different levels of fondness expressed by G–d for Moses at the time the Tabernacle was completed when G–d's voice manifested itself in the אהל מועד, the Tent of Meeting. The first indication of fondness for Moses was in the very word ויקרא as opposed to ויקר, the expression used when G–d called upon Bileam (Numbers 23,4). The second expression is seen when the Torah adds: וידבר י-ה-ו-ה that Moses was being addressed by the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d. The repetition of לאמור, וידבר is an additional sign of the fondness of G–d for the person whom He addressed. Rashi felt impelled to provide an explanation for this unusual construction which did not occur during all the 38 years when the generation who had listened to the majority report of the spies were dying. Only after they had all died did G–d once more speak to Moses in this way (Deut. 2,16). A third sign of the fondness of G–d for Moses and Israel at this stage is the fact that the קריאה, the "call" or invitation, preceded the actual message. The Torah does not say (as is frequently the case) ויקרא ה' וידבר אל משה, but it starts with the introduction "ויקרא" to show that henceforth such a קריאה would precede the actual message. This was definitely a display of fondness. The fourth sign of fondness for Moses is the word אליו, to him, i.e. exclusively. Aaron was not included in this. If this demonstrated that Aaron, who occupied a very special and lofty position, was on a lower level of intimacy with G–d than Moses, the same certainly applied to other great people with whom G–d had conversed in earlier times.
  Concerning the first manifestation of fondness for Moses, where the Midrash had asked why G–d did not use the term ויקר, we may answer that it is a word connected with קרי, impurity contracted through the emission of seminal fluid. If the word ויקרא reflects an added degree of fondness compared to ויקר, why did G–d employ it when speaking to Adam at a time when He asked him איכה i.e. accused him of disobedience. Surely, at a time when Adam had absorbed the pollutant of the serpent which is equivalent to טומאת קרי, such an expression of fondness would hardly have been in place! 
  Rashi already draws attention to the fact that both in Genesis when G–d asked Adam where he was, and when He asked Cain where his brother Abel was, as well as when He appeared to Bileam asking who the men were who had come from Balak, it was not because G–d did not know, but the introductory remarks only served G–d as a pretext to enter into a dialogue with these people. All of this reinforces the question as to why G–d should have employed an endearing term such as ויקרא. This is why the Midrash had to answer that there was no disgrace in speaking to one's tenant.
  Concerning the second term of endearment, we must understand what additional proof of endearment Moses experienced here when G–d said to him after the Tabernacle became functional: וידבר לאמור? Do we not have a similar expression even when G–d spoke to Noach where there was no reason for G–d to employ a special term of endearment? The Midrash therefore had to answer that there was no shame attached when a king spoke to his herder.
  We also find that the preamble of קריאה was used prior to the actual message in the case of the angel speaking to Abraham. What special proof of fondness does this expression indicate here in Leviticus where the Torah does not even link this form of address to some form of express compliment to Moses in contradistinction to the compliment paid to Abraham in Genesis 22,15 where the use of the word ויקרא is followed by an acknowledgment of why Abraham qualified for this special fondness G–d displayed for him? In that instance G–d explains that He swore an oath acknowledging Abraham's outstanding act of obedience.
  Concerning the fourth expression of endearment listed, the use of the word אליו, this too had been used in connection with Abraham (Genesis 22,11), and one cannot answer that it did not represent an expression of fondness since it was not coupled with וידבר לאמור. The absence of the extra word לאמור in Genesis 22,1, is more than compensated for by the repeated use of Abraham's very name! The answer is that Abraham had to personally prepare himself spiritually in order to receive a communication from G–d. Moses did not need such spiritual preparation. He was ready at all times to perform his task as a prophet. We know this from Numbers 9,8 where some of the people asked Moses why people who had been ritually impure through no fault of their own could not perform the Passover sacrifice at the appointed time. Moses told the people: "Stand by and let me hear what G–d will command concerning situations such as yours!" There was no need for Moses to prepare himself to speak to G–d. We now understand the abbreviated form of the קריאה reported at the opening of the book of Leviticus, i.e. why the Torah did not even bother to identify the caller, and immediately wrote: "He called." Had the introduction "G–d called" been used by the Torah, there would not have been room for error, no one could have argued that it was the angel Mattatron who had addressed Moses and invited him to ready himself spiritually, that it was not G–d Who had addressed him directly. Why then did the Torah take a chance and omit defining who called Moses? We are forced to conclude that the Torah used this form of introduction to demonstrate how fond G–d was of Moses, that G–d was both the caller and the speaker, as distinct from Abraham where the fourth endearing term אליו is used in G–d's address (Genesis 22,11). This is the plain meaning of the paragraph in the Midrash.
  In order to penetrate the mystical dimension of what is contained in the Midrash; we need first to elaborate some more about the reasons for the sacrifices, even though we are aware that we can at best hope to scratch the surface of this subject. If such spiritual giants as Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his colleagues did not succeed in revealing more than a small part of the secrets contained in this legislation what can someone like myself hope to achieve in this field? Nonetheless, we are all duty bound to contribute what we can in accordance with the degree of spirit that we have been endowed with.
  I will select only the very best of all the material that I have seen in the various commentators, and build further on the insights they have already revealed to us. One of the reasons for animal sacrifice which is discussed by Nachmanides on Leviticus 1,9 is as follows: "It would have been more appropriate if the fools who thought that the animal sacrifice legislation was only an accommodation to the people who were in the habit of offering sacrifices to pagan deities would have paid attention to the reason that Maimonides gave for this. He described the people among whom the Jews lived as deifying the animals in question. The Jewish people had to learn by slaughtering precisely those animals that they were not deities. In India cows are not slaughtered to this day. Man's actions comprise three elements, thought, speech and execution. G–d commanded that when man has sinned and offers an animal sacrifice as a sin-offering, he must place his hands (weight) on the animal as a symbol of the sinful act he has committed. He must recite a confession as a symbol of the words that preceded the sinful act for which he is attempting to atone. He has to burn the animal in fire, i.e. the entrails, including the kidneys which are the organs within which sinful thoughts originate. He has to burn the feet -which in turn symbolize hands and legs- the organs that facilitate the carrying out of most sinful intents. He has to sprinkle the blood of the animal on the altar, the blood representing his life-form, נפש. By performing all these actions, the sinner will concentrate on the enormity of the error he committed against his G–d with both his body and his soul, and he will realize ??? his own life that should have expiated for his sin, ??? to him by G–d that he is able to substitute the life of the animal for his own. The מנות, meat portions, which are consumed by the priests, are intended to give physical strength to the Torah scholars who in turn will pray on behalf of the sinner who offered the animal. The daily public offerings, on the other hand, are in the nature of a preventive action, seeing that the multitude will not always be saved from committing sins. These words are appealing to one's mind if one understands them allegorically." Thus far Nachmanides.
  Our sages added that the animal first has to be thrown to the ground forcefully as a symbol of man having thrown down his own person, thereby confessing that he himself is guilty of death by stoning. When the animal is slaughtered this is equivalent to the owner killing himself suggesting that he is guilty of the two death penalties: death by the sword and by hanging. (There is a momentary feeling of choking experienced by the animal before the knife slices through its throat). When the animal is burned on the altar, this symbolizes the fourth kind of death penalty, death by burning. The owner of the animal recites a confession and G–d accepts it. The priest must also see to it that at the time when he sprinkles the animal's blood on the altar the man or woman for whom he performs this service should observe what he is doing. The priest is not himself allowed to look directly at a woman while he performs service in the precincts of the Temple; the copper laver used in the Temple was made of the mirrors the Jewish women used in Egypt when they prettied themselves for their husbands; when the priest offers a sin-offering owned by a woman he looks at this copper laver and sees her reflection in it. This has been explained by the Rekanati. The rule we learn from all that we have described above is that the person who offers the sacrifice should regard himself as being sacrificed. He is then fulfilling (2,1): ונפש כי תקריב קרבן מנחה "When a person sacrifices (himself) as a gift-offering".
  From what I have explained you will understand that by means of the (animal) sacrifice man's "lower" will is elevated and thereby able to approach G–d's "higher" will. G–d's will in turn is also able to relate more closely to man's "lower" will. It is incumbent on the lowly to subdue his will by means of the sacrifice, so that man's soul, נפש, will identify with the נפש of the animal he offers up. When he does this the Torah will consider his sacrifice as if he had sacrificed his own נפש, his own life. When the priest offers the sacrifice, his נפש "sticks" to the נפש on the Celestial Altar in the first instance, and then proceeds to still higher regions. When that process is complete the priest is called מלאך. This is what Malachi 2,7 has in mind when he describes the function of the priest as מלאך ה' צבאות הוא.
  The reason the קרבן מנחה is called מנחה is because the root of the word is הנחה, such as the הנחה, amnesty (tax reduction) king Ahasverus proclaimed for the provinces when he made a feast in honor of his marriage to Esther (Esther 2,18). The word is used similar to Zachariah 6,8: הניחו את רוחי, "They have gratified My spirit." Thus far the Rekanati.
  Abraham ibn Ezra writes that the animal offerings are in the nature of a תמורה. As is well known, we are not allowed to swap animals that have been designated as sacrifices for other animals, be they inferior or even superior (Leviticus chapter 27). An animal which has once been designated as holy to G–d does not revert to become חולין, profane. 
  The mystical dimension of all this is that the sacrifice is designated for G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name, not for any of the non-essential attributes of His. It is in the nature of what the prophet Isaiah 43,4 said: ואתן אדם תחתיך, that G–d will forego the offer of any other human beings to serve Him in lieu of the Jewish people. Our sages have revealed the reason for all this in Menachot 110a where they quote Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai as saying that it is remarkable that the name for G–d used in the entire קרבנות legislation in פרשת ויקרא is invariably the four- lettered Ineffable Name of G–d. We do not find such names as אלוקים, אל, צבאות, but only the four-lettered Ineffable Name regardless of the type of sacrifice the Torah discusses. Nachmanides discusses the implication of this statement at length.
  The Zohar (Sullam edition Vayikra page 13 as well as page 33), describes at length how the letters in the Ineffable Name unite by means of the קרבן. When the name of G–d becomes "whole" in this fashion, then the purpose of the קרבן to become ריח ניחוח, a sweet-smelling fragrance has been achieved. The King in the Celestial Regions can then find satisfaction, so to speak. This is what Solomon had in mind in Song of Songs 5,1 when he said: אריתי מרי עם בשמי אכלתי יערי עם דבשי שתיתי ייני עם חלבי, "I gathered My myrrh with My spice from your princely incense; I accepted your unbidden as well as your bidden offerings to Me; I drank your libations pure as milk." The various items described in that verse are understood as symbolising either different emanations and/or people such as David, etc., who symbolised the attributes which these emanations represent. A comparison is cited with a king who has prepared his own meal without having prepared a meal for his servants. G–d is portrayed as waiting with His own meal until Israel has had its meal. The dual ריח ניחוח, suggests that G–d "eats" after Israel has been able to eat. Whereas the first half of the verse which speaks of אכלתי יערי עם דבשי, speaks of G–d's meal, the latter half אכלו רעים speaks of the meal of the Jewish people.
  The Zohar also explains that the last part of the metaphors in the verse refers to the 4 חיות Ezekiel saw in his vision of the מרכבה, and Rekanati page 109 comments on that. He says that every concept can be described by means of some metaphor, example. The relation of the metaphor to the concept it represents is like that of the shadow to the object that casts it, from which it is inseparable. The life-force, רוח of the beast which serves as the offering is derived from the שור, ox, of the four חיות in Ezekiel's vision. When the animal rises in the form of smoke after being offered on the altar it re-unites with its source in the מרכבה, G–d's celestial chariot. The life-force of the bird which serves as an offering similarly re-unites with the חיה called eagle in Ezekiel's vision of the מרכבה. The פני אדם, a third category of the four חיות which form part of Ezekiel's vision, derives "nourishment" i.e. is re-united when man on earth initiates the bringing of sacrifices involving his own נפש ונשמה. Each category of the מרכבה, the carrier of G–d's throne in Ezekiel's vision, unites with its respective counterpart on earth. Only afterwards are they able to accept a gift from the "King." Prior to such development no one has the right to enjoy the "king's" meal. This is what our sages (Berachot 14a) had in mind when they said that one must not engage in one's own mundane activities before one has offered prayer to G–d. The fourth חיה, the image of the lion in Ezekiel's vision, does not confer of its strength to others but is only a passive recipient. When Israel was at its optimum spiritual level, they lay on the altar. This is an allusion to the lion which does not have to rouse itself.
  I have dealt at some length with these matters in my treatise on תענית in the section of the offerings. You will also find more about the mystical dimensions of the קרבנות in my chapter שער השמים on the daily תמיד offerings as well as in my treatise dealing with איזהו מקומן.
  We find a similar approach to the mystical dimensions of the sacrifices, each one according to its specific purpose, in a book called שבעה היכלות. The sacrifices, or their smoke, are represented as rising heavenwards, there to re-unite with spiritual forces in the Celestial Sanctuary from which they originated.
  Remember that there are sacrifices parts of which may be consumed by the altar, the priest, and the owner. Examples of such sacrifices are the so-called peace offerings, שלמים. Other sacrifices may be eaten only by the priests in addition to the parts offered on the altar; examples of these offerings are different sin offerings called חטאות ואשמות. Their blood is sprinkled on the altar, and the אימורים are burned up to atone for the sin committed by their owners. The קרבן עולה, on the other hand is offered up whole on the altar, no part of it is eaten, even not by the priest. No one was allowed to derive bodily gratification from the עולה, because it atoned for sinful thoughts rather than for sinful actions. The sin had remained in the realm of the נפש, the intangible part of man. It had not touched his flesh. It is therefore appropriate that the entire animal which represents this sin should be converted to something intangible, i.e. רוח. When we keep this in mind we understand the statement of our sages (Yuma 29a) that הרהורי עבירה קשים מעבירה, "the contemplation of the sin is more serious than the actual execution of the sinful deed." Some sacrifices had to be brought from male animals only and others again from female only. The Zohar explains that the sacrifice of a male animal signifies an affinity between Heaven and earth which originated in the Celestial Regions, whereas the sacrifice of a female animal signifies an affinity between our region and the Celestial Regions which originated on earth.
  The Rekanati (page 111) on Leviticus 4,2: דבר אל בני ישראל לאמור נפש כי תחטא בשגגה מכל מצות ה' אשר לא תעשינה, "Speak to the Children of Israel; if a person commits an unintentional sin involving any of the negative commandments,etc," comments that we must realise that anyone committing a transgression of any of G–d's commandments is called a sinner, חוטא, to the extent that the particular commandment depended on him to fulfil it. Since negative commandments fall under the heading of שמירה, have to be observed by not violating them, a transgressor has to bring a sacrifice to atone for his sin in a manner appropriate to the nature of his error. It is fitting therefore that the animal chosen for such a sin offering be a female sheep or a female goat. [The sinner should have remained passive like a female, whereas he actively violated the commandment. Ed.] The reason that the sin offering called אשם must be a male animal is explained by Rekanati as follows: The sin offering called חטאת applies in respect of sins which would have carried the penalty כרת, a form of premature death possibly involving one's descendants, i.e. a return of one's נפש, life-force, to G–d who had granted it in the first place. The sin offering called אשם is not brought for sins which, if committed intentionally, would have resulted in the כרת type of death. It therefore may be viewed as closer to the עולה offering which is converted to ריח ניחוח, a sweet smelling fragrance for G–d. It rises to a higher region in Heaven. The bull of the כהן המשיח and the bull of the High Court in atonement for errors of judgment committed, both sin offerings, are brought only to פתח אהל מועד (4,4), only the blood to be sprinkled on the altar within the Sanctuary. 
  Most of the animal is to be burned outside the encampment of the Jewish people על שפך הדשן, "on an ash heap." Rashi explains the wording used in 4,12. I have already explained the reason for this: it seems that the bulk of the male goat offered as a sin-offering by a king or temporal authority who had sinned in error was also burned up on this ash heap outside the encampment, or, when the Temple stood in Jerusalem, outside the city. The mystical dimension of offering up male goats has to do with the removal of the spirit of impurity. The sages of the Zohar claim that that was the only reason.
  The opinion of Rekanati, however, seems to be that the reason that the king had to offer a male goat if he had sinned unintentionally is, that it is the king's function to dispense justice, to fight the wars approved by G–d. In other words: the sword is the instrument of his power. Someone who has mistakenly become guilty of an idolatrous act also has to expiate by means of a sin offering consisting of a male goat. It is the function of the צדיק to battle for truth, to fight the fight on behalf of G–d in a spiritual manner just as it is the function of the king to uphold G–d's law by physical means. Both the function of the צדיק and that of the king is to be active. Both have to atone for errors by means of a male goat, the male being the symbol for being active.
  The reason the blood had to be sprinkled on the altar "seven times before the Lord," as the Torah states in 4,6, is connected to the deeper meaning of the number seven. The addition of the words: "before the Lord," may indicate that it addresses itself to G–d's anger, i.e. the face of the dividing curtain. Thus far the Rekanati.
  As a general rule we may stipulate that the sacrifice is intended to the whole, i.e. unified name of the Lord, the four-lettered Name. It is offered on the altar so that its remains will rise to the Celestial Altar as alluded to in Isaiah 60,7: יעלו לרצון על מזבחי ובית תפארתי אפאר "They shall be welcome offerings on MY altar and I will add glory to My glorious House."
  ועל כל קרבנך תקריב מלח . Salt represents the Covenant with your G–d, for salt is water which has become solid through being heated by fire. It alludes to the emanation מלכות. Although אסתר המלכה, Queen Esther, [a symbol of the emanation מלכות Ed.] had the חוט של חסד, thread of loving kindness (from the emanation חסד which represents the "upper” waters) extended to her, the fact remains that דינא דמלכותא דינא, that the preponderant emanation she was subject to was the emanation of דין, justice. The waters of this emanation are "salted" due to the power of the fire which has "burned" those waters. Salt as a symbol of the Covenant is the mystical dimension based on the emanation יסוד, which is in itself the אות הברית, symbol of the Covenant, as is well known to Kabbalists. שאור ודבש, yeast and honey, represent the כחות חיצוניות, negative forces in the universe, because yeast causes fermentation, whereas honey "sweetens” the חימוץ, i.e. strengthens the negative forces [because it makes sin appear palatable, enjoyable. Ed.]. Inasmuch as these two ingredients represent rebellion against G–d's commandments, they must not form part of any offering dedicated to G–d. The purpose of קרבן is to bring about a rapprochement between man and G–d. Yeast and honey are instruments which help to estrange man from G–d. It is clear that they cannot be part of any offering.
  Many philosophers have conceptual difficulties with understanding how animal sacrifices can achieve a rapprochement between Israel and G–d. In his Kuzari, Rabbi Yehudah Halevi has tried to explain this to the doubters. He explained that the affinity which already existed between G–d and the people of Israel is sustained by means of the sacrifices offered up on the altar in the Temple. It is similar to the affinity which exists between the spiritual life-force נפש and the body. Life, i.e. the continued existence of the soul within the body, is made possible through the intake of food by the body, which in turn sustains the soul, preserves the soul's attachment to the body. Just as we are unable to understand how the process of tangible food translates into its assimilation by an intangible spiritual force such as the soul, although we observe the result, so we also do not understand how and why the שכינה needs our sacrifices in order that the mutual close relationship between us and G–d may be maintained. The fact remains, however, that our affinity to G–d is maintained through the animal sacrifices. Thus far the Kuzari.
  Rabbi Yitzchak Arama, author of the Akeidat Yitzchak deals with this problem in chapter 57 of his book, after taking the Kuzari to task for presenting us with a parable in which the משל is not at all like the נמשל. The human body needs physical food for survival, something which is not true of the Jewish people i.e. an abstract concept. Rabbi Arama concludes that, of course, the שכינה does not "need" the sacrifices. He believes that it is the motivation that prompts one to eat food which determines if such food can be converted into "soul-food." If we eat in order to be able to serve G–d better as the result of the food we consume, the spiritual level of the individual Jew, (or even the Jewish nation in the case of communal sacrifices), is enhanced. As a result our affinity with the שכינה is strengthened. He refers to chapter six in his book in which he explains that the highest level our soul achieves is not the level at which it was when we were born, but rather that the level of "soul," intangible spiritual force- we possess is either נפש, רוח or נשמה, depending on how much effort we put into developing our personality. The Torah has said concerning this in Genesis 2,7: ויהי האדם לנפש חיה, "Man started out with only the נפש part of his soul as long as he had not developed his personality."
  The kind of food needed to sustain a soul of a level over and above the minimum level נפש, is different from the kind of food needed to sustain a body. When Moses spent three times forty days on Mount Sinai without physical food or drink, he certainly sustained his נשמה by spiritual nourishment instead. 
  Rabbi Arama further refers to his commentary on the phenomenon of Moses going without food or drink [chapter 32] in which he states that the more refined the food, the more it can serve as soul-food. This is the meaning of the concept of ריח ניחוח, the almost totally intangible part of food. "Man does not live on bread alone, but on all that emanates from the mouth of the Lord" (Deut. 8,3) i.e. one can live on spiritual nourishment. This is the reason that a meal during which no words of Torah are spoken is considered an abomination (Avot 3,3).
   It is this aspect of the food which determines our affinity with G–d as a nation, not the aspect of the "nutritional" value of the animal sacrifices presented on the altar. Should these considerations not be present and not motivate the animal sacrifices presented by the priest on behalf of the Jewish people, the Heavenly Table, i.e. the altar, may be considered as uprooted. Thus far the words of Rabbi Yitzchak Arama.
  Whereas I fully agree with the views expressed in the Akeidat Yitzchak, one needs to support his words with something "tasty," just as salt is needed to make the food tasty. The Arizal has explained the way in which the affinity of the soul to the body is maintained in a beautiful manner. This is what he says: "There is nothing which does not contain some element of sanctity. Our sages have already stated that there is not a blade of grass in our world which does not have a mazal in the "higher" world instructing it to grow (Bereshit Rabbah 10,7); this Celestial force exerts great influence on the development of the blade of grass. This influence is spiritual in nature and is translated into the physical by the blade of grass behaving in accordance with the laws of nature. Something similar applies to everything we eat and drink. On the one hand the food and drink we consume is something physical, on the other hand it contains some concealed spiritual element. This relationship is similar to the relationship of גוף ונפש, body and soul. When man, a combination of body and soul, eats and drinks, his body benefits from the physical element of the food or drink consumed, while his soul is strengthened by its spiritual element. This is the reason that body and soul remain attached to each other. Concerning this phenomenon the Torah says in Deut 8,3 that man does not live on bread alone in order to teach us that it is not only the "visible" part of the bread that contains sustenance for man. On the contrary, bread also contains מוצא פי ה', an invisible expression of G–d's spirit which contributes to keeping man, i.e. his soul, alive." Thus far the Ari zal.
  I wish to add that what applies to individual man and the relationship between his body and soul also applies to the concept of the Jewish nation and its relationship with G–d through the presentation of the קרבנות. We know that whatever exists in our world is the result of concepts and ideas that exist in the Celestial Spheres which have devolved through a number of stages called ספירות until they - became part of the physical universe. The phenomena in our world are divided into basic groups called דומם, inert matter, צומח, vegetation, i.e. growing but immobile matter, חי living creatures, and finally the מדבר, articulate living creatures, i.e. man. These four categories of phenomena on earth symbolize the four basic elements. Inert matter, the lowest of the creatures, symbolizes the element עפר, dust, earth. Vegetable matter symbolizes the element מים, water, for when rain descends on earth it irrigates and promotes the growth of plants. Animals and birds symbolize the element רוח, air, something without which no living creature can exist. Man, whose distinction is his soul, symbolizes the fourth element אש, fire, or spiritual light; we know from Proverbs 20,27, that נר ה' נשמת אדם,"the soul of man is the light of the Lord."
  We know that these four elements have their roots in successive layers of the Celestial Regions. At a higher level they are known as the four encampments of the שכינה which are supported by the archangels מיכאל, גבריאל, אוריאל and רפאל. The archangel מיכאל is the source of the waters in the "higher" regions, the spiritual waters; גבריאל is the source of the heavenly אש, spiritual fire; אוריאל is the source of אויר, air, whereas רפאל is the source of the spiritual equivalent to עפר, dust. These four foundations in turn are the result of downward evolution of still higher spiritual concepts, the ones represented by the four חיות in Ezekiel's vision of the מרכבה, the lion, the ox, man, and the eagle. These four images in turn have evolved from four concealed "legs" of the Celestial Chariot, מרכבה, which rests in the region of אצילות, until – at the top of the pyramid – we have the four letters of the Ineffable Name, the ultimate root of the four basic elements found in our world. The letter י represents the element מים, the letter ה represents אש, the letter ו represents the element רוח, whereas the last letter ה represents the element עפר. All this is familiar to scholars of Kabbalistic texts. Each of the levels we mentioned in turn has tens of thousands of sub-levels until we reach the ultimate level at which point it becomes clear כי ה' הוא האלוקים בשמים ממעל ועל הארץ מתחת אין עוד, "that the Lord G–d is in the Heavens above and on the earth below and that there is no one else." This means that there is absolutely no existence which He is not somehow part of, which is independent of Him (Deut. 4,39).
  The קרבנות, sacrificial offerings, are composed of all four types of creatures on earth. The salt represents the דומם, inert matter. The Torah commands that it must be part of every sacrifice (2,13). The מנחות, gift offerings as well as the נסכים, libations, with their predominantly flour or wine content, represent the צומח, the growing but immobile vegetable matter. The living creatures are represented by offerings of cattle, sheep, goats, doves and pigeons respectively. The fourth category of creature, articulate man, is represented in every sacrifice by the person offering same when he thinks about the meaning of what he is doing and rouses himself to become closer to G–d through vicariously offering G–d his very life-force, נפש. The reason the Torah (2,1) speaks about ונפש כי תקריב, "a life-force sacrificing," is that on occasion, by means of גלגול, G–d summons a soul or several souls to serve as sacrifices to expiate for some unatoned sin of the past. This is further alluded to in the words אדם כי יקריב מכם, This demonstrates that by sacrificing himself in our world man can establish a closer relationship with G–d in the spiritual world. The medium of achieving this is the קרבן.
  Let us return to the three tasks of the sacrifice. They are: 1) to achieve atonement, 2) to serve as an exchange for our own lives, and 3) to establish the affinity with the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d. Keeping these three objectives in mind, the verse אדם כי יקריב מכם must be viewed as telling us that in order to obtain forgiveness the sinner who offers the sacrifice must humble both his body and his soul by performing a deed which symbolizes that he is aware that he is guilty of one of the four categories of death penalty administered by a Jewish High Court. When he does so his קרבן is considered לה', G–d's. 
  If he fails to do so and only goes through the motions, the offering of the animal is not considered a קרבן, a means to come closer to G–d. Under such conditions we consider this merely קרבן האדם, and this is why the Torah continues in our verse מן הבהמה, מן הבקר ומן הצאן תקריבו את קרבנכם, meaning unless the aforementioned attitude is present the sacrifice does not qualify for the description קרבן לה'. When Psalms 51,19 speaks about זבחי אלוקים רוח נשברה, לב נשבר אלוקים לא תבזה , that "true sacrifice to G–d is a contrite spirit; G–d, You will not despise a contrite and crushed heart," the reference is to a period when we do not have a Temple in which to offer a sacrifice. Considering that the entire function of animal sacrifice was to evoke a crushed heart in man, when such a crushed heart is present G–d will relate to the penitent sinner as if he had offered the sacrifice he would have had to offer had there been a Temple. This is how Rabbi Yitzchak Arama explains this verse in Psalms.
  The second function of the קרבן, that of being an exchange for one's own life, is a moral lesson which man has to apply to himself in two ways: 1) G–d admonishes those whom He loves. The afflictions man undergoes [and the way in which he accepts them, Ed.] are what ultimately secure him his entry into the Hereafter. When he has undergone these afflictions he, himself, has been elevated to the level of being the קרבן. This is the other meaning of the words: אדם כי יקריב מכם (הוא) קרבן לה'. 2) Sometimes the element of תמורה, exchange, is an exchange for something that is part of the system of nature. We know that phenomena which exist in this universe are subject to exchange from (Isaiah 43,4) ואתנה אדם תחתך, "I give אדם, men, in exchange for you. When the Torah says: מן הבהמה מן הבקר ומן הצאן תקריבו את קרבנכם, this means "your sacrifice which was the one suitable for you, which corresponds to your position in the universe." Cattle, sheep, etc. will serve as an exchange for your life. This principle is valid even when the sacrificial offerings can no longer be presented due to the absence of the Temple. G–d, in His mercy, is the Guardian of those who love Him and He finds for Himself an exchange to take your place in order to afford you an opportunity to achieve atonement. This occurs when man attempts to draw close to his G–d.
  Keeping this in mind, we can reconcile two apparently totally contradictory opinions among our sages. Some sages claim that the fortunes of the Jewish people are not subject to מזל, horoscopic influences, whereas other sages state that horoscopic influences do have a bearing on our fate (Shabbat 156a). Israel is subject to horoscopic influences. Sometimes G–d interferes and substitutes someone else for Israel. This "substitute" then experiences what would have been the destiny of Israel had G–d not interfered.
  The third and mystical function of the קרבן is that it facilitates the union between man and the Ineffable Name of G–d. Concerning this function the Torah says: אדם כי יקריב מכם (הוא) קרבן ל-י-ה-ו-ה. Israel is the sacrifice called אדם. When G–d had said in Genesis 1,26: נעשה אדם בצלמנו, "Let Us make man in Our image", He created man in this world while at the same time establishing the likeness of man on the throne in the Celestial Regions. It is significant that the numerical value of the word אדם (45) corresponds to the numerical value of the Ineffable Name when spelled as a word, i.e. יוד-הא-ואו-הא. This is the allusion that man is close to G–d, i.e. is a קרבן. Such affinity is achieved by means of בקר and צאן which we sacrifice down here on earth. When the Torah continues: תקריבו את קרבנכם, this is the instruction to awaken within ourselves the consciousness of the highest achievements we are capable of in our affinity with G–d. Nowadays, when we find ourselves in exile, the sages introduced the daily prayer services as a substitute for the public offerings in the Temple. Prayers are also capable of establishing this unity between ourselves and the Ineffable Name. 
  By reciting the relevant sections of the daily public offerings in our prayer book, generally observing the commandments, reciting all the benedictions and keeping ourselves free from character blemishes just as the sacrificial animals had to be free from physical blemishes, we ourselves can qualify as being the קרבן for G–d. We will have fulfilled the requirements on all three levels, thought, speech and deed. The movements of our lips when reciting the פרשת הקרבנות is considered the "deed" part of our efforts only if one feels saddened that one cannot actually offer the sacrifice itself. Under such conditions G–d accepts the intention as the equivalent to the deed. While the Temple was still standing prayer was not acceptable as a substitute for the actual sacrifice. Whenever we are able to fulfill a commandment by actually performing it, there is no way we can substitute. 
  When one can pay "lip-service" – as in the case of the substitution of prayer for the sacrifice – one's lips move normally and do not display a sign that their owner grieves over the fact that he has to content himself with such "lip-service." Nowadays, when in exile, our "lip-service" is accompanied by our lips becoming painfully distorted when we really grieve over our inability to fulfil our duty in the optimal manner. To contrast this experience with the way we shall feel after the Temple will be restored, David says in Psalms 126,2: אז ימלא שחוק פינו ולשוננו רנה, "Then our mouths shall be filled with laughter and our tongues with songs of joy."
  The foregoing enables us to understand the Zohar who comments on Leviticus 1,1: "He spoke to him out of the Tent of Meeting," that G–d spoke from the interior, or depth of the Tabernacle, informing Moses that the Children of Israel would be prepared to sin and how the Temple would be destroyed as a result. This is why the Torah writes here ויקרא, without identifying who called. When the destruction of the Temple is referred to in Isaiah 22,12, the prophet quotes G–d as: ויקרא ה' אלוקים צבאות ביום ההוא לבכי ולמספד, "On that day The Lord G–d of Hosts summoned to weeping and lamenting." [The context of this prophecy was a day on which Yehudah mistakenly believed itself secure, able to withstand any onslaught by its enemies. Ed.]
  When considering the Zohar's comment we understand that that it is based on two fine points in our verse in Leviticus. 1) We would have expected the Torah to write: ויקרא מאהל מועד; 2) We would have expected the Torah to state: ויקרא ה' באהל מועד. The latter would have been appropriate especially in view of Rashi's comment that the voice of G–d was not audible outside the Sanctuary, but was as if cut off by the walls of the Sanctuary. If we understand the Torah according to the Zohar's interpretation the wording is absolutely justified. G–d spoke with Moses on account of the destiny of the Sanctuary which would ultimately be destroyed.
  This still leaves us with the problem that we have a tradition that G–d does not allow moments of joy to be disturbed by revealing sad tidings (Rashi on Genesis 6,6). Why then would G–d cause Moses mental anguish on such a day when the Tabernacle was being inaugurated?
  I believe we can answer this when we consider that we also have the problem of the word לאמור in the verse we are dealing with. In view of verse 2 commencing with the word דבר, speak, the word לאמור, to say, seems totally out of place at the end of verse 1! When we follow the Zohar it becomes clear that G–d displayed His love for Israel by revealing to Moses that even at a time when there would not be a Sanctuary the sacrifices -which are the mechanism for atonement- would be replaced by a remedy alluded to in the word לאמור, the appropriate lip-service, i.e. prayer during such periods. G–d reassured Moses that there would not be reason for despair even if there were no Temple because of Israel's sins. The whole verse then means that "He spoke to him from the 'depth' of the Tent of Meeting, i.e. alluding to a time when there would not be a Tent of Meeting, revealing that the remedy for such a situation would be lip-service." What this lip-service was to consist of is introduced by the word דבר in verse 2, i.e. "speak or recite the liturgy entailing the sacrificial service."
  Let us return to our principal subject, the three reasons for animal sacrifice. We have stated that one reason is that the sacrifices are the instruments of achieving atonement. The sacrifices which perform this function are the חטאת, עולה, ואשם. The second reason we need sacrifices is to be able to take advantage of the phenomenon of תמורה, to enable G–d on occasion to override the horoscopic influences we are subject to by substituting some other creature in our place. The sacrifice which is most likely to accomplish this is the קרבן תודה, offering of thanksgiving. We are taught (Berachot 54b) that there are four categories of people who have to offer such a type of offering because they have been saved from dangers by G–d through personal intervention, i.e. through the phenomenon we have described as תמורה. I have explained elsewhere that the mystical dimension of a miraculous escape is due to the phenomenon known as תמורה וחליפין. The third function which we hope that sacrifices perform for us is achieved through the daily public offerings, the תמידים as well as the מוספים on the Sabbaths, the Holy Days, and the New Moon. These days possess inherent sanctity. 
  This is what the statement we quoted from the Midrash that Adam, Noach and Abraham respectively offered sacrifices is all about. Adam's sacrifice was a sin offering, designed to obtain atonement. G–d responded by saying that there was no disgrace involved if He spoke to His tenant. We have a Midrash in Shemot Rabbah section 42 in which Rabbi Berechyah is quoted as saying in the name of Rabbi Levi that we may compare the situation to that of the owner of a vineyard who entrusted its care to a tenant farmer. Whenever the wine produced from the annual harvest was good, he would credit the vineyard; when the harvest turned out unsatisfactorily the owner would blame this on the tenant farmer. We have copied this Midrash in our commentary on פרשת כי תשא where G–d called the Jewish people Moses' people as soon as they made the golden calf, whereas prior to this the Jewish people were described as His own people. We know that the World to Come is called חמר טוב, good wine, since this is where the יין המשומר, the wine which has been preserved in its original grapes since the days of גן עדן will be served to the righteous. Everything which is described as good originates with G–d. Unfortunately, as a result of his freedom, man chose an inferior wine when Eve squeezed a cluster of grapes to extract its juice. As a result Adam was called אריס, a tenant farmer. Later on he had to bring a sin offering to rehabilitate himself.
  Noach's sacrifice was in the nature of a thanksgiving offering. He thanked G–d for his miraculous escape from the deluge, i.e. he had survived a descent into the sea. I have already explained that the thanksgiving offering is in the nature of a תמורה. G–d, by interfering personally in man's fate, selected an alternate creature to experience the fate that was in store for the person saved. In this way G–d neutralised horoscopic influences. The various animals offered on the altar normally, serve as the substitute for the person G–d saved. This is the reason that Noach was called נקדוד, herder in the Midrash.
  G–d looked upon Abraham as the innkeeper of the Sanctuary, so to speak. When we read in Genesis 17,22: "G–d rose from above Abraham," this is a clear indication that Abraham served as the מרכבה, the carrier of the שכינה. I have explained already that the letters in the name אברהם are an allusion to the various מרכבות. Abraham had personally fulfilled the injunction of the Torah אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לה' when he offered up his only beloved son Isaac. This amounted to אדם התחתון, man in the lower regions, establishing a close affinity with אדם העליון, man in the Celestial Regions in the mystical dimension of ואת הדבקים בה'. Isaac was the perfect עולה offering for G–d. 
  The Midrash continued that the words אל משה specifically exclude Aaron from this call of G–d from the Tent of Meeting. I have explained earlier in this chapter how both Abraham and Aaron served as rehabilitation for Adam We will understand this with the help of two introductory remarks. 1) One consideration to keep in mind is that Aaron was chosen in lieu of Adam who had become estranged from G–d. Aaron became High Priest. Abraham too served as תקון, rehabilitative substitute for Adam, as I have explained in detail in my commentary on פרשת חיי שרה on page 129. Once Aaron entered the priesthood he left the domain of זרות, being an "outsider," to become holy and sanctified by the anointing oil and the vestments reserved for the priesthood, the vestments which symbolize the כתנות אור, the garments of light, in lieu of the garments of skin worn by Adam after the sin as explained on פרשת תצוה.
  The second introductory remark concerns what I wrote in that portion, i.e. that Moses performed the priestly functions during the first seven days of the Tabernacle wearing a white tunic. Moses had been "light" ever since the day he was born and his parents' home was filled with light at his birth. He had never been a זר, "outsider," unlike his brother Aaron. He was therefore on a much higher spiritual plane than Aaron. The Midrash therefore was quite justified in pointing out that the Torah's words: "G–d called to Moses," are to alert us to the fact that only Moses qualified for this call, not even Abraham or Aaron had ever qualified to such a call.
  Let us now demonstrate how Aaron served as the instrument of Adam's rehabilitation. We have already mentioned that the whole purpose of creation was Man, and that when Adam sinned he corrupted not only himself but the whole planet. At the revelation at Mount Sinai the process of rehabilitation had advanced to a point where the whole planet, including Man, was ready to resume the spiritual and physical level which had existed in גן עדן. The episode of the golden calf ruined this rehabilitation; ever since the progress towards Man's complete rehabilitation has been very halting and irregular. The establishment of the Tabernacle was a major part of whatever rehabilitation has occurred since. The reason that the Tabernacle was such a major factor in the process of rehabilitation is that it represented a world "reborn." It was meant to be a microcosm of the cosmos. Within this "reborn" world Aaron occupied the place that Adam had occupied on our planet when he was first created. Sacred vestments were made for both Aaron and his sons to take the place of the regular garments made of skin worn by Adam after his sin. Adam had been forced to wear those garments in exchange for the garments made of light which he had been equipped with at the time he was created. 
  The purpose of these garments was to be לשם ולתפארת, "for dignity and adornment," as stated by the Torah in Exodus 28,2. Genesis 2,28 reports: "Adam and Eve were nude; they did not experience a sense of shame." The serpent became jealous when it saw their nudity. This is the mystical dimension of all the forbidden sexual unions. The serpent had infected humans with a pollutant. The priests were warned by the Torah not to climb the altar by means of steps so as not to reveal even part of their bodies in the process (Exodus 20,23). It is a natural tendency of man to want to climb steps, to become G–d-like, the vision held out to Eve by the serpent in Genesis 3,4. This tendency became outlawed, i.e. ערוה. Adam later was מושך בערלתו tried to conceal the fact that he was circumcised, as stated by our sages in Sanhedrin 38b. The seven days of inauguration of the Tabernacle before Aaron took over in his capacity as High Priest were symbolic of the seven days of creation. On the eighth day Moses called upon Aaron; on that day he was crowned with ten crowns (Rashi on Leviticus 9,1). He was considered as if he had been created anew on that day. On that date Adam was resurrected, so to speak, because Aaron fulfilled the commandment of "sacrificing his own personality," i.e. אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן, performing an act which reversed the direction Adam had taken, when, instead of cementing his close relations with G–d, he had distanced himself from G–d by eating from the tree of knowledge and bringing death into the world. Nonetheless death henceforth would occur when someone, who was close to G–d (i.e. a priest) would fail to observe all the strictures on the performance of the service in the Tabernacle G–d had placed on the priests, just as death was the consequence of non-observance of G–d's law in the macrocosm, so now death would be the penalty for failing to observe G–d's law within the Tabernacle, the microcosm. At the creation G–d had warned with the words מות תמות; now two sons of Aaron died because they had approached G–d in a forbidden manner, as will be explained in due course.
  The Talmud reports in Chagigah 14b that four outstanding scholars entered the "orchard," i.e. they investigated secrets, mystical dimensions of Torah study not given to everyone to understand. Only one of these four sages, Rabbi Akiva, returned from this investigation without any harm. Four people preceded these four Talmudic scholars in their desire to probe these mysteries. They were: Adam, Noach, Abraham and the sons of Aaron (who are considered as one, as a team). They all entered this "orchard" or vineyard. 
  Adam squeezed out a cluster of grapes and became a heretic at that very moment, as our Rabbis have stated in Sanhedrin 38b. Our sages have expressed this as והיה נעשה אחר, "he turned into someone else." Noach planted a vineyard (Genesis 9,20) and when drunk became spiritually hurt, lost his sanity. Abraham planted an orchard and emerged unscathed. This is the mystical dimension of being the מרכבה, the carrier of the שכינה. The two sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, also had a glimpse of these mysteries but they died in the process. The Talmud described the experiences of the four scholars as being identical with the four people who had tried to probe these mysteries before them. As far as the death of the two sons of Aaron is concerned, it occurred because they had penetrated so deeply into these mystical matters, i.e. they came so close to the purely spiritual dimensions of G–d that their bodies could not keep up the pace. It is significant that the Torah speaks about their coming close to G–d i.e. בקרבתם, not about בהקריבם, their bringing close, i.e. sacrificing something else (Leviticus 16,1). This means that their very death was their coming close to G–d. They had brought themselves to such closeness. They sanctified G–d by their very death because they had achieved an exceptionally high spiritual level. Moses explained this to his brother Aaron in 10,3: בקרובי אקדש ועל פני כל העם אכבד, "Through those near Me I will show Myself holy, and gain glory before all the people." G–d Himself testified to the stature of these two sons of Aaron and to the fact that He felt honoured by their attempt to draw close to Him. These two sons of Aaron rehabilitated their forebear Adam. We have a tradition going back to the Arizal that these two sons of Aaron were the re-incarnation of the soul, נפש, of Adam. These re-incarnations can occur on three levels, נפש, רוח, or נשמה respectively. Nadav and Avihu were re-incarnates of the נפש of Adam as is hinted at in Numbers 9,6: ויהי אנשים אשר היו טמאים לנפש אדם, "There were two men who were impure due to the soul of Adam." Rabbi Akiva believed that the men referred to were Mishael and Eltzafan who carried the bodies of Nadav and Avihu out of the Sanctuary. He appears to have understood the word נפש in our verse as referring to that of first man, Adam (Sukkah 25b). This is supported by Leviticus 10,5 in which Mishael and Eltzafan are described as וישאום בכתנותם, as having carried them in "their tunics," the latter word referring to the כתנות אור, the tunics made of light worn by Adam prior to his sin. 
  Eve was the reason that death came into our world, as we know. Vayikra Rabbah 20,2 on Psalms 75,5 states: "I said to wanton men: 'do not be wanton.'" Elisheva, daughter of Aminadav, did not rejoice in spite of five joyous events on the same day: The appointment of her husband as High Priest, the appointment of her brother-in-law Moses as king, her brother Nachshon as prince, her sons Eleazar and Itamar as deputy High Priests, and her nephew's Pinchas elevation to the priesthood. In spite of all this, her sons Nadav and Avihu entered the Sanctuary with אש זרה resulting in their death and turning her joy into mourning. This is why David warns us in the Psalm not to indulge in excessive joys. It is not given to the righteous to experience so much joy in this life. The Midrash mentions that G–d does not rejoice anymore in this world since He had to withdraw His שכינה due to Eve's sin but will rejoice only in the World to Come as we know from ישמח ה' במעשיו, that "G–d will once again rejoice in His accomplishments" (Psalms 104,31) [as He did when He completed the universe. Ed.]. In this world only the wicked experience true joy. There are several difficulties in this Midrash. Why does the author speak about Elisheva's having seen five joyous events on that day instead of the same joyous events "seen" by her husband Aaron? Did not her husband experience even greater joy on that day when he personally was elevated to the position of High Priest? He saw his brother crowned as king, his sons installed as deserving children, as mentioned in the Torah by the words למשפחותם לבית אבותם, "belonging to their families because they are descended from the house of their respective fathers," meaning that his sons are compared to him even more than to their mother? His sons became his deputies which demonstrated how closely they resembled their father in character traits. Some people want to answer our question by referring to the Talmud in Avodah Zarah 31 which regards the wife of a חבר, a pious person, as being equal to her husband. This means that she experienced that her sons regarded themselves as related to their mother as intimately as to their father. This is in line with the advice of our sages (Baba Batra 110a) who counsel a person to examine the brothers of a prospective bride to see what character traits he may expect to find in his bride. When the Torah reports the marriage of Aaron to Elisheva in Exodus 6,23, it stresses that Elisheva was Nachshon's sister. This proves that he was influenced by the character qualities of Nachshon. Still, I regard this answer as somewhat forced.
  We should remember that Aaron represented the mystical dimension of Adam. If this was so it is reasonable to regard his wife Elisheva as equivalent to the mystical dimension of Adam's wife Eve. Eve sinned primarily by allowing her eyes to seduce her. The Torah emphasises that "she saw that the tree was good as food, pleasant to behold, etc." This is simply a description of the urge to become honoured. This urge brings about the קליפה that women behave arrogantly. In explaining the verse in Psalms 75,5, the Midrash describes Elisheva's joys as the root of her experiencing some haughtiness. When the Midrash emphasises "Elisheva saw her husband elevated, etc.," it wishes to draw our attention to the fact that in contrast to his wife, Aaron did not "see," did not become haughty on account of the honours and joys he experienced on that day. Aaron acted as if he had not seen these honours which could have caused him to become haughty. When Nadav and Avihu died Elisheva suffered a similar disappointment to the one Eve experienced when death was decreed on mankind, i.e. on her sons and descendants. The Midrash begins with the word תדע, "Know!" meaning that if you want to understand the whole occurrence you would do well to study the chapter of Eve's seduction in גן עדן.
  Our sages in Vayikra Rabbah 20,5 claim that one of the reasons the two sons of Aaron died was that they entered the Sanctuary while intoxicated by wine. This is a veiled reference to the יין המשומר, the wine stemming from גן עדן, which we have frequently discussed, as being instrumental in their death. This is why the Torah reports the legislation that priests must not enter the Sanctuary after having drunk wine or other intoxicating drink. If the priests want to benefit from the יין המשומר in the World to Come, they must refrain from drinking the intoxicating drinks of this world while performing service in the Temple.
  The reason that the wine saved from גן עדן is called משומר, is that its dregs, its yeast has been removed. When Eve squeezed the grapes and gave her husband to drink she had not removed those dregs first. The Torah (Numbers 18,8) writes of Aaron, who was the rehabilitation of Adam, that he was to be the recipient of what G–d calls משמרת תרומתי, "The residue of My gifts." It is also said of Abraham (Genesis 26,5) וישמר משמרתי. Some of our sages interpret the repetition of the expression שמר in this verse as meaning that Abraham introduced "fences," preventive measures around G–d's laws so as to ensure that the laws themselves could not easily be violated. This would be similar to the Mishnah in Shabbat 20,1 permitting the suspension of a sieve i.e. <i>meshameret</i> on the holiday in order to catch the <i>shemarim</i>, sediments, yeast, of the wine.
  The mystical dimension of all this is that ever since the pollutant of the serpent, i.e. the negative fall-out of the sin, infected man it has become necessary to build "fences" around G–d's laws to make it almost impossible to transgress an actual Biblical injunction. When someone is guilty of being פורץ גדר, demolishing such a fence, the serpent will bite him. In other words, if someone does not construct a משמרת he is liable to transgress the essence of G–ds commandments. In the future, when G–d will remove the pollutant of the serpent there will no longer be a need for these fences; this need stems from the power of the Sig, dross, introduced into our bodies by the serpent. It is significant that in the parlance of our sages the fence is not called גדר, but rather Se\yag, i.e. the same word as Sig. Our Rabbis in Avot 1,1 wanted to make sure that we appreciate the reason for the need to construct such "fences." Aaron came close to G–d in lieu of Adam. He was the Meshameret. This is the meaning of G–d saying in Numbers 18,8 that he would be the משמרת תרומתי.
  After conclusion of the paragraph dealing with the death of the sons of Aaron and the precautions priests must take not to run the risk of displeasing G–d to the point where they would become guilty of death, the Torah continues with a list of what we may or may not eat. The chapter dealing with these forbidden foods parallels the prohibition not to eat from the tree of knowledge in גן עדן. The origin of theses forbidden foods is in the סיטרא אחרא, the side of the emanations in which negative influences originate. The Zohar explains this at length.
  Eve's sin was due to her being seduced by the serpent which had mated with her and introduced its pollutant into her body. The potency of that evil-smelling drop of semen caused her to become subject to menstruation at regular intervals; she therefore had to remain in a state of impurity for seven days, corresponding to the days it took to create the universe. She, after all, had damaged the work of the six days of Creation. When a woman gives birth she is also subject to ritual impurity in a similar way to the impurity of menstruating women, as per Leviticus 12,2. This too is due to the original sin for which she has to suffer great pain when giving birth as per Genesis 3,16. 
  Midrash Kohelet, quoting Rabbi Yehudah bar Simon, is of the opinion that the seven days of impurity a woman experiences in connection with menstruation correspond to the seven times Solomon referred to הבלים, futilities, in Kohelet 1,2. [When the word הבל appears in the singular it refers to a single "futility," whereas when it appears in the plural it refers to two "futilities." Ed.] This means that in view of the sin committed by Adam and Eve everything which was created during the seven days of Creation is futile. Creation experienced another damaging blow when Cain murdered his brother הבל. Man indulged in the pursuit of futile objectives, וילכו אחרי ההבל ויהבלו, "They went after delusion and were deluded" (Jeremiah 2,5).
  It is well known that the real reason Cain killed Abel was on account of a female, Abel's additional twin-sister. It is understandable then that the Torah legislates that a woman who gives birth to a female child has to remain ritually impure for fourteen days instead of the seven days she remains impure when she gives birth to a male child (Leviticus 12,5). The reason that she is granted a period of thirty-three days if she gave birth to a boy or sixty six days respectively if she gave birth to a girl during which any blood seen by her is not considered as causing impurity, (although she is not yet totally pure again), is hinted at in connection with the birth of Cain and Abel in sacred texts of the Kabbalists. 
  When a woman experiences the pangs of birth, this results in impurity. After the birth, the impurity has been released through her pain. After the seven days of recovery from such impurity she no longer contains the ingredients that have caused it and therefore is free from any new impurity for a period longer than normal. Since, in the case of the birth of a female, the original impurity was stronger and lasted longer, the period during which she will be free from again contracting such impurity is correspondingly longer. [I have paraphrased the author's quotation of th anonymous source. Ed.] Another reason for that is that man lost his garments of light due to his sin and had to wear garments made of skin, i.e. something removed from the flesh of some animal. He became susceptible to נגע צרעת, afflictions of his skin. The Torah (Leviticus 13,1 expresses this by saying: נגע צרעת כי תהיה באדם … אדם כי יהיה בו נגע צרעת בעור בשרו. What all this means is that Adam, who was the cause of man having to wear clothing made of skin, is the cause of these skin diseases which afflict those who engage in slander. The serpent had been the one to indulge in slander against the Lord Himself when it said that Eve could safely eat from the tree of knowledge (Genesis 3,4) without incurring mortality. It seduced Eve and Adam to violate G–d's command. 
  The Torah instructs that such a skin affliction can only be healed by a priest, the priest being Aaron who was the rehabilitation of Adam. Afflictions such as seminal discharges, זב וזבה, are similarly due to the pollutant the serpent introduced into our genes. Purification rites from such ritual impurities caused by the disease are complete only when accompanied by a קרבן presented by a priest on behalf of the afflicted person.
  The Torah resumes the story of the death of the sons of Aaron when they approached G–d (16,1). Looking at the sequence of the Torah from the beginning of פרשת שמיני, we find that the order is perfectly logical. We would have been faced with a difficulty, were it not for the explanation of the sequence we have just mentioned. The beginning of the Book of Leviticus deals with the Tabernacle and the sacrifices to be offered there. It interrupts this discussion with a list of forbidden foods, followed by the legislation of various degrees of impurity due to birth and seminal flux and skin afflictions including such afflictions on one's clothing or one's house. The Torah then resumes the story of the death of the two sons of Aaron and proceeds to the service on the Day of Atonement. According to the way I have presented these matters the sequence is perfectly logical, and the death of the two sons of Aaron is mentioned in connection with the closest approach to G–d possible for man in this world. 
  The Torah explains that it is impossible for man, while alive, to see G–d. This is why David described the death of the pious as being precious to G–d (Psalms 116,15). Having all this in mind the Torah had to spell out that even a High Priest such as Aaron could enter the Holy of Holies only on one day of the year, on the Day of Atonement. He had to be warned not to enter at will since he had to realize that even the sacred vestments were only made of materials comparable to the כתנות עור ובשר, materials of the physical world, not the כתנות אור worn by Adam prior to his sin. It is only the nature of the Day of Atonement and the forgiveness which G–d grants on that day which enables us to become comparable to angels on that day.
  The purpose of the scapegoat tendered to Azazel (17,10) was to silence the negative forces so that Satan would not perform his perennial role as Israel's accuser on that day. The scapegoat would carry our sins so that we could remain pure, free from sin, as had been our status when Man was first created. At such a moment the High Priest was able to enter the Holy of Holies, a place as pure as גן עדן which Adam had inhabited at one time. There was no accusation pending against us then; in fact the perennial accuser became our advocate at such a time. All of this is achieved by means of the High Priest who is the תיקון, the instrument of rehabilitation, for the Jewish people. This is further alluded to when the Torah says: וכל אדם לא יהיה באהל "No Adam shall be in the tent" (16,17). The Torah suggests that only Aaron is the instrument of Adam's rehabilitation.
  This is followed by the legislation dealing with עריות, forbidden sexual relations. The Rekanati, quoting 18,6: איש איש אל כל שאר בשרו לא תקרבו לגלות ערוה אני השם, "None of you shall come near anyone of his own flesh to uncover nakedness, I am the Lord," states that most Kabbalists do not offer a specific reason for this commandment; some of them claim that the reason is that something that has been separated by G–d should not be fused again by man. The branch is not to be made part of the trunk. Since all of us move centrifugally, i.e. each generation is further removed from the original pair of human beings, it would be wrong, if, through incestual relationships, we were to reverse this process. קרובים, relatives, are like branches of a tree (root) which extend further and further. We must not make new "trees" through these forbidden unions. These branches are to receive their growth-sustaining moisture from other branches, not from their own root. The original root is perceived as if it was already drying up. Sexual union with the forbidden categories of relatives contributes to further drying out of the vital juices of the parties concerned. The metaphor is applied to the drying up of our affinity to the מרכבה העליונה, the Celestial carriers of G–d's Presence. [Rabbeinu Bachyah writes on this in a similar vein. Ed.] Cain was not forbidden to marry his sister, seeing his sister was one of the original seven human beings who had been created or born under the direct influence of Heavenly forces, corresponding to the seven days of Creation. [The seven are: Adam, Eve, Cain, his twin-sister, and Abel and his two twin-sisters. Ed.]
  Some more recent commentators see the reason for this legislation as connected to the mystery of conception. It is designed to ensure that the name of certain deceased persons should not be erased from history due to a relative becoming part of a forbidden union carrying the כרת penalty. G–d, in His great wisdom, knows whether the name of the deceased will be perpetuated as a male – if he was deserving – or as a female if he was less deserving. Since we, in our limited wisdom, do not know through whose womb the name of such person is to be perpetuated, i.e. איזה מקום מנוחתו, and so that some relative with whom sexual union is forbidden should not impregnate the woman whose issue is to be the carrier of that name, the Torah outlawed certain unions. These commentators see this as the reason that the Torah, who addresses the male, speaks also of ערות אביך, ערות אחי אביך, all males. [I believe that this exegesis is applicable only if we subscribe to the principle of transmigration of souls. Ed.]
  
  Some other reasons for the עריות legislation are advanced by some of the more recent commentators. They say that we are aware that there are ten emanations by means of which G–d established a physical world. He remained close to these emanations exerting His influence on them, remaining inseparable from them. We also know that acts performed in our world are liable to have a damaging effect on the equilibrium in the Celestial Regions. If someone has sexual relations with one of the forbidden categories of relatives he is looked upon as having taken hold of the scepter of the Celestial King in an unauthorized manner [the word שרביט could be a euphemism for the male organ Ed.] since in those Regions a close relationship between איש באחיו, "brothers" is commonplace.
  These commentators describe intercourse with one's mother as disturbing the equilibrium in the domain of the emanation בינה, also known as אם הבנים. It also disturbs the equilibrium of the שכינה, also known as the אם כל חי. This is the reason that the Torah in 18,7 writes ערות אמך לא תגלה אמך היא twice in succession. The only one who is entitled to exert his influence, [masculinity] on the domain of the emanation בינה is the King of Kings. Anyone who usurps this privilege [vicariously of course, Ed.] is guilty of the death penalty. Intercourse with the wife of one's father results in upsetting the domain of the emanation הוד, the natural partner of the emanation נצח. This emanation is also called אב לצדיק. If someone engages in sexual intercourse with his sister he damages the equilibrium of כנסת ישראל, the spiritual counterpart of the Jewish people on earth, the latter being referred to in Song of Songs 5,1 in the words: באתי לגני אחותי כלה.
  We are to understand the words: מולדת ביתאו מולדת חוץ in 18,9 as an allusion to two "sister-like" emanations, i.e. בינה and גבורה. [This emanation is also referred to as דין, and is on the "left" side of the diagram, immediately beneath that of בינה. Ed.] These two emanations are perceived as each having another "sister" emanation i.e. הוד ומלכות. If someone indulges in sexual intercourse with a granddaughter (daughter of his daughter), he inflicts damage on the equilibrium in the emanation הוד, which is perceived as a "daughter" of the emanation גבורה, whereas if he indulges in intercourse with a granddaughter who is the daughter of his son, he disturbs the equilibrium in the domain of the emanation מלכות, which is perceived as the daughter of the emanation נצח.
  Having sexual intercourse with two sisters [while they are both alive, Ed.] is perceived as equivalent to damaging the equilibrium in the domain הוד ומלכות. Only our patriarch Jacob, whom G–d Himself had called "אל" a celestial being (Genesis 33,20, cf. Megillah 18a), attained a level of spiritual perfection that permitted him to use the sceptre normally only used by the "King" in the Celestial Regions. In connection with the prohibition to marry two sisters simultaneously, the Torah (18,18) uses the expression לצרור לגלות ערותה, which we may provisionally translate as "as a rival." Rabbi Abraham Saba, in his Tzror Hamor understands the word as "creating a knot," i.e. tying up Celestial conduits and preventing them from exerting their beneficial influence on their respective partners in the domains of the emanations, and through them on this world. [This comment of the Tzror Hamor is not found in his commentary on this chapter in our פרשה. Ed.]
  Having intercourse with one's daughter-in-law upsets the equilibrium in the domain of the emanation הוד which is perceived as the partner of the emanation נצח, "son" of the emanation חסד. He simultaneously upsets the Celestial equivalent of daughter-in-law i.e. the emanation בינה. If someone sleeps with his mother-in-law he upsets the equilibrium in the domain of the emanation גבורה, which is perceived as the mother-in-law of the emanation נצח. If someone sleeps with his aunt, he upsets the equilibrium in the domains of the emanations גבורה and והוד. The emanation גבורה is Perceived as the aunt of the emanation נצח, the emanation הוד is perceived as the aunt of the emanation מלכות. They represent the sister of one's father and the sister of one's mother respectively, as per 18,12-13. If someone has sexual relations with the wife of his brother who already has children by him he upsets the equilibrium of the domain of the emanation הוד, which is perceived as the wife of the emanation נצח, itself the brother of the emanation תפארת, and its son צדיק [commonly known as the emanation יסוד. Ed.] and its daughter מלכות. Sexual relations with one's father's wife upset the equilibrium in the domain of the emanation גבורה, which is perceived as the wife of the emanation חסד. The reason that the Torah uses the term לא תגלה, "do not reveal," in connection with the entire עריות legislation is that such relations result in the offender laying bare what should remain an intimate relationship between two natural partners or mates. All the עריות allude to spiritual forces of the higher world which receive their spiritual input from their natural partners. The wise will understand this hint. Thus far the remarks of the last mentioned Kabbalists.
  The aforementioned Kabbalists view the Torah's introductory words to the עריות legislation i.e. ערות אביך, as an example of all the other forbidden unions. The reason for all these prohibitions is that through the system of גלגול, transmigration of souls, someone whose soul in his former life inhabited the body of a male may now inhabit the body of a female, or vice versa. The reason the Torah singles out אביך and דודיך [i.e. אחי אביך, seeing the Torah speaks to the male and should restrict itself to pairings with females, Ed.] is that through such matings one could reverse nature, turning the משפיע, active force, into the מקבל, recipient, passive force, and vice versa. This is different from other instances of homosexual relations [where such גלגול considerations do not apply, Ed.] when the party initiating such a relation turns his partner from a משפיע into a מקבל, whereas he himself remains a משפיע. The reason that the Torah also refers to a relationship ערות אחיך in 18,16, [although this appears to be covered by the prohibition of homosexual relations. Ed.] maybe that by indulging in such a relationship with someone who is on a par with him, he reduces his brother to becoming inferior by turning him into a מקבל. The reason the Torah mentions בנך in 18,15 maybe that by such relationship the father expresses dissatisfaction with his role as משפיע of his own generation in favor of becoming a משפיע in the next generation.
  There follows פרשת קדושים which deals with how to sanctify oneself, how to get rid of the residual pollutant of the serpent. The very purpose of the legislation in this פרשה is alluded to in 19,26: לא תנחשו, "do not indulge in practices reminiscent of the נחש, the serpent." The Rekanati comments on this verse as follows: "Do not commit the error of following the path of the original serpent which is known as the spirit of impurity, whose actions are known as ניחוש. We know about this from Bileam of whom the Torah reports in Numbers 24,1 that he discontinued consulting נחשים as had been his practice. Such consultations involved calling upon the assistance of impure spirits by swearing some kind of allegiance to them. These spirits are presumed not only to know the future but also to be able to reveal it to man. Anyone who prefers to rely on these spirits will find that G–d withdraws from him, and delivers him up to the mercy of those spirits. This is the meaning of Pessachim 110: כל דקפיד קפדינן בהדיה, "The more one is worried [about the influence of negative forces, מזיקים, Ed.] the more power these forces will have over such a person. When such a person dies, the aforementioned forces will accompany his body in accordance with the statement of our sages: בדרך שאדם רוצה לילך בה מוליכין אותו, "One leads man along the path he has chosen for himself" (Makkot 10). There are other commentators who see a warning in the verse exhorting us not to be מנחש, not to do something similar to what the serpent did when it upset the equilibrium of the Celestial equivalent of Eve by seducing Eve on earth.
  Still other commentators write that if someone violates the commandment in question his garments will be the serpent. The statement is, of course, a metaphor for the impact which certain transgressions will have on our character.
  The injunction at the end of 19,26: לא תעוננו, not to base one's actions on the perceived fortuitousness of certain dates (soothsaying), is related to the word עונה, similar to Deut. 18,14 where the Torah denigrates the Gentile nations which put their trust in "soothsayers and augurs."
  Immediately afterwards the Torah mentions the prohibition of shaving off corners of one's beard seeing that imitating pagan practices has been forbidden. One must not destroy the very symbols representing the emanation חד. This is a profoundly mystical aspect to which I have already alluded when discussing Genesis 49,22: בן פורת יוסף, where we discussed the mystical dimension of man's features, that the hair alludes to divine forces found in אדם העליון, the Celestial equivalent of terrestrial Man. Some of these are spiritual outgrowths of the attribute of חסד, whereas others are outgrowths of the attribute of דין. The former are the ones that one must not destroy by shaving them off. This is the mystical dimension of the injunction in 21,5 that: לא יקרחה קרחה בראשם, "The priests must not make bald spots on their heads (in mourning for someone who died). The priests, who more than anyone, originate in the emanation חסד, are forbidden to do this, whereas the Levites who originate in the emanation גבורה, are on occasion even instructed to shave off all the hair on their bodies (Numbers 8,7) in order to weaken the forces of דין. We observe that Gentiles, especially their clergymen, who are the recipients of abundant influences from the emanation גבורה, i.e. the attribute of Justice, and upon whom the spirit of impurity rests, make a point of destroying the hair around the corners of their beards, even though they act like a blind man looking for a window [they do not realize the mystical dimension of what they are doing. Ed.]. Similar considerations are at the root of the prohibition to inflict tattoos on one's flesh (19,28). Once you understand this you realize the reason that women are not subject to the injunctions not to shave off the hair on their heads. They are comparable to the Levites.
  It would seem that the Torah compares other hairs to forces originating in the emanation דין, for we read in Song of Songs 5,13: לחייו כערוגת הבשם, "His cheeks are like a bed of spices," מגדלות מרקחים, "towers of perfume;" שפשותיו שושנים, "his lips are like lilies," נוטפות מור עבר, "they drip flowing myrrh." We also have a verse in Song of Songs 4,3: כחוט השני שפשותיך, "Your lips are like crimson thread." All the areas of the body mentioned in those verses are allusions to the attribute of Justice. Rabbi Elazar, in his book called ספר הנפש, writes that the hairs on one's head derive their nourishment from the brain, similar to מלאכי הכבוד, a category of angels; he goes into a great deal of detail on the subject.
  In פרשת אמור the Torah details the sanctity of the priests. They must not defile themselves ritually through contact or association with a dead body because it is they who offer up the sacrifices which are to rehabilitate Man who introduced such impurity into the world. They are forbidden to marry divorcees, harlots, or women who are the issue of marriages forbidden to priests. The latter symbolize expulsion, i.e. Man's rejection from the inner circles of sanctity to a domain in which Samael, i.e. the קליפות also exercise a dominant influence. Both the priests who offer the sacrifices and the animals to be offered must be free of blemishes because they represent sanctity. Any blemish, however insignificant, is termed רע, because it originates in the pollutant man has absorbed from the original serpent.
  There follows the legislation concerning days that have been sanctified, the Sabbaths and the Holidays. The more sanctity G–d has imbued certain times with, the more sacrifices of a holy nature are needed to achieve the rapprochement to the Ineffable Name of G–d which is the aim of these offerings.
  The general rule which emerges from all this is that the Tabernacle or Temple respectively symbolize the חידוש העולם, the rejuvenation of the world, and that the priest is the basis of bringing about man's rehabilitation, i.e. the rehabilitation of אדם הראשון. It is the latter who is perceived as the subject in the second verse of the Book of Leviticus when the Torah speaks of אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לה'. When a person suffers from any of the skin afflictions mentioned in chapters 13 they must not only undergo a period of purification, but in order for this purification process to be completed successfully, he has to offer a sacrifice or sacrifices which the priest offers on his behalf. Until such a sacrifice has been presented on the altar of the Tabernacle he has not achieved atonement for whatever caused his affliction. In summation, the entire Book of Leviticus from פרשת ויקרא until פרשת בהר deals with the various aspects of the קרבנות.
  The Torah next discusses mystical elements of Creation in פרשת בהר, where the seven times seven periods of the שמטה cycles symbolise hidden elements of the seven days of Creation. We have discussed these aspects in connection with "time" [Beginning of 'Torah Ohr' section on Vayetzei]. 
  Following this legislation the Torah holds out promises for our future, i.e. all the blessings listed at the beginning of פרשת בחוקותי. These promises have never been completely fulfilled and will come fully true only when G–d will once again take up residence in our midst, at which time He will lead us קוממיות, upright, as per 26,13. G–d describes the Covenant with the Jewish people which forms the basis of our national existence in our own land. We will be recipients of all the blessings listed, as long as we keep our part of the Covenant and observe the laws of the Torah; if not, G–d forbid, we become subject to all the curses listed from verse 14 and onwards.
  After this the Torah in chapter 27 once more discusses the "value" of Man in monetary terms. This chapter contains allusions to many mystical aspects which we hope to explain in due course. The chapter concludes in verse 29: כל אשר יחרם מן האדם לא יפדה, מות יומת, "No human being who has been proscribed can be ransomed; he shall be put to death." Since it is man's function to live indefinitely, as will be the case in the future, the Torah commences the Book of Leviticus, i.e. תורת כהנים with the verse describing how אדם, Man,can be rehabilitated by establishing close affinity with the Ineffable Name of G–d by means of sacrifices; it concludes by again referring to אדם. We are all mortal nowadays and our approach to G–d is only through sacrifices and the priest. In the future, however, Man himself, both body and soul, will be the sacrifice and will then live forever because he will have fulfilled the injunction: תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך, to be unblemished in his relations with G–d.
  Let us now discuss some details of the portions which deal with the priests who are the ones offering the sacrifices, the animals to be sacrificed, and the times at which such sacrifices are to be offered. There are specific times when these various public offerings are to be offered up on the altar. The daily עולה is offered once in the morning and once in the evening. The מוספים are offered after the daily morning עולה on the days such a מוסף offering is called for, i.e. on the Sabbath days, New Moons and the various Holy Days. The sacrifices which have to be offered by persons who have purified themselves after having been ritually impure have to be offered immediately after the other purifying rites have been completed. Sin offerings have to be presented after the inadvertent commission of a sin. The word זמן, time, can be understood as an acronym meaning זמן-מקריב-נקרב.
  The portions ויקרא and צו speak about the priests who are מקריב, and about the בהמות or מנחות which are נקרבות, are being sacrificed. The sacrifices whose function it is to help us obtain atonement from specific sins will rehabilitate us from the sin which resulted from the original pollutant of the serpent.
  At the end of פרשת צו the Torah mentions the sanctity of Aaron and his sons and how they were sanctified. The Torah (8,6) writes there: ויקרב משה את אהרון ואת בניו, "Moses offered Aaron and his sons (as a sacrifice)." The Torah had also commanded Moses to do just that in Exodus 28,1. The meaning of these verses is that Aaron as well as his sons themselves served as sacrifices, i.e. the mystical dimension of אדם, as we have explained this at the very beginning of the Book of Leviticus. 
  By the act of Moses "sacrificing" them to G–d they ceased being זרים, "strangers," mundane, and became sanctified. At that time the status of Aaron and his sons was similar to that of Isaac after Abraham had offered him to G–d and Isaac had agreed. All our traditional sources describe יצחק as having been an עולה תמימה לה' "an unblemished burnt-offering to G–d." The book בעשרה מאמרות specifically describes Aaron and his sons as having been sacrificed as offerings to G–d, and personifying the instruction in 1,2: אדם כי יקריב מכם. The author quotes 8,6 as his proof. He further states that the burning of the souls of the two sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, is to be understood like the burning of the flesh parts of an animal offering on the altar after the blood had been sprinkled, etc. He finds his proof for this in the similarity of the wording used by the Torah which is identical with wording used in connection with animal offerings.. On the one hand the Torah (10,2) writes: ותצא אש … ותאכל אותם, whereas a little while later the Torah speaks of the remaining two sons of Aaron, Eleazar and Ittamar, as הנותרים, "the leftovers," an expression used for parts of a sacrifice which were not consumed within the prescribed time. The meaning of the word: בקרבתם in 16,1 would describe what happened when Isaac was being offered, i.e. that the fire in the pan for burning had already been lit. [metaphorically speaking, since Isaac was not an incense offering. Ed.] [This even though through Heavenly intervention the sacrifice was not actually consumed. Ed.] The Torah states in 9,22: וירד מעשות החטאת, "Aaron descended after offering the sin offering." [The author may mean that the word מ-עשות here refers to something that had not been completed. Ed.]
   I believe we can use this explanation to answer a difficulty which arises from Exodus 29,33: "These things shall be eaten only by those for whom expiation has been made with them when they were ordained and consecrated; they may not be eaten by a layman for they are holy." The meaning of the verse is that the owners of the animals receive their expiation through the priests' eating. The difficulty is that Aaron and his sons consumed these parts while being owners, whereas Moses was the priest performing the sacrificial service described in the relevant section of the Torah. We can only answer this by viewing Aaron and his sons as being both priests and owners at one and the same time. They had become priests by the very fact that Moses "sacrificed them," i.e. בקרבתם לה' coming close to G–d. They became similar to the archangel Michael who, in his capacity as Celestial High Priest, offers the souls of the righteous as a sacrifice. We find an allusion to this comparison between the task of Aaron and that of the archangel מיכאל in (9,4) כי היום י-ה-ו-ה נראה אליכם where we have the letters of the names of Aaron and מיכאל side by side in the last two words of the verse. In comparison to Moses, Aaron and his two sons were indeed the owners of the sacrifices (מילואים), seeing that Moses at that time occupied a position even higher than that of the High Priest. The reason for this was that Moses had never been a זר, mundane person, and did not have to be raised to his spiritually elevated position as did his brother Aaron. We have explained that he was holy from the moment he left his mother's womb and how the whole house was filled with light at that time. To repeat, in respect to the מילואים Aaron and his sons were both owners and priests. Because this is so the religious ruling for all future generations evolved that by the priests eating the parts of the sacrifice allotted to them the owners obtain forgiveness.
  Let us now return to our statement that פרשת ויקרא as well פרשת צו speak about the people offering the sacrifices as well as about the objects of these sacrifices. Among the latter there are some which serve as atonement for their owners, such as the קרבן חטאת, and the קרבן אשם. There is the קרבן חטאת קבוע, the purpose of which is to obtain forgiveness for a “מום קבוע,” the kind of sin which has become second nature to us due to the pollutant from the serpent. There are also sin-offerings for various leaders of the community and the community as a whole respectively. In each of these instances different elements are at the root of the sin committed. This is why separate sacrifices are needed to secure atonement and absolution of the residual pollutant of the serpent. There is even a type of sacrifice called אשם תלוי, a sin-offering of a suspended nature, which must be offered when the owner is in doubt whether he has become guilty of a certain transgression. One's duties were clear as the light of the sun, and being in doubt whether one had behaved in a circumspect manner or not is the kind of doubt that should never have arisen.
  When a person has trespassed against property belonging to the Temple treasury he must not only make restitution and bring a sacrifice but must also add 20% to the value of the property against which he has committed such מעילה, trespass. It is a precondition to the achievement of perfect harmony in the world that there has to be a perfect union in the spiritual world of the ten emanations. This union must be able to "flow" from the "top" downwards as well as in reverse from the "bottom" upwards. The "top" is the emanation כתר, whereas the "bottom" is the emanation מלכות. The mystical dimension the emanations is י, ten. When we spell י as a word, i.e. יוד,=20. This is the mystical dimension of אור הישר, original light and אור החוזר, reflected light, a concept familiar to the Kabbalists. The former originates in the emanation כתר, whereas the latter originates in the emanation מלכות. Between them these two emanations represent 20% of all the emanations. If someone has made profane use of property designated as sacred he therefore has to atone for this by adding 20% to the value of the property involved. This is to encourage him to become penitent and thereby achieve atonement for his negligence.
  
  Tzav
  
  In my treatise מסכת פסחים you will find numerous beautiful explanations of the תורה אור aspect of the פרשה.
  
  Shmini
  
  Although I have already referred to a number of verses of פרשת שמיני in the aforegoing, I have copied here some lectures on this פרשה delivered during my younger days:
  ויהי ביום השמיני . Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 42,4) have taught us a rule that whenever the Torah uses the expression ויהי, this is a reference to a painful experience. The sages are sometimes hard-pressed to demonstrate the validity of this dictum. Our question is why the Torah chooses to use an expression which points at something unpleasant when we are taught that elsewhere (Genesis 7,2) the Torah spent additional verbiage such as הבהמה אשר לא טהורה, "a category of animal which is not ritually pure," instead of simply saying בהמה טמאה, "an impure animal," merely to avoid referring expressly to something unpleasant?
  קרא משה לאהרן ולזקני ישראל – Moses called to Aaron, his sons, and to the elders of Israel . Rashi explains that this was in order to announce to them that the appointment of Aaron as High Priest was decreed from above, and that Moses had not used his prerogative in this matter. This is strange. We have already heard this in the previous פרשה where the Torah reported in 8,4: "And when the community was assembled at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting." This had been in response to G–d's command to assemble the whole congregation at that entrance. Why, in that instance, was mention made of the whole congregation being assembled?
  Rabbi Abba son of Kahane in Vayikra Rabbah 11,2 quotes Proverbs 9,1-3: "Wisdom has built her house, when she has hewn her seven pillars. She has slaughtered the meat, mixed her wine; she has also set her table. She has sent out her maids, she cries out." He explains these verses as referring to the Tabernacle. He understands the words חכמות בנתה ביתה, "wisdom built her house," as a reference to Betzalel, concerning whom the Torah (Exodus 31,3) says: ואמלא אותו רוח אלוקים בחכמה בתבונה, "I have filled him with the spirit of G–d, with wisdom, etc." Rabbi Abba understands the words חצבה עמודיה שבעה, "she has hewn her seven pillars," as referring to the seven days of מלואים, consecration, during which Moses performed the service and Aaron and his sons prepared themselves for their holy task. The words טבחה טבחה, are understood as referring to the animals which served as the sacrifices, the words מסכה יינה refer to the drink-offerings; the words: אף ערכה שלחנה, refer to the לחם הפנים, the show breads. The words: שלחה נערותיה תקרא are a reference to Moses. The first verse in our פרשה reports that Moses called on Aaron, etc. Thus far the words of Rabbi Abba. 
  It is difficult to understand the point of this Midrash. We have a principle that one does not show man visions of what was in the past. Besides, why is the whole procedure described in the feminine gender [hence the Midrash's reference to Proverbs which constantly contrasts the woman of valor with the seductress Ed.]?
  On the day the terrestrial Tabernaclde was erected a parallel Sanctuary was established in the Celestial Regions. This is the reason that the word משכן is repeated in Exodus 38,21: משכן, משכן העדות. G–d displayed as much desire for that which is in hidden regions as for what is revealed in our world. Rabbi Shimon (ben Gamliel) stated in the Midrash Nasso 16 that at the time G–d created the universe, He wished to have a residence in the terrestrial world similar to His residence in the Celestial Regions. This is discussed at length. The reason that G–d did not establish such a residence at that time was the damage caused to the universe by Adam and subsequent generations through their sins. Now a time had come when G–d related to the Jewish people with goodwill and it had become possible to establish His residence in the terrestrial world and to simultaneously establish its counterpart in Heaven. The Tabernacle is perceived as a microcosm and the process of building it was comparable to the steps involved in creating the universe. Midrash Tanchuma on פרשת פקודי explains this in detail. We know that when G–d created the universe, He created everything both male and female (Baba Batra 74b). The commentators explain that this means that G–d created both משפיע, and מושפע, active forces as well as their passive counterparts. This can alternatively be described in terms of the visible forces containing invisible forces. Or, to put it differently: There is constant interaction between cause and effect.
  Man is the ultimate purpose of the universe. This is something that all our commentators have been at pains to prove. It is the reason we say in our prayers on Rosh Hashanah זה היום תחלת מעשיך, "This day (the date on which Adam was created) is the beginning of Your works." The author of Kley Chemdah says that this is the meaning of Psalms 66,3: אמרו לאלקים מה נורא מעשיך, "Say to G–d how awesome are Your deeds." Significantly, the Psalmist does not speak about מה נוראים G–d's works in the plural, but sums them all up as a single deed נורא although the word מעשיך "Your deeds" is in the plural. What the Psalmist means is that all of G–d's deeds had but one aim, אדם, Man. This is why Man is a combination of terrestrial and celestial elements. Rashi explains this in his commentary on Genesis 2,7. This established a permanent linkage between terrestrial and Celestial creatures. It helped remove jealousy between the creatures of the "upper" world and the creatures of the "lower" world (Rashi ibid.). There remains a complaint [by the Celestial Forces] inasmuch as only man is at home on earth. This subject bears further investigation.
  Man is composed of body and soul, a visible as well as an invisible part. This is the deeper meaning of Exodus 25,8: ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם, "They shall make for Me a Sanctuary and I shall dwell among them." The difficulty here is that the verse speaks about the Tabernacle. Our Rabbis in Shavuot 16 tell us that the expression Tabernacle and Sanctuary may be used interchangeably. This was not the only difficulty in the verse. Why, if the Sanctuary is a single unit, does the Torah report G–d saying that He will dwell among them (pl)? The Torah should have written בתוכו! 
  We have here an allusion to the fact that the cause is fond of the effect, i.e. the hidden longs for the revealed. Our sages (Pesachim 112a) articulated this thought when they said that more than the calf desires to suckle on the teats of its mother, the cow is anxious to nurse its calf. In פרשת ויקהל 36,1 the Torah writes: אשר נתן ה' חכמה ותבונה בהמה, "whom G–d had given wisdom and insight." Shemot Rabbah 48,3 states that the word <i>beheimah</i> in the above verse is to teach us that it was not only man whom G–d imbued with wisdom but also the animals. Betzalel was the only one who was privy to the wisdom possessed by the animals. Perhaps the Torah wants to hint at the proverb we quoted earlier that the mother cow is more anxious to nurse its calf than the calf is anxious to be nursed. It is all an allusion to the close connection between cause and effect. We are taught a lesson in reciprocal attachment and unity, i.e. that nothing exists outside of G–d Himself, that He is inextricably involved with all that He has created. It is this lesson the Rabbis wanted to teach us when they said that מקדש and משכן can be used interchangeably; the exterior, visible part, is called משכן, whereas the interior, invisible part, is called מקדש. We have a further clear allusion to this relationship between cause and effect, the visible and the invisible, when the Torah describes the way the קרשים, planks of the Tabernacle, were joined together. The Torah (Exodus 26,24) uses the term "תאמם, twins," when describing the manner in which these planks were joined to each other. When ??? they are described as תמים, perfect. We have here a description of the essence of the Tabernacle, i.e. that it was a microcosm.
  I have already written about Man being the essential part of the universe. This premise of the Zohar has been quoted in treatise שער קדושה of ראשית חכמה at the beginning of chapter seven. It is stipulated there that Man is a microcosm, and that there are allusions to compare Man to both the universe and to the Sanctuary. The author says that the heart corresponds to the Inner Sanctuary, the קדש קדשים. Maimonides, in a letter to his son Rabbi Abraham quoted at the beginning of the above named book, compares the Tabernacle and its furnishings to a distinguished body. When G–d said "I will dwell among them," He meant inside their essence, something more essential than the mere interior of the Tabernacle, the part called also the משכן העדות, the Tent of Testimony i.e. the Torah. This תוכיות is the source of everlasting life, as we know from אורך ימים בימינה. Yet even the "left side" of Torah, i.e. the life in this world is filled with wealth and honor (Proverbs 3,16) as part of the benefit of our having the Tabernacle in our midst. Our sages (Baba Batra 25b) paraphrased this thought when they taught: "If someone wishes to acquire wisdom let him turn southward" i.e. towards its symbol, the candlestick; if on the other hand, he wants to become wealthy, let him turn northwards," i.e. towards the symbol of wealth, the Table (both in the Sanctuary). This is the meaning of "Tent of Testimony." The מזבח העולה, the altar for the burnt-offering, is the site whence one achieves closeness with G–d. 
  The expression קרבן לה' which we invariably find when the offerings to be presented on this altar are mentioned, reflect the purpose of these offerings to achieve closeness, קרבן, with G–d. The Torah constantly repeats the expression לי-ה-ו-ה in connection with these קרבנות in order to stress the profound value of this spiritual rapprochement and unification with the Celestial Regions by means of these offerings. All this is explained by the Zohar. This too is the reason that the Torah stresses in Deut. 8,3 that "Man does not live on bread alone but on everything that originates from G–d." Man lives also on the spiritual dimension of food. This is why the legislation of forbidden foods in chapter eleven follows immediately after the legislation of who and under what circumstances the priests may enter the Tabernacle. The Torah wanted to establish a conceptual linkage between food consumed by man and food consumed by the altar In chapter 15 of the above cited שער הקדושה the author – again basing himself on the Zohar – writes that the impure spirit of the חיצונים rests on the מאכלים טמאים, forbidden foods, and that anyone who eats them ingests this spirit and that his own נפש is thereby detrimentally affected. Consumption of מאכלים טהורים, pure foods, however, confers upon the person eating them some of the spirit of purity and holiness resting on those foods. This is what is meant by צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו, "The righteous man eats to satisfy his soul" (Proverbs 13,25). The entire chapter in ראשית חכמה is relevant to our פרשה, including the prayers mentioned there. 
  The objective of those prayers is to ask G–d that one may be influenced by the "Heavenly Table." Chagigah 27a teaches us that as long as the Temple was standing the altar, i.e. the sacrifices offered on the altar, were the instruments of atonement for the Jewish people. Nowadays, when we do not have a Temple and an altar, it is our table which has to serve as the instrument for our atonement. The author of Emek Ha-Berachah also states that a heavenly sanctity rests on foods which are pure and permitted. 
  This is alluded to in 11,2: זאת החיה אשר תאכלו … אך זה לא תאכלו. Our sages say that Moses had difficulty understanding this paragraph and that G–d showed him what the various categories of animals looked like (Chulin 42). In Vayikra Rabbah 13,4 we are told that G–d showed Moses a head of fire, explaining that if the protective skin around the brain was pierced such an animal was unfit to eat regardless of the size of the hole. It is difficult to understand what Moses' problem was. We could have understood his problem if the chapter would have listed free-roaming animals which Moses had never seen. After all, Moses was not a hunter. However, the Talmud meant that Moses had difficulty understanding the reason for this legislation. He wanted to know why certain categories of animals were permitted, whereas others were prohibited. G–d showed Moses the positive spiritual impact which consuming certain animals would have on the people eating them, and the negative spiritual impact of certain other animals. He showed Moses the respective influence of those animals in the higher regions. Thereupon Moses understood why some categories of animals are termed "pure," whereas others are termed "impure." This is the mystical dimension of Deut. 14,23: ואכלת לפני ה' אלוקיך, "You shall eat in front of the Lord your G–d;" this is a reference to the "Table", i.e. a reference to the sacred element of the act of eating. Psalms 104,1: "Bless the Lord, O my soul," as well as Exodus 24,11: "They ate and drank and had a vision of G–d," are reminders of the impact consumption of food has on our spiritual faculties. This means that even when the Israelites consume food which has not first been specifically sanctified as a sacrifice, such meals are considered as if an act of spiritual significance had been performed. When Gentiles eat, on the other hand, this is a totally profane activity.
  At the conclusion of this whole chapter the Torah writes: להבדיל בין הטמא ובן הטהור, "In order to make a distinction between what is impure and what is pure," etc. When we recite the benediction of הבדלה, at the conclusion of the Sabbath, the formula is: המבדיל בין קדש לכל, בין ישראל לעמים, "Who separates between the sacred and the profane, between the people of Israel and the other nations." This means that there is a vital difference between (even) ordinary Israelites, non-priests, and members of the Gentile nations. 
  It is this thought which Vayikra Rabbah quotes in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish when the latter saw in the words (11,9): את זה תאכלו a warning to the Jewish people that if "you merit it, you will consume the Gentile nations, if not, you will be consumed by them. In Vayikra Rabbah 13,5 we are told that the reference of the Torah to the גמל, "camel which is chewing the cud" in 11,4 is an allusion to the kingdom of Babylonia which praised the Lord. Nebuchadnezzar, as reported in Daniel 4,31, praised the Lord for giving him back his sanity. The Talmud also reports that this king once made a runner run for 4 miles after a scribe to retrieve a letter to King Chizkiyahu in which he had greeted the king before greeting G–d Almighty. He changed the form of address, realizing that it would be an insult if he mentioned G–d only in second place. In 11,5 the Torah uses extra words to describe that the שפן, daman, also chews the cud though it does not have split hooves. This is an allusion to the empire of the Medes whose king Cyrus praised the Lord as reported in Ezra 1,2. The reference of the Torah to the ארנבת, hare, in 11,6 which is similarly chewing the cud, and to which the Torah allots a whole verse, is an allusion to the Greek empire whose emperor Alexander the Great also paid homage to the Lord. The Talmud Yuma 69 reports how this emperor deferred to the High Priest Shimon Ha-Tzaddik, praising the Lord. When referring to the חזיר, pig, in 11,7, the Torah mentions that it does not chew the cud; it is an allusion to the Roman empire none of whose rulers paid homage to the Lord. Not only did the Romans not pay homage to G–d, but they blasphemed against Him, as we know from the sarcastic remark in Psalms 73,25: "Who is there for me in Heaven?" which is attributed to the Romans.
  We must ask why the four empires , hosts of Israel in its various exiles, are mentioned in this Midrash at all? Our sages have described the Jewish people as serving idols in purity while in exile. Pardes Rimonim explains this by pointing out that G–d's bounty to Israel while they are in exile is directed via the respective שר, celestial representative of our host nation. G–d (16,16) is on record that: אני ה' השוכן אתם בתוך טומאתם, "I remain their G–d while dwelling amongst them in their impurity" (cf. Rashi on this verse). This is proof that sanctity still adheres to the Jewish people even in exile. The reasons for this, partially, is that G–d's praises emanate from the mouths of the Jewish people by reason of the food they consume. The Jewish people realise that it is G–d Who orders all food to grow in order that it may become the instrument of the people's sanctification.
  Edom, on the other hand, is impure, his food habits are worse than those of other nations, as had already been demonstrated by their patriarch Esau when he wanted the lentils Jacob had cooked (Genesis 25,30). He said to Jacob: הלעטני נא מן האדם האדם, "Please pour some of this red, red (food) down my throat." The exile the Jewish people suffer under the dominion of Edom is by far the worst. The Torah uses the pig as a symbol of the abominable manner in which this animal pretends to be pure, displaying its cleft hooves as proof, while refusing to chew the cud, symbol of paying homage to G–d. 
  The mystical dimension of all this is described in Deut. 33,2: וזרח משעיר למו … כל קדושיו בידך והם תכו ברגלך. When food descends in a beneficial manner and is sacred in nature it is described as: "G–d You open Your hand" (Psalms 145,16). Nowadays we are under the dominion of Edom; Jews residing in countries belonging to the Moslems are also considered as in the exile of Edom, as explained by Nachmanides on Numbers 24,20. Nachmanides questions whence the Edomites have acquired sufficient sanctity to enable them to lord it over Israel. He explains that this stems from the time described in Deut. 33,2, when "G–d shone forth from Se'ir," (the land of Edom). Esau, or rather the שר של עשו, its celestial representative, at that time hosted the שכינה for a very brief time. The Zohar explains this at length in connection with the above verse. The sanctity of Israel is personified by the ten fingers of its hands [symbolizing the ten emanations. Ed.] as anyone who has studied some Kabbalistic texts is aware of. When Deut. 33,3 speaks about אף חובב עמים … הם תכו לרגלך, this is an allusion to the pig stretching out its cleft hooves as explained. Although it is true that only a minute amount of sanctity can be found in ordinary foods (non-sacrifices) of the emanation מלכות, (our physical world), yet G–d recognizes the great distinction in this regard between the Jewish people and the Gentile nations. 
  In other words, the foods consumed by Jews are almost on the same spiritual level as the sacrifices offered on the altar in the Tabernacle. When the Torah urges us in 11,44: והתקדשתם והייתם קדושים, "If you strive to sanctify yourselves you will become holy," the first expression is addressed to our souls, the hidden aspect of our personalities, whereas the last expression addresses our bodies, the visible part of our personalities. This is parallel to the מקדש-משכן relationship. The consecration of the Tabernacle embraced both these aspects at the same time. Concerning consecration of the hidden part, נפש, the Torah (9,4) said: כי היום ה' נראה אליכם, "For on this day the Lord appears to you," whereas concerning the visible part, גוף, the Torah (10,3) said: ועל פני כל העם אכבד, "I shall be honored in the presence of the whole nation." This revelation would take place by means of the Heavenly fire which consumed the sacrifices on the altar.
  The Heavenly fire is alluded to in Song of Songs 2,5: סמכוני באשישות, "Sustain me with fires," which the Zohar explains as a reference to the two fires on the altar, the man-made one as well as the fire coming down from Heaven to consume the offerings. In our context the reference would be to the physical fire, representing the body, and the spiritual fire, representing the soul. 
  When G–d began the work of Creation, He said: "Let there be light," the foundation of fire. There is both visible and hidden fire. This is the mystical dimension of the Torah's commandment in Exodus 35,3: לא תבערו אש בכל מושבותיכם ביום השבת. "Do not light a fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day." The Torah singled out this prohibition of work (whereas none of the other 38 basic prohibitions of work is named).
  I believe that the first act of creation, the creation of light, already included elements of all the other activities involved in creating the universe. The first act was the Creation of the root of fire. When the Torah forbade the lighting of fire on the Sabbath, this too included all the other types of work prohibited on the Sabbath because the Sabbath-rest is testimony to all the work the Creator rested from on that day. By observing this commandment we testify to the fact that G–d preceded the universe not vice versa. When the priests performed the service in the Tabernacle the use of fire on the Sabbath was permitted. The reason is that the very service was testimony that G–d had created the universe, that He is the Master and we are His servants. According to the author of Ginat Egoz, the lessons derived from the prohibition to light a fire on the Sabbath are the same as the lessons learned from Temple-service performed on the Sabbath involving the use of fire. The author elaborates on that theme.
  Personally, I believe that this idea is alluded to in the words: מחלליה מות יומת, "Those who desecrate it will be put to death" (Exodus 31,14). The Torah legislates (Numbers 28,9) that on the Sabbath day two sheep be offered as an additional public burnt-offering, i.e. שני כבשים The fact that these two sheep are lumped together in one expression [unlike the frequently used expression פרים … שנים. Ed.] requires analysis.
  The author of Ginat Egoz continues as follows: "Logic would dictate that [the mere] handling of fire ought to be prohibited on the Sabbath so that by refraining from its use we could remind ourselves of the fact that G–d's existence preceded that of the universe. However, in view of the fact that we perform a sacrificial service before Him which is specifically known as תמידים, daily offerings, this already emphasises that G–d presides over the world at all times and ensures the continued existence of Heaven and Earth and all the "fires" of the universe. What is different on the Sabbath then? The additional sacrifices on the Sabbath are to testify that the Sabbath is a fixture needed by the universe, a day of the calendar around which all other days revolve. The active performance of the sacrificial service before Him is more potent testimony than any other testimony implied by the laws of nature.
  The prohibition of handling fire is a testimony for us that G–d created the world ex nihilo. The fact that handling fire on the Sabbath before Him in the Tabernacle is permitted is a testimony for G–d. We have therefore two witnesses -in accordance with the dictum of the Torah that in order for testimony to be valid we need two witnesses- (Deut 17,6). The dual nature of this testimony is that A) We testify to G–d's leadership of the universe by the performance of the sacrificial service in the sacred domain of the Tabernacle; B) We testify -by not lighting fire on the Sabbath in our own domain- that G–d created the universe ex nihilo. When there is testimony by two witnesses which seems to contradict the testimony of a single witness, we do not offset one witness against another, but disregard the testimony of the single witness completely (Yevamot 88). The "testimony" by the two sheep which form the additional Sabbath offering, and which are burnt on the fire specifically on the Sabbath, therefore overrides any contrary "testimony" by the prohibition of lighting a fire in our private dwellings. This is also in line with the statement by our sages: אלמלא התמידים לא נתקיימו שמים וארץ, "were it not for the daily public offerings Heaven and Earth would not have endured" (Zohar 1,58). Thus far the Ginat Egoz.
  The matter of the fire is a mystical dimension of the whole process of Creation, the "light" available in our "lower" world, and the "light" concealed and stored in the "higher" world. The latter may be perceived as the "fire" which descends from "above" to consume the burnt-offerings on the altar. This in turn is a mystical aspect of the attachment between what we have termed cause and effect. The students are perceived as the effect, the teacher as the cause. When we said previously that the cause wants to exert influence, whereas the effect wishes to become influenced, this now leads to the tragic occurrence involving Nadav and Avihu. The latter, by presuming to teach a הלכה, religious ruling, in the presence of their teachers Moses and Aaron, reversed the role of cause and effect. As a result "fire" descended from Heaven and consumed their souls as part of the incense-offering they were carrying. 
  The incense-offering is the mystical element which establishes the connection between the "lower" and the "upper" domains of this universe. Rashi also explains the word קטורת as identical with the alternate name of Hagar, i.e. קטורה, to mean that her deeds were comparable to an incense offering because she "tied up" her door [euphemism for her vagina Ed.] and did not remarry until Sarah had died and Abraham was free to marry her (Genesis 25,1). Our sages suggest that Nadav and Avihu entered the Holy of Holies in order to teach a lesson concerning the mystical dimension of the incense-offering. They wanted to demonstrate that G–d anxiously awaits the prayers of the righteous. All of these notions are alluded to in Psalms 141,2: תכון תפלתי קטורת לפניך, "Take my prayer as an offering of incense before You." The subject of prayer teaches us the mystical dimension of the משפיע and the מושפע The latter prays with his eyes facing downwards while his heart is turned upwards toward G–d, the cause who turns His attention to what happens "down" here in our world. We in our hopes pour out our hearts heavenwards for He is the עילה, cause, whereas we are the עלולים, effects. 
  G–d has granted me an insight enabling me to find that the word עלול is an acronym for עיניו למטה ולבו למעלה. We find a difference of opinion among the sages about the sin committed by Nadav and Avihu. One sage claims that they entered the Sanctuary while intoxicated with wine, whereas another claims that they taught a הלכה which it was not their place to teach (Rabbi Eliezer in Eiruvin 63). The two sages do not disagree with one another. One of them looks at the נסתר, hidden aspect of the matter, i.e. the מקדש aspect, whereas the other looks at the נגלה aspect, i.e. at the aspect of משכן. We have explained that the two sons of Aaron strove for the most intimate relationship possible with G–d, i.e. the מקדש aspect. According to this view their death was actually occasioned by too close an affinity to G–d. They died בקרבתם לפני ה', because they came too close to G–d. We have explained this problem when we discussed the אצילי בני ישראל, another description of these sons of Aaron. They are reported in Exodus 24,11, as having seen the Lord and eaten and drunk. Their souls were so much exposed to the hidden "fire" of holiness that they died because of their being too close. 
  This is why the Torah in 16,1 did not write בהקריבם, "when they brought close (their offering)" but בקרבתם לפני ה', when they came close to G–d. This "coming close" was of a spiritual, conceptual nature. Their death was an example of what the Psalmist meant when he said: "The death of His pious ones is something very precious to the Lord" (Psalms 116,15). Rabbi Abraham Saba, author of the Tzror Hamor, in his commentary on Genesis 13,5 already wrote that the experience of Nadav and Avihu paralleled the four sages – of whom Rabbi Akiva was one – who נכנסו לפרדס, entered the orchard, [euphemism for study of the mystical aspects of Torah. Ed]. The four were Rabbi Akiva, Ben Azzai, Ben Zoma and Elisha ben Avuyah (who emerged as an heretic). These four sages had already been preceded by Adam, Noach, Abraham and now the two sons of Aaron in their desire to probe the mysteries of the מעשה מרכבה. The word פרדס used in this story related in Chagigah 14 means a place in which grapes and pomegranates grow. Adam sinned regarding both the נגלה, revealed aspect of Torah legislation, as well as against the נסתר, hidden aspect of G–d's commandments. The Talmud describes him as קצץ בנטיעות, having mutilated the young saplings in the garden of religion, and having turned into an heretic. The same thing happened to his counterpart Elisha ben Avuyah. Noach too drank from the wine, became drunk, and as a result temporarily of unsound mind. Ben Zoma reportedly beheld something he was not spiritually prepared to understand and as a result suffered insanity.
   Abraham planted an אשל, (another word for orchard); he entered and emerged spiritually whole. Abraham traversed the whole land of Canaan (Genesis 12,6) descended into the land of Egypt, a country filled with all sorts of impurities. He was saved from being affected by any of them, and the Torah reports him as having ascended again from Egypt "southward" (Genesis 13,1). [The term "southward" is geographically incorrect as the land of Canaan is situated north of Egypt. Ed.] All of Abraham's ascents were "southward," in line with the statement of our sages that he who wishes to acquire true wisdom should turn "southward." (Baba Batra 25b). Rabbi Akiva, too, entered the orchard spiritually whole and emerged whole. 
  The sons of Aaron entered while intoxicated, took a look and died. The same happened to ben Azzai. Both of them illustrate the truth of Psalms 116,15, quoted earlier. Although normally death is perceived as the result of Man having failed to live up to G–d's demand, as we know from Psalms 49,13: "Man could not even remain sin-free for a single night before becoming mortal" [freely translated], in this case death was not due to sin, but was precious in the eyes of the Lord as it was the result of rapprochement to G–d.
  We can utilize this thought to answer a problem in the wording of the first Mishnah in tractate Avot. The author says: משה קבל תורה מסיני ומסרוה ליהושע, "Moses received the Torah from Sinai and handed it over to Joshua." Why does the Mishnah change from the term קבל to מסר when describing the transfer of the tradition? Another difficulty is that there is no word of how the transfer from Joshua to the elders, and from the elders to the prophets took place, whereas we find the term מסר used again when the Mishnah describes the transfer of the oral tradition from the prophets to the members of the Great Assembly. A further difficulty is the statement in Eiruvin 54: "How did the oral tradition get taught? Moses learned it from G–d. Then Aaron entered and Moses would teach it to him. After that Aaron's sons entered and Moses taught it to them. After that the elders entered and Moses taught the elders; finally the people at large entered and Moses taught all of them. We do not hear one word in this sequence about Moses handing over the oral tradition specifically to Joshua, as was mentioned in the Mishnah.
  We must assume that the Mishnah speaks about the hidden aspects of the Torah and describes four categories of people, Joshua, the elders, the prophets and the men of the Great Assembly entering the aforementioned פרדס in order to acquire these secrets of the Torah. These four categories of people were not all on the same spiritual level. The men of the Great Assembly did not match the groups mentioned before them. Moses, of course, towered above them all spiritually, and it was not appropriate to describe him as "entering" the orchard. He was at home there, as G–d had testified (Numbers 12,7), בכל ביתי נאמן הוא. When someone enters or leaves his own home one does not bother to mention it. His ability to enter and leave his home without suffering spiritual harm is taken for granted. Joshua entered the orchard and returned from it unharmed. This is alluded to in Exodus 33,11 when the Torah describes Joshua as never departing fom the "tent," i.e. the Tent of Testimony (home of Torah). Our sages described the face of Moses as like that of the sun, whereas the face of Joshua, by comparison, is described as like that of the moon. The former radiates its own light, whereas the latter only reflects light received from another source. 
  The author of the Mishnah therefore described Moses as קבל תורה, receiving the mysteries of the Torah as it were in a container, a covered box. The word בית קבול, suggests that the contents of the container are hidden. Anyone who merely looks at the container does not automatically see what's in it. The term מסירה, handing something over, which the Mishnah uses in connection with the way Moses transferred the oral Torah to Joshua implies that it is transferred from hand to hand, in a visible manner. This indicates that matters which were of a mystical nature appeared so clear and simple to Moses that he did not bother to treat them as if they were secrets.
  Let us now return to these four groups of people who entered the פרדס. Joshua accomplished more in the פרדס than Rabbi Akiva; the Talmud in Chagigah 14 reports that the angels were about to attack Rabbi Akiva, and only G–d's intervention enabled him to re-emerge from there spiritually unharmed. Joshua, on the other hand, had been endowed with some of Moses' glory (Numbers 27,20), and Moses had demonstrated his power to prevail over the angels while he had been in the Celestial Regions and had brought down the Torah to the Jewish people from those regions in spite of the angels' objections. The elders deserted Moses on his first mission to Pharaoh (cf. Rashi on Exodus 5,1). G–d paid them back for this at the time of the revelation at Mount Sinai when they were not allowed to come close to the Mountain, as distinct from Aaron (Exodus 19,24). G–d had said to Moses: ועלית אתה ואהרון, "you and Aaron (alone) will ascend." 
  When G–d gave the Jewish people the Torah at Mount Sinai, the people said to Moses: ואת תדבר אלינו, "You speak to us," that Moses should be the intermediary between G–d and them because they were afraid they would die if they would be exposed to G–d's voice any longer (Deut. 5,20-25). We may assume that the Israelites did not speak about this concern of theirs to the elders [which would have been the normal channel of communication with Moses at that time. Ed.], but, since they were afraid to look and die, they turned to Moses directly. Their concern was that the very fact that they had achieved such a high level of insight had brought them so close to G–d that their souls would return to their Creator and remain there due to the affinity established with Him. Such a "death" achieves far more in the way of תיקון, rehabilitation, than any ordinary death meant to atone for sins committed. It would have been a greater תיקון even than that achieved by Ben Azzai's death as a result of his entering the פרדס, even though his death was of the category described in Psalms 116,15. The elders mentioned in the Mishnah outlived Joshua.
   The prophets mentioned there all experienced a weakening or complete loss of their bodily functions at the time they received prophetic insights. This process has been described by various commentators. This is the reason a prophet is frequently called mentally disturbed, משוגע, a description of the sage Ben Zoma who entered the פרדס "had a look" and was hurt, i.e. became of unsound mind. The prophets were on a higher level than Ben Zoma because of the cumulative nature of their prophetic insights. The mental disturbance experienced by prophets or the death experienced by the elders are basically of the same order, the result of visions by the soul when the body has not reached a spiritual level to match that of the soul. This is why the Mishnah puts the elders and the prophets in the same category.
  The Mishnah continues that the prophets מסרוה, handed over the oral tradition to the men of the Great Assembly. The men of the Great Assembly rehabilitated Israel from the sin of idol worship as reported in Sanhedrin 64, and Yuma 69. They did this by succeeding in vanquishing one part of the evil urge within us, the יצר הרע של עבודה זרה the natural urge of Jews to serve idols.
  Let us return to the subject of Nadav and Avihu. These two sons of Aaron did not restrain themselves and, as a consequence beheld a vision that was beyond the capacity of their bodies; this was what caused their death. Theirs was the death described as precious to the Lord in Psalms 116,15. Their "death" should not be considered a regular death, and we must not think of it in terms of their being punished for a sin and having to die. On the contrary, they had achieved such a close affinity with G–d that their souls simply remained in the Celestial Regions, i.e. בקרבתם לפני ה'. This is the reason Moses told Aaron that theirs was an example of בקרובי אקדש, "I will be sanctified through those who are close to Me" (10,3). What this means is that their very death was the beginning of their life in the Hereafter. They may therefore be perceived as having entered the פרדס and having emerged unscathed. Since their departure from earth occurred when they were publicly preparing to enter into the most intimate relationship with G–d, it was of the "על פני כל העם אכבד" type, viz. 10,3. Rabbi Akiva suffered a similar fate when he died on קדוש השם, a martyr at the hands of the Romans. He sanctified G–d's name after having emerged from the פרדס, albeit sometime later. When the angels demurred about the fate of Rabbi Akiva and the other nine Martyrs, [cf. the liturgical prayer אלה אזכרה in the Mussaph service of the Day of Atonement. Ed.] G–d silenced them by saying that this was His decision. Here too we find that Aaron remained silent after Moses had explained the nature of his sons' "deaths" to him. This then is the explanation of the first Mishnah in Avot.
  We find a little later in the same chapter of Avot that Rabbi Shimon son of Rabban Gamliel said that, having grown up amongst Torah scholars, he had not found anything better for the body than silence. He added that it was not the exegesis of Torah which was of primary importance, but practicing its precepts. He further added that anyone who indulged in too many words was bound to commit some sin sooner or later. We find several difficulties in this series of statements. 1) Why did the Rabbi say that the benefits of silence are primarily for "the body?" 2) Why did he interrupt his statements extolling the virtue of silence by saying that action was more important than teaching by word of mouth?
  Midrash Shemuel on Avot quotes the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Tzadok to the effect that the Rabbi Shimon who told us about the advantages of silence in the above quoted Mishnah was one of the Ten Martyrs. All these martyrs sanctified not only their souls but also their bodies. There are two methods of sanctifying the body. 1) The way of Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues who died on קדוש השם, a martyr's death.This kind of holiness is referred to in the Torah as: והייתם קדושים (11,45). The second method of achieving holiness of the body is referred to in the Torah as: אני ה' מקדשם (21,23). Nadav and Avihu acquired holiness of the body via the second method, i.e. their souls were burned whereas their bodies remained intact. Their departure from this world was similar to that of Chanoch (Genesis 5,24), and Elijah (Kings II 2,11). This is why I believe that the reason their bodies remained intact was that their death was due to the intimacy they had established with G–d. When Rabbi Shimon said that he had not found anything better for the body than silence, he alluded to the instruction given to Rabbi Akiva and the other Martyrs to be silent and accept G–d's decree without question. Only after having made this point does Rabbi Shimon explain in detail what this silence is all about. The Talmud (Berachot 61b) reports that when he was about to die, Rabbi Akiva told his students that he had wanted to fulfill the instruction (Deut. 6,5) to "love your G–d with all your heart, all your soul and all your might," as we recite three times daily. He had wondered when he would finally be able to fulfill the part of "loving G–d with all your soul." By dying a martyr's death he was satisfied that he had finally been granted the opportunity to also fulfill that dimension of loving G–d. It was in this connection that Rabbi Shimon – who was also to become a martyr – said: "study is not of the essence whereas practice is." He referred to the difference between displaying one's love for G–d in theory and displaying it in practice. He also wanted to teach that when the practical opportunity to die a martyr's death does not arise (as in 99% of all lives), G–d will consider the intention to do so, i.e. the fact that one has mentally and emotionally prepared oneself to love G–d to the point where one is ready to die for His Name, as if one had actually done so. This is the deeper meaning of: אני ה' מקדשם "I, the Lord, sanctify them."
  Concerning the other method of sanctifying the body, the method described in the Torah by the words: והייתם קדושים, Rabbi Shimon said that when one indulges too much in words, דברים, one is bound to commit a sin sooner or later. Rabbi Meir says in Avot 6,1 that כל העוסק בתורה לשמה זוכה לדברים הרבה "Whosoever studies Torah for its own sake will merit many דברים." In view of Rabbi Shimon's statement about the potential problems arising out of דברים הרבה, we seem to have a contradiction between the statements of these two sages. We also wonder what these דברים הרבה can possibly be in view of the long list of benefits listed in that same Mishnah as accruing to people whose preoccupation with Torah is totally altruistic. It seems that the answer may be found in something the Rivash (Rabbi Yitzchak ben Sheshet) wrote in a responsum about prayer. Concerning the ability to understand mystical dimensions as alluded to in Psalms 37,5: גול על ה' דרכך ובטח עליו והוא יעשה, "Leave all to the Lord, trust in Him; He will do it," the Rivash explains that G–d will arrange and reveal, יגלה, these hidden aspects of Torah to you. These hidden aspects are called דברים הרבה. The reason they are called this is that whatever is revealed in our world is only a little, whereas the ramifications of these hidden dimensions of Torah in the Celestial Regions are many. This is why the sages said: מקדש עצמו מלמטה מעט, מקדשין אותו מלמעלה הרבה, "If someone sanctifies himself a little in our world one will add a great deal more sanctity to him in the "higher" world." These are the דברים הרבה which Rabbi Meir referred to in Avot 6,1. This is also what Rabbi Shimon referred to when he said that if one is involved in such דברים הרבה it will lead to one's soul being out of step with the development of the body. One's soul will cleave to G–d whereas one's body will cease to function normally and one will have caused its death. Since we believe that there is no death without sin of some kind, the sin in such a case would be the unbalanced progress toward דבקות ה'. It is also possible that when Rabbi Shimon mentioned the word חטא, he equated it with חסרון, a deficiency. A biblical example of this would be אני ושלמה בני חטאים, in Kings I 1,21 where Bat Sheva reminds king David of his oath that Solomon would be his successor. She tells the king that unless arrangements for Solomon's succession to the throne are made prior to his death, both she and her son will be deprived of his promise. The word חטאים in that context can certainly not mean that Bat Sheva and Solomon would be sinners because David died. It means rather that the "physical aspect,” i.e. גופנית, of the promise that Solomon would rule would go unfulfilled. The word may also allude to the fact that when the revealed and the hidden do not go hand in hand, when the משכן and מקדש aspects of the Tabernacle do not work in unison, something will go awry. Man was created בצלם אלוקים, a combination of the physical and the spiritual; the two parts must work in tandem.
  The author brings a few more examples of the principle just mentioned. Among them he mentions that the use of the word חכמה in the plural, i.e. חכמות in Proverbs 9,1 alludes to the need to employ our physical as well as our mental faculties when building the "house," i.e. when Betzalel built the Tabernacle. 
  
  
  The principal components of our food are bread, meat, and wine. The Torah's legislation concerning these foods is comprehensive, and when one has observed all the various observances necessary to ensure that one consumes only what has been approved by the Torah, one may consider the act of eating as similar to the altar consuming a sacrifice. One's body will acquire varying degrees of sanctity in accordance with the care taken in selecting what one eats. When the Psalmist (Psalms 84,3) speaks about: לבי ובשרי ירננו אל-אל חי, "My body and soul shout for joy to the living G–d," the לב, heart, is perceived as the home, משכן, of the soul, as I have already explained. The soul has seen much חכמה. The body, בשרי is described as being on a par with the soul in this Psalm by the sons of Korach.
  An alternative explanation would be that the Psalmist speaks of both body and food as symbols of matter, the latter sustaining the former. When both achieve a degree of sanctity they express their joy to G–d. The word לבי is also an acronym for לחם-בשר-יין. The Midrash quoted which examined Proverbs 9,1-3 in detail saw in these three kinds of food something very important. In other words, the verse speaks about two worlds, the נגלה, as well as the נסתר, the visible and invisible world. 
  We have explained on several occasion that the שר העולם, the angel to whom G–d has entrusted the proper allocation of the food- supply in our world, is called Mattatron, or נער. Moses' function too, was to provide for the needs of his people. He is already referred to as נער when the daughter of Pharaoh found him, although normally he should only have been referred to as ילד (Exodus 2,6). Our commentators have said that Moses' voice was like that of a נער. The very name משה is also an acronym for מטטרון שר הפנים. On Exodus 24,1: ואל משה אמר עלה אל ה' our sages comment that Moses' name was Mattatron, just like the name of his teacher. When the Torah commenced the Book of Leviticus with the words ויקרא, this is a choice expression for all those who are מושפעים, direct recipients of G–d's favor. This is another dimension of Proverbs 9,1-3 which we discussed on page 739, i.e. נערותיה תקרא, that Moses called out to Aaron and his sons, etc. The latter were also comparable to angels, as pointed out by Malachi 2,7 that the priest is an angel of the Lord. Every time the Torah refers to a girl as נערה, the word is spelled without the feminine ending, i.e. it is written נער, although we read it as נערה. The description of Moses as נער then is an allusion to his function being similar to that of Mattatron.
  The Torah reports here that Moses called Aaron, his sons, and the elders of Israel. The Talmud Eruvin 54b describes the procedure of Moses explaining the Oral Tradition in the words: "How did Moses teach? Aaron entered and Moses expounded the Torah to him. Afterwards Aaron's sons entered and the procedure was repeated. After this the elders entered and the procedure was again repeated. Finally the whole of Israel approached to be taught the Torah." Here Moses called on the three choicest categories, ignoring the rest of the people for the time being. This was because the paragraph commences with the words ויהי, which – as we have stated – introduces an episode marred by tragedy. Moses knew that the Sanctuary was going to be sanctified through one of the outstanding personalities of Israel. He thought that it might be either himself or his brother Aaron (Torat Kohanim on 10,3). The kind of death experienced by Nadav and Avihu is an excellent death because it testifies to the high degree of sanctity they had achieved. Moses invited the choicest of the people to be taught the Torah first so as to signify that when the need arises to sanctify the name of G–d, i.e. to die for the glorification of His Name, it will be the spiritual leaders of the people who will be chosen for this distinction (sacrifice). When G–d announced the instruction to build the Tabernacle, He said that when all would be completed ושכנתי בתוכם (Exodus 25,8). The building of the house that we read about in Proverbs 9,1-3 refers to the גן עדן of the future when this "house" will have an enduring existence. It refers to the residence of humans at that time. 
  The "seven pillars that she has hewn" refers to seven categories of righteous people (Sifri Devarim 1,10). These groups occupy different levels in גן עדן, one above the other. Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai comments on Psalms 16:11: שבע שמחות, "full of joys," [i.e. satisfied, from Sova] that the word should be read as שבע, "seven." It would then refer to the seven facets of the various righteous people who would be similar to the moon, the sun, the firmament, the stars, lightning, שושנים, [a reference to the righteous as per Psalms 45,1, see my translation of the Alshich's commentary page 315. Ed.], and the candlestick in the Temple.
  Yalkut Shimoni on Parshat Shoftim understands the repeated reference טבחה, טבחה in Proverbs 9,2, as an allusion to Leviathan and the שור הבר, the "wild ox," auroch, whose meat will be served by G–d to the righteous in the Hereafter (Baba Batra 74b). According to the Aggadah, G–d slaughtered the female Leviathan and salted away its meat in order to serve it in the future at a festive meal for the righteous.
  The reference to מסכה יינה in the same verse is to the יין המשומר, the wine which has been preserved in its grapes ever since the days when Adam was in גן עדן, as we have mentioned repeatedly. 
  When Solomon continues in the same verse of Proverbs to speak about אף ערכה שלחנה, he refers to the angels who grind the manna for the righteous in this World of the Future. The reason he uses the term אף, "also," is because once before, when the Jewish people were in the desert manna had descended for them from Celestial Regions. This is a hint of what would be in store for them in an idyllic future. The words: נערותיה תקרא, in Proverbs 9,3 are an allusion to the expression in Esther 2,9 where Esther is described as entitled to and receiving the services of seven maid-attendants. The number seven –according to Kabbalists – ensured that her soul would acquire a level of holiness every day of the week. May we all soon merit such a level of sanctity in our own lives, Amen.
  
  Tazria, Metzora
  
  I have previously referred to an allusion contained in the words: אדם כי יהיה בעור בשרו וכו'. The vestments for the priests were to be לכבוד ולתפארת, "for dignity and adornment." These were to symbolize the כתנות אור, garments of light, which Adam and Eve wore before they had to exchange them for כתנות עור garments of skin, after the sin. Onkelos translates כתנות עור as לבושין דיקר, "precious garments" (Genesis 3,21). At first glance it seems that Onkelos equates כתנות אור with כתנות עור and בגדי כהונה. There is a mystical dimension to this comparison which is rooted in Kohelet 2,13: כיתרון אור מן החושך, "as the advantage of light over darkness." The message there is that G–d makes purity emerge even out of impurity. I have dealt with this at length in one of my addresses on שבת הגדול, the Sabbath preceding the festival of Passover. You will find it in my tractate Pesachim.
  
  Achrei Mot
  
  In this portion we find allusions to the sanctity of time and space, notably the Holy of Holies, also known as לפני ולפנים This site is accessible only on the Day of Atonement, and then only to the High Priest. The report of the death of the two sons of Aaron when entering this part of the Sanctuary is repeated here to underline that their very death was the commencement of their life in the World to Come. Their entry into this sacrosanct area was an expression of their closeness to G–d. I have previously mentioned that the word עשן, the smoke of the incense offering, is an acronym for the concepts עולם, שנה, נפש. The deeper reasons why sacrifices may not be offered outside the holy sites of the Sanctuary, whereas on that day an offering is made to the Azazel, away from the Sanctuary, are all closely intertwined. None of the עריות have access to holy sites either. Once a year on the Day of Atonement we are children of the Lord our G–d, and our representative the High Priest can enter His innermost sanctum. The mystical element of the Day of Atonement is all tied up with the service performed in the קדשי קדשים, Holy of Holies, and the היכל, outer part of the Sanctuary and the relationships with what we know as חיצון, the less than holy domain. I have dealt at length with all this in my tractate Yuma. It is included in my address on שבת שובה.
  
  Kedoshim
  
  The main thrust of this portion is to urge us to sanctify ourselves by abstaining from indulgences which are permissible. Whereas the previous פרשה concerned itself mostly with the סור מרע "depart from evil" aspect of Judaism, this portion is concerned with the עשה טוב, "do what is good" aspect of our faith. Since I have already written on many subjects mentioned here, I prefer to copy here a sermon which I delivered in my youth.
  Rabbi Chiyah taught in Vayikra Rabbah 24,5 that this portion was read out during the הקהל ceremony because so many basic elements of the Torah are contained therein. Yalkut Shimoni at the beginning of פרשת ויקהל states that the teachers of aggadic material concurred that there is no other portion of the Torah which starts with a report of the Jewish people all being assembled. G–d asked Moses to arrange for many mass meetings at which the laws of Sabbath observance would be taught. Subsequent generations were meant to learn from Moses how to teach Torah in public gatherings with the objective to glorify the name of G–d among the people. This is why Rabbi Chiyah was convinced that the portion of קדושים was read on the occasion of הקהל [a public gathering of the entire nation including women and children as per Deut. 31,12 at which the people were to hear and learn to fear the Lord. Ed.] Rabbi Chiyah further supports this by the opening verse in our פרשה.
  It is difficult to see why the Torah writes קדושים תהיו in the future tense; it should have said: !קדושים היו with an imperative. Furthermore, why does the Torah once more conclude at the end of this portion (20,26) with והייתם לי קדושים? The Midrash comments that this latter verse is a directive to be holy in public. This entire Midrash (24,8) requires analysis. Rabbi Avin describes what the Torah means as twofold. "Imagine a king who owned a wine cellar and who appointed guards to watch that cellar. Some of the guards were teetotalers whereas others were in the habit of imbibing. When the time arrived to be paid, the king paid the teetotalers only half the salary that he paid to the other guards. The teetotalers complained stating they had put in just as much time doing their work. The king countered that since they had not felt an urge to drink of the wine they had not had to overcome as much temptation as had the other group of guards who were in the habit of drinking alcoholic beverages." This parable is applicable to the difference between the angels and the Jewish people as regards the observance of G–d's commandments. The angels' task is easy, for they do not have to fight off the evil urge; G–d wishes only that the Jewish people -who do have to fight an evil urge- would resist its lure in their awareness that their reward will be twice that of the angels. G–d expressed the wish that the two levels of sanctity granted to human beings would be sufficient to ensure that they could achieve their spiritual objectives.This is why the Torah describes in 20,7: והתקדשתם, והייתם קדושים כי אני ה' אלוקיכם. A further parable by the same Rabbi Avin goes as follows: "Another parable: Consider the inhabitants of a country who constructed three crowns for their king. What did the king do [seeing he could wear but one crown at a time? Ed.] He placed one of the crowns on His own head, whereas He placed the other two crowns on the heads of his two sons. We may understand the angels as crowning G–d daily with three crowns. What does G–d do? He places one crown on His own head whereas He places the other two crowns on the head of Israel." This is why the Torah repeats: דבר אל כל עדת בני ישראל קדושים תהיו … והתקדשתם והייתם קדושים. 
  The syntax used by the editor of the Midrash above is strange. Normally, the editor would refer to an alternate explanation as דבר אחר, "an alternative interpretation." Why does he say that Rabbi Avin said תרתין, i.e. a "twofold explanation" in this case? An even more serious problem with the Midrash is that Rabbi Avin's second parable almost contradicts his first parable. What kind of קדושות, "sanctities," does he refer to? Further, in the first half of the first version he speaks about the amount of the reward; in the second half of that same version there appears to be great doubt if Israel would qualify for any reward at all!
  The author of these two parables dealt with a difficult question which I have already raised, namely that the angels possess one sanctity while Israel possesses two sanctities; this is derived from Psalms 103,20: ברכו ה' מלאכי, גבורי כח עשי דברי לשמוע בקול דברו, "Bless the Lord, O His angels, mighty creatures who do His bidding, ever obedient to His bidding." Based on this verse the angels are perceived as possessing one level of sanctity whereas Israel is perceived of possessing two levels of sanctity. Israel's first level of sanctity is acquired by "being obedient and doing G–d's bidding," whereas the second level is achieved through observing Rabbinic "fences" erected around basic Sinaitic laws to make it more difficult for the individual Jew to transgress such Biblical injunctions (cf. Avot 1,1). The reason for all this is alluded to in the parable about the wine cellar. We know about the יין המשומר, the wine preserved in its grapes since the time of גן עדן. There is some wine which does not contain any sediment apt to cause the wine to go sour under certain conditions. The wine, i.e. grapes of the tree of knowledge which Eve squeezed out and drank and gave Adam to drink, had not been guarded by a fence around the prohibition not to eat from the tree of knowledge. It thus was able to form sediments, which clouded its appearance, thereby preventing the detection of the pollutant emanating from the original serpent which was concealed therein. When Rabbi Avin speaks about guarding the wine cellar, he refers to the unpolluted remnant of the wine from גן עדן. Another word for such sediment or dross is סיג, and this is why the "fence" around Biblical laws is called סייג. This is also the deeper meaning of 18,30: ושמרתם את משמרתי, which is interpreted in Moed Katan 5 as עשו משמרת למשמרת, "construct a strainer for the strainer!" The Torah suggests that extra precautions should be taken to ensure against violations of its commandments. The function of the second strainer is similar to what is discussed in Shabbat 137 where the question is debated whether it is permissible to suspend such a strainer above the cup on a festival.
   The words קדושים תהיו are a reference to these "fences" which the Rabbis have erected in order to achieve our maximum separation from spiritually injurious materials, thus enabling us to achieve two levels of sanctity. If we practice והתקדשתם, we will achieve והייתם קדושים. The author of the parable in the Midrash speaks about a double amount of remuneration received by the guards who were used to drink alcoholic beverages. Rabbi Avin explains in the second parable that the challenge to the Jewish people [or mankind in general who are all subject to the evil urge Ed.] is so great that even with the help of the two "crowns" i.e. משמרת למשמרת, with which G–d adorned the Jewish people, He can only hope that Israel will achieve sanctity. If we only had the first parable of Rabbi Avin we would immediately question the premise that the teetotalers should receive a reward at all. Why should creatures who have no free will such as angels be paid for their services? Since the Torah links the demand for us to achieve sanctity to the statement כי אני ה', what does all this have to do with reward for performance of Torah commandments? 
  In order to answer this difficulty Rabbi Avin quoted his second parable, i.e. a postscript, not an alternative explanation. Rabbi Avin goes on record in his first parable that even though the angels are recompensed for their service to G–d, this is not related to their having overcome an evil urge. The reason they receive a reward at all, says G–d, is כי אני ה', "I G–d am gracious," I do something over and beyond what anyone has the right to expect of Me. The nature of the reward received by the angels is spiritual, similar to the concept of שכר מצוה מצוה, that the reward for performing a מצוה is the continued ability to perform מצות (Avot 4,2). Israel, whose מצוה performance is the result of overcoming great handicaps, receives two kinds of reward. 
  This is the meaning of the Rabbinic statement (Berachot 17a) that in the future the righteous will sit in Heaven and wear their crowns on their heads. The term used in that statement is עטרותיהן "their very own crowns" instead of simply עטרות על ראשם, "crowns on their heads." It is a reference to the choices the righteous had to make before attaining their status. To sum up, the Israelites receive both the reward the angels receive and also their very own reward. The former is perceived as part of G–d Himself. Both these sanctities are not within the province of G–d to control, as we know from: חוץ מיראת שמים, "Everything is within the power of Heaven, except instilling fear of Heaven in a person" (Berachot 33). The sum total of rewards received by Israel is threefold then. There is the קדושה which is part of G–d, and there are two further קדושות, sanctities, earned by Israel's performance. 
  This solves all the problems in the Midrash we have quoted. Before addressing other parts of the פרשה, allow me some remarks about the פרשה in general, after which I will deal with specific matters raised in this portion. We shall be guided by the approach in Midrash Tanchuma which commences its commentary on our פרשה with the verse: ויגבה ה' צבאות במשפט, והאל הקדוש נקדש בצדקה, "The Lord of Hosts is exalted by judgment, the Holy G–d proved holy by righteousness" (Isaiah 5,16). The Midrash says: "When is G–d perceived as exalted in His world? When He performs justice with the Gentile nations." The Midrash, at the end of the paragraph, cites Isaiah 49,3: "He (G–d) said to me: 'You are My servant, Israel in whom I glory.'"
  This is a very profound comment, and I will not address every detail of it as is my usual practice. A general difficulty in this Midrash is the apparent exclusion of converts as people G–d glories in. How can we reconcile this with the statement by the Talmud in Chagigah 3 that G–d is called אלוקי אברהם in recognition of the fact that Abraham was the first of a string of converts to monotheism? The Talmud there quotes Psalms 47,10: "The great of the people are gathered together, the retinue of Abraham's G–d." To the obvious question why G–d is not also called the "G–d of Isaac and the G–d of Jacob," the answer given is that Abraham was the first convert and as such all future converts are called by his name. Another difficulty is the fact that in the Psalm mentioned, G–d is first referred to as the גאון יעקב, "the pride of Jacob." How can we reconcile this with the reason the Talmud gives for calling G–d the G–d of Abraham? Before G–d became the G–d of Israel (when Jacob's name was changed), He had already been the G–d of Jacob!
  It is erroneous to believe that the name יעקב preceded the name ישראל. The concept ישראל preceded the creation of the universe. We know from the ספר יצירה that G–d created 310 worlds for every צדיק, each equipped with 231 gates, [the word יש-ראל=310+231]. The very first revelation of G–d's spirit in the world occurred when He created the first נקודה, point. This was called the יש מאין. The emanation חכמה, the means by which this creative process developed, as per כולם בחכמה עשית, "You have made all of them using חכמה" (Psalms 104,24) is a reference to ישראל. The חכמה employed in creating the universe served as a guideline. This is why our sources in the various Midrashim all agree that the idea of "Israel" in the Celestial Regions preceded the process of Creation. The "Israel" we are familiar with is simply the terrestrial counterpart of this concept which G–d employed while creating the universe.
   The deeper meaning of the word is that it is an instrument ready and willing to be fashioned by G–d. Acceptance of Divine input from the Celestial Regions results in a spiritual awakening in our regions. Our sages who stated that the sacrificial service is something needed in the Celestial Regions meant that the concept of Israel in the Celestial Regions depends on this input from us through our sacrifices for the furtherance of its own perfection. This is the meaning of Psalms 20,3: ישלח עזרך מקדש "May He send you help from the Sanctuary." It is a reference to sanctity in the "higher" regions helping to establish sanctity in our "lower" regions. The meaning of the word מקודש is also that "for the sake of the sanctity which will emanate from our regions G–d sends His help from above." Jacob merited this level of sanctity because he, as the first of the patriarchs, succeeded to sire children all of whom were loyal to G–d and His teachings. As a result he qualified for the name corresponding to all that the name ישראל in the Celestial Regions in connection with מעשה בראשית stands for. This is the mystical dimension of Genesis 47,31: וישתחו ישראל על ראש המטה, "Israel bowed at the head of the bed." This is also the mystical dimension of Midrash Tanchuma Kedoshim 1 אתם מתקדשים בי ואני מתקדש בכם, "You will become sanctified through Me, and I will become sanctified through you." Whichever way you look at this, it all expresses צדקה, "righteousness," as it shows G–d's desire to help those who wish to sanctify themselves.
  Let us now explain some of the aspects of קדושה, holiness or sanctity. There are three different kinds of holiness, five if we include sub-categories. The three basic categories are: 1) The sanctity of the body   as discussed in the earlier portions of the Book of Leviticus concerning which the Torah said – והתקדשתם: 2. The sanctity of space as mentioned in the Torah in Exodus 3,5: כי המקום … קדש הוא (this has to do with התבודדות, physical separation from others; 3) The sanctity of time, such as when the Sabbath is called מקרא קודש, "a holy convocation."
  The sanctity of the body is divided into three levels. They are the three levels which our sages have listed and which are dealt with in Reshit Chochmah. Our sages in Berachot 57b have spoken about them in terms of דירה נאה, אשה נאה, כלים נאים, מרחיבים דעתו של אדם, "a beautiful residence, a beautiful wife, and beautiful furnishings develop a man's mind." The word דירה, residence, is a metaphor for the heart, the seat of life itself. The word כלים, furnishings is a metaphor for one's tools. The word אשה, wife is a metaphor for the holy soul. The Arizal gave these three items a סימן by relating them to Psalms 90,3: תשב אדם עד דכא, "You return man to "dust." The word ד"כא he understood as an acronym for דירה, אשה, כלים.
  The meaning of all this is that it is the task of man's various limbs, i.e. the tools, כלים, with which he performs G–d's laws to keep the owner away from potentially dangerous situations which might lead him to defile himself. These "tools" must be employed to ensure that man performs the positive commandments as well as to see to it that he refrains from transgressing the negative commandments. The duty of the heart, the דירה, is in the sphere of thought and contemplation. The heart must be the instrument which enables man to achieve the קודש קדשים, the spiritual elevation he is capable of. There are so many things which the heart has been entrusted with that it is impossible to list them. They include such headings as: "לא תשנא, לא תקום ולא תטור, ואהבת לרעך כמוך, "do not hate, do not take revenge, do not bear a grudge, love your neighbor, to name but a few. There are also innumerable virtues that the Torah tries to teach us. Most of them and their sources in our Torah are listed in the book Chovot HaLevavot.
  The sanctity of the soul which is part of G–d is to cleave to every mystical aspect of Torah one is capable of. One may then merit to become privy to hidden aspects of the process of Creation, and even to part of what is commonly termed מעשה מרכבה, speculations about procedures in the Heavenly Regions, esoterics. 
  Achievement of higher levels of sanctity in the three areas mentioned is all included in the directive to sanctify the body, והתקדשתם. This directive encompasses the entire domain called קומת האדם, "the stature of Man," both its visible and its invisible aspects. The sanctity of space is a mystical dimension of כבוד. The Torah alludes to this when it legislates that most sacrifices have to be offered on the northern side of the altar. Whenever that term is used in the Torah, it is associated with the words: לפני ה', "in the presence of the Lord." In other words, G–d is perceived as being צפונה. [The deeper meaning of the word is clearly related to the word צפון, "hidden." Ed.] I have dealt with this concept at length when I wrote about the statement in Shir Hashirim Rabbah 7,6 that "as long as an embryo is within its mother's womb it receives all its sustenance through its navel."
  I have also dealt elsewhere at length with קדושת הזמן, the sanctity of time. The reason why our sages call the week שבת [not שבוע Ed.] is that they wish to exhort us to conduct ourselves every day of the week in such a way that from a spiritual point of view each day represents the essence of the idea of the Sabbath. Once we do this we cleave to a world which is totally under the aegis of the Sabbath spirit, and every one of our mundane activities thereby assumes a sacred character. It is this thought that dominates the benediction we recite at the end of the Sabbath when we refer to "G–d who makes a distinction between the holy and the profane, between light and darkness, between Israel and the Gentile nations and between the seventh day and the six days allocated to work." The Gentile nations are the epitome of what is mundane or profane, as explained by Rabbenu Chananel in connection with Pessachim 103-104.I have discussed this in connection with Proverbs 10,27: יראת ה' תוסיף ימים, "The fear of the Lord prolongs one's days."
  The above named three types of קדושה, which are really 5, are alluded to in the statement that G–d gave Israel three gifts, תורה, ארץ ישראל, ועולם הבא. The gift of תורה consists of the three branches of achievement the heart is capable of. The study of all aspects of the Torah leads to the performance of its commandments. The gift of ארץ ישראל represents the sanctity of space, whereas the gift of the World to Come represents the sanctity of time, i..e. a world which is identical with the Sabbath concept.
  Berachot 10 asks whom David had in mind when he repeated the words ברכי נפשי five times in Psalm 103. The answer given is that David addressed himself to the relationship between G–d and the soul. The Talmud lists five aspects in which the soul is like G–d. Just as G–d fills the universe, so the soul fills the body. Just as G–d sees without being seen, so the soul sees without being seen. Just as G–d sustains the whole universe, so the soul sustains the whole body. Just as G–d is pure, so the soul is pure. Just as G–d resides within an inner sanctum, so the soul resides within the most hidden area of the body. David said that the soul, because it possesses these five features, is suitable to bless the Lord who excels in these five areas. The soul judges the body because of the five aspects in which it is similar to G–d. The author cites proof how the five attributes of G–d possessed by the soul affect man.
  Adam sinned with the word דכ"א (as mentioned earlier). He stole by eating from the tree of knowledge. He also "stole" by trying to mislead G–d. He also pulled on his foreskin, [i.e. he tried to cover up the fact that he lacked a foreskin. Ed.] Philosophically speaking, his sin consisted of giving additional weight to the physical part of his personality. 
  Noach sinned in a similar fashion by getting drunk on wine which contained sediments, i.e. pollutants introduced by the original serpent when Eve first drank from the grapes of the tree of knowledge. This led to the fact that man would henceforth be born with a foreskin. 
  Abraham suffered spiritually from having a foreskin. The foreskin may be perceived as an obstacle to receptivity of higher degrees of sanctity by the body. Only after Abraham became circumcised was he able to resume his spiritual ascent towards higher insights and a higher level of sanctity. His descendants after him achieved some permanent sanctity in space. Some of his descendants were not fit however, and, until Jacob, whose children were all loyal, no permanent site of holiness was established. When the Talmud Berachot 6b said that כל הקובע מקום לתפלתו אלוקי אברהם בעזרו, "Anyone who prays from a site permanently assigned for that purpose will enjoy the assistance of the G–d of Abraham," this is an allusion to the fact that Abraham was the first to establish sanctity of space on earth.
  Isaac erred by loving Esau and not paying attention to the separation between the holy and the profane, and the Gentile nations respectively, as outlined above, i.e. the sanctity of time as represented by the Sabbath. Jacob was למעלה מן הזמן, "above the limitations imposed by time." His stature is symbolized by: ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים. Jacob was replete with all kinds of sanctities; he represented the root of the tree that is Israel. All of these concepts are alluded to in this portion.
  לא תגנובו, "Do not steal," alludes to Adam who was a thief. נטע רבעי, the legislation of sanctifying the fruit of a tree in its fourth year, alludes to Noach who was drunk on a Wednesday. When a stranger (convert to Judaism) takes up residence among you, etc.," is an allusion to the first convert, Abraham. The prohibition of offering one's children as a sacrifice to the Moloch (20,2) is not part of the general prohibition to worship idols, but concerns itself specifically with the worship of fire. There are two kinds of fire. There is the fire described by the prophet Ovadiah 1,18 in the words: והיה בית יעקב אש, "The house of Jacob will turn into fire." This is a sacred fire, because the Lord your G–d is also called "fire." Also the fire in the Temple (Deut. 4,24) was sacred fire. However, there is another kind of fire, the fire of Esau, the fire of purgatory, a destructive fire emanating from the קליפה. When discussing the Moloch, the Torah adds (20,3) למען טמא את מקדשי ולחלל את שם קדשי, "and he so defiled My Temple and profaned My holy Name." How does the Temple feature in this paragraph? What does a fire-offering to the Moloch have to do with the Temple? The Torah wishes to point out that though fire-offerings to the Moloch are an abomination, there are fire- offerings such as the ones brought by Jacob which reflect the highest level of sanctity. When the Torah writes: והתקדשתם והייתם קדושים, it is an instruction to sanctify את קדוש יעקב, the G–d considered as the personification of holiness by Jacob. This is merely another way of saying: קודש ישראל לה', or that His name is called ישראל, the concept known as ישראל סבא, the first manifestation of G–d when He commenced creating the universe as a יש מאין by means of the first נקודה, as we explained above.
  The beginning of our portion deals with קדושת הגוף, attaining sanctity of one's body. Nachmanides (Chavel edition page 115) – as distinct from the Midrash Rabbah quoted by Rashi –  does not see in this a directive to be separate, to refrain from incest, etc., but understands it to mean that people who qualify for the description קדושים, holy, are the ones who have sanctified themselves not by abstaining from what is forbidden, but by abstaining from what is permitted, each person according to his individual urges. Our sages (Yevamot 20a) have called this process קדש עצמך במותר לך, "sanctify yourself by denying yourself something you are entitled to!" From the above we learn that to a certain extent every single person has his own Torah. Assuming that every person had the same natural tendencies, and that every day or hour of the year would be identical to each other [that there would not be a predisposition to seek warmth in the winter and a cooling breeze in the summer, for instance. Ed.], the Torah, when legislating what may or may not be eaten would simply write that: "a certain quantity of certain foods may be consumed, everything else is prohibited." The Torah would express itself in similar terms concerning with whom and how frequently one is allowed to have sexual intercourse. The Torah would find a way to phrase prohibitions of permitted speech and thought in a similar way. As it is impossible to state these prohibitions in such a detailed manner, the Torah has to allow for the differences in the nature of different people. It therefore contents itself with a general directive: "Strive to become holy!" The meaning of the directive of the Talmud to sanctify oneself by means of denying oneself enjoyment of things which are permitted in principle, is that a person must be mature enough to know what is permissible in accordance with his particular station in life and his particular natural tendencies. When a person feels himself to have attained a particular spiritual level he considers certain matters as forbidden to him though they may formerly have been perfectly permissible, and though they may still be perfectly permissible for others not on his spiritual level.
  The Talmud illustrates this point by various examples. In Baba Kama 99b we are told that a woman came to Rabbi Chiyah asking him to determine if a certain coin was sound. He told her that it was. The next day the same woman came back to him complaining that others had refused to accept the coin at full value. Thereupon Rabbi Chiyah instructed Rav, the keeper of his money, to give this woman a coin of his own to compensate her for what he perceived to be an error of judgment on his part. He asked Rav to record this transaction as a loss. The Talmud questions why this instance was different from the previously mentioned example of a professional money-changer who erred in his judgment and who had given his opinion without charging. Such a money-changer does not have to compensate the enquirer. The Talmud answers that Rabbi Chiyah did not have to make restitution, but that he acted לפנים משורת הדין, beyond what was demanded of him legally. He took his cue from Rav Yossi who interpreted Exodus 18,20: "You will inform them of the path they should take and the practices they are to follow" to mean that one should go beyond the demands of the law in dealings with fellow human beings.
  We have another even more astounding example of how this principle is applied to men of outstanding caliber. In Baba Metzia 83a, we are told about workers who had broken [apparently deliberately, Ed.] a cask of wine they were transporting on behalf of Rabbi bar Chanah. The Rabbi took some of their clothing as compensation. When the workers turned to Rav complaining, the latter ordered Rabbi bar Chanah to return it. To Rabbi bar Chanah's query whether this ruling was in accordance with the law, Rav replied in the affirmative. He quoted Proverbs 2,22: למען תלך בדרך טובים, "so that you may walk in the way of the good ones" as his source. When the carriers complained to Rav that in view of their poverty they could not afford to forego their wages for the transport of the caskets of wine, Rav ordered Rabbi bar Chanah to pay these workers full wages. When Rabbi bar Chanah again questioned whether his ruling was legal, Rav quoted the second half of Proverbs 2,20 וארחות צדיקים תשמור "keep to the paths of the righteous" as the source for his ruling. It is interesting that Rav did not justify his ruling by citing the need to apply more stringent yardsticks to oneself than the law requires of one, but he made it plain that as far as Rabbi bar Chanah was concerned his ruling was the requirement of the law itself. Tosaphot in Baba Kama 99 deal with the difference between Rav's ruling against Rabbi bar Chanah and that of the incident involving his nephew Rabbi Chiyah in the case of the woman's coin. Tosaphot's answer that the concept of לפנים משורת הדין does not apply when the damage one has sustained has been caused willfully by the other litigant, is very forced. If we adopt my approach that Torah law applies to different people according to their spiritual level, Rav's ruling is simple. He viewed Rabbi bar Chanah as on an exceptionally high spiritual level; therefore he explained the law to Rabbi bar Chanah as it applied to him. Once the principle of לפנים משורת הדין has been derived from a verse in scripture, the way we adapt the slogan קדש עצמך במותר לך, "sanctify yourself through foregoing what is permissible to you" is applied on a very individual basis.
  I believe that in the many instances when the Talmud justifies certain rulings by the statement אדם חשוב שאני, that we apply different yardsticks to morally high-ranking people, the Talmud wants to emphasize that the law is different when applied to such people. It is not merely a voluntary abrogation of one's rights. When the Talmud speaks of "doing one's duty in the eyes of Heaven," however, it is something else again. Such considerations apply where for one reason or another the human tribunal is unable to enforce a certain ruling.
  In 19,3 the Torah, after commencing in the singular איש אמו ואביו תיראו, "you must each show respect to your mother and father," continues with the plural תיראו. Why did the Torah not write תירא, "You must show respect" in the singular? According to the plain meaning the answer is that the Torah at one and the same time addresses three different people: the man who is a son, the person who has already become a father or mother in his/her own right who is still duty-bound to show respect to their own parents, and in reverse, the parent who must not kick a grown up child lest he/she retaliate making the father guilty of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול, "do not place an obstacle in the path of the blind" (based on 19,14 cf. Moed Katan 17a).
  One difficulty is the sequence of these various verses. How are the different subject matters related? Another difficulty is the connection of the injunction to respect mother and father to the laws of Sabbath observance. The answer that Sabbath observance overrides the commandment to respect mother and father is quite inadequate, since such a principle applies even if the parents ask one to violate a far less serious commandment of the Torah.
  One might say that the Torah refers to the sanctity of the body of individual man. The meaning of the words קדושים תהיו, "you shall strive to become holy (plural)," is addressed to both partners of a marriage. The Torah speaks of three partners in the creation of a human being, i.e. father, mother, and G–d. G–d's share in this creation is already holy, i.e. כי קדוש אני ה' אלוקיכם. The sanctification of man and his wife is most easily achieved on Friday nights, i.e. the Sabbath, the preferred time for the union of man and his wife to produce children conceived in sanctity. In other words, the Sabbath, a sanctified point in time, is the reason that a child comes into being. In view of the foregoing, a son who hears his father order him to do something which violates the Sabbath may entertain the idea of fulfilling the father's bidding. The Torah tells the son not even to contemplate such a thought. The stress on the word איש underlines how inconceivable it is to give precedence to a command by man over a command by G–d.
  The plural used by the Torah, i.e. תיראו, is connected to the soul. Sanctity may sometimes be inherited from father and mother and the spiritually pure thoughts they entertained at the time of marital union, whereas it can also be attained through one's own merits. These ideas have been expounded upon both in parts of the Zohar called רעיא מהימנא and in the Pardes Rimonim. They explain the plural in our verse as alluding to these two alternative ways of attaining sanctity, i.e. either through heredity or through personal achievement. Which ever might be the case, the Torah exhorts you to let the fear of G–d take precedence over all other demands that may be made upon you. When the Torah continues in 19,4: "Do not turn to idols, and do not construct for yourselves a graven image," this commandment is addressed to children who have not been sired by parents who have attained sanctity.
  וכי תזבחו זבח (19:5) which speaks about the conditions when sacrifices or parts thereof may be eaten by the owner, legislates the need to sanctify one's foods. I have explained that, as long as the Israelites were in the desert, the consumption of meat was possible only after such meat had become the remains of a peace-offering, שלמים. After the Jewish people settled in their land, and most lived a considerable distance from Jerusalem, the site of the Temple, consumption of meat which had not first been offered on the altar was permitted (Deut. 12,21). The reason that the Torah (19,6) places a restriction on the time sacrificial meat may be consumed, i.e. the law of נותר, may be an allusion to teach us not to ask "what shall we eat tomorrow?" The Torah up to now had addressed itself to the sanctification of the body by its legislating on sexual relations and on permitted foods. 
  The Torah next addresses itself to the sanctification of one's money, one's possessions. We know that there are people who treasure their possessions more than they treasure their lives. The Torah wishes to teach such people a moral lesson when it demands that after having invested time and labor in producing a crop, they must allocate part of this crop to people who have neither invested time nor effort in producing it. Starting in 19,9 we have a whole string of such commandments. The Torah commences addressing a multitude, i.e. ובקצרכם את קציר ארצכם, "when you (pl) reap the harvest of your land," only, to switch immediately to the singular in the very same verse, i.e. לא תכלה פאת שדך לקצר, "do not reap all the way." This is the way of the Torah telling the farmer that the פאה, edge of the field that he must leave unharvested, never belonged to him in the first place, but always belonged to the poor by right. The same applies to לקט, the gleanings. Were this not the case, the Torah would have included these items under the heading of the מתנות, gifts, which the farmer has to give away. It would have been be quite inconceivable if the Torah had legislated that such "gifts" should constitute the most inferior produce such as the unripe grapes or prematurely fallen fruit mentioned in verse 10. Someone giving charity is certainly expected to give of the superior part of his produce. The Torah has already taught us that the gifts given to G–d must be the best of the type of animal one has offered as a sacrifice, i.e. כי חלב לה' (Leviticus 3,16).
  When the Torah speaks about not stealing, (19,11) (compare negative commandment 155 according to the Semag,) this does not refer to the theft of something tangible, but to what our sages called גנבת דעת, false pretenses, trickery. Such false pretenses are prohibited even in one's dealings with a pagan. This is discussed in Tur Choshen Mishpat section 228. The basic prohibition of גנבת דעת is expressed in the words: לא תשקרו, "do not lie." A person is not permitted to deny his guilt by claiming he had merely made a mistake. This is why the Torah says: לא תכחשו, "do not deny." The Talmud in Shabbat 119a tells of a butcher who had become extremely wealthy and who attributed this fact to his having saved the very best part of his animals for the Sabbath [but for his own and his family's consumption. Ed.]. This does not contradict the statement that the best part of one's goods should be presented to G–d, or, failing this, to charitable causes. The Talmud merely mentions the incident to demonstrate how great is the merit of honoring the Sabbath and that he who honors the Sabbath for its own sake will be rewarded.
  The Torah continues (19,12) with the prohibition to use the name of G–d when swearing a false oath. I believe that what is meant is that one must not swear an oath in order to promote something which is false, i.e. in order to acquire an unfair financial advantage. Money is not something אמיתי, a true value, i.e. enduring. When G–d adds the words אני ה', "I am the Lord," this is as if G–d said that only He Himself can swear a really true oath. Tur Yoreh Dey-ah section 203, discussing the laws of vows, etc., first draws attention to the fact that vows, i.e. a form of oaths, are unwelcome because they may not be fulfilled. Even someone who does fulfil his vow on time is called a רשע, a wicked person. The Alshich in his commentary on the sequence of these verses points out that they describe how one mistake leads to another, how from merely committing גנבת דעת, a false pretense such as inquiring about the price of goods one has no intention of buying at any price, one may end up by feeling embarrassed enough to deny one's motives, eventually swearing a false oath of denial.
  The Torah (19,13) continues with: "Do not oppress your fellow, neighbor." Why does the Torah mention in this connection רעך, a term usually employed for someone who is a friend of yours? Why does the Torah add: "and do not commit robbery?" A report in Berachot 5b appears to allude to our problem. Rav Huna once sufferd the loss of four hundred barrels of wine which had all turned sour. Rav Yehudah, brother of Rav Salo the Pious, visited him together with other scholars. They suggested to him that he should examine his past deeds. He said to them: "Do you suspect me of wrongdoing?" They replied: "Do you perhaps imply that G–d is suspected of having caused you such a grievous loss without cause?" Thereupon Rav Huna challenged anyone who had heard something negative about him to say so. They told him that they heard that he did not give his land tenant certain shoots that the latter was entitled to. To this accusation Rav Huna retorted that since the land tenant in question had not given him any part of the harvest of that vineyard, how could there be a question of his stealing from the land tenant! In other words, at worst he had only reimbursed himself partially for what the land tenant had stolen from him! The Rabbis quoted a popular proverb to Rav Huna which states that if someone steals from a thief he still tastes the fruits of theft. Rav Huna accepted the rebuke and made restitution. His vinegar then turned to wine again, or, according to another version, there was an increase in the price of wine so that he recouped his loss when selling the balance of his stock. Applied to our verse, this means that the Torah calls the person who steals from a thief רעך, i.e. puts him on the same moral footing as the thief himself. The Torah adds "and do not commit robbery" to tell us that if we steal from a robber, we too are considered robbers.
  The Torah (19,14) continues with: "Do not curse the deaf." This should be understood in the sense of Kings II 24,14: וכל החרש והמסגר, "all the craftsmen and smiths." In the above mentioned context all the leading people of Jerusalem who could have enabled its continued existence as an independent nation were exiled. Here, too, the Torah means that one should not curse the judges, the leaders, etc., without whom the state could not continue to function properly.
  Following this injunction, the Torah warns that one should not place obstacles in the path of the blind, an allusion to attempts to bribe judges whose sense of fairness would be blinded by acceptance of a bribe, such as Moses has repeated in Deut. 16,19. There are other dimensions to such bribes, i.e. attempts to trip up the blind, such as the advice given in Jerusalem Talmud Taanit 3,6 "to honour, i.e. send gifts to your physician before you are in need of him." People who do this know that sooner or later they will be in need of the services of a physician, and they want to ensure that they will then get immediate attention. The same is true of someone who is in the habit of sending gifts to a judge. He knows that if ever he will need to have to appear before a judge in litigation, he can choose this judge knowing he will be favourably disposed towards him. The Torah therefore ends the verse with the injunction to fear the Lord your G–d, i.e. that G–d is quite aware of our machinations. This fear of the Lord is something within the province of one's heart.
  The Torah (19,15) continues by exhorting: "Do not commit injustice while performing justice." On occasion one commits an injustice while in the midst of performing justice. An example would be a judge favoring a poor person before him in the knowledge that any judgment against the pauper would bring about his own or the community's legal obligation to provide for him.
   The Torah adds in the same breath: לא תהדר פני גדול, "Do not show deference to the rich." Maimonides, concerning this verse, writes that it includes giving every litigant a chance to have his say be he long-winded or not. A litigant should not be able to claim that the judgment pronounced by the judge was based solely on unsupported arguments. Tur Choshen Mishpat 16 confirms this. Every argument presented by either litigant must be examined so that it could serve as shedding a favorable light on the actions of that litigant, whenever possible. This is why the verse concludes with the words: בצדק תשפוט עמיתך.
  We next have the injunction not to go about slandering people (19,16) This is also directed at judges. It includes a judge who did not preside over a certain litigation and who says that if he had been the judge in that case the decision would have been different. When the Torah phrases this injunction as "do not walk…" it is an allusion to people who are in the habit of going from one house to another exchanging gossip, etc. The Torah suggests to such people that if they do not want to become guilty of slander they should not keep "walking" around so much. Staying at home is a self-imposed "fence" around this law.
  The Torah continues with: לא תעמוד על דם רעך, meaning that you should not only not actively spread such gossip, but you should not even remain in a place where gossip is discussed. The Talmud (Erchin 15) calls it “לשון הרע "לישנא תליתא, evil gossip a "threefold tongue," because it causes death to both the person against whom it is directed, to the person spreading it, and to the person listening to it.
  The Torah next exhorts us not to bottle up our hatred against a fellow jew in our heart (19,17), but to tell him openly if we wish to criticize his conduct, i.e. הוכח תוכיח. Proverbs 27,5 provides the rationale, namely that a rebuke reveals loving concern for the person so rebuked. This is a virtue as explained by Rashi on Genesis 37,4 that Joseph's brothers, rather than concealing their dislike of Joseph and flattering him, spoke out about it. One must not contrast this with the statement of our sages who condemned Naval for saying what was in his heart. They even changed the reading of the name of his ancestor from נבל to כלבו so as to emphasize that every evil thing in his heart he expressed with his lips (Samuel 25, Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin 2,3). His was a special case; he should not have spoken at all instead of using his power of speech only to denigrate others. Joseph's brothers, on the other hand, had to maintain relations with him. Rather than pretend to like him they chose to say what was on their minds.
  When the Torah urges הוכח תוכיח, it moderates it by adding: ולא תשא עליו חטא, "incur no guilt because of him." I understand this to mean that in the process of rebuking your fellow you are to stress your surprise that a good man such as he should become guilty of the misdemeanor you are rebuking him for. You are to rebuke only those people who are intelligent enough to realize that you have their interest at heart and who will love you for it. Solomon spoke about this distinction in Proverbs 9,8. The Alshich elaborates on this in his commentary on the Book of Proverbs, [see my translation of this commentary, pages 173-4. Ed.]
  The Torah continues (19,18) telling you not to take revenge or even to hold a grudge against fellow-Jews. The conjunctive letter ו, linking the two commandments is justified. Someone might have thought that if the Torah even forbids us to hold a grudge there is no need to forbid actual revenge. This is not so. I would then have considered an act of revenge as less culpable than that of bearing a grudge. If someone refused his neighbor the loan of, say, a gardening tool, such refusal might not be attributed to the owner wanting to revenge himself against the potential borrower, but the potential borrower might think of the refusal as due to the owner's concern over possible damage to the tool. We also might have considered it a transgression of a negative commandment not involving a deed by the person violating the commandment. A human tribunal is not competent to impose a penalty in such cases, seeing that there is doubt about the motive of the refusal, a doubt which only G–d Himself is able to resolve. For the above reasons one might have thought that the two prohibitions should have been written separately without the conjunctive letter ו linking grudge-bearing to an act of revenge. The Torah writes first: "Do not take revenge," so that even if the refusal of the loan of the tool is due to one's genuine concern that the tool should not suffer damage while in the hands of the borrower, he is still not allowed to refuse because bystanders would interpret the refusal as an act of revenge.
  The Torah continues with: ואהבת לרעך כמוך, אני ה', "Love your fellow as yourself, I am the Lord." Whereas the Ten Commandments commence with G–d saying: אנכי ה' אלוקיך, in this instance G–d describes Himself as, אני ה'. The latter word is the Egyptian equivalent for אנכי. The Ten Commandments comprise 613 letters from the beginning until the word רעך in Exodus 20,14. The last two words in the Ten Commandments, i.e. אשר לרעך, "that which belongs to your fellow," are the רגל, "foundation," upon which the entire Torah is based.
  Mixing species which G–d wanted to remain separate, whether in the sphere of clothing, i.e. the inert, the sphere of farming, the sphere of growing vegetation, or in the sphere of the living creatures such as the mismatching of domestic animals, is forbidden because it runs counter to G–d's design for His universe. This is why the Torah (19,19) prohibits a variety of such species from being paired. The letters in the word שעטנז are the same as שטן ע"ז, that "Satan is strong" an allusion that warns us that we would strengthen the forces of Satan if we worked against G–d's design for this world. The word שטן is an acronym for שוע, טווי, נוז, terms denoting the spinning, twisting of threads and smoothing or carding of certain mixtures used in making garments.
  פשתן, flax, and צמר, wool, are the mystical dimensions of Cain and Abel respectively. History has taught that the two, i.e. Cain and Abel, did not mix successfully. 
  We have elaborated elsewhere on the fact that each blade of grass depends on a spiritual input from the higher world that tells it to grow. When such spiritual input addresses a species other than the one which it is supposed to complement, an intolerable situation results. 
  In the case of animals of different species being mated with each other, this is an intolerable mixture of spiritual forces with one another. A classic example of opposing spiritual forces is the maid-servant (of gentile descent, 19,20) who has been partially freed [such as by only one of her masters, Ed.] She is neither able to wed a slave nor can she wed a Jew because she has "one foot" in the spiritual domain of slaves, whereas her other "foot" is already in the spiritual domain of the Jewish people. We have also described her relationship with G–d as partially like that of a child, and partially like that of a slave.
  In 19,23, the Torah legislates that trees planted in ארץ ישראל undergo a period of three years of ערלה, a period similar to that of a male child before it has been circumcised. We have understood Torah legislation as an attempt to rectify errors committed by Adam , Noach, etc, who have been responsible for a withdrawal of G–d's presence and for damage to G–d's universe. Noach became drunk because he drank prematurely from a vineyard which had not yet reached its fifth year. In his comments on Rav Alfassi at the beginning of the sixth chapter of Berachot, Rabbeinu Yonah quotes a ruling that of all the trees which grow in the diaspora only the vineyard is subject to the נטע רבעי legislation because whenever there is a dispute concerning whether a certain legislation applies, we decide in favor of the more lenient viewpoint when it concerns applicability of the law in the diaspora. He supports this ruling with the argument that wherever teachers of the Mishnah disagree regarding the הלכה, we adopt the more lenient view where practice in the diaspora is concerned. In the case of wine, there is a special requirement to sanctify wine, i.e. to bring it to the level of sanctity that existed prior to the sin in the garden of Eden. The ruling is supported by similar sounding words ערלתו [even when the context is totally different. This exegetical method is known as גזרה שוה. Ed.] on separate occasions.
  When someone pulls at the piece of skin near his glans, he denies the sanctity of his body achieved through circumcision, as we have previously explained in connection with one of the three sins Adam is accused of. The expression קודש הלולים may also be understood as קודש חלולים sanctifying what had previously been desecrated, i.e. the יין המשומר. 
  Rabbeinu Yonah holds that wine in its fourth year, after redemption, requires a benediction as a matter of biblical law, both before and after one has drunk it. He bases this on the word הלולים, in the plural. A drunk person is not allowed to recite such a benediction. By reciting a benediction one "redeems" the wine from its גלגול, its need to be rehabilitated. The author, basing himself on some works of the Arizal, describes the benediction recited by the owners of the sacrifices who eat part thereof as crucial to the process of "the priests perform the service, whereas the owners eat in order to bring about effective atonement." The injunction not to eat of the sacrificial meat prematurely, i.e. before the blood has been sprinkled on the altar by the priests (19,26), also contains allusions to this process. The allusions to transmigration of the soul are found in Job 33,29 where hope is held out that a person who has not fulfilled his task on earth may be given a second or even a third chance to do so. We may see a similar allusion in the legislation of נותר, which follows the legislation that meat of the peace-offerings may be eaten on two days and the intervening night, i.e. during a maximum of three time periods. This alludes to the three opportunities given to the soul (personality) to redeem itself within the body of a person while on earth. When the Torah says in 19,8: ואכליו עונו ישא, "that anyone who consumes such sacrificial meat after the deadline has expired will bear his sin," the idea is that he will no longer qualify for atonement. The statement by Hillel in Avot 1,14 –If I am not for myself, who is? If I am only concerned with myself what kind of a person am I? If not now when?" – may also be read as an allusion to the statement in the Talmud concerning the validity or invalidity of the repentance of a person who says: “I shall sin since I will have a chance to rehabilitate myself (on the Day of Atonement, Yuma 86), or, in a transmigration of my soul!" Anyone who ever had such thoughts during his life on earth will not be permitted to rehabilitate in such a way, for surely he will not be granted a second round on earth. Pardes Rimonim deals with this problem in his chapter on the soul. The author explains that the contribution one's friend or associate can make to one's own rehabilitation is extremely limited; this is why Hillel stresses that what one does not do for oneself no one else is going to do for one. On the other hand, if one attempts to achieve one's rehabilitation by one's own efforts, not relying on other factors, one will experience that G–d extends one a great amount of help, similar to what David said in Psalms 31,20: "How abundant is the good that You have in store for those who fear You!" One will realize then that one's own contribution was really major, that G–d appreciated it. The rhetorical question: "What am I?" must be understood in the sense that I grew to realize my importance in the eyes of G–d. This is the deeper meaning of 19,5: לרצונכם, "to your satisfaction."
  The Torah (19,26-29) continues with legislation not to imitate the "cultural" standards of the Gentile nations. All their so-called culture is based on idol worship, a form of being ערל לב, of uncircumcised heart. When a human being initiates the process of defiling himself, other forces will defile him even more (Yuma 39). This is why the process of rehabilitation has to begin immediately, before one becomes progressively more defiled, more impure. We can interpret the Torah's demand מפני שיבה תקום "arise in the presence of an aged person" (19,32) as a warning not to wait until one's evil urge has become so old that it does not tempt one anymore. Compare the comment of the Zohar on this verse (Sullam edition page 45). The word מפני then is read as לפני.
  The paragraph commencing with וכי יגור אתכם גר, "When a stranger (convert) resides amongst you, etc" (19,33), contains an allusion to Abraham, the first convert to Judaism. He also became the first אזרח, natural born citizen, as we know from Psalms 89,1, which, according to all our sources, is a reference to Abraham. The reason the Torah alludes to Abraham as the first convert is to teach us not to accuse others of shortcomings when we ourselves suffer from the same type of shortcoming. To denigrate a stranger is to forget that we ourselves started our career as a nation as strangers. In the words of Baba Metzia 59b: "If one's family tree contains the name of someone who has been legally hanged, he should not even say to a fellow "hang this fish up for me," for the very mention of hanging is a reminder of a blemish in his own family." The Israelites were guilty of idol worship while in Egypt as well as of many abominable practices. How then could they dare remind a convert of his pagan past? Abraham himself chose exile (Shemot Rabbah 59) for his descendants in preference to their having to linger in purgatory. Purgatory comprises both the dimension of dryness and wetness. The dryness expresses itself in the fire, the wetness in a form of snow. As an allusion to this, the Torah here continues with the prohibition to sacrifice to the fire-god Moloch (20,2-5) a warning of what is in store for Esau and his followers. The Torah speaks only of people who sacrifice some of their offspring to Moloch. The author of Semag writes an explanation as a reply to the heretics; however, the true reason for this is analogous to the statement of our sages on Genesis 21,12 where Abraham did not want to expel Hagar and Ishmael. G–d told him there that his principal heirs would be "part of Isaac." Just as the Torah referred in that case to "part of Isaac," so here too the syntax of the Torah speaks of the likely event, i.e. that someone offers some of his offspring as a sacrifice to that deity. Just as only part of Isaac's descendants turned away from the Abrahamitic tradition, i.e. Esau, so the Torah, by speaking of "some offspring being offered to the Moloch," reassures us that it is inconceivable that a descendant of Isaac would sacrifice all of his offspring to such a deity. The Torah continues in 20,7: והתקדשתם. This is a reference to Jacob. He had succeeded in attaining sanctity of his body.
  When the Torah speaks about someone cursing his father or mother in 20,9, the opening word כי, is difficult. The meaning could be that if a person who curses father or mother must face execution, how much more so is such a penalty applicable to someone who curses G–d. The Torah addresses those charged with carrying out the execution, i.e. it is part of the ושמרתם את חקותי in verse 8. Nachmanides understands the word כי as referring to 19,3 the commandment to respect mother and father. The Torah would tell us here that in the event a person ignores the commandment of 19,3 but curses his parents instead, he would face the death penalty. His explanation would be difficult to accept because the Torah dealt with too many other subjects in the interval. I see no such problem because I have demonstrated how all the various legislations form a continuous concept, i.e. aspects of sanctification. The Alshich as well as Klee Chemdah elaborate further along these lines. [cf. my translation of Torat Moshe by the Alshich, page 543. Ed.] The paragraph concludes with the promise that by making a separation between the impure and the pure we will achieve sanctity and will be apart from all the other nations (20,26). This means that we will merit to live in a world all of which is under the spiritual aura of the Sabbath. 
  [Following is a fragment of a section of which the beginning pages was lost:]
  The opposite is true of the wicked, who will experience הכרת תכרת הנפש, an extermination of their souls, as spelled out in Numbers 15,31. Whereas it is within the power of the righteous to transform the attribute of Justice to become the attribute of Mercy, the wicked accomplish the very reverse. Although in this context body and soul are viewed as opposites, both the body's and the soul's activities may evoke responses from either the attribute of Mercy or the attribute of Justice. Sin is possible when body and soul work in tandem, as we know from the parable of the blind and the lame. Whereas neither the one nor the other could commit theft individually, they managed quite well by the lame becoming the eyes of the blind and the blind becoming the legs of the lame.
  In Avot 3,1 Rabbi Akavyah enumerates three thoughts which are apt to help a person avoid the commission of a transgression. Since we can all count to three, and the thoughts are mentioned separately, why did the Rabbi have to tell us that there were three considerations? Midrash Shmuel suggests that the Rabbi wanted to stress that these three considerations are effective only if one thinks of all of them at the same time. Hence he stressed the number "three." The author of this Midrash proceeds to show that whereas the first of the considerations listed by Rabbi Akavyah referred to the body, the second referred to the soul. This explains why the Rabbi did not use the word Ayin i.e. "nothing" when describing the way we are headed as he had described the place we originate from. Instead, he refers only to a direction, i.e. Le-on. The soul enters the body "naked," and its task is to leave it after having become a personality, i.e. after having acquired suitable "clothing." These subjects are discussed in the chapter about the soul in Pardes Rimonim. When it has to give an accounting, the soul has to demonstrate its accomplishments while in a body before the attribute of Justice because the yardsticks applied to the soul are in accordance with its superior origin. The body has to give an accounting before the King of kings, the King who judges all the terrestrial kings as pointed out in Avoda Zarah.
  Such considerations also enable us to explain the Mishnah in Avot 5,8, that the Jewish people experienced ten miracles while the Temple was standing. The list includes such things as that no woman suffered a miscarriage due to the odour of the flesh of the sacrifices which was burned up on the altar, and that the meat itself never turned putrid. No fly was ever seen in the slaughterhouse of the Temple; no unclean emission ever befell the High Priest on the Day of Atonement. The rain never extinguished the fire on the wood pile of the altar; the wind never prevailed over the column of smoke that rose from the altar; no disqualifying defect was ever found in the Omer, the two Shevuot loaves, nor in the show-breads. The people stood closely pressed together and yet found ample space to prostrate themselves; no snake or scorpion ever caused injury in Jerusalem, and no man ever said to his fellow: "There is too little room for me to lodge overnight in Jerusalem." 
  Why did the author of this Mishnah not say "G–d performed these miracles etc.," instead of phrasing it passively, merely as something experienced by the people? When the same phraseology is used in connection with the miracles performed in Egypt as listed in the preceding Mishnah, this could be explained as a by-product of the plagues, i.e. Israel being saved from the afflictions suffered by the Egyptians. It is worthwhile to read the comment of Midrash Shmuel on this Mishnah which he attributes to a Rabbi Moshe Almosnino [a prominent scholar in Salonika and Constantinople during most of the 16th century. Ed.].
  The reason the ten miracles are described in the manner they are is that they teach us ten lessons. Man has free choice. Five of the miracles listed represent man's right hand, the other five represent his left hand. The right hand symbolises the three awarenesses demanded by Rabbi Akavyah concerning one's soul, plus the need to rectify any sins one has already committed. This makes four. The fifth is the awareness of before whom one has to give an accounting. Once one has to give an accounting before G–d it is too late to engage in remedial action, i.e. תקונים. There are also five awarenesses that apply to the body, i.e. the "left hand." In view of all this, our Mishnah in chapter 5 commences with the negative aspects of such miracles, whereas it concludes with miracles which demonstrate positive accomplishments by the people who experienced them.
  The fact that a pregnant woman did not experience a miscarriage due to the stench of the meat on the altar corresponds to the statement of Rabbi Akavyah that we must be aware of the smelly drop of semen our body originates from.. This subject is mentioned in Yuma 82 where we are told about a pregnant woman who experienced a terrible urge to eat on the Day of Atonement and whose predicament was presented to Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi. The latter instructed that one should whisper to this woman that the date was the Day of Atonement. When this advice was followed the woman's hunger pains subsided. Concerning this incident they applied the verse in Jeremiah 1,5: "I have known you before you were even formed in the womb." The baby that this woman gave birth to was the famous scholar Rabbi Yochanan. The Talmud next reports about another similar case involving Rabbi Chanina and a pregnant lady. The same procedure was followed, but it did not assuage the lady's terrible urge to eat. The bystanders applied to that lady Psalm 58,4: "The wicked are defiant from birth." The child born from that pregnancy was a certain Shabtai who hoarded produce during years of drought and sold it at exorbitant prices. We draw a parallel from the experience of pregnant ladies who passed the Temple and who did not abort an embryo due to the unpleasant smell of the sacrificial meat to women who did not feel revolted by the smell (or awareness) of their own flesh and blood. According to Rabbi Akavyah the mere thought of it should have been revolting.
  The second kind of awareness demanded by Rabbi Akavyah, consciousness of one's destination, a place of worms and decay, similarly holds no terror when one speaks of meat such as the sacrificial meat which has been sanctified on the altar. Such meat is not subject to decay amd worms. The Talmud describes several instances of rabbis whose body had not decayed for many years after their burial. One such instance was that of Rabbi Eleazar who was blessed by a Jewish adulterer about to be executed that his flesh should not become worm-eaten nor decay (Baba Metzia 83b).
  The absence of flies in the slaughterhouse cited as one of the ten miracles which occurred in the Holy Temple symbolises an absence of bodily desires. The body is less likely to decay when one controls them. Rabbi Akavyah therefore demanded an awareness of the fact that there would be a price to pay for indulging one's body in order to frighten us into controlling such urges. Berachot 10a states that the Shunamite woman who used to provide lodging for the prophet Elisha recognized that he was a holy man because flies never bothered him or his food. The presence of flies then symbolizes an excessive concern with the physical. The people who ignored Moses' instructions in Exodus 16,19 not to try and leave over part of the manna which fell on the first day learned their lesson because their left-overs became worm-eaten and stank. We read in Malachi 2,3: "I will strew dung upon your faces, the dung of your festival sacrifices, and you shall be carried out to its heap." The presence of flies and their ilk round the sacrificial meat is a clear sign of a curse. We have stated that our own table should serve as our private altar, i.e. as the visible symbol that we should strive for holiness.
  The fact that during the hundreds of years the Temple stood the High Priest never suffered from an involuntary emission of seminal fluid on the Day of Atonement is a clear indication that the putrid drop of semen – mentioned by Rabbi Akavyah – from which human life originates has been rehabilitated. The origin of seminal fluid is in the brain, and pure thoughts influence the purity of the seed. When man starts out correctly, pure, undefiled, every day of his life can be like a Day of Atonement and in his purity he may be comparable to the angels. This is what Rabbi Eliezer (Shabbat 153) had in mind when he told his students to repent one day before their death, i.e. on a daily basis. When one lives on such a basis, the pollutant transmitted as a residue of Eve's sin is purified each and every day.
  The inability of the rains to extinguish the wood pile of the altar alludes to the eternity of the judgment in the future. Let me first explain something about the nature of the rain and what it symbolises to the extent that I understand the matter. We have mentioned that the Torah does not spell out spiritual goals and rewards. Different scholars have advanced different reasons for this. Most are listed in a book called Avodat Hakodesh. We shall also explain why Hebrew is called לשון הקודש, "the holy tongue." At the same time I shall explain why the handles of certain vessels are subject to impurity, whereas the "foot of the small chair" is not considered in the category of such a יד, i.e. handle. We will also endeavor to explain the meaning of attributes such as "hand" or "foot" when attributed to G–d. 
  We shall follow the approach of Pardes Rimonim in his introduction to שער האותיות. Many people mistakenly believe that the letters of the Hebrew tongue are only symbols used to express certain formations by our mouths when we make certain sounds. Such a premise is called הסכמיים, an accommodation, by the sages who formulated the אלף-בית, to an already existing speech pattern. These letters must instead be considered as עצמיים, original in their own right. Whatever language we speak is originally borrowed from the Hebrew. All languages evolved from Hebrew. When Adam first named all the animals in Genesis 2,19, he expressed the essence of each animal through the name he accorded that animal. As a result, a name of an object represents its true spiritual dimension. When the Hebrew word for rain is גשם, for instance, this is an expression denoting the spiritual influence exerted from the higher regions, denoting that the purpose of the spiritual input has been achieved. This process applies to the various worlds, such as the world of בריאה, יצירה, and עשיה, respectively, until in our physical world the drops of moisture that fall from the sky are also called גשם. This is actually a name "borrowed" from a word which had a broader meaning to begin with. The same applies to the word ידות used by the Mishnah to describe handles. Keeping this in mind, we understand that when the Torah (Leviticus 26,4) lists a number of blessings in store for us as a result of observing G–d's various statutes, etc., the first such blessing mentioned is that of גשם, rain. In view of the fact that rain is only one of the instruments enabling a crop to materialize, we would have expected the Torah to first mention bountiful crops as a consequence of Torah observance. The fact that the Torah chooses to mention rain first is an indication that there is much more to גשם than we thought.
  To return to the miracle of the woodpile on the altar not being extinguished by rain. The corresponding fire in the Heavenly Regions is a mystical dimension involving the souls of the righteous which the archangel Michael sacrifices on that altar. We have explained that the word גשם in its original meaning expresses the outpouring of spiritual largesse to regions in the various worlds, such spiritual largesse eventually to be perceived in this physical world as rain. The ability to absorb such spiritual largesse without being overwhelmed by it is tested, so to speak, by the souls in those regions. The souls have to demonstrate their ability to maintain an affinity with the Divine while assigned to this world. The souls who pass this test have demonstrated love for their spiritual origin. Once they have done this theirs is the kind of love of which Solomon has said in Song of Songs 8,7 that the most powerful waters cannot extinguish such love, i.e. the fire symbolizing such love. So much for the five miracles that pertain to the body.
  The other five miracles mentioned in our Mishnah, are the ones we have termed "positive" miracles. We again find reminders of three kinds of awareness respectively as in the Mishnah of Rabbi Akavyah, and two illustrations of תקונים, measures designed to repair damage caused by previously committed sins. Between them they represent the יד ימין, right hand. The wind never prevailed over the column of smoke that rose from the altar." The column of smoke alludes to the reminder of "where you came from" in Rabbi Akavyah's statement. The souls within the body are reminded of their original holy origin. Their root is with the One of whom it is said: עושה מלאכיו רוחות, "He makes the winds His messengers" (Psalms 104,4). The smoke which connects the meat of the offerings to the Higher Regions is viewed as a ladder of souls. All the souls stood at the foot of Mount Sinai at the time G–d gave the Torah and the Ten Commandments to spiritualized man and when the Mountain was enveloped in smoke. This was the moment, when, according to our tradition, the angels, i.e. the רוחות, protested that G–d would hand over His glory to Moses, to mortal man who had risen to take the Torah from Heaven. G–d then instructed Moses to engage in debate with the angels. At the end of the debate the angels said to G–d: "Give Your glory upon him" (Shabbat 88). This is the meaning of the statement in the Mishnah that the רוח, "wind," (messenger sent by G–d) did not prevail over the column of smoke.
  The next miracle, that no disqualifying defect was ever found in the "Omer, the two loaves which were presented on Shevuot, nor on the showbreads," alludes to Rabbi Akavyah's second awareness that of knowing where one is headed. When one considers that only the righteous, i.e. those people who have managed to attach their bodies to their souls instead of vice versa, are headed for eternal life, this is a potent reminder not to sin.
  The Torah (Deut. 8,3) has taught that man does not live on bread (physical) alone, and the three sacrifices mentioned here which all involve offerings of one kind of bread or another are the perfect symbol for this lesson. The spiritual "bread," i.e. whatever emanates from the mouth of G–d, is what sustains the צדיק. The reason that the Rabbi mentioned three separate examples of bread elevated to a spiritual dimension is that they represent the spiritual dimension of the weekday (Omer), the spiritual dimension of the Sabbath (showbreads), and the spiritual dimension of the festivals (the two loaves of Shevuot). The sanctity of all three kinds of bread "evolved" through the manna, the "heavenly" food the Israelites were fed during their wanderings in the desert. These three sanctities of bread also allude to three levels of the human soul, the נפש, רוח, נשמה respectively. These basically spiritual breads had to become manifest so as to enable one to examine whether any had been disqualified through some defect. 
  The way the Israelites rehabilitated themselves for shortcomings in appreciating the relative significance of spiritual food, i.e. the value of their souls, was that while they stood pressed together, they prostrated themselves before G–d and suddenly did not find themselves hemmed in any more. The tightness experienced while standing symbolized the smelly drop of semen, their putrid origin, whereas the spaciousness experienced when prostrating oneself before G–d represented the spiritual uplift experienced by their souls. As long as their concerns had been centered around physical progress the Rabbis' injunction not to be boastful, not to "make waves," was fully applicable. Hence, even while in the precincts of the Temple, they experienced the tightness of space. Only when their main concern had become a spiritual one did they no longer find space confining. It is the mark of a truly great Torah scholar that he becomes more and more humble. Our sages have already said that "whoever raises himself up, will experience that G–d will lower him" (Eruvin 13b). The reverse is also true. The author of the Mishnah simply gave us a recipe. If someone desires prominence in this world, i.e. he stands upright, עומדים, he will experience that space in this world is at a premium, צפופים; if, on the other hand, he is prepared to prostrate himself before the Lord, to assume a low profile, he will find רווחים, that there is no shortage of space. This is the way to rectify any error one had committed in the direction in which one was headed, i.e. לאן אתה הולך, meaning that no disqualification would be found in the way one utilizes both one's physical and one's spiritual "bread." This then is the moral message of "no disqualification was found in the Omer," etc. We have been exhorted by our sages (Avot 1,6) to appoint a Torah authority for ourselves, i.e. עשה לך רב, and the Talmud (Sanhedrin 19b) said that anyone who teaches the child of his neighbor Torah is equivalent to having given birth to him. This statement refers to the soul of the person, since Torah is like a soul to a body. 
  The Mishnah continues by stating that neither serpent nor scorpion was ever reported to have inflicted harm on people in Jerusalem. We may also understand this in a spiritual sense, namely that the words (fire) of scholars (Avot 2, 15) do not harm the soul; should these scholars have been provoked however, their words have been compared in power to that of serpents and scorpions.
  The Mishnah next lists the fact that no one was ever heard complaining that Jerusalem was so crowded that he could not find lodging for the night. This corresponds to Rabbi Akavyah's third awareness, that one needs to constantly be aware of before whom one will eventually have to give an accounting of one's conduct. We have already explained that different categories of people, even different categories of צדיקים, are measured in accordance with the spiritual level they had attained and are expected to maintain. When the Mishnah mentions Jerusalem, this refers not only to the physical Jerusalem in our world, but also to the spiritual concept of what our sages have called ירושלים של מעלה, the Jerusalem in the Celestial Regions. Torah scholars, as we mention in our prayers daily, מרבים שלום בעולם, constantly add new dimensions to the concept of peace and harmony in the world. They do this by joining together different parts of the אהל של תורה, the tent which is a symbol of Torah.
  Avot 5,13 discusses four basic attitudes amongst people, i.e. the one who says: "what is mine is mine and what is yours is yours." Such an attitude is called "average" by some, and extremely negative, i.e. the attitude of the people of Sodom, by others. The second attitude is that of people who say: "What is mine is yours, but what is yours (by the same token) is mine." This attitude is categorised as that of an ignoramus. The third attitude: "what is yours is yours, and what is mine is yours (at your disposal) also," is described as the attitude of the pious; finally, there is an attitude which proclaims: "what is mine is mine, and what is yours is mine also;" this is the attitude of the wicked.
  We may understand the word שלי as referring to what is material, whereas the word שלך in the Mishnah in question refers to the mind, the abstract. When a person proclaims: שלי שלי ושלך שלי, it is as if he said: The body and the mind both belong to the secular, to earth-bound values. This is typical of the wicked person who wants to make life a totally physical experience and to drag down the spiritual part of man to the level of the merely physical. When a person declares: שלך שלך וגם שלי שלך, he is described as pious because he expresses his striving to elevate what is physical to the level of the spiritual. The person who says: שלי שלך ושלך שלי is similar to the person of whom Solomon said in Kohelet 2,24: "Is it not good for a man to eat and drink and enjoy?" Solomon refers to the person who wishes to partake of "both tables," i.e. life in the here and now as well as life in the Hereafter. When he refers to the enjoyment, he refers to the joy of studying Torah. Whereas some of our sages consider this attitude as average, i.e. tolerable, others consider it as the attitude espoused by the people of Sodom. The Rabbis who see in this attitude an average attitude believe that a philosophy of זה נהנה וזה לא חסר, "The fact that one person derives pleasure but not at the expense of his fellow," is something morally tolerable. It is similar to someone who lights his candle from another candle. He secures light for himself without diminishing the existing light for others. These rabbis compare such conduct to the verse in Psalms 34,11: ודורשי ה' לא יחסרו כל טוב, "Those who turn to the Lord are not failing to do something wholly good." The motto of: "What is mine is yours and what is yours is mine," is equivalent to turning the laws of nature upside down. When a person turns the weekday into the Holiday by denying himself all physical pleasure on weekdays, whereas he uses the Holidays for unbounded physical enjoyment, he reverses the order G–d has established for this world and is clearly ignorant of G–d's plans. The Torah has spelled out that only certain activities are allowed on the Holidays in order to ensure our minimal physical comfort on such days. This is the meaning of Exodus 12,16: אך אשר יאכל לכל נפש הוא לבדו יעשה לכם, "Only what every person has to eat, that alone may be prepared for you." When we examine what the author of Emek Berachah writes in connection with the above Mishnah we find that the desire to enjoy both the physical parts of this world as well as the spiritual ones is not enough for a person who wants to qualify as pious. People such as the prophets Elijah and Chanoch learned how to cope while availing themselves of less and less of the comforts available for the body in this world. In order to establish the closest possible ties with G–d the physical part of this world cannot be enjoyed in its own right. The enjoyment of the Holiday should comprise the life-force of the body, נפש הגופני, as well as the life-force of the soul, נפש הרוחני, through the study of Torah and engaging in prayer.
  When our time will come to be tested as to how we lived our lives, the test will include three areas of our conduct, everyone having to prove how he lived up to the moral imperative to become an אדם. The Mishnah under review lists five levels of such achievement. The level חסיד, describes the highest such category. The second highest category is the category of those, who, while enjoying the here and now, – seeing it is impossible for most people to utterly negate physical comforts – enjoy such comforts in order to better serve the Lord. They dedicate all physical enjoyments to G–d. Both Maimonides and Tur Orach Chayim section 231 recommend such a lifestyle. In a different context I have explained an incident related in 104 in which Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi is reported as having made a solemn declaration: "I raise my ten fingers towards Heaven and declare that You, G–d, are my witness that I toiled with all these ten fingers for Torah and that I did not devote even my little finger to help me indulge in physical comfort."
  We have a famous statement by Rav cited in Berachot 17a that in the Hereafter there is no food and drink, etc., but that the righteous will sit with their crowns on their heads deriving pleasure from the brilliance of G–d's Presence. Why did Rav have to emphasize that in a world of the spirits, an abstract world, there are no such activities as eating and drinking? The use of the word "enjoying" for the brilliance of G–d's Presence is peculiar since the term נהנין is usually associated with the enjoyment of earthly pleasures. Rav should have used an expression such as: "they will experience illumination," or something of that order. Rav wanted to justify the eating of the righteous in this world. If in the Hereafter there is no eating, clearly this indicates that eating even in this world is something that is an inferior activity. How do the righteous explain their indulging in this world? 
  When Rav spoke about the righteous "sitting," he referred to their mode of life in this world Even in this world their physical enjoyments, i.e. נהנין, came from the brilliance of G–d's Presence; they made use of the comforts of this world only in order to better appreciate the brilliance of G–d's Presence. Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi's testimony meant that he had used all the comforts of this world only in order to further his Torah study and his spiritual advancement. When the Torah (Exodus 24,11) speaks about the אצילי בני ישראל, the spiritually most highly placed Israelites eating and drinking and enjoying a vision of G–d, this is an allusion to the motivation which should be present when we eat and drink while in this world. A similar allusion is found in Psalms 40,9: ותורתך בתוך מעי, "Your Torah is within my entrails." The correct way to live in this world is spelled out in Proverbs 21,23: שומר פיו ולשונו שומר מצרות נפשו, "He who guards his mouth and tongue, keeps his soul from troubles." Onkelos already explained (Genesis 2,7) that what makes a person into a human being is the power of speech. It follows that we have to sanctify ourselves through the manner in which we use this power of speech.
  We are taught in Sofrim 6,4 that there are three occasions when the Torah writes the word לא whereas we read it as לו. Once in Leviticus 11,21, another time in Leviticus 25,30, and a third time in Leviticus 5,1, where the Torah commenced the verse with the words: ונפש כי תחטא, "When a 'soul' commits an inadvertent transgression, etc." The nature of the transgression is improper use of the mouth, abuse of the power of speech. In this instance the abuse consists of failure to testify, i.e. אם לוא יגיד. The Zohar (Sullam edition page 86) seems to understand the choice of the word נפש as opposed to the word רוח or נשמה, part of our life-force, as indicating that any sin we commit is due only to this inferior part of our "soul." The superior parts such as רוח ונשמה are by themselves quite incapable of committing a sin. The dual spelling of the word לוא is a hint that the רוח ונשמה has to make restitution to the נפש for the purity it has deprived them of by its sin. In other words: What the purely part of man has deprived the רוח, of "לא," has to be restored to the רוח, i.e. לו. Unless this occurs, the result will be: ונשא עונו, "he will bear his sin." This is the first of the three aspects concerning which an individual's lifestyle will be examined after his death, as we mentioned at the beginning of this discussion.
  The second aspect of one's lifestyle which will be subject to examination is the use one has made of one's mouth concerning the food one ate. Did one consume food with the intention of increasing one's sanctity? The Torah describes winged creatures which primarily use their legs to move with (11,21). There appears to be a symbolism here. Does one ignore one's wings, symbol of flying to higher regions, in favor of לנתר על הארץ, jumping around merely on earth, thus signalling one's preference for the physical aspects of this universe? Permission to eat the species which לא כרעים, do not use their feet in preference to their wings but rather strive towards the spiritual regions לו, symbolizes why one should eat and what motivation should guide one when eating.
  The third aspect concerning which man's conduct on earth will be examined is alluded to by the dual spelling of 25,30 in connection with the discussion of the applicability of the law on redemption of houses sold permanently. The Talmud Erchin 15 discusses the advantage enjoyed by a creature who has been given the power of speech. Basing themselves on Psalms 120,3 "What can you profit, what can you gain, O deceitful tongue," our sages portray G–d as saying to the tongue: "All the other limbs of man are upright; but you are in a prone position. All the other limbs of man are an appendix to his body, but you are within his body. Not only that but I have surrounded you with two חומות, walls, one of bone (the teeth) and one of flesh." The secret dimension of the letter מ is that it appears both as an open letter and as a closed letter (the final ם which in its form is like a closed wall). When a person is circumspect about the use of his tongue, the mouth acts like a dosed wall. When he is careless, his mouth is like a wall which has broken down. This is alluded to in the final, closed ם in the middle of the word in Isaiah 9,6: למרבה הפשרה ולשלום אין קץ, "In token of abundant authority and of peace without limit." In the verse just quoted, our Rabbis perceive that it is human nature to look for faults in others, i.e. "a broken wall" while considering themselves like a "closed wall," i.e. free from faults. This is the deeper meaning of what our sages (Baba Batra 2a) describe as היזק ראיה, damage caused to a person by invading his privacy by looking into his domain [a kind of peeping. Ed]. It is the moral background to the Mishnah in the above mentioned section of the Talmud in which the contribution a neighbor has to make to a wall dividing common property is discussed. The purpose of the wall is to prevent such damage. In other words, the so-called damage is due to the tendency of people to discover something discreditable about their neighbors. We see that even halachically the wall is perceived as something that prevents damage of an abstract nature such as היזק ראיה.
  Another allusion to walls being perceived as preventing moral damage is found in 26,28 where G–d is described as dealing with the recalcitrant Jewish people as בחמת קרי. G–d's anger is the result of abuse of the חומה, wall, as we shall see. In all the three instances of the dual spelling of the word לא-לו, we follow the written text first. This means that if the house in question did not have a wall surrounding it לא חומה, it ought to have one, i.e. לו חומה. [It is in the nature of such spelling that the reader first notices the written text before he articulates the word when reading it. The לא therefore is seen first. Ed.] If we were to read the לו before the לא, the meaning would be that we speak about a house which first had a wall, i.e. moral inhibitions, whose moral inhibitions were removed subsequently, i.e. לא חומה. In such an instance the words in the תוכחה describing G–d's reactions as בחמת קרי are applicable. We may then see the removal of the חומה, "wall of moral inhibition," as the catalyst of G–d's anger, חמת קרי. We have three areas in which man's lifestyle is examined by G–d. We have statements by our sages relating to all these three areas. The first area is covered by the Mishnah we have quoted in Avot. The second area is covered by the statement of Rav concerning the absence of food and drink in the Hereafter. The third area is covered by the dispute about the nature of הזיק ראיה discussed in Baba Batra. The sages (Baba Kama 30a) said in very succinct language that if someone wishes to be considered as pious he should observe the various rulings pertaining to the benedictions we are to recite. Other sages say such a person should live up to the moral precepts found in the tractate Avot. 
  The underlying principle of all this is that the way Torah scholars increase peace and harmony in this world is that they demonstrate that the dichotomy between body and soul must be healed, that through Torah study the body is elevated to the level of the soul and not vice-versa, G–d forbid. Through Torah study they also contribute to the harmony in the Celestial Regions. We have an allusion to this in Isaiah 27,5: או יחזיק במעוזי יעשה שלום לי שלום יעשה לי, "Or, if he holds fast to My refuge, he makes peace for Me, peace he makes for Me." The repetition of the word peace indicates that the prophet speaks about peace on earth as well as peace in the Heavens. 
  It was Moses' particular accomplishment to have so refined his body that he could ascend to Heaven and G–d asked him to establish שלום, peace, there. This is the true meaning of the famous Aggadah in Shabbat 89a which reports that when Moses arrived in Heaven he found G–d preoccupied with tying crowns to the letters of the Torah. Moses observed this without saying a word, whereupon G–d said to him: משה, אין שלום בעירך? "Moses, is there no peace in your city?" [we normally understand this as a mild rebuke that Moses did not offer a greeting. Ed.] When Moses said כלום יש עבד שנותן שלום לרבו, "a slave can certainly not make any contribution to the peace of his master," i.e. be brash enough to presume that he can do what the master is unable to do himself, G–d replied: "you should have assisted Me." This is precisely what Isaiah spoke about in the verse we quoted. When there is no שלום, there is nothing. By prefacing his remark with the word כלום, Moses indicated that in the absence of שלום, peace, there is nothing at all that is worthwhile. G–d responded that there are different levels of יש, there is peace on earth and peace in the Heavens. As long as peace has not been established on earth, however, the "peace" in Heaven remains as כלום, equivalent to nothing. Looking at that exchange in this light gives a deeper meaning to it.
  The relationship between blessing and curse is like the relationship between body and soul. The righteous excel in converting the curse into a blessing, i.e. to transform something which was merely physical into something spiritual. This is the meaning of the statement in Bereshit Rabbah 33 that the righteous transform the attribute of Justice into the attribute of Mercy, whereas the wicked do exactly the reverse. The first two letters of the Ineffable Name of G–d, י-ה, symbolize the attribute of Mercy, whereas the last two letters of this name, ו-ה, symbolize the attribute of Justice. This is well known to all students of the Kabbalah. When a person proceeds "forward" in the letters of the alphabet, i.e. א-ב-ג-ד, these four letters amount to a numerical value of י, ten. When he then adds the next letters the sequence is ה-ו in that order. When one proceeds backwards, the order of the letters ר-ה is reversed.
  Since I am already on this subject, I want to include an insight which G–d has granted me concerning the peculiarities of the ערכין legislation in פרשת בחוקותי. We find the letters י and ה respectively as symbolizing two categories: 1) When the Torah lists respective monetary values for males and females in the chapter, the numbers "five" and "ten," ה and י respectively -in different combinations- form the backbone of this legislation. We have said that the letters י-ה which symbolize the attribute of Mercy, are used in connection with evaluation of the male, whereas the letters ו-ה which symbolise the attribute of Justice are used in connection with the evaluation of the females. The Biblical allusion to all this is found in Psalms 96,11: ישמחו השמים (masculine), ותגל הארץ (feminine), [the respective first letters of the two expressions י-ה, and ו-ה respectively are the symbols of male and female. Ed.] The second category of numberings in that chapter uses the letters י-ה, as each representing either male or female. Psalms 122,4, speaking about שבטי י-ה עדות לישראל, alludes to the fact that the Jewish nation is composed of males and females and that only when they are together are they considered "the tribes of G–d."
  Let me now explain the significance of the various ages as mentioned in the ערכין legislation. Our sages (Rosh Hashanah 2b) have said that a single day is considered as a whole year [under certain circumstances, such as a king who was appointed on the last day of the month of Adar. Ed.]. By applying the same rationale, i.e. that there is a cut-off date which determines who or what belongs to a certain year, we can view the Torah's statement מבן חודש עד בן חמש שנים, as a reference to a five year old, since no change in the evaluation takes place until after that child is over five years old. The same applies to people between the ages of five and twenty. They are viewed as if they were twenty years old. Once a person is over twenty and qualifies for military service, he is considered as if he were sixty years old, [the age at which military duty terminates. Ed.] During these years a person's value is considered at its maximum, and his value is based on the number י-ה, i.e. ten times five=50 shekel. A female of the same age group is evaluated at thirty shekel based on a calculation of ו-ה, six times five=30 shekel. Between the ages of five and twenty, the period during which a male is supposed to wed a woman, he is evaluated as 20 shekel which is expressed in terms of the letter י spelled as a word, i.e. יוד=20. A female of the corresponding age group is also evaluated in terms of the letter י but in her case we spell the number ten as a letter, i.e. י instead of as a word. Her value is therefore determined as being ten shekel. Since the method of writing a letter as a word is called מילואים, and the full spelling of the word יוד is achieved by the addition, i.e. מלוי, of the letters ד-ו, there is a clear symbolism here, seeing that woman is to man is what ד-ו is to י. We find a sort of confirmation of this analogy in an Aramaic proverb quoted by the Talmud Kiddushin 41a: טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו, "better for (two) to dwell together than to live (alone) as a widow." A woman views herself as man's complement. We therefore find that man and woman together are still considered under the concept of י, i.e. either as regular י, or as יוד במילואו. A similar calculation applies when either of the male or the female is between the ages of five and twenty. They are then evaluated under the concept of ה. When the Torah describes the value of the male as five shekel and the value of the corresponding female as three shekel, the "three" is alluded to as a complement to the male in "three" ways.
  [The author continues in this vein. I have decided to condense here as it gets very complicated. Ed.]
  Let us return to the statement that by their actions the righteous can transform the attribute of Justice into the attribute of Mercy and that the reverse is true of the actions of the wicked. This is the deeper meaning of 26,5: וישבתם לבטח בארצכם, "you will dwell safely in your land." Such a state is achieved through the refinement of matter, i.e. converting ארץ earth because of the בטח, the way one relates, i.e. relies on G–d. When your life on earth is one in which your enjoyment is motivated by the desire to serve G–d better, then the land itself assumes a spiritual dimension. This is why the prophet Isaiah 11,9 may have chosen to describe such a future period as כי מלאה הארץ דעה את ה', that the earth will be full of knowledge of the Lord." This is the reason why we have numerous allusions to this thought in פרשת בהר, where the sanctity of the land is discussed. The subject is always the sanctity of matter, not just the sanctity of the spirit. In פרשת בחוקותי the emphasis is merely shifted to the future when we have statements such as ועץ השדה יתן פריו, "and the tree of the field will yield its fruit" (26,4). This promise does not speak about the fruit-bearing trees yielding their harvest; rather it promises that as a result of sanctifying the land through our conduct the "tree of the field," (not the orchard) will also produce fruit fit to be consumed by man. The mystical dimension of all this is that matter will be perceived as possessing an intelligence of its own.
  The land of Israel which is under the constant direct supervision of G–d (Deut. 11,12), is in this respect an allusion to the corresponding ארץ עליונה, "earth of the Celestial Regions" all of which belongs to Israel. This is the meaning of Isaiah 60,21: ועמך כולם צדיקים לעולם יירשו ארץ, "As for your people who are all righteous, they will inherit an earth in another world." The Hereafter (the rejuvenated planet earth), [alluded to in פרשת בהר as the seventh year, Ed] is called שבת, as opposed to the six years, i.e. the 6,000 years of mankind's physical existence on this earth as it is now.
  The plain meaning of the verses dealing with the שמטה and יובל legislation points to the need for the seventh year to enable the land to assume a spiritual dimension after six years of continuous farming just as the dimension of time is consecrated on the Sabbath after six days of toil involving mostly mundane, secular matters. Looked at from an allegorical point of view, we may think in terms of a lifespan comprising seventy years. These years, commencing at the age of twenty and coincidental with full accountability [for one's actions] to Heaven, are considered the fifty years of adulthood. The seventy years which comprise an average lifespan allude to the seven days of Creation during which G–d issued ten directives (daily?). When you deduct twenty from this total you are left with fifty, i.e. seven times seven. 
  At the end of every such seven year cycle, the earth produces ספיחים, spontaneous growth without your having either plowed or seeded. This is equivalent to the שבת שבתון concept. At the end of the chapter called מהות והנהגה, in Pardes Rimonim, the author explains that nowadays (since the expulsion from Eden) our sustenance is only the product of accretions, ספיחים, whereas when the world was perfect, i.e. when man resided in Eden, sustenance was the product of G–d's careful planning as described by the Torah in Genesis 2,10: "A river would issue from Eden to water the garden etc." This river no longer exists. This is why the Torah warned us not to harvest the grain that grows of itself, nor the grapes that grow by themselves. This type of grape alludes to the wine squeezed out by Eve out of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. 
  Instead, the land should enjoy a Sabbath "on which one could eat" (25,5-6). This is an allusion to the statement of our sages that he who toils on Sabbath eve will have what to eat on the Sabbath (Avodah Zarah 3a). The words: לך ולעבדך, "for you and your servant" in the same verse may be understood as telling us that when G–d provides sustenance for the צדיק i.e. לך.He will also provide for the person who is not a צדיק. We have a tradition that a צדיק is able to save a number of souls from their suffering in purgatory. By merely passing by the gates of purgatory (Shir Hashirim Rabbah 8) he can "kidnap" them and secure their entry to the Hereafter. We know this from Elisha, whose bones conferred life on a person even after he himself had already been dead for some time (Kings II 13,21). When the Torah (25,8) emphasizes וספרת לך, "Count for yourself," this is an allusion to how we interpret Hillel's maxim "if I do not do it for me who will?"
  The words שבת שבתות are a further allusion to the seven days of Creation during which a new world was created. The fiftieth year corresponds to the seventieth year of one's life.
  The sounding of the Shofar is reminiscent of an ancient custom in Israel that when someone died, the sounding of the Shofar was a signal for people to attend the burial (Moed Katan 27). The seventieth year, which symbolizes the end of a normal lifespan, is to remind one of impending death and the accounting one has to render. The blowing of the Shofar is also in order on the Day of Atonement (25,9) when one renews one's life after having secured forgiveness. When verse 10 speaks about "return to one's original possession," the meaning includes return to one's former innocence. Death secures the atonement for those who return to G–d, i.e. when the spirit returns to G–d, as Solomon said in Kohelet 12,7. These are all thoughts that man should constantly bear in mind, they should not be קרי, something he thinks about only incidentally. One needs to think of oneself as an alien, גר, in this world, not as a permanent fixture. This is what the Torah implies in 25,23: כי גרים ותושבים אתם עמדי, "For you are strangers and residents with Me." We will not acquire permanency until we arrive in the Hereafter. The last verse seems self-contradictory. Either we are strangers or we are residents. How can we be both? The answer is that as long as we do not sanctify ourselves as the Torah wishes us to do, our tenure is no more than that of strangers, גרים; once we have sanctified ourselves through our Torah-oriented lifestyles, however, we acquire tenure, i.e. become תושבים. The warning not to view ourselves as possessing tenure on earth is expressed more forcefully by the legislation that land cannot be sold permanently (25,23). People who live under the illusion that land ownership secures them tenure on this earth are fools. They forget what David reminded us of in Psalms 127,1 when he said: אם ה' לא יבנה בית שוא עמלו בוניו בו, "Unless the Lord builds the house its builders labor on it in vain." We have now explained how all these various paragraphs in our portion are linked together logically.
   The overriding rule to be learned from all this is that man must strive to cleave to his Maker not only with his spiritual faculties but also with his physical attributes. This is the meaning of the promise: "you will dwell securely on the land." Once we have achieved such a level of closeness to G–d, the Torah then proceeds to speak about spiritual rewards in פרשת בחוקותי by promising to transform the rain into something which we will be able to perceive as a spiritual dimension of G–d's largess, as we have already pointed out.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  Vayikra
  
  
  אדם כי יקריב מכם . I have already pointed out that this verse addresses itself to the awakening of the אדם attribute within us urging us that when we do offer sacrifices to G–d we should consider that it is our very selves we offer to Him. This kind of urgent advice is valid both for when we offer a total offering, or a sin offering. When the Torah introduces the details of the various categories of sacrifices with the words: זאת תורת העולה, or זאת תורת החטאת, etc., it means that what one does to the animal in question is what really should have been done to oneself, the person who now is required to offer this animal in lieu of himself. The Torah uses the same words of introduction when a peace offering is offered and no sin is being atoned for, to teach us that the owner ought to view himself as establishing harmony with the altar, harmony with the priests, and harmony with the owners (himself). If such considerations prevail the directive-promise of Exodus 19,6: "You will be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" will be fulfilled. This is because the owners, too, consume part of the meat of the peace offering, שלמים.
  Nowadays, when we do not have an altar or priest to perform all these duties on our behalf, the only way we can compensate for this lack is by studying the relevant sections of the Torah with a grieving heart and confessing our sins, so that at least the verse in Psalms 51,17: זבחי אלוקים רוח נשברה, "True sacrifice to G–d is a contrite spirit" can be applied to us. Our sages are on record that he who occupies himself with the portions of the Torah which deal with the sacrifices by trying to understand their deeper significance to the extent that he imposes fast-days upon himself is considered as if he himself had become a sacrifice of sweet smelling fragrance. The author of Tolaat Yaakov dwells on this on page 67 of his book. He writes as follows: "The mystical dimension of fasting is that it is viewed like an altar, ready to atone for the sins of the person fasting. By reducing the intake of food and drink one reduces one's body fat, sacrificing it to G–d combined with one's prayers. Towards evening, when such a person feels increasingly weak, he is as though the fire which is one of the basic elements man is made of becomes predominant within him so that it symbolizes the burning wood-pile on the altar of which the Torah said that its fire should never be allowed to be extinguished. This body-heat then consumes part of the fat and blood the body has accumulated. This physical process parallels what used to happen on the altar when the animals were burned. On a still more fundamental level: just a there are איברים, "limbs," i.e. individual parts of sacrifices in the Celestial Regions whose function it is to be consumed by Heavenly fire, so there are corresponding איברים in our world whose function it is to be consumed by the fire on our terrestrial altar. Just as the smoke from the altar rises heavenwards, so the spirit of man leaves his body and rises turning into ריח ניחוח, a sweet smelling fragrance for G–d. All of this takes place on the day the person who is engrossed in the study of the deeper meaning of the sacrifices observes a fast. A person must concentrate on this objective wholeheartedly with both body and soul. He must mentally pepare himself for this as if he were preparing his sacrifice for the altar. When he does this he will obtain forgiveness for the transgressions he has been guilty of. In the above mentioned manner man can transform himself into a fully fledged altar. He can "offer" all the different kinds of sacrifices on this altar.
  When a person has examined himself for sins and has been unable to find such sins G–d has no fault to find with him and He will accept such a person's effort to atone with his own flesh for any shortcomings of his in the form of a peace offering, שלמים. Thus far the words of Tolaat Yaakov.
  לא יבדיל . Concerning the law not to sever the head of a bird serving as a sin offering (5,8). Rabbi Menachem HaBavli reasons that seeing the sinner had been קשה עורף, stiff-necked vis-a-vis G–d when he committed the sin he now wishes to atone for, this is symbolized by the Torah specifying that he must "pinch the head of this bird at its neck without severing it." 
  על כל קרבנך תקריב מלח . Rabbi Menachem HaBavli sees this requirement as analogous to the covenant which G–d is reported to have made with the waters of the oceans promising that they would be used for a sacrifice on the altar. Anyone who offers a sacrifice has to cause himself some physical discomfort. Just as salt sweetens the meat, i.e. makes it more palatable, so physical afflictions make his sacrifice of himself more palatable to G–d. Our sages in Berachot 7a expressed this idea when they said: "A single self inflicted pain has more beneficial effect on one's heart than many painful blows administered by outsiders."
  שלא להקטיר שאור ודבש . Rabbi Menachem HaBavli points out that the Torah's use of the expression להקטיר instead of להקריב in connection with the prohibition to offer leaven or honey on the altar (2,11) is a reminder that, in order for any offering to achieve its purpose and ensure goodwill from G–d, the owner must practice הכנעה, humility. Leaven and honey are symbols of the exact opposite. It is their nature to inflate themselves. All מנחות offerings are made of unleavened bread, i.e. flat cakes. Atonement always depends on the petitioner demonstrating submissiveness, and an agent that symbolizes the reverse cannot be used in this connection. We have the rule that אין קטיגור נעשה סניגור, "a prosecuting attorney cannot switch roles and become counsel for the defense." A real connection with the Divine can be established only after all the elements separating man from G–d have been submerged in the sense of ואד יעלה מן הארץ והשקה את כל פני אדם, "mist flooded the whole person."
  אשר נשיא יחטא . Rashi comments on this that the אשר word can be read as אשרי, "hail to" a generation in which the leader acknowledges personal guilt (4,22). When the leader acts in such a way the ordinary people are encouraged to own up to their own shortcomings and to make amends. Another moral lesson to be learned from the positioning of this verse next to a verse discussing the errors of the whole community is that the sins of a community automatically reflect on its leader, because the leader should have used his authority to prevent any sin by the community.
  נפש כי תחטא וגומר או הודע אליו חטאתו . Both in the Zohar and in the Tzror HaMor much has been written about these verses (4,22-23). The words או הודע אליו חטאתו are understood to refer to pre-natal knowledge, information given to the soul of the person in question prior to his being born. These commentators compare the situation to Jeremiah 1,5: "Before I created you in the womb I selected you, etc." This proves that communication with man commences before he is born. His soul is exhorted to behave in a certain way once he is on earth. The subject is explained by Rabbi Simlai in Nidah 30: "While the embryo is in the womb of its mother it may be compared to a writing book folded over, his two hands at his sides, etc.. A light is lit near his head enabling him to view every corner of the globe. He is taught the entire Torah as we know from ויורני ויאמר לי יתמך דברי לבך, "He also taught me and said to me: 'let your heart retain my words'" (Proverbs 4,4). Another verse from scripture along similar lines is Job 29,4: ואומר בסוד אלוקה עלי אהלי, "When the secrets of G–d were in my tent," i.e. I was privy to the mystical aspects of Torah while still in the womb. The baby is not born until it has been made to swear to be a צדיק not a רשע. He is told that even though the whole world may describe him as a צדיק, he must still consider himself a רשע. He should remain aware of the purity of G–d and his angels, as well as of the purity of the soul he has been equipped with. He is warned that as long as he preserves the purity of his soul all is well and good, but should he fail to so preserve its purity, his soul will be removed from him. This is the gist of Rabbi Simlai's statement.
  Man was thus forewarned of the consequences of improper conduct even before he was born. This will help him to refrain from sinning. Whenever he remembers this he will hasten to make amends. This is the meaning of the words או הודע אליו חטאתו אשר חטא in 4,28. Perhaps this is also the reason the Torah continues in the paragraph following with the words: ונפש כי תחטא ושמעה קול האלה, "When a person sins and hears the voice of the oath, etc." The "oath" in question may allude to the one he himself swore before he was born as described above by Rabbi Simlai. This may also be what David alluded to in Psalms 24,4 when he described someone who has never sworn a vain oath as a person fit to ascend the Mountain of G–d. [otherwise we could ask why such a person had to swear an oath altogether, seeing our sages frown on any oath. Ed.] The remainder of 5,1, i.e. והוא עד או ראה או ידע may also be understood as applying to an experience every person had prior to his birth when he was sworn to remain free of sin. The verse concludes with the statement ונשא עונו, that a person who ignores what he was taught as an embryo will bear his guilt.
  ומעלה מעל בה' . Rashi, quoting Rabbi Akiva, comments that since transactions such as loans and the purchase of something substantial always involve the presence of witnesses and the recording of the transaction in a document, we must assume that denial in the quotation means that the guilty person denies the authenticity of the document and/or the reliability of the witnesses. This is not the case, however, when someone entrusts valuables to a friend. The essence of such a transaction is its very secrecy. The depositor can only rely only on the third party [G–d] to know the true facts. Any denial of such a deposit by its recipient is a direct sin against G–d. Thus far Rashi. This teaches us what enormous dimensions a simple monetary dispute may assume. It may be equivalent to denying the very existence of G–d, G–d forbid.
  
  Tzav
  
  היא העולה על מוקדה . Our sages (Vayikra Rabbah 7,6) say that anyone who brags or boasts will be judged by fire. This statement is rooted in our verse here, i.e. if someone is עולה, he will find himself on the מוקדה, on the site where things are apt to be burned.
  להרים הדשן מעל המזבח . Rabbi Menachem Habavli writes that the reason for this procedure is that after a sinner has received his punishment and his flesh has been turned to דשן, ash, through the penalty of "fire," having been applied to him, the subject is closed and one must not remind the sinner of it by saying to him: "remember your former deeds." There is an allusion here that after the soul has received its punishment in the mythical river Dinur (Daniel 7,10), it is entitled to be respected again because it is after all a princess, i.e. descended directly from G–d. Any penitent sinner deserves to be honored. The meaning of והרים את הדשן then is that "he is to be raised from the ashes." When the verse continues ושמו אצל המזבח, this means that he is to be re-instated near the holy site, the altar.
  להדליק אש תמיד על המזבח . The fire on the altar has to burn constantly (6,5), i.e. והאש על המזבח תוקד בו לא תכבה, The reason for this commandment is to demonstrate that the fire of the altar is capable of saving people from the fires of purgatory. The forces of evil (Satan) are entitled to be compensated for each transgression committed by the sinner. These transgressions are perceived as having been committed by various parts of the body. The fire on the altar consumes the corresponding parts of the animal sacrificed as a sin offering, and thereby settles the sinner's debt to the forces of evil. This is why the altar saves the person of the sinner from the fires of purgatory. The message that the fire must not be extinguished is addressed to these forces, to our perennial accusers. The Torah tells our accuser that G–d's love for Israel is as likely to be extinguished as is the fire on the wood pile of the altar.
  והנותרת ממנה יאכלו אהרן ובניו . The reason that the priests must consume the remainder of the קרבן מנחה after the קומץ (less than a handful) has been burned on the altar is to teach us that even when a poor person brings an עולה ויורד offering, i.e. some baked material instead of the animals that a rich person would have to bring to atone for a similar sin, the partnership between the priest and the owner of the offering remains the same; the priest's eating contributes to the atonement to be received by the owner of the sacrifice. It is assumed that the priests will bless the owner at the time they consume their part of the offering. This is why 5,11 specifically states that the priest must treat such an offering as if it were a מנחה. A poor person would be upset if he were to think that most of his offering would simply be thrown away.
  זה קרבן אהרן ובניו וגו' ביום המשח אותו  . The commandment that the High Priest must offer a daily מנחה offering, part to be offered in the morning and part in the evening, is derived from 6,13: זה קרבן אהרון ביום המשח אותו על מחבת בשמן תעשה. "This is the sacrifice of Aaron…on the day he was anointed….lt shall be prepared with oil on a griddle." This commandment is to ensure that the High Priest prays for the whole community all of whom depend upon him to obtain forgiveness from G–d. The High Priest must concentrate on being the instrument of forgiveness for his people to secure atonement for them and to establish harmony between them and their Maker. In order to be able to secure forgiveness for others, he must first of all secure forgiveness for his own sins. This is why he personally has to bring two such sacrifices daily. We derive this idea from the words והזה הטהור על הטמא, that "only a person who himself is ritually pure can perform the rite of sprinkling blood on the ritually impure" to help him regain ritual purity (Numbers 19,19). The purpose of the קרבן חביתים is to obtain forgiveness for "hidden" sins, sins one is unaware of. The Hebrew word for this is חבוי, hence the sacrifice has to be prepared on a griddle, i.e. מחבת. Thus far Rabbi Menachem HaBavli.
  This Rabbi has also written concerning the negative commandment not to add לבונה, frankincense, to the עולה ויורד sin-offering (5,11) [as opposed to a מנחה offering. Ed.] of a poor person. He quotes a Baraita in which Rabbi Shimon argues that logic would have dictated that even the baked goods offering of a poor sinner required oil and frankincense as a component. The reason for this is that by allowing the sinner not to add these components he would actually profit when compared with an ordinary person offering a מנחה sacrifice. Why then does the Torah forbid the addition of these components? The reason is because the offering of a sinner should not appear to be luxurious. Rabbi Menachem adds that the absence of beauty and fragrant aroma is an additional incentive for the sinner to try and regain his good standing in the eyes of G–d. When the Torah speaks about לא ישים שמן, instead of לא ישים בה שמן, "no oil must be put over it," instead of "no oil must be mixed with it," this is a hint that the sinner does not deserve that his offering be covered with the most expensive of all liquids. It is an indication that this poor man, whose poverty should have caused him to seek out G–d instead of sinning, does not deserve an עליה, ascent, as would have been indicated by a mere לא יצוק עליה שמן, "that the oil must merely not be poured over the offering. He may not use oil with this offering in any form."
  לא תכבה . The reason that the Torah legislates that the fire on the altar should be kept going, never to go out (6,5), is to ensure that whenever our perennial accusers seek to be paid off by the life of some Jew or Jews there be an alternate fire handy to satisfy their demand to burn someone. The fire, in other words, acts as a "bribe" to Satan, much like the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement. Nowadays, when we have no altar, man's table fulfills the function of the altar. If we sit down to eat without at least saying some word of Torah during our meal, we may not have succeeded in extinguishing the fire of purgatory by keeping the fire on the substitute altar going. Inasmuch as תורה is a term used in connection with every category of sacrifice, all the destructive waters in the universe do not have the power to extinguish the flame of Torah, the flame of love.
  לא תאפה חמץ . The prohibition to bake the part of the מנחה set aside for consumption by the priests as leavened dough which is derived from 6,9 is rooted in the above mentioned principle of אין קטיגור נעשה סניגור, that the advocate for the prosecution cannot also act as counsel for the defense. The offering which symbolized the sin must be totally burned without it being allowed an opportunity to develop mildew, etc., which could be the case while the dough rises before being baked. Hence the Torah insists that all of the dough be baked only as Matzah i.e. unleavened bread or cake. Traditionally we equate Chametz with the accuser. Thus far Rabbi Menachem Habavli.
  כל חלב וכל דם לא תאכלו . The prohibition to eat any kind of חלב ודם, fat of the animals or their blood (7,25-26), is based on the fact that these parts of the animal represent its strength, its essence.
  
  Shmini
  
  וידום אהרן . Aaron was rewarded for his silence in 10,3 when G–d spoke to him exclusively in 10,9. We are to learn from this that we must accept with good grace what appear to be G–d's strictures and afflictions.
  ובגדיכם לא תפרומו . The reason that the priests must not rend their garments (10,6) is connected with their function as a sign of honor and dignity. We can apply the treatment to be accorded to these garments to the treatment we must accord to our bodies. The body is the garment of the soul. How much more insulting would it be to the soul if our body, its showpiece, would be torn, i.e. would bear signs of the sins we have committed!
  הייטב בעיני ה' . The difficulty with this verse (10,19) is that Aaron does not explain to Moses that the general rules -pertaining to who eats these parts of the sacrifices as well as when and where- do not apply in this case. Must we assume that Moses was unaware of when exceptions to the general rules apply? The answer is that Moses was certainly well aware of the validity of Aaron's argument. In this case it was the fact that he was angry which caused him to err in his interpretation of the law. In verse 16 Moses was reported as angry. When Aaron spoke to him soothingly in verse 19, Moses responded in verse 20 by acknowledging his error. The Torah is anxious to demonstrate that Moses did not need Aaron to remind him of the law. The knowledge came back to him a soon as his anger subsided. Rabbi Menachem Habavli uses this episode to point out how important it is to "keep one's cool." 
  Concerning the physical peculiarities which determine which living creatures we may eat: Rabbi Menachem HaBavli writes about the reasons for these various identifying marks of mammals, fish and fowl. It all has to do with the fact that, figuratively speaking, the souls are hewn from beneath the throne of G–d [the "throne" being perceived as sort of a Celestial quarry. Ed.]. Scales and fins on fish are perceived as a protective cover, shield. In a gloss the author makes the point that fish with scales and fins occupy the upper clear parts of the waters, whereas those which do not have fins and scales usually are found in lower, more murky parts of the water.
  Any creature whose habitat is water is not only considered unfit to eat unless it possesses both fins and scales (11,9), but it is also described as שקץ, an abomination. Were we to consume them as food, the impure nature of such creatures would cause spiritual damage to the holy nation of Israel. Such damage would become recognizable, something which is not the case when the Gentiles consume such fish or crustacea, because the latter are so used to impurity that they have developed a tolerance for it. We know from many experiments that if someone ingests toxic agents on a regular basis he can develop his tolerance for such substances. The same is true with the tolerance the Gentiles have developed for foodstuffs outlawed for us by the Torah as "impure." Total health of the soul, נפש, depends among other factors also on a totally healthy body. Since everything that is impure similarly has its root in an emanation which is the root of all impurity, anyone who derives gratification from such impure things automatically imbibes something of the spiritual domain where such impurity originates. Impurity has a habit of rising towards its origin, i.e. its spiritual domain and as such it exercises a potentially lethal influence on the נשמה, the higher soul.
  את אלה תשקצו מן העוף . This is the prohibition not to eat an עוף טמא, "impure" category of bird (11,13). 
  There follows the prohibition not to eat certain kinds of grasshoppers, as well as all categories of insects. ...
  The reason for all this may be that we could have thought that any of these creatures which are so mobile that they can fly anywhere would be immune to impurity attaching itself to them. The Torah is more concerned with the source of food of these creatures. Anyone consuming them also absorbs some of the impurity absorbed by these creatures on a regular basis. The fact that even insects which do not develop through the standard process of the male fertilizing the female are also prohibited, teaches that size has nothing to do with the negative effect which creatures described by the Torah as impure exert on those who consume them.
  
  Tazria, Metzora
  
  ושלשים יום ושלשת ימים תשב . She may remain (without becoming a menstruant) in a state of purification for thirty-three days." The Zohar (Sullam edition Tazria page 10) explains that the soul which descends from the Celestial Regions does not "settle down" in the body until thirty-three days have elapsed. Although thirty days normally are considered adequate for acclimatization, in this case the three days of pain experienced by the male after circumcision are also allowed for. When the body is in pain the spirit is not as dominant as usual. During the first seven days the soul is considered like a tourist, exploring the body, looking for a suitable place to establish its residence. This is analogous to the first seven days of an animal's life when it is not yet fit to be offered as a sacrifice (22,27), and has to remain under the care of its mother. After the foreskin, symbolic of the כחות חצוניות or קליפות has been removed, and the baby has suffered three days of pain, these forces have lost their influence over him. The Torah first refers to these days as תשב בדמי טהרה, she experiences purity even whilst she is bleeding. In verse 6, the Torah speaks of "after completion of the days of her purity." The first reference is to the bleeding for three days after the circumcision. In that instance the word טהרה does not conclude with a מפיק ה, which would indicate that this purity is specifically hers, whereas in verse 6 the מפיק ה indicates that the Torah speaks about a period of thirty days which is specifically accounted for as days of purity for this mother.
  ענין מצורע . The affliction of a body with צרעת reflects that the soul has first been infected with spiritual blemishes. We know from the Zohar that the usual cause is abuse of one's power of speech.
  טמא טמא יקרא . He shall call out (13,45) "Unclean! Unclean!" This is an allusion to the statement by our sages (Kidushin 70a) that כל הפוסל במומו פוסל, "When someone declares someone else as unfit, this usually reflects upon himself," i.e. that he suffers from a similar imperfection. When the Torah says in 21,18: כל איש אשר בו מום לא יקרב, "any person who is blemished must not draw near (the Tabernacle to perform sacrificial service)," this is because in principle the priest is to offer himself when he offers a sacrifice on someone else's behalf.
  Onkelos translates the words נגע צרעת as מכתש סגירותא, a plague of leprosy (requiring conduits to be shut off). This is an allusion to the conduits from Heaven which have been shut off to such a person. This is how the Zohar explains the meaning of the word. 
  טומאת הגוף והבגדים והבתים . The fact that this type of affliction can manifest itself in any one of our bodies, our clothing or our houses may indicate that we have to observe a standard of purity in our deeds, our speech, and even in our thoughts.
  
  Achrei Mot
  
  כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם . I have written a great deal about this as a separate treatise.
  אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם . This verse suggests that a person should do everything he does with determination and dispatch as this is the meaning of וחי. Rashi has already explained this in connection with the ten requirements to make the cup of benediction when saying grace effective (Berachot 50a). One of these ten factors is that it be חי, fresh, potent. This paragraph is followed by the laws dealing with incestuous relationships, i.e the exhortation that we must sanctify ourselves in our sexual lives and demonstrate that we can conquer our carnal urges. I have already explained that the test of sanctification lies in one's preparedness to forego gratifications of the body that are permissible.
  
  Kedoshim
  
  This entire portion deals with aspects of sanctifying oneself by the performance of practical deeds. I am forthwith copying a number of comments by Rabbi Menachem Habavli about both positive and negative commandments in this portion.
  והנותר ממנו באש תשרופו . Concerning the requirement to burn left-over portions of the sacrifices that have not been consumed within the time frame given by the Torah (19,6), he writes that since these meat portions have become the property of a higher domain and it is in the nature of meat to deteriorate, which would be an affront to Heaven, it is better to burn it. Since Heaven has appointed a separate angel for each day who is concerned with these offerings, etc., it would not do to leave over something from the domain of one angel to that of another on the following day. Were we to do that, it would appear as if tomorrow's angel would be invited to partake only of left-overs. Considerations such as these may account for the Halachah stipulating that one may not prepare foods from one day of a festival for the succeeding day.
  לא תכלה פאת שדך . The reason for the demand to leave a corner of one's field unharvested and to leave other parts of the harvest for the poor, (19,9) has to do with the poor man's quarreling with Heavenly Justice complaining about his underprivileged status. The four kinds of harvest left-overs designated by the Torah for the poor are designed to restore peace and harmony between the poor and G–d. They are able to do this because they apply to bread and wine, the two major components in man's eating habits. The poor derives some satisfaction when he observes that at the very time when the landowner has reason to be most smug and self-satisfied, i.e. when he brings in his harvest, he is reminded by this legislation that he himself is subservient to a Higher Authority, i.e. to G–d.
  
  
  בצדק תשפוט את עמיתך . The moral lesson here is that you should employ the weapon of צדקה, charity, to ensure that your fellow (especially if he is poor), should not become guilty of theft and have to be judged, i.e. משפט. We have an example of David who is reputed to have paid the penalty of people he convicted when he found that they did not have the means to pay the judgment. This is another aspect of "judging with righteousness" (19,15).
  הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך . The commandment to reprove fellow Jews when they do wrong is based simply on the principle that we are all responsible for one another. Since we share in the penalty for sins committed by other Jews, we certainly have the right and the duty to call them to order when they act in a way that is liable to bring punishment on our own heads. In addition, by reproving a Jew who commits a sin one demonstrates one's love for him as one tries to save him from G–d's retribution.
   ואהבת לרעך כמוך . Philosophically speaking, we have demonstrated that the Jewish people are considered as a single unit; the seventy souls that came to Egypt are described as נפש, a single composite soul (Genesis 46,27), as distinct from the clan of Esau whose members are always described in the plural, to emphasize their diversity (Genesis chapter 36). You may well ask how you can be expected to love your fellow Jew just as yourself (19,18), when the reason you are to admonish him is that he commits transgressions which are apt to make you share in his punishment? The answer may be that we find many times that a person breaks his own hand or damages his own eyesight. He did not do so willingly, but the fact that it happened was a punishment for him. One does not stop loving oneself because one has caused oneself the loss of a hand or the loss of an eye. Similarly, one must not stop loving a fellow Jew who may have been or may become instrumental in causing one damage.
  ובשנה הרביעית יהיה כל פריו קדש  . The reason for this commandment is that during the first three years impurity was an integral part of the tree, causing all manner of כשופים. In the fourth year this spirit of impurity departs. The words ערל, ערלה are expressions of impurity. Once sanctity is introduced such objects become purified. The word הלולים denotes a festivity. It signals that the destructive power which had up to then affected this tree has departed and all of its fruit has from now on become fit to receive blessing.
  ומקדשי תיראו . Relating to the Sanctuary with a sense of awe and remembering whose abode it is will implant within us [our hearts] the necessary reverence and humility even before we enter the Temple there to present our prayers. Nowadays, due to our sins, the synagogue takes the place of the Temple, and we call it the מקדש מעט the miniature sanctuary. We should relate to it as well as to the Torah scholars with the proper amount of reverence. 
  The Torah has stipulated this in 19,32: והדרת פני זקן. The Torah scholar is entitled to our respect because by his teaching us Torah he enables us to inherit a life of unlimited duration in the Hereafter and to avoid being consigned to purgatory.
  מאזני צדק אבני צדק הין צדק . You shall have an honest balance, honest weights, etc." (19,36). These laws are designed to emphasize how far we must distance ourselves from robbery. The very fact that the Torah chose to call such weights by the adjective צדק, indicates that it considers a person engaged in weighing or measuring as though he were a judge presiding over litigation and required to pronounce fair judgment. Civilization is based on justice as we know from Rabbon Shimon ben Gamliel in Avot 1,18. The reason that the Torah quotes three examples of such weights or measures, i.e. איפה, אבני and הין, may relate to the three levels of our spiritual existence, our soul, i.e. נפש, רוח, נשמה.
  מות יומת הנואף והנואפת . The reason why both adulterer and adulteress are to be executed by suffocation (20,10), a relatively easy death penalty, may be connected to what the Torah writes elsewhere concerning the type of death penalty to be administered to a murderer. For a person who murdered another with one single stroke (or bullet causing instant death), the Torah legislated death by suffocation; he presumably did not make his victim suffer. There is no reason therefore to impose a harsher type of execution on the adulterer.
  באש ישרופו אותו ואתהן . When someone marries a wife [mother-in-law. Ed.] and her mother (20,14), the Torah decrees death by "burning" for all three parties. Our sages teach us the type of "burning" the Torah has in mind for this transgression as well as for all other instances where death by "burning" is decreed. It is similar to what happened to Nadav and Avihu whose souls were burned while their bodies remained lifeless but intact. If the Torah would have written ישרפו באש, the fire would have first consumed the body as is the case when someone is "burned at the stake" Since the Torah mentions the word אש first, it is clear that a different kind of burning is meant.
  Rabbi Menachem Habavli has this to say when dealing with the reason of the negative commandments in this portion: The reason that the נותר must not be eaten, (the time-limit for consumption of the sacrificial meat, about which the Torah writes in 19,18 that if someone were to ignore this time-limit he would bear his guilt) is that the sin brought about by such eating becomes an accuser against the transgressor along with the angel appointed for this very sacrifice on that very day. The angel whose "meal" has thus been cursed will look upon such a person with ill favor. This becomes even more serious if someone else for whom this meat had never been intended were to eat it now that it carries a curse. This is why the Torah goes into details saying: ואכליו עונו ישא, anyone eating of this left-over will carry his guilt, i.e. the sin of the person consuming it will rest on the shoulders of the person who had originally owned the sacrifice and had neither eaten it up nor burned its remains.
  וכרמך לא תעולל . The wording of the prohibition to pick your vineyard bare or to pick up fallen grapes (19,10) which is clearly designed to afford the poor a means of sustenance, carries a veiled warning not to chase away עוללים, people who spend all of their time studying Torah, when they come to the vineyard at harvest time to pick up their gleanings. In the final analysis it is Torah students such as these who ensure that the harvest of the vineyard will be successful, that G–d will direct His blessing onto our land. 
  ופרט כרמך לא תלקט . If the word עולל referred primarily to those who study, the word פרט in the same verse refers primarily to people who have already distinguished themselves by translating their Torah study into deeds, i.e. אנשי מעשה. The farmer is warned that he must not do anything which could result in these people's premature departure from this earth. 
  לעני ולגר תעזוב אותם . Those who do not perform מצות, i.e. the עני וגר, remain alive only by the merit of those who devote their lives to Torah and the performance of the commandments. By starving those people not only might they themselves die prematurely but also all those less observant people who owe their lives to the genuine יראי שמים may have their lives cut short.
  לא תגנובו . Here (19,11) the Torah speaks about someone stealing money or other valuables, whereas in the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20,13 the Torah referred to the kidnapping of a person or persons. I find it puzzling why the Torah used the singular, i.e. לא תגנוב in Exodus, whereas in our portion the legislation is formulated in the plural, לא תגנובו. It is also puzzling why the Torah first legislated the prohibition against completely harvesting one's field. We may understand the sequence of "do not steal" as addressed to the multitude, not because so many people may be guilty of this sin, but because of what the sin leads to. Theft leads to denial of the theft, denial leads to other lies in order to cover up the theft; this is turn leads to perjury. Such behavior even if only by a single individual, will give the whole Jewish people a bad reputation because of the multiple sins involved. The Torah warns us against compounding a sin committed by denying it and even possibly confirming such denial by an oath.
  לא תשקרו ... לא תכחשו . Anyone committing this string of sins cannot be a true son of the people of Israel who have a reputation for not lying. We have a tradition that if one tells the truth even though it involves one in immediate losses, one will eventually benefit by having told the truth. Conversely, if one lies, even though the benefit of the lie will be immediate, one will ultimately become the victim of one's lie and lose. Verse twelve, not to swear falsely, refers then to the previous lies and denials.
  
  לא תשבעו בשמי לשקר. A number of Rabbis have stated that if one swears by the Ten Commandments or even by a handshake in lieu of an oath, such an undertaking cannot be revoked by a group of Rabbis, as distinct from ordinary oaths and vows where it can be demonstrated that the person who swore the oath as a שבועת בטוי, a personal undertaking, was unaware of some of its implications.
  לא תגזול . This embraces the prohibition to use violence to acquire something which is not ours (19,13).
  לא תעשוק  . refers to the acquisition of something that is not ours by subterfuge instead of outright violence. Whereas in Halachah one is culpable for something which has been acquired by outright robbery only if it is worth at least as much as a certain coin called פרוטה, cheating by using unfair weights is punishable even if the amount by which one has cheated is totally insignificant, much less than the value of a פרוטה. The decree to bring on the deluge was sealed on account of the sin of robbery. We have a saying (Vayikra Rabbah 33,3) that סאה מלאה עונות וגזל בתוכה מקטרגת, "in a סאה, a given amount of sins (about 800 cubic inches), if it contains even a minute amount of the sin of robbery this quantity turns into an accuser against us." I have observed pious people who, when they purchase something for a holy purpose, always pay the asking price and never haggle so as not to be remotely guilty of transgressing these commandments of לא תעשוק את רעך ולא תגזול. They are so similar that when one transgresses one there is a good chance that one becomes guilty of transgressing both, becoming guilty on two counts. Technically speaking, לא תעשוק means to withhold by force something someone else is entitled to.
  ולא תלין פעולת שכיר אתך עד בוקר . The reason one is not allowed to delay paying wages to a day laborer till the morning following (19,13) is that G–d arranges sustenance for each of His creatures and the laborer in question was allocated these wages by G–d to use them for his food supply this very day. By denying him access to this the employer effectively interfered with G–d's decree and the angel appointed to oversee allocation of sustenance on that day will turn into an accuser against the employer in question. He will be judged as having transgressed a Royal decree. The domain which will judge the employer is the attribute of night, [an attribute applying justice rigorously. Ed.] The Torah (Deut. 24,15) describes the state of mind of the laborer in question in the words: ואליו הוא נושא את נפשו, "And his life depends on it."
  לא תקלל חרש . One must not curse any Jew, not even someone who cannot hear the curse (19,14). The reason is that we know that the power of the curse or blessing is not confined to it being actually pronounced i.e. capable of being heard.
  ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול . One must not offer improper advice which will prove damaging to someone who trusts our advice. The Torah calls this "placing obstacles in the path of the blind" (ibid.). This is simply the reverse of "love your neighbor as yourself," i.e. do not do to him something that you would not have anyone do to you. The reason the Torah adds the words ויראת מאלוקיך, "and fear your Lord," is that sometimes your advice may be capable of more than one interpretation and you may argue that you have been misunderstood if the wrong interpretation was chosen by the person to whom you had offered this advice. If you swear that your intention was to be helpful, remember that though this is something that no one has a way of disproving down here on earth, there is a G–d who is aware of what had been your true motive.
  
  לא תעשו עול במשפט . Someone rendering unfair judgment (19,15) may tilt the previously balanced Heavenly scales by which mankind is judged towards a decree of "guilty." By pronouncing fair judgment he may do the very opposite.
  ולא תהדר פני גדול . The Torah has to mention this in connection with litigation. Whereas normally one is certainly urged to honor Torah scholars (19,32), in case of litigation a display of deference for a litigant who is widely acclaimed may confuse the other party so that he cannot present his arguments coherently. By pandering to the important litigant, one is, in effect, pandering to the "great accuser," giving him ammunition against us. Nonetheless, one must also fulfill the commandment of honoring Torah scholars. One does this by inviting both litigants to be seated during the proceedings, just like the judges.
  לא תלך רכיל בעמך . The reason that the Torah forbids tale-bearing (19,16) is that by doing so one "kills" three different parties i.e. the victim, the tale-bearer, and the listener. Onkelos translates the word רכיל as תיכול קורצין, as if the Torah had said "do not eat destructive insects." The meaning is that some people invite gossips to their table, wine and dine them in order to listen avidly to what these people have to say about their peers. It is permissible to speak ill of the people who perennially are involved in quarrels if by gossiping about them one may fulfill the commandment of saving someone from unjust accusations. One would then fulfill לא תעמוד על דם רעך, not to stand by idly while someone's blood is being spilled (ibid.).
  לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך . The reason that you must not hate your brother in your heart (19,17) is that one automatically feels superior to the person one hates in one's heart. People who feel superior are anathema to G–d. Whereas it is your duty to hate people who hate G–d, unjustified hatred has led to the destruction of the Temple and to our exile. In fact the opening lines of the famous elegy of Jeremiah איכה ישבה בדד העיר רבתי עם היתה, add up to איבה רעה. Just because he is your brother, you must not hate him in your heart (but you should tell him what is on your mind).
  לא תעמוד על דם רעך . The reason for this prohibition (19,17) is simply that we are all part of one unit, responsible for each other. If we must try and save each other's bodies, how much more so must we endeavor to save each other's souls. When one sees a fellow Jew commit the kind of sin which would result in the death of his soul one must make every effort to prevent him and not stand by idly watching him commit the sin, i.e. לא תעמוד. Alternatively, the word דם in this context may refer to silence, a double entendre, and the Torah warns us not to remain silent lest our blood pay for our silence.
  ולא תשא עליו חטא . The gist of the prohibition is not to shame your fellow Jew, for you might bring about his death by causing his face first to blush and then turn white. On the other hand, if you fail to reprove someone who commits transgressions you will have to bear the burden of his sin on your own shoulders. It follows that the key to correct behavior is the way you reprove. You must do so with a friendly mien in order that he will accept your constructive criticism. Should you have been guilty of a similar offence you must first reprove yourself before you take it upon yourself to criticize someone else. This teaches us an important rule. If one may not shame a person who has committed sins and is subject to being reproved, how much less may one contribute to the embarrassment of a person who has not been guilty of such sins! When there is quarreling going on one must be especially careful not to become guilty of unprovoked hatred.
  לא תקום . The prohibition against revenge or grudge-bearing (19,18) is based on the principle that a holy nation cannot relate to someone with hostility. Bearing a grudge in one's heart will ultimately result in acts of revenge. When a Torah scholar has been publicly slighted he must not ignore such a slight since the insult was directed at the Torah he represents. The Talmud relates that Mar Zutra the Pious forgave everyone who had caused him pain. The commentators explain that this referred only to physical pain or curses directed at his person. No Rabbi has the right to ignore insults that were directed at the Torah which he represents. Our sages (Yuma 22b) go so far as to say that any Torah scholar who does not take revenge like a snake is not worthy of the title "Torah-sage."
  It is possible that our verse refers to matters involving monetary matters only, and that a Torah scholar ought to display a forgiving nature so that G–d may forgive him whenever he himself becomes guilty of a misdemeanor and expects G–d Himself to forgive the insult.
  שדך לא תזרע כלאים...בהמתך לא תרביע כלאים .  The reason for this string of forbidden mixtures (19,19) is that the Creator in His wisdom saw fit to separate certain species; the account of their creation repeatedly underlines that they were created למינהו, each according to its kind, even the lowly grass (Genesis 1,12 et al). It is incumbent upon us not to upset G–d's order in the universe. We have explained that every blade of grass has a Mazal which supervises and encourages its development.
  ג' שנים יהיו לכם ערלים לא יאכל . During these first three years the forces of impurity predominate in a tree; it is therefore called "uncircumcised." Anyone who would enjoy the fruit of such a tree grown during this period would be considered as if enjoying the forces of impurity. It therefore behooves him to remove such forces from "G–d's vineyard," i.e. the Jewish people. Once the three years have passed the same tree becomes pure and a source of sanctity. This is not as strange a concept as it seems at first glance, since we have the halachic ruling that the hymen of a girl under the age of three which has been pierced will heal and grow back. If the penetration occurred after her third birthday this permanently deprives her of her status as a virgin. We can deduce from this that during the first 3 years of a girl's life negative forces do not exert a permanent influence upon her. The same is true of the negative forces which dominate the tree during these years.
  לא תנחשו . The reason for this prohibition is to teach us not to rely on falsehoods, nor to attribute events to coincidence. We must remain aware that G–d supervises His universe and exercises control. If we want to know something essential about the future we can consult the Hight Priest who will receive an answer from G–d via the אורים ותומים in his breastplate. Even the wicked Bileam realized that כי לא נחש ביעקב, that Israel's relationship with G–d is such that it does not need to resort to soothsaying and similar black magic. 
  Similar considerations are the reason why we must not consult cloud patterns. The overall lesson is that our fate hinges on our merits and not on the caprice of pre-determined times which by themselves influence our fate.
  ולא תשחית את פאת זקנך...לא תקיפו פאת ראשכם .  The reason for this string of prohibitions concerning the defacing of the head or the skin is to make a clear distinction between our mode of living and that of the pagan priests. A G–d-fearing person does not use the razor anywhere near his throat so that he may not accidentally injure his skin close to where his sideburns grow. The use of scissors in all those areas is permitted. Since we have the principle that the commission of one sin usually triggers the commission of other sins, the Torah prohibits using the razor on "the corner of your head,” so that, having failed to observe this injunction you should not also become guilty of using it on the "corners of your beard."
  וכתובת קעקע . "Do not tattoo your skin." This is an allusion to pagan priests who tattoo themselves as a sign of fealty to their respective deities.
  אל תפנו אל האובות ואל הידעונים . "Do not turn to ghosts and do not inquire of familiar spirits." The reason is that such ghosts are apt to turn you away from having faith in G–d who is the Creator of all. The method employed by people who are experts in communicating with the dead involve manipulating the powers of impurity. When these "dead" spirits make predictions of the future some will come true, others will not. The reason the Torah calls these ghosts אבות, "fathers," is that they are the "patriarchs" of all the forces of impurity. The Torah says "do not turn to them" instead of "do not practice or perform such rites" so that you should not even contemplate having anything to do with such practices. The word תפנו is related to פנים, face. Merely looking at such ghosts introduces impurity into the atmosphere; it is just as damaging as looking at the face of a wicked person.
  The ידעוני is a rite which relies on the use of a bone of a certain animal which is put in one's mouth.
  לא תעשו עול במשפט במדה . According to ancient sources this prohibition at this point (19,35) is addressed to people who measure unfairly. People who do this contribute to destroying the universe. The person who does the measuring is called "judge". The Torah had already prohibited the perversion of justice when it said: לא תטה משפט, "Do not subvert justice, etc." (Exodus 23,6). The emphasis on the words לא תעשו, "do not engage in a tangible activity," suggests that the meaning here is that it is the making of changes which is illegal.
  ולא תלכו בחקות הגוים . The warning not to imitate Gentile practices (20,13) is based on the belief that all their cultural activities are merely preparations for עבודה זרה, idol worship. Their forms of entertainment are displays of promiscuity, which itself is a form of paganism. The Torah warns you to distance yourself from such entertainment, not even to walk in the neighborhood where such entertainment is being offered (Proverbs 5,8). Since the Torah does not make this prohibition dependent on your actually doing something (as opposed to the previous verse which discusses proper performance, ועשיתם of G–d's commandments), in this case the mere תלכו is part of the prohibition. 
  מאזני צדק אבני צדק . Terms such as מאזני צדק, are all references to mystical concepts. This is an additional reason to be most careful not to tamper with weights and measures.
  כי איש איש אשר יקלל את אביו ואת אמו . Some commentators have difficulty with the word כי at the beginning of this verse. They cannot relate it to what the Torah writes immediately before this verse (20,9). One may view the point the Torah makes as simple logic. If cursing one's biological father or mother is a capital crime, how much more so would cursing one's Heavenly father, one's spiritual origin, be a capital crime! G–d is one of the partners in the creation of every human being. If obedience to one's parents is required, obedience to G–d's statutes (20,8) all the more so. G–d, after all, has contributed the most valuable part of all to every human being. When we find Yonadav instructing his descendants to abstain from wine, building and dwelling in permanent houses, etc. (Jeremiah 35,7), and these descendants adhere strictly to such cumbersome instructions by their ancestor, the prophet contrasts their behavior with the average Jew who ignores even G–d's commands.
  
  Emor
  
  ומן המקדש לא יצא . Every person must make of himself a servant of G–d, must sanctify himself so as to come as close to the sanctity of the High Priest as is possible. He should practice some solitude and avoid emerging from this communion with G–d to the extent his circumstances allow. He must be concerned that no blemish, physical or spiritual, should attach to him. His striving must be that he himself should qualify as an offering to G–d. Once he endeavors to do all this is he is considered קדוש לה'.
  אותו ואת בנו לא תשחטו ביום אחד . The Zohar (Sullam edition page 24) poses the question that if this legislation of not slaughtering the young animal on the same day as the mother animal (22,28) is to save the mother animal the pain of watching its young killed, this could be avoided simply by keeping them apart. The true reason, however, is connected to the Jewish peoples's sense of empathy. To the extent that a person displays consideration for the feeling of others he in turn may find that such considerations of his own feelings will be a factor when he will be judged. The reverse is also true.
  מועדי ה' אשר תקראו אותם מקראי קודש אלה הם מועדי  . The thrust of the legislation is that the בית דין proclaims the dates when the various festivals are to be observed (23,2). You determine when to rejoice, when to eat festive meals. These festive meals should serve a spiritual purpose, just as did the delicacies Isaac ordered before blessing his son. When one approaches the חגים, Holidays, in this spirit, the second half of the verse אלה הם מועדי, "These are My festivals," will be true. If, however, these days are observed only as days when you fill your stomachs, indulge your body, then they are not "My festivals," but are vomit, excrement, concerning which the prophet has quoted G–d as saying: מועדיכם שנאה נפשי, "My soul hates your festivals” (Isaiah 1,14). I have discussed this at greater length in my treatise about the laws applicable to festivals. 
  I have pointed out that on the festivals a person must not be so preoccupied with chores that he thereby should lose the awareness of his special closeness to G–d on such days.
  
  Behar
  
  כי ימוך אחיך . Rashi has already explained that the connection between this and the previous paragraph is to teach us the lesson that one must not sell one's land in ארך ישראל unless one has absolutely no other choice. If one sells for, say, speculative reasons, one may find oneself impoverished, as indicated in 25,25.
  לעולם בהם תעבודו . This rule of owning Gentile slaves permanently (25,46) (as opposed to Jewish servants), is rooted in the status of Canaan as a slave since the days of Noach. The status was conferred upon him in retaliation for his having uncovered the nakedness of his grandfather. The curse is connected with the original pollutant introduced into Eve as a result of the serpent having mated with her. Israel are called אחיך, having been created in the צלם אלוקים, the image of G–d. When one does not behave like a "brother," אחיך, by such deeds as behooves a person created in the image of G–d, then the Torah will apply the epithet ובאחיך to such a person.
  
  Bechukotai
  
  אם בחקותי תלכו ועשיתם אותם . The word Otam is spelled without the letter ו, so that it can be read Attem "you" instead. The Zohar (Sullam edition page 7) explains that when Israel performs G–d's laws G–d considers them as if they had created G–d Himself, so to speak. I have enlarged on this theme in a number of places.
  ואם תלכו עמי קרי . We learn from here that a person must set aside a specific place for his Torah study and prayers, etc. He should not let this become a matter of coincidence, קרי.
  וזכרתי את בריתי יעקב . Whereas this verse (26,42) is one of the verses comforting us, why does the Torah continue with verses which indicate that the תוכחה is not yet at an end? I have heard that this verse (42) is also still part of the admonition/curse. The Torah distinguishes between wicked people who are the children of wicked parents and those who did not see such wicked examples before them when they grew up. The latter kind of רשע deserves to be punished much more harshly than a person who has never seen a model of good conduct before him. Similarly, if one has been raised in an environment which was hostile to Torah and religion one is not nearly as guilty for not following the dictates of the Torah as one is if one had the good fortune to be raised in a community of Torah observant Jews. G–d is on record that He will remember that we had the advantages of having the patriarchs as our models before our eyes, as well as the advantage of having been given ארץ ישראל the holy land; in spite of these advantages we breached the holy covenant with G–d. The Torah therefore exhorts us to consider our additional guilt in this context.
  
  Bamidbar, Nasso, Beha'alotcha
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  Bamidbar
  
  
  These three פרשיות speak basically of one subject, namely the Tabernacle and those who camped around it, i.e. altogether three camps. The first of these camps is the מחנה שכינה, the Tabernacle itself. The second camp is the מחנה לויה which surrounds the Tabernacle on all sides. Here the Levites were encamped. The third camp is the מחנה ישראל, the camp of the twelve tribes with their four flags. (Three tribes would always be grouped together facing one direction). We focus in our commentary on all these three פרשיות together because the name of this chapter is aptly called שלושה מחנות.
  There is not a single commandment in Parshat Bamidbar.
  
  Nasso
  
  Parshat Nasso, commences with commandment 362, that people who have become defiled are required to leave the camp, as it says (5,1) וישלחו מן המחנה people who suffer from serious impurities such as טומאת זב, טומאת מת, or צרעת.
  Commandment 363 forbids a person who is impure to enter the precincts of the Tabernacle or Temple respectively.
  Commandment 364 stipulates that if one is aware of a sin one has become guilty of, one has to confess to G–d. This commandment includes the need to do penitence. The relevant verse is 5,7.
  Commandment 365 forbids the addition of oil to the מנחה sacrifice to be brought by the husband of the סוטה, the woman suspected of marital infidelity (5,15).
  Commandment 366 forbids the addition of frankincense to that sacrifice (5,15).
  Commandment 367 requires that a woman suspected of infidelity without adequate proof must undergo all its provisions.
  Commandment 368 prohibits the Nazirite from drinking wine, or any mixture containing grapes or parts of them, since the Torah writes: "וכל משרת ענבים לא ישתה" (6,3).
  Commandment 369 forbids the Nazirite to eat fresh grapes.
  Commandment 370 forbids the Nazirite to eat dry grapes, raisins; it states: וענבים לחים או יבשים לא יאכל (6,3).
  Commandment 371 forbids the Nazirite to eat the kernels of the grapes, חרצנים (6,4).
  Commandment 372 forbids the Nazirite to eat the husks of the grapes, זג, (ibid.).
  Commandment 373 forbids the Nazirite to shave; it says: "תער לא יבא על ראשו, a razor must not be used on his face/head" (6,5).
  Commandment 374 commands the Nazirite to grow his hair during the period of his vow, since the Torah says: “גדל פרע שער ראשו” (6,5).
  Commandment 375 prohibits the נזיר from defiling himself through contact with a human corpse (6,6).
  Commandment 376 forbids the Nazirite to remain under the same roof as a dead human being; the Torah says: "ועל כל נפשות מת לא יבא" (Leviticus 21,11).
  Commandment 377 requires the Nazirite to shave his hair if he has defiled himself during the period of his vow, or to shave his hair at the termination of his state of נזירות (based on Leviticus. 14,8, he must shave all his hair). [This quote seems inappropriate as it deals with the מצרע, not the נזיר. Ed.]
  Commandment 378 commands the Priests to bless the Israelites in the Tabernacle, based on 6,23.
  Commandment 379 instructs the Priests who carry the ark, to carry it on their shoulders, as is written in 7,19: "בכתף ישאו."
  
  Beha'alotcha
  
  Commandment 380 provides for people who have not been able to observe the Passover on the appropriate date, to do so on the 14th resp. 15th of אייר, instead (9,10).
  Commandment 381 legislates that the meat of the "second" Passover has to be eaten in the night between the 14th and 15th of אייר. This is based on 9,11.
  Commandments 382 forbids the leaving over of part of the meat of that sacrifice (9,12).
  Commandment 383 forbids breaking of the bones of the Passover lamb; (ibid.).
  Commandment 384 instructs that trumpets be blown in the Temple, at the time the offerings are made, and Maimonides includes in that commandment the instruction to proclaim and observe public fasts whenever the Jewish community faces imminent dangers. This is so since the paragraph commences with the words: כי תבא מלחמה בארצכם (10,9). The observance of these fasts will remind G–d of Israel's plight.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Bamidbar
  
  There is a difficulty concerning the sequence in which events are recorded in these three פרשיות. The Torah begins by relating the erection of the Tabernacle on the first of Nissan. Then it reports that G–d's Presence manifested itself there on the first day of the following month, lyar. The Torah then states that the people were counted. Next the Torah explains that henceforth the tribe of Levi would assume the functions that used to be reserved for the firstborn. The Torah proceeds to report the counting of the tribe of Levi, i.e. the Kehatites, the Gersonides and the Merarites. Their respective duties are also listed. After that, in Parshat Nasso, we read about the people who have to leave the camp because of impurity. Up to this point, the order of events is logical. At this point however, the Torah inserts other subjects, such as the steps for rehabilitation of people who have trespassed against Torah commandments. There follow the laws about סוטה, the woman accused of unproven infidelity. This in turn is followed by the laws governing the conduct of a Nazirite. Only after that does the Torah resume dealing with matters related to the Tabernacle, such as the Priests bestowing blessings on the people of Israel. This is followed by reports about the consecration of the Tabernacle/Altar by the offerings of the twelve tribal heads, נשיאים. This is followed by details about the candelabrum in the Tabernacle in Parshat Behaalotcha. At this point, the Torah again refers to the Levites (8,5), and their consecration. Why did the Torah interrupt with the legislation about פסח שני only to report subsequently about the encampment of the twelve tribes, the manner of getting ready to break or pitch camp? This is followed by a report that two trumpets had to be made, and by the proposal to keep Yitro with the Jewish people permanently. Next we hear how the Israelites complained about the manna, how they craved a meat diet, and how they were punished for their greed and lust. This is followed by Miriam's slanderous remarks about Moses and her punishment by צרעת. We will have to justify the order in which the Torah relates all these matters by showing how each is directly related to what follows. The numbers three and four respectively, which play a major role in our Parshah, find their counterpart in the layout of Jerusalem and the Holy Temple.
  The numbers three and four respectively, which play a major role in our Parshah, find their counterpart in the layout of Jerusalem and the Holy Temple.
  Here we have 1) the מחנה שכינה, the camp in which only the Priests were allowed. 2) The מחנה לויה, the area in which the Levites resided and performed most of their duties. 3) The מחנה ישראל, i.e the area in which four armies each comprised of 3 tribes were camped, each group with its own respective flag. Later on in Jerusalem, we have 1) the Holy Temple, 2) the Temple Mount, 3) the remainder of the city of Jerusalem (within the walls), as well as the four walls of the city, i.e. the one wall facing in four different directions, enclosing the city.
  When we look at all this from a metaphysical vantage point, we will find that the מחנה שכינה itself contained three distinct areas of sanctity: 1) We have the קדשי קדשים, the inner sanctum, Holy of Holies, in which only the High Priest performed any function, and that only on the Day of Atonement. 2) We have the היכל, "palace," containing the golden altar, the table and the candelabra. On all of these the Priests performed functions regularly, i.e. daily or weekly. 3) We have the area containing the copper altar, better known as the מזבח העולה, the altar on which the daily communal offerings and others were burned. The three camps that we described were also divided into 3 areas of competence of the Priests, the Levites and representatives of the twelve tribes respectively (מעמדות). In the מחנה שכינה, the Priests performed עבודה. In the מחנה לויה, the Levites sang and played music during the sacrificial service. The Israelites provided contingents from various parts of ארץ ישראל, a token presence of the "owners" of the daily communal sacrifices. Details about all this can be found in Taanit 27. The leaders of each contingent proclaimed four fast days during the week when their משמר was on duty. At any rate, each of the groups described was of a higher degree of sanctity than its counterpart.
  The number four in the desert represents the four flags, the four army groups of the Jewish people. Later on, in Jerusalem, their place was taken by the wall enclosing Jerusalem and facing in all four directions. This number corresponds to four concepts, each one closer to the "Essence" of things than its preceding one. They correspond to the four letters in the ineffable name of G–d, i.e. י-ה-ו-ה, which in reality contains only three elements, since the letter ה occurs twice in that name. These three letters represent three חכמות, wisdoms, as has been explained in the Sefer Yetzirah. They are the roots of the major קוים, "lines" in the universe, i.e. the line of חסד, love, the line of גבורה, justice, and the line of רחמים, mercy. By utilizing the last letter ה in the name of G–d mentioned, we end with ד אותיות, i.e. four letters which in turn suggest four of the ten ספירות, “spheres,” namely those of חכמה, בינה, תפארת and מלכות. [These "spheres" are four of the ten emanations by means of which Kabbalists understand how basically abstract concepts could gradually be converted or applied to the material world we are part of. compare Luzzato Ed.] These four emanations hint at the four "legs" that support the מרכבה עליונה, the "carriage" in the highest regions that supports the שכינה. Details of how these four emanations do this will be explained later.
  By taking a close look at the respective significance of the number three and four, we will understand the meaning of the Midrash HaNe'elam on Parshat Chayei Sarah, in which it is stated that the commandment ועשו לי מקדש is based on the mystical dimension of תפילין, phylacteries. Rabbi Eliezer reports in that Midrash that he had been told that G–d in His great love for Israel asked the Jewish people to build for Him a dwelling similar to the "carriage," מרכבה, in the Celestial Regions which supports His Presence, in order that He could take up residence amongst them. This is the meaning of ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם (Exodus 25,8). The message contained in this verse reveals the metaphysical significance of the commandment of תפילין.
  The four paragraphs of the Torah which are written in the תפילין correspond to the four letters in the Ineffable Name of G–d, i.e. י-ה-ו-ה, as explained in the Tikkunei Zohar. The "carriers" of G–ds glory derive from these four letters in His name, the emanation being three or four respectively, as we will explain. This is hinted at by the fact that on one side of the תפילין, phylacteries, we have the letter shin with 3 "legs," whereas on the opposite side, the letter shin appears with four "legs." The origin of that practice is the verse in Exodus 28,39: "ושבצת את הכתונת שש, ועשית מצנפת שש." The Talmud Zevachim 19a says that there was a spot on Aaron's forehead where he laid his phylacteries between the headband, מצנפת, and the golden plate, ציץ, (Exodus 28,36). The word שש refers to the two shins we have on the תפילין.
  The fact that the same word is also used in connection with the tunic, כתונת, i.e. a garment worn on the body and not on the head, may be understood as a reference to the Zohar which says that "here on earth the תפילין are made of hide, skin, i.e. עור. However, in their ultimate place, i.e. מקומם העליון, they are made of light, אור." These are the תפילין, concerning which our sages say that G–d Himself lays them, since the emanation of תפארת acts as a crown, an adornment in the Celestial Regions. If Adam had not sinned, or, if Israel had not sinned subsequently with the golden calf, they could have laid תפילין made of אור, light. After the sin, however Israel could qualify only for תפילין של עור, phylacteries made of hide. This meant that the original light created by G–d at the very outset of creation underwent a process of contraction, i.e. lost most of its power. The Zohar expands on this theme in connection with ויעש אלוקים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור, that G–d made cloaks of hide for Adam and his wife and clothed them (Genesis 3,21). It follows that כתנות עור-כתונת שש, and the תפילין, are the instruments which enable man to rehabilitate himself after he had committed the sin in the garden of Eden. משכן, similarly, is the means by which Israel rehabilitates itself after the sin of the golden calf. These concepts need further clarification.
   The purpose of creation, is, as far as man is concerned, for the sake of the Torah, i.e. he is to perform the positive and negative commandments contained in Torah. He has to avoid transgressing negative commandments. His task vis-a-vis Torah can be summarised as לעבדה ולשמרה, just as Adam's task in Eden had been the same thing. All this is hinted at in Genesis 1,26, when G–d said: "נעשה אדם, instead of אעשה אדם." The word נעשה, alludes to the נעשה ונשמע the Jewish people proclaimed at Sinai prior to receiving the Torah. That moment in time was their finest hour, as we explained when discussing the appropriate verse. Once Adam had sinned, "Man's" rehabilitation did not commence until the giving of the Torah and the building of the Tabernacle. This is because the Tabernacle was built in a way that made it a universe in miniature, i.e. a microcosm. It reflected the universe, since it too had been created for the sake of Man. Adam had distanced himself and his place was now taken by Aaron, who had been brought close. G–d instructed Moses in Exodus 28,1: "ואתה הקרב אליך את אהרון." I have elaborated on this theme in Torat Kohanim i.e. the book of Leviticus. I also explained how the Tabernacle was the universe in miniature. Aaron is equivalent to "Adam" i.e. Man, for whose sake the universe had been created, so that he could receive the Torah. It is this which is hinted at at the beginning of the book of Numbers, אוהל מועד=ציור העולם. The Levites, who are close to Aaron, may be viewed as if they were branches of "Adam," and it is a fact that only Israel is described in the Torah as אדם.
  כהן-לוים-ישראלים, in descending order, are similar to נשמה-רוח-נפש. The Torah describes "Adam" on three levels, Genesis 2,7, ויהי אדם לנפש חיה. In Genesis 6,3, we find רוח האדם. Finally, in Genesis 2,7, we find him also as נשמת האדם. Kabbalists have described this parallel relationship and have claimed that this is the source for our reciting one hundred benedictions daily. The Israelite, who represents the נפש level, gives ten percent of his harvest to the Levite, who represents the רוח level. The Levite in turn, gives ten percent of what he has received to the Priest, who represents the נשמה level. This means the Priest is entitled to the "number" one (one out of a hundred). The author of Shaarey Orah as well as the author of Tolaat Yaakov have elaborated on the significance of these various numbers in the alphabet. We find the whole Jewish people referred to as נפש (singular), when Jacob and his family moved to Egypt (Genesis 46,27).
  We know that G–d created the universe and converted abstract concepts into physical reality. This process entailed the "creation" of three worlds, i.e. 1) the עולם הבריאה, 2) the עולם היצירה, and 3) the עולם העשיה. The נשמה, stems from the עולם הבריאה, the רוח, from the עולם היצירה, and נפש, the from the עולם העשיה. All this has been explained at length in the Zohar, the Pardes Rimonim and the Reyshit Chochmah. The עולם הבריאה, must be understood as similar to the מחנה שכינה, since it serves as לבוש, "garment" for the שכינה. We find the כהנים, Priests, who represent נשמת אדם in the precincts of משכן or מקדש respectively, i.e. in the מחנה שכינה. The מחנה לויה corresponds to the עולם היצירה, the source of the dimension of רוח. Above all the domains described is the עולם האצילות, i.e. the root of roots of abstract emanations such as נפש, רוח, נשמה. The נפש ultimately derives from the emanation of מלכות, the lowest of the emanations, and as such is rooted in our physical world. The רוח ultimately derives from the emanation תפארת, whereas נשמה derives from the emanation of בינה, something all students of Kabbalah are familiar with. Together, these three ספירות account for the letters ה-ו-ה, in the four lettered name of G–d, the first ה referring to בינה, the last ה referring to מלכות, and the middle ו to תפארת.
  The number four plays a crucial role in each of these three worlds, i.e. בריאה-יצירה-עשיה. The four חיות referred to in Ezekiel Chapter 1, as supporting G–d's מרכבה, "chariot", are all part of the עולם הבריאה. They are אדם, נשר, שור, אריה. After that we find the number four also in the עולם היצירה, in which the "chariot" is described as ארגמן, short for the angels אוריאל, רפאל, גבריאל, מיכאל, and נוריאל. The latter is actually identical with אוריאל, and the slight change in name describes the fact that when something is the combined product of the emanations חסד וגבורה, then אוריאל suggests that it is derived from "light," i.e. אור, whereas נוריאל suggests that its origin is the emanation גבורה, i.e. אש. מיכאל represents חסד. גבריאל represents גבורה נוריאל/אוריאל represents תפארת. רפאל represents the emanation of מלכות.
  We also find the number four in the עולם העשיה, since the four basic elements in our physical world are אש, מים, רוח, עפר, i.e. fire, water, wind and earth. These are the four elements that govern in all the four directions of the compass. We have now accounted for the relevant significance of numbers "three" and "four" respectively. Above all this is the name of G–d i.e. the three basic letters י-ה-ו, which "convert" into the six seals with which the six extremities of our world are sealed (the four points of the compass plus height and depth).
  The three camps, i.e. the camp of כהונה, לויה, ישראל, are three self-contained units since the kind of service performed by their respective residents is different for each camp. The מחנה כהונה, however, embodies three separate degrees of sanctity, as we have already pointed out. We then can view the three camps as parallel to the letters ה-ו-ה of G–d's name, whereas the letter י is parallel to the three degrees of sanctity within the מחנה כהונה.
  The Kabbalists are agreed that כהן, לוי, ישראל, represent the emanations of חסד, גבורה, תפארת respectively. We have practical examples of this when we look at the Nazirite legislation, where the Torah forbids the Nazirite to cut his hair, i.e. תער לא יבא על ראשו (Numbers 6,5). The reverse is the case when we read about the Levites being consecrated in Numbers 8,7, where the Torah commands the Levites to shave off all the hair on their bodies, i.e. והעבירו תער על כל בשרם. In the case of the נזיר, the Torah stipulates that he must retain the "crown," i.e. nezer, just as a כהן wears a "crown," i.e. מצנפת. Both are forbidden to defile themselves through contact with the dead. Just as the sanctity of the כהן derives from the emanation of חסד, so do the special "powers" of the נזיר derive from that emanation. His hairs allude to the צנורות עליונות, conduits from "higher regions," and divinely inspired characteristics which are derived from the attribute of חסד. This is why he is commanded not to destroy them (the linkage to that attribute). The Levite's spiritual strength, on the other hand, derives from the attribute of גבורה=דין and unbroken contact with this source, which is also the source that inspires negative manifestations here on earth, and must be avoided. That is why he must proceed in manner opposite to that of the Nazirite. This is then why the Torah commands that he shave off all his hair, i.e. all that is reminiscent of conduits connecting him with that source. It is the task of the Levite to frustrate the powers of impurity, to prevent them from gaining ascendancy anywhere. He does so symbolically by destroying his hair, i.e. "by removing the thorns from the vineyard." כהן, לוי, ישראל, can also be viewed as representative of חסד, גבורה, תפארת.
  The focal point of these camps is the holy ark containing the tablets. We find here an allusion to the "great" name of G–d, the one that contains seventy-two letters or words respectively [when the letters are spelled as words Ed.]. This appears three times, i.e. 216 (72 times 3) corresponding to the fact that the ark was really three arks, an outer ark made of gold, which encased the wooden ark which in turn was covered by an inner ark of gold. The tablets were six tefachim long, six tefachim wide and six tefachim high. If you multiply these measurements by one another you get 216. [Actually the author proceeds in the reverse order dividing 216 by six and then again by 6.] The Zohar on Parshat Behaalotcha explains that though the 72 lettered name of G–d is rooted in the emanation חסד, and חסד=72, it is actually composed of a combination of חסד, גבורה and תפארת. The Pardes Rimonim, in the chapter dealing with details of names, chapter 5, discusses this at length. [In order to appreciate the following, it is necessary to understand the system of tzerufim, or permutations. By transposing the letters in a given word, numerous combinations of the same letters can be achieved. In the case of a four-letter word, such as the Ineffable Name of G–d, 12 permutations are possible. This number is increased considerably when the letters in question are spelled out as words, i.e. the letter “י” as "יוד". In addition to this, such letters as "ה” for instance, could be spelled out as "הי", "הא”, or "הה”. By combining either the number of letters obtained by such spellings, or by adding the numerical value of each of such letters when this milu-im system is used, Kabbalists arrive at amazing relationships in key concepts.] You will find the number 72 hinted at in the passage about the Levites, since the Torah writes “והיו לי” (Numbers 8,14) referring to G–d claiming the Levites as His. By reading these two words as והי ולי, you have the first 2 of the 72 worded name of G–d. By combining 72 with the numerical value of ישראל=541, you get 613. In other words, Israel and the "great" name of G–d correspond to the whole of Torah. Viewed differently: The three camps כהונה, לויה, ישראל, that are 72 times 3, surround the core i.e. the tablets, which in turn are 3 times 72=216. Whenever the Jewish people broke camp, the flag of the camp of Yehudah featuring אריה=216, was the first to start marching.
   I have already mentioned that the division of כהן, לוי, ישראל, points in two directions, one being the נשמה-רוח-נפש, relationship, in other words the letters ה-ו-ה out of the 4-lettered Ineffable Name, the other, namely י-ה-ו, pointing at the "line",חסד, גבורה, תפארת in the diagram depicting the 10 ספירות, emanations. At first glance it appears as if these two divisions of "3 each," fail to account for the fourth letter of the ineffable name, i.e. the “י” in the case of the כהן, לוי, ישראל line, or the letter "ה" in the חסד, גבורה, נפש line. I will however, come back to this and explain what happens to the missing letters of G–d's name in those "equations," once I have described the 4 flags and what was inscribed on them in detail.
  Nachmanides, in his commentary on Numbers 2,2, states that the flag of the camp of Yehudah featured the image of a lion, in accordance with Genesis 49,9, which compares him to a lion. The flag of the camp of Reuben featured the image of Adam, reminding us of the דודאים containing the letters "אדם," as we read in Genesis 30,14. The flag of the camp of Ephrayim featured the image of an ox, שור, seeing Moses had described Joseph as בכור שורו הדר לו, in his blessing in Deut. 33,17. Lastly, the flag of the camp of Dan featured the image of an eagle, based on Deut. 32,11, "כנשר יעיר קנו,” "like an eagle who rouses his nestlings." This was appropriate since Dan's position as the rearguard of the army required him both to protect the rear and hurry up the slow moving ones in front of him to move faster. The overall effect of these camps and their flags corresponded to the vision of Ezekiel of the מרכבה, as we have mentioned earlier. [Although Yonathan ben Uzziel has the flag of Dan displaying a snake instead of an eagle, as in Genesis 49,17, this need not contradict Nachmanides, since the Tziyoni quotes Kabbalists as saying that the body of the picture was indeed a snake, but that the snake had the wings of an eagle. The latter suggests the attribute of mercy, רחמים.]
  It follows that the pictures on the 4 flags which the Israelites had in the desert were of the four חיות that support G–d's throne, that they also hinted at the four camps of the שכינה, namely the four emanations mentioned, and that they also reflected the concept of the four basic elements in our world as well as the four compass directions. The Zohar elaborates on all this. The Rekanati says that the four basic elements are presided over by the four angels מיכאל, גבריאל, אוריאל, and רפאל. מיכאל presides over the element water, and establishes a link between the waters in the upper regions, the waters of חסד. He does this in his capacity of "High Priest” of the Celestial Regions. He atones on behalf of Israel, since the region of atonement is in the domain of חסד. As a result, his position in those regions is on the right of G–d's throne. גבריאל presides over the element אש הגדולה "the great fire," hence his position is on the left. His official title is "Commander in Chief" of the celestial armies. אוריאל is in front, presiding over the element רוח, the region whence light comes to the world, since it is positioned in the East. The sun rises in the East, of course. רפאל is in the West, presiding over the element עפר, earth. The Rabbis say that he is in charge of the earth that is attached to the throne of G–d, a material known as the חומר הראשון, "original raw material” (compare Bamidbar Rabbah 2,10). The Midrash there states that just as G–d had created four compass directions in our lower world, so He has surrounded His Throne with four angels, i.e. מיכאל, גבריאל, אוריאל, רפאל. So far the words of the Rekanati. The letters in the holy name of G–d are imbued with the glory of the שכינה, G–d's Presence.
  I will copy from the Tziyoni, who describes these flags in still greater detail: It is a tradition going back to Moses that in addition to the images mentioned on these four flags they also contained one letter each of the names of the three patriarchs, as well as three צירופים, permutations of the letters in the Ineffable Name. Reuben's flag contained the letter ב of Abraham's name, the letter צ of Isaac's name, and the letter ע of Jacob's name. To these letters were added 3 permutations of the letters in the Ineffable Name, such as heh-vav-heh-yud, heh-vav-yud-heh, and heh-heh-yud vav. The flag of Yehudah would have the letters "א", "י", "י", respectively, taken from the names of the patriarchs. To this would be added three more צירופים. When you continue in this fashion, namely the letters "ר", "ח", "ק" from the patriarchs' names on the flag of Ephrayim, with the respective permutations of the Ineffable Name added, and the letters "מ", "ק", "ב" from the patriarchs' names on the flag of Dan, again with the respective unused permutations in the letters of the Ineffable Name, you will remain with the last letter in Abraham's name, i.e. the letter "ה" unaccounted for. In order to solve this problem, G–d added the letter yud, so as to produce the two-lettered name of G–d, the one with which He created the universe, i.e. “י-ה”. G–d placed עמודים, a type of cloud (like the pillar of fire in Exodus 13,22) above, and ענן, another type of cloud, above and below the holy ark. These two letters were engraved on those two clouds. Whenever G–d wanted the camps to move, the columns of cloud containing the letters would rise from the ark, and the four ענני הכבוד, clouds depicting the Presence of G–d's glory on which the letters א-י-י, ב-צ-ע, ר-ח-ק, מ-ק-ב, were inscribed would start moving. So far the Tziyoni.
  However, I (של"ה) propose to pursue a slightly different approach. By means of these two letters "א-ה," the apparent deficiency which we mentioned after showing how the camp of Yehudah with its image of אירה, amounted to 216, or three times the numerical value of the permutated Ineffable Name, can be made up. Each of the four flags also had three permutations each of the ineffable four -lettered name of G–d inscribed on them, corresponding to the fact that each flag represented three tribes. That this was so can be gleaned from the verse in Psalms 122,4: ששם עלו שבטים, שבטי ה'. The appropriate translation would be: "There the tribes, the tribes of the Lord, ascended" (to the Jerusalem of the Celestial Regions). The reason for inscribing these permutations on each of the flags was to have the 72-lettered (worded, according to some Kabbalists) name of G–d inscribed thereon. This has been pointed out in the Sefer Habahir, and is referred to in Pardes Rimonim. We read there that a certain Rabbi Amorai expounded on the verse השמים ושמי השמים לא יכלכלוך (Kings I 8,27) "Neither the heavens nor the heavens of the heavens can contain You," that this proves that G–d has 72 names, and that all of them are incorporated in the שבטים, the twelve tribes. We know that this is so, since the Torah writes in Exodus 28,10, ששה משמותם על האבן האחת, ואת שמות הששה הנותרים על האבן השנית כתולדותם. "The names of six of the tribes on the one stone, (gem of the Ephod) and the names of the remaining six tribes on the second stone, according to the order of their births." These two stones of the אפוד, just as the 12 stones of the breastplate, חושן, of the High Priest, are לזכרון, as a remembrance. Since the words "as a remembrance” are used both times, it it is clear that both contained the same. Alternatively – even better in our context – since the Torah mentions only the number twelve, we must consider that the twelve stones had six facets each and that the total number of facets is thus 72. The deeper meaning of the sacrifices offered by the Princes in Parshat Nasso of which the Torah says in its summation שנים עשר בקר ושש עגלות צב, "six draught carts and 12 oxen,” may well be connected with this concept. The Torah tells us by mentioning the number 12, that G–d employs 12 מנהיגים," managers," each of whom is equipped with six כוחות, specific capabilities. The Pardes Rimonim elaborates on this.
  The twelve stones have six facets each, giving us a total count of 72. The מחנה כהונה "surrounded" the holy ark which in turn housed the tablets that measured 72 handbreadths cubed, i.e. 216 (216 טפחים, divided by the three dimensions: length, width, and depth).
  All of this "surrounded" the Ineffable Name, since it is said "תורת ה' תמימה" that the whole Torah exudes the Ineffable Name and the 72 lettered name derives from this since it "branches out" in three dimensions, length, width, and depth (The Ineffable Name is flanked on either side by תורה, and תמימה, respectively). The name can be spelled in three distinct ways, A) forward, פנים, B) backwards, אחור, and C) sideways, על ידי צירופים. The first method of spelling the Ineffable Name so that its total is 72, is by spelling each letter as a word and using the letter yud as a filler, i.e. יוד, הי, ויו הי. The result is 72. The second method, אחור, is by each time adding the next letter to the spelling, i.e. ""י", "י-ה", "יה"ו", "י-ה-ו-ה" When you add these letters now, you will also get a total of 72. The third method of spelling the Ineffable Name, is by using the 12 permutations as demonstrated previously, i.e. re-arranging the four letters in every possible combination. Seeing that there are 12 permutations, and each represents 6 facets, or כוחות, you multiply the number 12 by 6 and your total is 72. We find that the number 72 emanates from the Ineffable Name in three different ways (the dimensions), giving us a total of 216. On the four flags G–d's Ineffable Name was inscribed by using this method of permutations. Now that we have explained the significance of numbers three and four respectively, we understand that this is what the two kinds of the letter שין on the phylacteries are all about. We are reminded of the deep significance of the number three and the number four, by wearing on the תפילין both a three "headed" shin, and a four "headed" shin. In this way the commandment of Tefillin, symbolises the Tabernacle/Temple idea. The twelve stitches used in sewing together the phylacteries also symbolize the concept we have explained. What I have described so far is in the nature of an overview of these three פרשיות.
   When discussing them in detail we will concentrate on the fact that they represent the three camps i.e. the camp of the Priests, the Levites and the Israelites, respectively, and that as such the first one, Bamidbar, describes the Neshamah element within us, the second one i.e. Parshat Nasso, describes the Ruach element whereas the third one, Beha-alotcha, describes the Nefesh element. All of this will be explained in due course.
  במדבר סיני . This book is called חומש הפקודים, the book of those who have been numbered, because of the census the people of Israel underwent. This count will never become irrelevant (else we would not read about it annually, after over three thousand years). Our sages say that the purpose of the census was to ensure that the שכינה, Divine Presence, would take up permanent residence amongst the Jewish people. I believe that this Parshah and all its details refers to the מחנה כהונה. The מחנה שכינה on earth is, of course, "opposite" of the מחנה שכינה in the Celestial Region (Bamidbar Rabbah 4,13).
  The Parshah mentions only the number of Israelites, and the fact that the Levites from the age of thirty days and over were chosen to replace the firstborn. The number given for the Levites in this Parshah is only that of the Kehatites, since the מחנה שכינה contained the כהנים who came from their ranks. The reason why the כהנים were included in the count of the Kehatites is that we find the Priests carrying the Holy Ark on three occasions, though that assignment was usually reserved for the Levites of the family of the Kehatites. These three occasions were: A) When Israel crossed the Jordan (Joshua 3,3), see the commentary of Kimchi there. B) When they marched around the city of Jericho (Joshua 6,12-13), and C) when the Holy Ark was returned to where it belonged during the uprising of Absalom against David (Samuel II 15,29).
  Concerning the relevance of the number of Israelites required to assure a permanent Presence of the Shechinah, we will appreciate the following: Although we have a rule that anything subject to numbers and measures does not attract ברכה, blessing, this rule applies only when the number or measurement in question is intrinsically physical, part of this material world. Such numbers, by their very definition, do not bode well, since they are intended to stress individuality in the sense of separateness. Each item is counted separately. It also suggests limitation. Even if we say that "the number of the children of Israel will be as the sands of the beaches of the sea," an apparent blessing (Genesis 22,17), the presumption still is that eventually this is a limitation, that the number is finite.
  However, when numbers are viewed in the context of the spiritual world, עולם הבא, they do not imply limitation. Once something is numbered it will have an infinite existence, usually on an ascending level, the object that is numbered advancing towards ever greater achievements. When our sages said that Torah scholars do not find rest in this world or in the hereafter (Berachot 64a), this is what they had in mind. These scholars do not "rest on their laurels," as it were, but experience continuous growth. Their understanding of G–d increases continuously, and since G–d Himself possesses infinite achievements, any measurable progress of the Torah scholar is not something that is measured against a final target thus preventing him from progressing still further.
  Different Torah scholars vary in the degree in which they progress towards gaining this deeper insight into the Essence of G–d. It varies from נשמה to נשמה. The צדיק in the Hereafter will never be submerged in anonymity unlike people who are members of an army in this world. The latter lose part of their individuality by the very fact that they are lumped together in a group when being counted.
  This is why the prophet Hoseah 2,1, states of the future of the Jewish people: והיה מספר בני ישראל כחול הים, אשר לא ימד ולא יספר. "The number of the people of Israel will be like the sand of the sea that can be neither measured nor counted." We understand this verse as pointing out the difference between the function of numbering something in this world, and that of numbering something in the World to Come. In the World to Come, it is not something finite. This is so in spite of the fact that it does take place as is evident from the words "cannot be counted" which suggest that somebody is trying to count it. The message is that the count cannot be completed, cannot be finalized. 
  This is also what the Rabbis may have meant when they said that מספר, refers to a time when Israel performs the will of G–d, לא יספר when Israel fails to do so (Yoma 22b). When Israel does not perform the will of G–d, this is caused by their cleaving to this physical material world. When they do perform the will of their Maker, however, even counting them does not constitute something finite, something that imposes limitations on their development; then it is not something negative. When G–d was ready to take up His residence amongst Israel, He commanded them to be counted in order that this aspect of numbering should be understood; in that case their number was of course, finite.. This had to be so, since all those counted were at that time of this physical world, of course. We have explained in Parshat Ki Tissa, how the number six hundred thousand corresponds to the ספירות, emanations, and how all this demonstrates Israel's relationship to the שכינה.
  
  
  שאו את ראש . The word את is difficult, as well as other apparently superfluous words. Even if we allow for the fact that Shimon Ha'Amsuni explained every את in the Torah and when he was stymied by one particular את in the verse "et hashem elokecha tira,” he abandoned his attempt altogether (compare Pesachim 22b). The fact remains that we have to explain whatever we can. Rabbi Akiva explained also the one et that had stymied Shimon Ha-amsuni by saying that not only G–d but also Torah scholars must be shown reverence (Bechorot 6). Another difficulty is that when counting the Israelites, the word את appears in front of the word כל, i.e. Numbers 1,2, שאו את ראש כל עדת בני ישראל, thereby joining the Israelites to the previous "אהל מועד", whereas when the Levites are counted in 3,15, the word כל appears after the object of the count, the בני לוי. It says viz: פקוד את בני לוי לבית אבותם למשפחותם, כל זכר וגו', instead of as in 1,2, שאו את ראש כל עדת בני ישראל. Still another unusual inconsistency is found when we compare the respective counts of the Kehatites, Gersonides and Merarites. The Torah writes in 4,2: "נשא את ראש בני קהת," and in 4,21 we read: "נשא את ראש בני גרשון," whereas in 4,29, we read: בני מררי למשפחותם, לבית אבום תפקוד אותם, without the word את. Why this change in the wording? Nonetheless, the word את, is mentioned also with מררי, in 4,30: כל הבא לצבא לעבוד את עבודת אהל מועד. On the other hand when the Torah describes the function of the Kehatites in 4,3, it says: כל בא לצבא לעשות מלאכה באהל מועד." Strangely, the word את is missing here. When the function of the Gersonides is discussed in 4,23, the word את is also missing.
  We find a disagreement between Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish concerning whether articles which are normally sold by the piece, i.e. by being numbered, can ever lose their identity sufficiently to become assimilated by a mixture many times their size. Rabbi Yochanan holds that only items that are always sold by number cannot be assimilated. The fact that they are only sold by number gives them an importance that can never be lost. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish extends this rule even to items that are occasionally (את שדרכו למנות), sold by number. Compare Beytzah 11. Although the argument between these sages concerns matters of Halachah, Jewish ritual law, their disagreement reveals a deep insight into the relative worth of things that are subject to numbering. The attitudes of both Rabbis reflect a genuine Torah outlook, i.e. אלו ואלו דברי אלוקים חיים. The clue to this relative worth may be both the word את and the word כל respectively, as we shall try to demonstrate.
  Bamidbar Rabbah 1,9, on Numbers 1,1, שאו את ראש, says that G–d said to Israel: "I have not liked any other creature more than you, that is why I have 'raised' your head high." I have made you similar to Me. Just as My "head" is high, as stated in Chronicles I 29,11: והמתנשא לכל ראש, "so your head is high," as stated in Psalms 148,14: "He has exalted the horn of His people."
  It is difficult to see a compliment for Israel in the words of the Midrash "I have not liked any other creature more than you." The Midrash should have written: "I have liked you better than any other creature." Another difficulty is the expression "דמיתי אתכם," "I have compared Myself to you." What kind of a comparison is this? Also, how is all this related to the verse "G–d said to Moses: "Count the head of the whole community of Israel, etc.?"
  Another difficulty is the subsequent statement in Bamidbar Rabbah 1,11, on the verse "but do not count the tribe of Levi, etc." (1,49), that Rabbi Pinchas ben Idi said: "when it says at the beginning of the Book, שאו את ראש, it pointedly does not say גדל את ראש, "elevate the head." The expression "שאו" is similar to the judge telling the executioner to behead the convicted prisoner. By the use of this word, G–d hinted that Israel would have to qualify for greatness only through the accumulation of merits. In that case the meaning of שאו, would be similar to Genesis 40, 12, "within three days Pharaoh will lift your head, (ישא) and restore you to your former position." Should Israel fail to merit greatness however, they would all die, as did the chief of the bakers in Genesis 40,19, who was told by Joseph that Pharaoh would ישא ראשך מעליך "will lift your head off you, and hang you on a pole." It had been clear to G–d at that time, that all the people about to be counted would die in the desert. G–d therefore told Moses to count the Levites not with the Israelites, but separately. The Levites had to be counted separately. If the tribe of Levi had been counted together with the other tribes the angel of death would have had authority to kill all Israel including them, and the decree that Israel could not enter the Holy Land would have become operative, since the Torah says in Numbers 14,29: "In this desert your carcasses will fall, and all of you who have been numbered in accordance with their respective number." G–d separated the count of the Levites in order to head off this catastrophe. This is also why the Torah does not even employ the same wording when referring to the counting of the Levites, but instead of שאן את ראש, we have פקוד את בני לוי in 3,15. So far that Midrash
  This statement of the Midrash also deserves further analysis. Why does this Midrash see a connection to the use of the word "שאו" in the Joseph story involving Pharaoh that we have cited? After all, we have a rule בשעת חדוה, חדוה. This means that at a time when joy prevails, no sour note is introduced. Rashi explains this on Genesis 6,6. In our case the restoration of the שכינה, the visible Presence of G–d, was certainly such an occasion; why then look for negative connotations of the word "שאו?"
  כי בי-ה ה' צור עולמים
   What did the previous quotation of Psalms 20,6, "May we shout for joy in Your victory!" have to do with flags? Furthermore, what did the Midrash mean when it said that the flags were meant to lend each tribe a distinctive individuality, i.e. שיהיו נכרים? Why should the use of the expression חיבה גדולה "great fondness," by the Midrash on two occasions be the equivalent of love, אהבה?
  Another difficulty is that we are told by the Midrash in Song of Songs 2,4, that when G–d descended on Mount Sinai to give Israel the Torah He brought with Him 22,000 ministering angels. We know this from the verse in Psalms 68,18, רכב אלוקים רבותים, אלפי שנאן. "The chariots of G–d are myriads upon myriads, thousands upon thousands." All these angels were made to appear with flags, or like flags. Israel developed a yearning for flags and wished also to have flags like these. This is why it says in Song of Songs, 2,4, "He has brought me to the house of wine," i.e. Sinai where the Torah was given, which in turn has been compared to wine." The verse in Proverbs 9,5,"Drink of the wine I have mixed," refers to Sinai. The words דגלו עלי אהבה, in Song of Songs 2,4, refer to Israel exclaiming "I wish G–d would display His love for me through the flags." G–d responded saying: "Since you yearn for flags, I am surely going to fulfil your request," to wit Psalms 20,6, ימלא השם כל משאלותיך, "may the Lord fulfil your every wish." G–d immediately informed Israel of His decision by instructing Moses to make flags for them, as is written: “איש על דגלו באותות.” So far the Midrash. This Midrash too requires an explanation. Again we need to know what the term "love" is all about! We further need to know how the wording in this Midrash adds anything to the previous Midrash on that subject?
   כי בי-ה ה' צור עולמים .  This means that the universe, i.e. the עולם הבא, was created with the letter י, whereas the עולם הזה, the material world, was created with the letter ה. The Mishnah in Avot 5,1 already told us that G–d created the universe with ten מאמרות, directives. The first of these was אחדות, Unity, as we will explain later. The term דביקות, attachment, refers to something that is ongoing, everlasting, as we know from Deut.4,4, ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם, חיים כולכם היום, "you who have been cleaving to the Lord your G–d are all alive this day." The material world was created by five מאמרות, i.e. the letter ה. Our sages in Rosh Hashanah 21b, say that 50 שערי בינה, "gates of understanding," were created, and that Moses was given all of them except one. We know this because it says of Moses "ותחסרהו מעט מאלוקים," that You have made him only a little less than divine" (Psalms 8,6). In the introduction on his commentary on the Torah Nachmanides (Chavell edition page 3) describes this statement as meaning that all parts of creation such as the minerals, the various categories of vegetation, animal life and even human life, each required a special שער בינה by means of which they were brought into existence. This process continued until possession of an advanced שער בינה would enable a person to understand the psyche of fellow human beings, enable him to divine if his counterpart was a thief, an adulterer, etc. and even enable him to know if someone else who was suspected of disobeying the laws of ritual impurity concerning sexual relations with a menstruant woman was in fact guilty of such misconduct. Beyond that, a still higher שער בינה would give such a person access to knowledge about the motions and functions of the stars and planets. The total number of such שערי בינה is fifty, the fiftieth being reserved for the Creator alone, who had not revealed that potential to any creature. The wording in the Talmud, נבראו, "they have been created," suggesting that they had not remained only in the realm of G–d Himself, need not be understood literally, as the Talmud was concerned with describing what happened to the majority of these שערי בינה. So far Nachmanides. I personally, feel that the 50th שער בינה, an all embracing potential called hiyuli, primordial is the creative potential which has been withheld from any human being. Nachmanides possibly has this in mind when he refers to the verse in Psalms 33,9: “הוא אמר ויהי,” He said and it came into being."
  Each of the seven days of Creation comprised forces that had been employed on the previous days, seeing that all the forces employed in Creation were closely related to the primordial matter, היולי. The same applies to the four basic elements in this material world. Every element contains some of the essence of the other three elements. The element is called by its specific name only because it is dominant in that constellation.
  I have used this approach to explain why the Manna did not have the taste of cucumbers and melons, etc. as in Numbers 11,5. The Talmud in Yuma 75, and the Sifri on that verse explain that these fruits were harmful to nursing mothers. Since the Rabbis are on record stating that the Manna was capable of assuming any taste a person wanted, we must ask whether nursing mothers are not included in the definition of כל אדם, i.e. anybody? The real reason then is that in its primordial state the Manna was capable of assuming any taste. This potential was activated by the thoughts of the person about to consume it. Because of the fact that at least a minute amount of the other possible tastes would have been present at all times, and this could have had harmful effects on nursing mothers, G–d already had to exclude the taste of cucumbers, etc. from the primordial potential, i.e. כח היולי, of the Manna. Since we have stated that the total potential reposing in each of the seven days of Creation was used on subsequent days to further the creative activity on such day, we have 7 times 7=49 such potentials. By adding the primordial potential of all these individual potentials we get 50. When you consider the individual potentials of the various acts of Creation and combine them with more generalised potentials you will get a total of fifty. Rashi on Genesis 1,14, already tells us that on the first day of Creation, everything was created in כח, in its potential, though it was not actualised, i.e. did not become functional until the day the Torah reports about it in detail. Similarly, the last day of Creation, i.e. the Sabbath, combined all the potential creative forces within it. This is why the Sabbath is also called "week," seeing it comprises all the elements that make up the week. We therefore have five days of creative activity left, each one of which comprised 7 of the potentials (known as שערי בינה) mentioned previously. This gives you 35. By adding a small part of the three "general potentials" to each of these five intermediate days, i.e. the general potential of the first day, the Sabbath, and the primordial כח היולי, you will get a total of fifty. In this fashion we arrive at a different aspect of the relationship between the spiritual and the physical, i. e. the relationship of "five" and "ten" respectively. Five multiplied by ten makes fifty. This is a very ancient allusion to the ספירות, emanations of יסוד, the lowest of the emanations of the world of יצירה, and the emanation מלכות, the world of עשיה, respectively. The verse in which this is alluded to is Chronicles I 29,11, לך ה' הגדולה, הגבורה, והתפארת, והנצח, וההוד. "Yours O Lord are the greatness, might, splendour, triumph and majesty, yes, all this is in Heaven and on earth." Every one of these five (emanations) is made up of ten aspects, so that between them they total the fifty שערי בינה. This is supported by the end of the verse כי כל בשמים ובארץ. According to the Pardes Rimonim, this is a clear allusion to the "lowest" two ספירות. The word כל has a numerical value of fifty, and as such alludes to those fifty שערי בינה that between them account for all the potentials that exist. This is also the mystical dimension of the letter ה in the word “הששי,” in Genesis 1,31. It alludes to the seven times 7 days plus the כולל, general potential, which combined makes 50. The number 50 must be understood as five times 10, i.e. with the creation of the Sabbath, the material world, עולם הזה, had, so to speak been stamped with the seal of the spiritual world, the עולם הבא.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  At this point I want to explain the meaning of the verse "ובשם אלוקינו נדגול," "we will march with the banner of our Lord" (Psalms 20,6). This will be the conclusion of our explanation dealing with the אותות, i.e. that the word אותות is really a reference to the אותיות, the letters of G–d's name, and that they appear between them on the four flags of the four camps of the Israelites.
  Let us first look at the statement in the Mishnah in Avot 1,2, that the world is supported by three things: by Torah, by Avodah and by the performance of kind deeds to one's fellow man. In this instance Tzedakah, commonly translated as the giving of charity, is identical with the term Gemilut Chassadim, mentioned in the Mishnah. Each one of the flags corresponded to one of the letters in the four-lettered name of G–d. Torah corresponds to the letter yud, the Ten Commandments, since the 613 commandments are all condensed within the Ten Ccommandments. The flag of the camp of Yehudah alludes to Torah; Rashi points out that Moses, Aaron, his sons and the Levites, camped close to that camp (2,2). The direction was the East, the direction from which light, i.e. enlightenment has come to the world. Torah, after all, is identical with "light." In front was the angel אוריאל, the numerical value of אור, being 207, which alludes to the secrets of the Torah. This angel is also known as נוריאל. Nur is a kind of fire which burns one up thoroughly, as happened to the youngster who tried to penetrate into the secrets of חשמל [what is commonly known as roam מעשה מרכבה, and should not be taught to anyone who is not capable of studying this on his own]. The Talmud reports in Chagigah 13 that a youngster undertook to study these matters and was fatally burned by heavenly fire [the expression used by the Talmud is נורא].
  There are three aspects to this pillar of Torah, which is one of the pillars supporting the world. 1) Involvement with Torah must not serve ulterior motives, but must be designed to understand and observe its laws. Torah wisdom proclaimed must be halachically sound. 2) Its pursuit must be constant, in accordance with the maxim of והגית בו יומם ולילה (Joshua 1,8). At the very least it is required to set aside regular times for Torah study and to make one's working hours a lesser priority. 3) One must provide financial help to those who study Torah as their main occupation, much as our sages taught us based on the verse “שמח זבולון בצאתך ויששכר באוהליך” (Deut.33,18). Rashi explains on that verse that the two tribes made an agreement whereby יששכר shared the merit acquired through his Torah study with זבולון, seeing the latter had financed it. The fact that יששכר produced great Torah scholars is attested to in Chronicles I 12,33, when the delegation of that tribe at the crowning of King David is described as being composed of outstanding people, which compensated for the fact that it was such a numerically small delegation.
  Yehudah is an example of the first aspect of the pillar Torah that we have cited. Our sages say that during all the forty years that the Israelites wandered in the desert the bones of Yehudah kept turning over within his coffin, and that Moses prayed to G–d שמע ה' קול יהודה ואל עמו תביאנו, "please G–d listen to the voice of Yehudah and restore him to his people" (Deut.33,7). The Talmud Sotah 7 explains that during all these years Yehudah had not been assigned a seat in the celestial academy, had not made proper progress in his studies, and had not succeeded in reconciling what he studied with the halachic decisions. Moses prayed that this should change. In the case of David, however, we find that since his learning matched the halachic decisions it is rated extremely high, and that is why it is said of him וה' עמו, "that G–d was with him, i.e. approved of David's halachic pronouncements. (compare Samuel I 18,14, and Shabbat 56 on that verse.) Yissachar is an example of the second criterion that is required for Torah to be a true pillar supporting the world, i.e. his full time dedication to Torah study. Zevulun is an example of the third criterion, that of supporting Torah scholars financially. To underline the esteem the Torah has for that kind of Torah support, we find that tribe referred to as מטה זבולון, i.e. not ומטה זבולון, to show that he was in a class by himself (compare Baal Haturim on Bamidbar 2,7). He is shown the same deference in Deut. 33,18, when he is mentioned before Issachar, who was his senior.
  The camp, i.e. flag of Reuben, represents the letter ה in the name of G–d. The Talmud in Menachot 29b, asks why this terrestrial world was created with the letter ה, and answers that this is because the world is like a porch. If someone wants to depart, he may depart. The meaning is, of course, the open space on the left leg of the letter ה. The Talmud goes on to query this very phenomenon, and concludes that it is a signal to the repentant sinner that he will be welcomed back into the fold if he decides to return after he had "left." To the question that the letter has an opening underneath which the repentant sinner could use to return to the fold if he wants to, the Talmud says that sinners need additional encouragement to return to the fold. Therefore this letter has two openings. The direction South which faced the camp of Reuben, is guarded by the angel מיכאל whose position is traditionally on the right. [We have to conceive of "South" as being to the right of "East", not like in our maps which show "North" on top. Ed.] South is reminiscent of the institution of repentance, since it is an extension of the attribute of חסד presided over by the angel מיכאל. The Jerusalem Talmud Makkot 2,6, which describes the attitude to sinners by such attributes as "wisdom," "prophecy," etc. demonstrates that only G–d Himself suggests that a sinner do תשובה, and thus rehabilitate himself. Our sages say that the "right side" of G–d is always prepared to accept repentant sinners (Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer 33). G–d reportedly said to Reuben that until his time no one ever initiated repentance. As a reward G–d promised that a descendant of Reuben, i.e. the prophet Hoseah, would do so likewise when the occasion would arise. This is why we find Hoseah calling to the Jewish people: "שובה ישראל עד ה' אלוקיך." (Hoseah 14,2).
  Reishit Chochmah queries how this is possible, seeing that both Adam and Cain had preceded Reuben in repenting for their respective sins. The answer given there does not satisfy the author, and he says that the difference is simply that Reuben's repentance was "self propelled," i.e. he had not needed to be told by G–d that he had sinned, and would face punishment, as had both Adam and Cain. Bereshit Rabbah 21,6, on Genesis 3,22, "and now man has become like one of Us," comments in the name of Rabbi Abba bar Kahane that G–d opened the gate of repentance for Adam by the use of the word "ועתה." We have other examples where that word introduces the concept of repentance, such as in Deut. 10,12, "and now Israel, what is the Lord your G–d asking of you except, etc." 
  The expression of פתח בתשובה, "commenced with repentance," simply means that a person does Teshuvah before he feels any ill effects from his transgression. This is to be contrasted with someone whose repentance is due to old age, when the evil urge cannot hold out the promise of gratification as a reward for the sin. I have explained Lamentations 2,3, השיב אחור ימינו, "He has withdrawn His right hand," to mean that G–d withdrew the hand held out to repentant sinners. The reason G–d did so is because we find in that same verse: מפני אויב, "on account of the enemy." The "enemy" is the painful result of one's sins. When repentance is due only to G–d's retribution, they are not compared to "crowns." Repentance and good deeds are considered "crowns" of a person, i.e. adorn him when they are caused by free willed activity, and before reverses in one's life prompt one to try "religion."
  The flags of Reuven, Shimon and Gad contained all three elements of repentance. The first element is that demonstrated by Reuben, who did Teshuvah without being under any kind of pressure. The second element was demonstrated by Shimon, whose repentance was prompted by his being publicly humbled and shamed. His repentance was an example of what is meant by the verse in Jeremiah 31,18, אחרי שובי נחמתי, ואחרי הודעי ספקתי על ירך, בושתי ונכלמתי כי נשאתי חרפת נעורי, "Now that I have turned back, I am filled with remorse and shame; now that I have been made aware, I have struck my thigh, I am ashamed and humiliated, for I bear the disgrace of my youth." We also find in Ezra 9,6, אלוקי בושת ונכלמתי, "My Lord, I have been shamed and humiliated," that repentance was due only to such negative experiences. A public humiliation for the tribe of Shimon occurred in Numbers Chapter 31 where the punitive campaign against the Midianites is commanded and each tribe is supposed to contribute one thousand men to the army which undertakes that campaign. At that time the tribe of Levi also sent one thousand men, (cf. Sifri on 31,4). Since the Torah continues in verse 5 that the total number of men was twelve thousand, it is clear that none of the men were from the tribe of Shimon. It seems obvious that that tribe was too ashamed to participate, since its own leader had been the major factor in the seduction of the Jewish people by the Midianites having had any success at all. Berachot 12 raises the question how we know that G–d forgives anyone all his sins if he is ashamed. The proof is cited from Samuel I 28,19, when Samuel promised Saul he would join him in the Hereafter by the following day.
  The third element of repentance, that it be performed while a person is in his prime, when he is still subject to the temptation of the evil urge, is represented here by the tribe of Gad. The Mishnah in Avot 4,1, which describes a hero as a person who can conquer his passions, clearly shows that unless one has such passions, one does not qualify for the reward of having suppressed them. On Psalms 112,1, אשרי איש ירא את ה', "happy the man who fears the Lord," Rabbi Joshua ben Levi says that it refers to someone who does penitence while he is yet a man, in full possession of all his virility (Avodah Zarah 19a) [After all, why should a G–d-fearing woman not be described as happy? Ed.] The men of Gad were known as heroes. We know this from Genesis 49,19, when Jacob described him as turning the tables on any raiders. Compare Jerusalem Talmud Sotah 8,5. The heroism described there refers to his repentance, his sin having being due to his haste. Moses accused the members of that tribe by saying: "Shall your brothers go to war and you will sit it out here?" (Numbers 32,7) Note that although Gad was junior to Reuben, he was the first to make the request to stay in Trans-Jordan. Having been chastened by Moses, this tribe did more than it had been asked to do so as to compensate for its unbecoming conduct. This teaches that when repenting one should do so as wholeheartedly as the members of Gad and Reuven.
  The camp of Ephrayim, which faces West, the direction of our prayers, the direction of the שכינה, the Holy of Holies, is the region behind which the angel רפאל is positioned We find an allusion to this in Moses' prayer for Miriam, 12,13, "א-ל נא, רפא נא לה" Prayer corresponds to the letter ו in the Ineffable Name of G–d, because the conditions for successful prayer are 3, i.e. in reality 6. 1) Prayer is called עין ולב, eye and heart. It is called "eye," because Psalms 145,15, says: "all eyes are on You." It is called "heart," since the Torah in Deut 11,13, requires us to serve the Lord "with all your hearts." This demand may appear as a contradiction in terms.
  We have a disagreement between Rabbi Chiyah and Rabbi Shimon in Yevamot 105b as to whether, while engaged in prayer, one has to look downwards with one's eyes or upwards. The former bases his opinion on the verse (Chronicles II 7,16) והיה עיני ולבבי שם כל הימים "My eyes and My heart shall always be there" [This is G–d speaking, concerning the Temple Solomon has built]. The latter bases his opinion on the verse in Lamentations 3,41, נשא לבבנו אל כפים אל א-ל בשמים, "We shall raise our hearts with our hands to G–d in heaven." While this discussion was in progress Rabbi Yishmael son of Rabbi Yossi joined the scholars, asking them what they were debating. When told that they discussed the manner in which to pray, Rabbi Yishmael quoted his father as having said that one needs to lower one's eyes when engaged in prayer, whereas one needs to focus one's heart heavenwards, in order to comply with both verses.
  What is meant here is something that I have explained elsewhere in connection with the verses 1) "Serve the Lord with joy!" (Psalms 100,2), and 2) "Serve the Lord with fear!" (Psalms 2,11). When a person gets ready to pray he should consider that he is totally insignificant, no more than a drop of evil-smelling semen, sinful and obstinate and thus he will become fearful and feel ashamed. Hence his eyes will be turned downward. After that he should contemplate the greatness of the Lord, how exalted G–d is, etc. These feelings will produce joy within him. Joshua son of Nun was of the tribe of Ephrayim. We find that G–d had granted both Moses and Joshua the attributes of חכמה, and that both of them prostrated themselves when praying. Our sages, pointing to the example of Joshua, are on record that any scholar who is not certain that his prayer will find a favorable response must not prostrate himself when praying.
  Prayer is also called קטורת, incense: David says in Psalms 141,2, תכון תפלתי קטורת לפניך, "Let my prayer be an offering of incense before You!" Incense is a pleasant fragrance. One of its ingredients is called חלבנה, something evil smelling, a resin, not unlike a glue. This is required to be one of the ingredients of the incense offerd by the priests, to show us that a person when he prays should consider that his deeds should be as pleasing to G–d as incense, but he should also include those people in his prayer who have not yet repented. Our Rabbis have also told us that any fast that does not include sinful Jewish people is not rated a true fast, since the resin חלבנה was also part of the holy incense (Keritut 6b).
  A person must purify his heart before he commences to pray (Shemot Rabbah quoted by Menorat HaMa'or page 39). We also find that Job referred to the fact that "there is no injustice on my palm, my prayer was pure." Rabbi Joshua the priest, son of Nechemyah queries how a prayer could be עכורה, murky, dirty. He concludes that the statement about Job's prayer not having been offered with hands soiled with violence does not refer to hands that are physically dirty but to the stains caused by sin. A person who has not first removed sin from himself calling upon G–d is not likely to be answered. Gideon, who was descended from the tribe Manasseh, excelled in those two attributes. He demonstrated this even before he destroyed the altar dedicated to the idol Baal and by subsequently building an altar for G–d and sacrificing on it (Judges 6:25-28).
  Prayer is also called עבודה, service. Just as there is service inside the Sanctuary and outside it, so there is an internal and an external dimension to prayer. When prayer deals with man's confessions, his tears, etc., this is called the external dimension of prayer. When prayer consists of praising the Lord, thanking the Lord, jubilation, etc., this is called the internal dimension of prayer. The supplicant must view himself as if he were a Priest, and his prayer as if it were actual service in the Temple. Compare the Tur Orach Chayim, on this subject. The service in the Temple was performed in the area allocated to the tribe of Benjamin who was part of the camp of Ephrayim.
  The camp and flag of the tribe of Dan were situated in the North. The name of G–d concludes with the letter ה, symbolizing the charity, i.e. צדקה, of G–d. It is pointed out in the 12th chapter of the Talmud Shabbat, folio 104, that the letters ג and ד in the Hebrew alphabet are short for גמול דלים, dealing kindly with the poor. These letters are followed by the letter ה, a letter of the name of G–d. Not only does the way this letter is formed represent the name of G–d, but if you use the bottom left leg of the letter and place it before what remains, you get יד, hand, an allusion to the hand that should be extended to the poor. There are various symbolic meanings to the manipulation of sections of this letter, amongst others the result achieved is דודי. He who gives charity in the North, i.e. "hidden", anonymously, before G–d, is considered as having chosen a very commendable way of giving charity (The word Tzafon, North, should be read instead as Tzafun, "hidden"). Gold is supposed to have its origin in the North, or "is hidden," not easily accessible. The angel גבריאל, is positioned on the left, i.e. near the camp of Dan. We are told in Midrash Eicha, by Rabbi Joshua of Sachinan, that the angel Gabriel held the coals (symbol of the destruction that would come upon Jerusalem) in his hands for seven years, all the while hoping that Israel would do תשובה. When they failed to do so, he was ready to throw all these coals at Israel in anger and cause the destruction of Jerusalem. G–d called out to him to be careful not to be so indiscriminate, since there were amongst the people those who practised this charity anonymously, [and that is why their good deeds had not come to the attention of Gabriel. Ed.] In the book Shaarey Gan Eden, commenting on Ezekiel 10,8, "There appeared under the wings of the Cherubs the form of a man's hand," this is explained as a reference to this Midrash Eichah we have just quoted. The words "under their wings" is a reference to the hidden nature of these charitable deeds performed by Jews in Jerusalem.
  This camp had three distinct features. 1) גמילות חסדים, the practice of kind deeds. 2) צדקה, performance of charity. 3) מעשר, tithing. The practice of kind deeds extends to rich and poor alike, to the living as well as to the dead, to the individual as well as to a group of people. The finest way of practising this virtue is by providing the needs of the community faithfully, without exploiting one's position. By upholding the principles of justice, truth and peace, one assures that G–d in His Heaven will deal with us on the basis of חסד. All of this is alluded to in Genesis 49, 16, דן ידין עמו, "Dan will judge his people." There was no other public-spirited person such as the famous Samson who devoted his life to judging the people. The reason the verse quoted adds "like one of the tribes of Israel," is explained by Rashi as a comparison with King David. It is written of King David that he "practiced justice and charity to all his people" (Samuel II 8,15). In addition to these two virtues, the attribute of חסד is added as belonging to this camp, similar to Jeremiah 9,23: כי אני ה' עושה חסד, משפט וצדקה בארץ, "for I the Lord, perform kindness, justice and charity on earth."
  The second virtue, charity, is one that needs to be performed with a pleasant mien, and in a generous manner, i.e. substantial gifts. We read in Baba Batra 10, that a person who is desirous of having male children should give alms liberally to many poor. Rabbi Joshua says there that if someone actively pursues a lifestyle involving charity etc., he will have learned children, wealthy children etc. This is based on a variety of scriptural verses. 
  The tribe of Asher who was part of the camp of Dan is described in the Torah as being blessed with sons, in Deut. 33,24. Sifri says there that no other tribe was blessed with as many sons. Rashi says that he does not know the source of that statement, however I believe that it is based on the end of the verse which seems to extol Asher's virtue, i.e. that when he gave charity he gave "royal portions, and delicacies." He may have been blessed with many sons as a reward. The third characteristic of that camp, the matter of tithing, is related to the blessing of Maleachi 3,10, where we are promised unlimited blessings by G–d in return for meticulously fulfilling the obligation of tithes. The sages interpret the words עד בלי די, normally translated as "never ending," to mean that one will become weary of exlaiming די, enough! (Taanit 9a) This is also alluded to in the blessing the Torah gave to the third partner in that camp, the tribe of Naftali, of whom it says in Deut. 33, 23, that he is: שבע רצון ומלא ברכת ה', "sated with favor and full of the Lord's blessing."
  We have accounted for the four letters in the name of G–d being represented in the four flags, which was the meaning of ובשם אלוקינו נדגול. I have explained earlier that G–d's love for Israel that places the flags of Israel on a higher level than the flags of the angels (who had inspired them to ask for these flags), is rooted in the fact that the souls of the Jewish people emanate from a position very close to the Essence of G–d Himself. What they wanted was that their worth should also be recognized in public; hence they had asked for the flags to be their emblems. They wanted to be seen to be equal to the ministering angels.
  [At this point the author reviews the various points he has made in the course of his commentary on these three Parshiyot so far, demonstrating that they all tie in with what is written here and explaining why it is written in this order. Ed.]
  
  Nasso
  
  נשא את ראש בני גרשון . This Parshah corresponds to the מחנה לויה, the encampment of the Levites. The counting of the Kehatites already was reported in Parshat Bamidbar, because the Priests were part of the Kehatites. Since they carried the Holy Ark on occasion, just as the Kehatites did most of the time, the latter were included in the מחנה שכינה, the encampment of the Priests. This Parshah however, deals exclusively with the camp of the Levites. It commences with the Gersonites since גרשון was the eldest of the sons of Levi and on his account all the Levites merited to take the place of the firstborn who had up to that time performed the priestly functions for the nation.
  Bamidbar Rabbah 6,1, commenting on Proverbs 3,15, "she is more precious than rubies," speaks of Kehat. Although we normally accord first rank to the natural firstborn (in this case Gershon), the order was reversed here since the Kehatites carried the Holy Ark which contained the Torah. When Proverbs talks about פנינים, the reference is to something that comes first, as we know from Ruth 4,7, וזאת לפנים בישראל. [The unusual spelling of the word in Proverbs as פניים, is the reason the Midrash explains it that way Ed.]So far the Midrash. 
  Another statement we find in the Midrash there is: "If someone whispers to you; was not Gershon the firstborn? Why did the Torah accord superior rank to Kehat and his descendants and counted the Gersonites only afterwards? – Answer such inquiry by pointing out that the Kehatites carried the Holy Ark which is the Holy of Holies, and because Aaron who performed service in the Holy of Holies was a descendant of Kehat." Gershon, by comparison, was holy, but not "holy of holies." In order to demonstrate that Gershon had not forfeited his status as the firstborn amongst his brothers, the Torah writes: "נשא את ראש בני גרשון". Just as the Torah employs the expression ראש, when it instructs the Kehatites to be counted, so it employs the same expression when the count of the Gersonites is to be taken. (This term is missing when the Merarites are being counted in 4,29). Seeing that the Torah uses the expression גם הם, "also them," when it introduces the count of the Gersonites, one might have interpreted this as proof that they are considered inferior to the Kehatites. 
  To prevent us thinking this, the Midrash makes the point that Aaron was descended from Kehat, i.e. that the Kehatites as such were not superior to the Gersonites. By saying this the Midrash heads off the question why the carrying of the Holy Ark had not been entrusted to the Gersonites. At the same time the Midrash could not avoid mentioning the fact that the Kehatites carried the Holy Ark, and merely give us the fact that Aaron was descended from Kehat as the reason the Kehatites were counted first. Aaron, after all, was only a descendant of Levi, not a son, and reversing the order of mentioning the sons of Levi therefore needed an additional justification. Since carrying the Holy Ark made the Levites partners with the priests, it is clear why the Midrash mentioned Aaron and not the more illustrious Moses as having descended from Kehat.
  Since I am already discussing this Midrash, I want to explain it in greater detail; by understanding it we can solve several difficulties in the text of the Torah dealing with the count. 1) When the Torah mentions the count of the Kehatites commencing in 4,1, G–d had addressed both Moses and Aaron and instructed them. When the count of the Gersonites is introduced in 4,21, G–d had instructed only Moses with this task. When the count of the Merarites is introduced in 4,29, we do not find that G–d gave any special instructions to anybody. Why?  2) When the Kehatites are counted the Torah says "למשפחותם לבית אבותם," whereas when the Gersonites are counted it says "לבית אבותם למשפחותם," the reverse order.  3) Why is the expression "גם הם" used altogether?, What does it add to our knowledge? If it does add to our knowledge, why was it not used when the Merarites were to be counted?
  All these questions are answered perfectly with the help of the Midrash quoted previously:  When counting the Kehatites, the Torah also mentions Aaron, seeing he was one of the reasons, the Kehatites were counted first. This point is reinforced by not making Aaron part of the instruction to count the Gersonites. Moses is mentioned specifically in order to point out the greatness of Gershon by saying "גם הם," they too shared in this greatness of the Kehatites. This was because they were descended from the firstborn of Levi. I have already mentioned that Gershon, by the very fact that he was the firstborn, was the catalyst that enabled all the Levites to take over the functions which had previously been reserved for the firstborn of every family among all the tribes.
  The reason that the Midrash quoted the verse from Proverbs 3,15, was to substantiate the value that we accord to a natural firstborn. It interprets the word "פנינים," as derived from "פנים," front, or face. The question arises why is it not spelled פנים then? Why do we need the letter "נ" twice in that word? Another question is how do we prove that Gershon had not lost his rank as a firstborn? After all, the fact remains that the Torah gave precedence to Kehat counting him first! This question is answered by the Midrash quoting this verse which had the double "נ" in the word פנים. It is just like saying that in this case two families both ranked as panim, first. We must remember that G–d's original plan was that the Torah should be given to Adam, and this was the whole reason why he had been created. We have explained all this when we discussed the verse in Genesis 1,26, "נעשה אדם" Adam had been the "firstborn" of all mankind, since he was the first human being ever. We also have Israel being called "אדם." This in turn means that Israel is called "firstborn" as we know from Exodus 4,22: "My firstborn son Israel." Here, however, the rank of the Levites as firstborn outranks that of Israel as a whole, since the Levites represent the רוח אדם, whereas the remainder of the tribes of Israel only represent the נפש אדם. We have discussed this concept previously. To make certain that we appreciate this point, the Torah writes concerning the tribe of Levi in Deut. 33,10: יורו משפטיך ליעקב ותורתך לישראל, "They will teach Your laws to Jacob, and Your instructions to Israel." This refers to the revealed Torah, the תורת האדם, the practical Torah, the commandments that either have to be fulfilled, or the transgressions that have to be avoided. However, the spiritual Torah is the true "firstborn," having been created two thousand years before the universe; it is the Torah alluded to on the tablets that the Kehatites were carrying in the Holy Ark. The tablets after all, were מעשה אלוקים המה, "were the handiwork of the Almighty," (Exodus 32,16) just like the "spiritual Torah" which had preceded the written Torah. This Torah then must be viewed as the real בכור, "firstborn." It preceded the Torah that was given to אדם to perform. The Kehatites were mentioned first because they carried the Holy Ark containing the tablets, i.e. the spiritual essence of the Torah. From that aspect the Kehatites deserved to be considered as the בכור. It now is clear why they were counted first. We view Gershon as the "firstborn" in matters that have to be performed in this material world, and Kehat as the "firstborn" in matters that are exclusively the domain of the spiritual world. The very concept of the distinction of being the firstborn is enhanced by our understanding these nuances in the way the Torah is written. 
  We now understand why the word פנים in Proverbs 3,15, is spelled with a double Nun. Solomon tells us that Torah, i.e. the spiritual philosophical aspect of it, is superior to the physical precedence a firstborn has over those born later. The second letter Nun in that word then explains why: namely because that part of Torah had itself preceded its functional part. This brings us to the meaning of the letter Mem, at the beginning of this "dual" word מפנינים. For the first meaning of the word פנים, the letter Mem is a simple comparative, i.e. "more precious than." The function of the same letter Mem with the second Nun in that word, is "as a result of" in the sense of "since," i.e. since that part of the Torah had come into existence sooner than the functional part of the Torah.
  From all the above, it is clear that the Kehatites who are mentioned in Parshat Bamidbar are part of the כהנים, i.e. the מחנה שכינה, whereas the Gersonites discussed in Parshat Nasso are part of the מחנה לויה, which are the רוח אדם. This is to tell us that the damage done by the sin of "Adam," is capable of rehabilitation.
  We have previously discussed the fact that anyone whose soul, נשמה, is rooted in the very highest regions of the Celestial Spheres, in the עולם האצילות, can never be the cause of sin. If however, his soul is only on the level of רוח, then he may become the source of sin through the seduction of the serpent which was affected by the spirit of envy, which in turn brings in its wake the spirit of טומאה, impurity. King David constantly begged that the Holy Spirit, רוח הקדושה, as well as the spirit of wisdom and understanding may inhabit him, and that the prophecy of Zachariah 13,2, where G–d says "I will remove the spirit of impurity from Earth," be fulfilled in the future.
  It is appropriate then that the function of the Levites and their service in the Tabernacle between the ages of thirty and fifty should be recorded here. This number is symbolic of the רוח הקודש, Holy Spirit, with which the Levites were equipped, which enabled them to cleave to the great and holy Name of G–d, the Ineffable 4-lettered Name. The number three alludes to the letters vav and heh in that holy name, since 6 times 5 equals 30. The number five alludes to the letters yud and heh in that name, since 10 times 5 equals 50. You will find this number mentioned in the Tziyoni, when he discusses the name נח, and I have mentioned it in that connection.
  As a result of these considerations, you will find that what is described as the עבודת הקודש (7,9), performed by the Levites is in reality service performed while under the influence of the Holy Spirit. This is why the Torah almost immediately afterwards commands that the spirit of טומאה must be removed from the camp (5,2). There are three different degrees of impurity; those infected by it must be removed from all or some of the three camps. Someone affected only by the spirit of impurity caused through contact with the dead, must leave only the מחנה שכינה. A זב, a person suffering from regular seminal discharge, needs to leave the מחנה לויה also, whereas a person afflicted with the visible skin eczema צרעת must also leave the camp of the Israelites. A person who has incurred טומאת מת has not really been guilty of anything. He suffers from the fact that since as the ideal human being he should have lived forever, the mere contact with death should remind him of the mortality not only of the departed but also of himself. Had man cleaved to G–d who is eternal, the decree of death would not have been issued, as the Torah reminds us when it says ואתך הדבקים בה', חיים כולכם היום, "You who have cleaved to G–d, are all alive as of this day" (Deut 4,4). Anyone who is in the מחנה שכינה is in an area which is the source of the blessing G–d had commanded, and which makes eternal life possible. Now, due to the sin of "Adam," when the body became totally physical, death itself has become טוב מאד, "very good," meaning that by means of "death," which is something precious in the eyes of G–d, man's soul can be salvaged for Eternal Life. The reference is to Psalms 116,15, where the death of the pious is described as "precious" in the eyes of G–d; death is the gateway to Eternal Life. Even thus there is a brief interval when body and soul part, the transition of even a perfectly pious individual is interrupted. This is why anyone who has been in some kind of touch with the dead has to leave the מחנה שכינה until he is purified.
  The impurity of a person suffering from seminal discharge is of a different nature; his own body is its source. This too is the result of what happened with the original serpent, since the latter polluted man as a species. This is the prime reason why we experience impurity when any seminal discharge occurs or when a woman menstruates, even when such discharge is a normal bodily function, not the sign of disease. Had man never sinned, this very semen would have been considered as something sacred and would most certainly not have caused impurity. As it is, the Mishnah describes such semen as "an evil smelling drop" (Avot 3,1). This is why such a person must also leave the מחנה לויה the second of the camps. There is a way to avoid this impurity: if one sanctifies oneself at the time of engaging in sexual intercourse with one's spouse. As a result of such conduct one's semen becomes totally absorbed, so that not a drop of it is lost, which would have caused טומאת קרי, impurity through seminal discharge.
  The person suffering from צרעת, however, is afflicted with the essence of the impurity, and there is no way for him to avoid it. Hence he has to leave all three camps as long as he is afflicted. Such impurity in any Jew is of the kind that infects even the נפש, i.e. part of the camp of the Israelites. This is in accordance with Proverbs 21,23 שומר פיו ולשונו שומר מצרת נפשו – that "he who guards his mouth and tongue, keeps his soul from troubles." The Zohar suggests that the reading of מצרת is equivalent to מצרעת, i.e. from that skin eczema. Our sages are agreed that evil gossip is a principal cause of this affliction. Classic examples are Miriam (Numbers 12,10), and Moses (Exodus 4,6), both of whom were punished for having made inappropriate comments about Moses or Israel respectively. We observe many slanderers in our day who are never afflicted with this disease; this makes the matter even worse for them, since they have already forfeited the part of the נפש that would be stricken, and they are therefore no longer capable of being rehabilitated through that disease and the subsequent purification process. The מצורע, at any rate, has to leave all three camps. 
  We must always keep in mind that the Sanctuary on this earth is "opposite" a Sanctuary in the Celestial Regions, and that expulsion of a person from the precincts of the Sanctuary in our world signifies merely that he or his soul would not be allowed entry into the sanctuary in those "Celestial" Regions. Just as impure elements have a constant desire to penetrate into areas reserved for the pure, . similarly it is the dream of the handmaid to inherit the position of her mistress. Israel as a whole is holy by definition, careful to maintain its holiness and the sanctity of its camps. 
  Having said this, we understand how the following legislation in 5,5, is a natural sequence to what has been discussed by the Torah so far. The words מכל חטאת האדם, have to be understood as "any of the sins which are the result of the original sin committed by Adam." Ever since that time, the evil urge has become a "resident" within man and caused man to commit trespasses against the will of G–d, i.e. למעל מעל. The Talmud Berachot 35a states that anyone who derives benefit from this world without having first recited a benediction thanking G–d is as if he had stolen from holy property belonging to G–d. When Adam ate from the tree of knowledge he did not only do this, but worse.
  The metaphysical significance of all this is that the world was created with the letter ב, in the word Bereshit, which is a veiled reference to ברכה, blessing, benediction. Since Adam had preferred to follow the advice of the serpent, the source of curse, he was cursed himself, and with him the whole universe. Our sages express this by saying that the serpent cohabited with Eve, and infected her with its pollutant. This is the reason why the next section in our Parshah deals with the סוטה, the wife suspected of infidelity, and why the husband's feelings are described as ועבר עליו רוח קנאה. I have already described the meaning of רוח. When the Torah speaks about רוח קנאה it refers to the spirit of impurity with which man has become infested from the time Adam observed the serpent having sexual intercourse with his wife (Shabbat 146a). The Kabbalists pointed out that the dichotomy that the serpent caused in this "lower" world, the potential discord between man and his wife, had parallel results in the Celestial Regions, where the matches are made (who is to marry whom down here on earth). Originally, Adam had been created male and female, or, in the words of Bereshit Rabbah 8,1, דו פרצופי, with two faces in opposite directions, their common back not being visible until after Eve had been separated from him. After that separation, man and his potential partner remain united as one in the Celestial Regions. When the serpent polluted Eve, all this changed. Rashi already comments that the use of the word איש, איש, twice in 5,12, indicates that the trespass committed is twofold, a) against one's partner in marriage on earth, b) against the "איש מלחמה" in the Celestial Regions, i.e. against G–d. This is so because she tore asunder what even in the heavens formerly belonged together. The "pollutant" that the serpent impregnated Eve with, is a spiritual concept, i.e. Eve's counterpart in the Heavenly Regions became polluted. Pardes Rimonim already warns against our thinking that the קליפה, impurity, actually penetrated the holy regions of the Heavens. What is meant is that the complaint, or accusation of the forces of impurity that were leveled against the human beings now became "audible" in those Celestial Regions. Since it is incumbent on the true judge to dispense true justice, G–d's primary inclination to dispense חסד, kindness, was thwarted and He was "forced" to vacate the throne of Mercy and move over to the throne of Justice, and thereby restrain some of the largess He had intended to bestow upon those who cleave to Him. This whole episode is known as the כניסת הקליפה בתוך הקדושה, the penetration of the "peel" into the domain of sanctity. I have dealt with this at length in my introduction Toldot Adam. This then is what is at the root of the words "the spirit of jealousy overcame him, since she had become defiled, etc." The Torah depicts the effect of what happened when Eve had been seduced by the serpent. When the Torah continues with the apparent alternative of והיא לא נטמאה, "she had not become defiled," the obvious reference is to the "Eve" of the Celestial Regions, the spiritual counterpart of womanhood which could not actually become defiled; actual impurity cannot enter those regions.
  The Priest next makes her swear the שבועת האלה, "the curse of adjuration," that same curse stemming from his original encounter with the serpent. When G–d fashioned man, He took from the dust around the earthen altar, and thus vapor rose to irrigate that dust, so that man was formed from dust and water. When man became corrupt and sinned, he became a vessel made of earthenware on account of this dust contained in the material he was made of. The water that was also part of him, made him liable to impurity, since we have a halachic rule that water makes something capable of becoming impure in the first degree, ראשון לטומאה. This is why the סוטה is given water to drink out of a vessel made of earthenware. 
  Inasmuch as man is made of dust, his soul should by rights have been subservient to anything or anybody, as is the nature of dust. On the other hand, due to the fact that he was also made of water whose origin is in the sky, and which flows and spreads in all directions, this element contributed to his being "garbed" in the desire for honor, his greed and his envy. These elements are the cause of man's expulsion from his world. To remind us of this, water, halachically speaking, is the catalyst that causes impurity to be contracted.
  In the Talmud Shabbat 95b Ravah enumerates five ways in which an earthenware vessel can be purified of its impurity once it has contracted it. 1) If it is a shard and develops a hole big enough to allow liquids to escape from it, it will no longer confer impurity on anything it contains. 2) If the hole is big enough to allow liquids to enter it from the outside, it has lost enough of its function to make it unfit to store water for the red heifer in it. 3) If the hole is large enough to allow a small root to grow through it, it will no longer confer impurity to seedlings contained by such a vessel. 4) If the hole is large enough to permit olives to fall through it, it would no longer confer impurity on olives deposited in it. 5) If the hole is large enough to permit pomegranates to fall through, such an earthenware vessel has totally lost all its former impurity. We view man as a vessel capable of housing the שכינה, the Holy Presence of G–d. At the outset, man was a כלי שרת, a holy vessel fit for service in the sanctuary. By his sin, he became turned into a mere earthen vessel which can only be rehabilitated by its own destruction. This is the meaning of the verse in Psalms 51,19, that "G–d will not despise a contrite and broken heart." The first definition Rava gave us for partial rehabilitation of an earthen vessel is comparable to the principle of סור מרע ועשה טוב, "switch from doing evil and start doing good" (Psalms 34,15)! Expressed halachically, this means that impure waters are now able to drain from such a vessel. The second stage, that of עשה טוב, do good, is reached when outside waters can enter the earthen vessel. Concerning that stage, Ezekiel 36,25, says: "I shall sprinkle pure water upon you, so that you be cleansed from all your contamination, etc."
  The third stage, that when the hole is big enough to allow a small root to grow through it, signifies that we are now dealing with the עפר, earth, part of man, which causes all materialism, and grossness. Nonetheless, even עפר contains elements of spirituality, in fact it is its very root and essence. It is this essence which harbors the potential of growth something rooted in earth but ascending heavenwards. The same applies to the raw material man is made of. Man's growth potential is rooted in his raw material, עפר, and that is why it is described as "a small root." This raw material contains a "small" root, i.e. the soul, which is the root that, though physically small and invisible, has the value of a great root. When the sages of the Talmud call the disputations of Abbaye and Rava as "minor," they do so when comparing them to matters involving מעשה מרכבה, the carriers of G–d's entourage. Abbaye and Rava concern themselves with the practical observance of the laws of the Torah, i.e. something essentially physical, whereas the מעשה מרכבה is something essentially spiritual. Both matters, in fact, are very great indeed. Our Rabbis already debated at great length, whether תלמוד i.e. study or מעשה, practical performance, is of greater importance (Kidushin 40). The Zohar in Parshat Tetzaveh describes Exodus 27,20: "Pure olive oil beaten to produce the eternal light," as referring to Torah study, since Torah provides spiritual illumination. The olive is the size mentioned by Ravah in his fourth example above of an earthen vessel that needs to be rehabilitated from impurity. Olive oil dispenses physical light, whereas Torah study dispenses spiritual light. It is in the nature of Torah study to crush man's physical strength, and he is left as crushed as the olive when pressed to produce its oil. Finally, Rava's fifth example, a hole the size of pomegrantes. This is a veiled reference to the actual מעשים, performance of Torah commandments in practice. Israelites are described as "full of מצות, just like the pomegrantes" (Berachot 57a). So here we have a hint of the spiritual implications of the הלכה concerning the ritual purification of an earthen vessel which has become impure. This corresponds to the five levels of spirituality man could possess, namely, in descending order נפש, רוח, נשמה, חיה, יחידה. Our Rabbis have this in mind when they mention that the soul is similar to G–d in five respects (Berachot 10a).
  When the Torah in 5,15, describes the offering to be brought on behalf of the Sotah as מנחת קנאות הוא מנחת זכרון מזכרת עון, "it is a meal offering of jealousy, a meal offering of remembrance which recalls trespass," the reference is to the trespass committed by Adam which had been due to jealousy. When the Sotah has to respond by saying twice "Amen" (5,22), she does so because the Priest who pronounces the oath applies the principle of גלדול שבועה, that if a person is required to swear an oath, the opportunity may be used to make that person also swear an oath concerning other matters which by themselves would not have warranted an oath. Unless there is an absolute need for it, we are extremely reluctant to utter the name of G–d which is part of the oath. Our Rabbis have made a sacred rule based on what is written here (Sotah 9). 
  Had Adam not sinned through jealousy and thereby made his wife Eve a Sotah, G–d would only have created new souls, and the whole idea of a soul being reincarnated in another body for a second or third round of life on this earth would not have been necessary. The entire גלגול would then have been restricted to the Celestial Spheres. Our Rabbis understand this process of גלגול נשמות, transmigration of souls, as beginning with the soul being sworn to act as commanded by G–d before entering its first body.
  ואם לא נטמאה האשה וטהורה היא, "If the woman has not defiled herself, but is pure, she will remain unharmed and able to retain seed" (5,28). Why would the Torah have to add the words "she is pure," since this is obvious "if she had not defiled herself?" The deeper meaning is that if someone had defiled himself and subsequently purified himself through remorse and whatever purifying process prescribed, the Torah promises us that such "purity" is also subject to its blessing; repentance is such a great moral accomplishment that it turns erstwhile debits into merits (Yoma 86b).
  The Torah next deals with the regulations governing the behavior of the Nazirite. Our sages in Sotah 2a, state that the reason why this paragraph follows the paragraph dealing with the Sotah is that anyone who has seen the latter in her state of disgrace may decide to abstain from drinking wine in order to fortify himself against the temptation of adultery. He will abstain from anything connected with the fruit of the grapevine. The Zohar on our verse explains that we are dealing with the mystical dimension of the fruit of man, i.e. his deeds. It is taken for granted that the fruit Adam/Eve ate from was the fruit of the grapevine, that in fact she squeezed out the grapes. This seems based on Deut. 32,32, ענבמו ענבי רוש, "its grapes are grapes of poison.” Wine, grapes and grape juice are all perceived as deriving from the "left" line of the diagram depicting the ten emanations (the passive, feminine side). Its particular source is בינה, which is also described as יין המשומר, wine that has been preserved for a long time. We know that שכר is also from that side, because it stems from grapes. Crapes in turn collect all this (poison) from the "higher” emanations, since  they are a simile for the emanation מלכות. The descent on the left side from בינה to מלכות, is of course, via דין, (also known as גבורה). This is the tree with which Eve sinned. If both “wet” grapes and “dry” grapes are forbidden to the Nazirite, this is because the former represent the attribute of דין קשה, the 'hard' attribute of Justice, whereas the latter represent מדת הדין הרפה, the softer attribute of Justice.
  The Torah writes in connection with the Nazirite, כי נזר אלוקיו על ראשו, "for the crown of his G–d is on his head."Neither a נזיר nor a כהן, may defile himself through contact with a dead corpse, in order to retain his status as being קדוש, holy. The regulations that apply to the Nazirite however, are stricter than those that apply to the Priest. The Priest attained the status of holiness only by being anointed with holy oil, whereas the Nazirite attained this status merely through his vow. This needs explanation. Once we explain this, the introductory words of the Torah איש כי יפליא נדר לה', "if someone expresses the special desire to vow a vow of Nazirdom to G–d,” may also become clearer. The meaning of the word מופלא, is "hidden, concealed." A similar example in the Torah is Deut.30,11, "It is not concealed from you, not inaccessible." 
  The Torah is telling us that if only Adam had not sinned, his body would have been as holy as the כתנות אור, the garments of light that man was meant to wear in Gan Eden. Under the circumstances, these garments have become כתנות עור, garments of skin and flesh, something physical. As long as Adam did not need those garments, he was placed in גן עדן, to help preserve it since he was not a stranger, i.e. זר, in that environment. Once he had become forced to garb himself in garments made of materials that come out of the earth he had become a stranger in that environment, and this situation did not change until Aaron became anointed by holy anointing oil as High Priest. Compare what I have written earlier in Parshat Tetzaveh, concerning Moses performing priestly functions dressed only in a white tunic instead of in the High Priest's garments. This meant that he had never been a זר, stranger, at all; the whole house filled with light at the time he was born (Exodus 2,2, as quoted in Sotah 12). Moses' unblemished condition continued until, in the end, he himself radiated light, as we know from Exodus 34,29. This is as if he had been garbed in the כתנות אור, that we described as the state of man in his innocence in גן עדן. This is what was meant by the white tunic in which he performed the sacrificial service. It meant he did not need to do anything to rehabilitate himself in order to achieve the state of holiness necessary for a High Priest to perform sacrificial service, זרות, alienation, was a condition that did not come into existence till after the כתנות אור, garments woven out of light, had been withdrawn, to be kept in hiding until the future, the time of the Messiah, just as the original light G–d had created at the beginning of the creative process had also been "hidden" due to man's sin (Compare Tanchuma Noach 3). Moses did not have to wait for that light to re-appear.
  The Nazirite who has separated himself from wine, etc, has demonstrated his intention to remain in this "hidden" domain, in which Adam was at home before he sinned. In other words, he wants to protect himself against the temptation of greed which causes man to lose his "garments of light." Since the origin of man's fruit, deeds, are anchored in the domain called גפן, he declares himself as abstaining from that source to the best of his ability. Since it is impossible to remain on such a high level indefinitely, he declares a period of time that his vow is to be in force. Since he cannot divorce himself from the needs of the body altogether, (for otherwise he would die) and since he has been commanded by the Torah to keep his soul and body together, anything that promotes such continued life is not considered as pandering to his תאוה, greed or lust.
  We find that he is commanded to let his hair grow and at the conclusion of the term of his vow to shave it off. There is no doubt that excessive hair or total hairlessness both deprive him of the typical appearance of a human being. Such a condition helps to minimize normal human appetites, such as greed and lust. Hair carefully coiffed, tends to reinforce such human desires. We find in Nazir 4b, that Simon the Just, who had officiated as High Priest for eighty years, stated that only once in all those years did he eat of the offering that a Nazirite who had defiled himself had been forced to offer. He relates that once a good looking young man from the South had come to him, and when asked why he had allowed his hair to look so disheveled and overgrown, the young man had told him that he had assumed the vows of a Nazirite after having had a glimpse of his reflection in the water. He found himself so good looking that he had become sexually aroused. He realized at that time that this was a ruse of the evil urge, and therefore let his hair grow wild in order to preserve his innocence and future in the Hereafter. When Simon the Just heard the reason this young man had adopted the Nazirite vows, he kissed him and said: "May there be many more like you whose motivation in adopting these vows is as commendable. Concerning the likes of you the Torah has written: איש כי יפליא לנדור נדר לה'." This is what the Torah refers to when it describes a נזיר as having נזר אלוקיו עליו, "having the crown of his G–d on his head." Such a person has entered the domain that Adam was in before he sinned, before he became a זר, when he too still wore that "crown". At that time his closeness to G–d was such that it did not require something זר, i.e. an intermediary, such as holy anointing oil. This status, however, is maintained only during the currency of his vow; afterwards the Nazirite reverts to being an ordinary mortal like the rest of us and this "crown" is withdrawn from him. He therefore has to bring certain offerings to atone for reverting to a lower level of sanctity, to the condition that Adam/Man has been in since the first sin. This, then, is the reason the Nazir has to bring sin offerings.
  The Torah now continues with the blessings the Priests are to confer on the people (6,23-27). I have already mentioned earlier that the universe was created with the letter ב, which symbolizes ברכה, blessing. The presence of this blessing on an ongoing basis was spoiled due to the cursed activity of the serpent, which in turn led to the situation where ban איש או אשה כי יעשו מכל חטאת האדם, of "man or woman who commit any sins due to the all pervading influence of Adam" (5,6). It is Aaron's function to restore the natural state of the world as it was prior to sin. We have elaborated on the fact that Aaron was the תקון, the "repair, or correction," of Adam. When the Torah introduces the blessings with the words: "כה תברכו," the word כה, whose numerical value is 25, refers to the 25th of Elul, which is the date on which G–d commenced creating the universe, according to the view of Rabbi Eliezer (Vayikra Rabbah 29,1). A further allusion to this is the fact that G–d commenced His creation by saying: "יהי אור", let there be light, the word יהי having the numerical value 25.
  When the Princes consecrated the Tabernacle with their sacrifices, this was equivalent to the universe being consecrated anew. The Tabernacle is the world in miniature, and the offerings of the Princes correspond to the evolution of the twelve "worlds," i.e. the 12 possible permutations of the Ineffable Name. By the use of this Name three times in the blessings, we arrive at the number 216, i.e. 72 times 3. We refer to the calculations made in our commentary on Parshat Bamidbar. When the Torah concludes ושמו את שמי על בני ישראל “They shall place My name on the children of Israel, we observe that the first letters in the words על בני, equal 72. The author demonstrates how the 12 צירופים are actually 24, based on the Pardes Rimonim, who explains that the number 12 has to be doubled to allow for both the male and female aspect in that Holy Name. The numerical value of ישראל plus the number 72, i.e. the first letters in the words על בני is 613, the implication being that Torah, the Holy Name of G–d, and Israel, are really one and the same, when Israel is at its best.
  The root of all these considerations are the four letters in the ineffable name of G–d. The four חיות described in Ezekiel's famous vision in (Ezekiel chapter one) as supporting G–d's Throne all derive from that concept. The idea underlying the four camps of the Israelites are the twelve constellations, מזלות. Six of these are viewed as "rising" and the other six as "descending." They are represented by the offerings of the princes, i.e. "six covered wagons and twelve oxen" (7,3). Nachshon, leader of the tribe of Yehudah, was the first to present his offering, on the first day of Nissan, the month which is under the zodiac sign of the lamb. The word וקרבנו, indicates that his offering was related to others. Since the Torah first mentioned the word ראשון, the problem is that the conjunctive letter ו is out of place. When we describe a "circle", (something that recurs constantly) i.e. the 12 signs of the zodiac however, there is really no such thing as "ראשון," first. The "silver bowl" mentioned in verse 13 as part of that offering represents the globe. The weight of 130 shekel given for this bowl is an allusion to the 130 years that Adam lived until he sired Seth (Genesis 5,3). The Midrash Hagadol and others have a number of interesting observations on what occurred during these 130 years. Many of these comments concern themselves with Adam spending those years atoning for the harm he had previously caused in this world. Every one of those 12 princes had his own personal considerations, as Bamidbar Rabbah 12, explains. This is why their identical offerings are listed in the Torah separately. The common denominator of their intentions was to restore the equilibrium in the world which had been upset when Adam sinned. The completion of the Tabernacle here on earth caused the establishment of the corresponding Sanctuary in the Celestial Regions. Their offerings were to correspond to the patriarchs and matriarchs who are the pillars of the universe.
  We have a clue to this in verse 7,84: "זאת חנוכת המזבח ביום המשח אותו." "This is the consecration of the altar on the day it was anointed." It is strange that the verse should commence with the feminine זאת, whereas it concludes with the masculine "אותו." Why did the Torah not simply say "זה חינוך המזבח ביום המזח אותו?" The reason for this unusual combination is that we view the Tabernacle on earth as essentially feminine, i.e. receiving its input from the Tabernacle in the Celestial Regions which is viewed as masculine. The relationship between the two is analogous to the relationship of man and wife. In the future, everything will be masculine as our sages have said, because G–d Himself will build the Third Temple. This is the meaning of the שיר חדש new song, (masculine) with which we will greet that event (compare Psalms 33,3, Isaiah 42,10). At that time, G–d will "lower" the Temple from the Celestial Regions and establish it here on earth. This is what the Zohar says in Parshat Pinchas where he adds that this is the way it should have been after the Exodus from Egypt, a plan thwarted only on account of the sin of the golden calf. In the messianic era, however, this original intention will be carried out.
  
  A difficulty remains. How could the Torah describe the consecration as occurring “ביום,” i.e. on a certain day, when we see in effect that the consecration was spread over a period of twelve days until all the Princes had completed bringing their respective offerings? The answer is that all of the Princes concurred with the sentiments expressed by Nachshon on the opening day of these offerings. We have a rule that different prophets express identical thoughts or messages in their own personal style. The same was true here. The Torah wanted to emphasize that all the tribes were equal in the eyes of G–d, and therefore all their respective representatives were viewed as if they had all offered their offerings on the first of Nissan.
  When Aaron observed that it was the Princes who had consecrated the world, although he had been put in the place of Adam, and had not consecrated it, he felt aggrieved, as the Midrash tells us when it tries to explain the reason why the section dealing with the candelabrum and its lighting follows that of the offerings of the Princes (compare Rashi on 8,2). G–d reassured Aaron at that time, telling him that his share would be greater than theirs, since he would kindle as well as prepare the lights of the holy candelabrum daily, evenings and mornings. So far the Midrash. Nachmanides raises the question why G–d chose the candelabrum and lighting it to console Aaron with, why had G–d not consoled him with the fact that he was chosen to offer the incense on the Golden Altar mornings and evenings? After all, the Torah itself in Deut. 33,10, commends him for offering the incense on the altar? It also enumerates a number of other offerings that were the exclusive prerogative of Aaron (or other High Priests), and only Aaron was allowed in the Holy of Holies.
  Nachmanides pursues the subject at length and provides answers.
  According to my approach what Aaron was interested in was to provide education, i.e. consecration for the world. G–d said to him concerning this desire of his, that his share would be greater than that of the Princes, since he would kindle the lights, a reference to the Original Light, the first act of creation, something which included all future creatures. Now this light in the Tabernacle would correspond to the light of the seven days of Creation. This is why the Torah emphasises that the seven lights of the candelabrum should provide light (8,2).
  Nachmanides' commentary, interpreting this as referring to the lights of חנוכה, etc, is also most appropriate. 
  
  Beha'alotcha
  
  This Parshah deals primarily with the camp of the Israelites. This is strongly suggested by the statement in 8,6: קח את הלוים מתוך בני ישראל וטהרת אותם, "Take the Levites from amongst the Israelites, and purify them." Since the Levites acted as the atonement for the Israelites, they were commanded to place their hands on them (8,10). They were then able to atone for the sin of the golden calf which Israel had made and which the firstborn had worshipped, as Rashi points out on verse 7 in the name of Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan. It follows that the sanctity of the Levites caused a degree of sanctity to be bestowed on the Israelites. This is why the Israelites are mentioned five times in 8,19. Rashi explains that this number corresponds to the five books of the Torah and that it underlines how beloved the Israelites were in the eyes of G–d. This quintuple belovedness refers to the five parts of the soul of the Jewish people, i.e. the נשמה, רוח, נפש, חיה, יחידה, that we discussed in Parshat Nasso. The Levites are perceived as the messengers or agents of the Israelites, and we have a halachic ruling that a man's messenger has equal standing in law to the man who has appointed him as such.
  The paragraph then tells us that the camp of the Israelites had become purified of the remnants of the sin of the golden calf and was now a holy camp. There follows the paragraph dealing with details of the observance of a פסח שני, a "second Passover," i.e. a Passover for those who had been genuinely unable to observe the Passover on the original date due to no fault of their own. When Israel served the golden calf, they in effect exchanged their zodiac sign of the ram for the zodiac sign of the bull. This was due to the mixed multitude of Egyptians who had accompanied them out of Egypt and had seduced them. Those people had originally served the sign of Aries (ram), but due to the defeat of the Egyptian nation who had up to then worshiped that sign, they now chose the next constellation, i.e. Taurus, the bull. This is why the פסח שני, second Passover, has to be observed in the month of lyar, which is the month of the sign Taurus. By observing the Passover in that month they declared that they had abandoned any vestige of worshiping that sign. In fact it demonstrated that the whole idea of worshiping zodiac signs was bankrupt, and that they had been weaned from it. This is what Amos 9,1 may have referred to when he said: הך הכפתור וירעשו הסיפים וכו', "Smite the lintel so that the posts may shake, etc." These wicked opportunists, the ערב אב that Moses allowed to join the Jewish people, were not only wicked but also very foolish. They should have realized that if their time honored horoscope had been discredited, any new horoscopic constellation they would adopt as their celestial protector would be even less effective.
  There is another mystical aspect to this matter. The "second" Passover is similar to the original Passover in that it too teaches the uselessness of the zodiac signs as a force that helps man. Both dates demonstrate the uselessness or defeat of the sign of the Aries. The original date of Passover corresponded to the date when the sign of Aries commences to dominate the sky, whereas the date of the "second" Passover coincides with the date that the sign of the ram moves to the sidelines.
  This is hinted at in Exodus 13,4, היום אתם יוצאים בחודש האביב, "Today you are leaving, in the month of spring." The word "today" in this context seems superfluous. I have heard that the meaning is that on that day the sign of the Aries begins its ascendancy, signifying to Israel and to Egypt its helplessness against Israel. This is stressed since the appearance of that sign does not always coincide with this date. Sometimes it appears a day sooner, sometimes a day later. The Torah emphasizes that in that year the appearance coincided with the date of Passover, i.e. on the fifteenth of the month. The end of its dominance in the sky therefore, was on the 14th of lyar. Though this is not typical of most years, the determining consideration is the commencement, the root, as I explained elsewhere. Normally, Aries commences on the day of the spring equinox. In the year of the Exodus the sign of the ram took up its position in the sky starting on the fifteenth of Nissan. As a result of all this the 15th of ניסן and the 15th of אייר share something significant, so that it is logical that the observance of the "second" Passover should be fixed to occur on that date.
  The paragraph describing the details of the פסח שני, alludes to the מחנה ישראל camp of Israel in accordance with what I have written earlier in my introduction to these three פרשיות. I had then described "the camp of Israel," as an allusion to the נפש, i.e. "soul," of the Jewish people. This is demonstrated by the introductory verse ויהי אנשים אשר היו טמאים לנפש אדם, "There were some men who had been impure through contact with the soul of a human being (Adam), etc." We have a tradition in the name of the Arizal, that Nadav and Avihu had been part of the נפש of אדם הראשון. These men whom the Torah describes as having been defiled through contact with נפש אדם are Mishael and Eltzafan who had carried the bodies of Nadav and Avihu out of the Sanctuary (Leviticus 10,4). This is the reason the Torah repeats here in 9,10, איש איש כי יהיה טמא לנפש אדם או בדרך רחוקה, וכו' The meaning is that whether someone is impure due to the present state of the נפש, such as Mishael and Eltzafan, or due to causes far distant in time such as the נפש of original "Adam", such as in the case of Mishael and Eltzafan, the result is similar.. The reason there is a dot over the letter ה, in the word רחוקה is that though it is to be understood literally it also alludes to what we have just described. 
  The Zohar points out that this is one of ten instances in the Torah where we find such "dots." The common denominator in all those instances is that they all allude to something that is רחוק מן הדרך, i.e. the meaning of בדרך רחוקה, is that something is spiritually distant from the path that Israel is supposed to take. As a result, such an Israelite has defiled himself to such a degree that his impurity reaches heavenwards. According to the Zohar then the word נפש refers to the effect of this defilement which does not yet reach the Celestial Regions. If such a person is בדרך רחוקה however, it is more serious, since he has estranged himself from the domain of holiness. In such an event, if he wants to rehabilitate himself, he must observe the "second" Passover in the second month. So far the comments of the Zohar. I believe that my own approach is quite similar.
  The paragraph dealing with the construction of the trumpets and when they are to be blown (10,1-10), describes an "awakening," a recipe how to dispose of the forces of קליפות, the negative forces rampant in the universe, the evil urge. We know from our sages that the blowing of the Shofar on New Year's day is meant to "confuse" Satan, to frighten him into realization that Israel prepares to do penitence (Rosh Hashanah 14). For this reason, the trumpets were blown daily in the Holy Temple, since it is not enough only to offer sacrifices, one must awaken oneself to remorse, confession, etc, in short also do תשובה. This is true even of the יום שמחתכם ומועדיכם, "the day of your joy, or your fixed holidays," since on such occasions a person is apt to relax his usual standards, and the evil urge is more likely to cause him to sin in some fashion. The need for repentance when war comes to our our land is even more pronounced, since success in battle depends on one's being in G–d's good graces, seeing He is the only reliable source of our salvation. Hence the Torah requires the blowing of the trumpets on such occasions. 
  The words הצר הצורר אתכם, in 10,9, are a fairly clear allusion to the evil urge, seeing there is no other foe that bothers us as much as Satan. We have further support for this view in the unusual construction in verse 9, which speaks about וכי תבואו מלחמה בארצכם, "When war will come to your land." Why is the word תבואו in the plural? We would have expected instead וכי תבוא The allusion here is to the ongoing struggle between man and the evil urge. Sometimes man gains the upper hand in this struggle, at other times the forces of Satan gain ascendancy. At any rate both are constantly involved in a state of war. This is why the Torah uses the plural here. Whenever the community is called upon to perform a collective act such as to come to an assembly or to get ready to journey on it is important that they perform those acts by dedicating themselves to fulfil G–d's commands. The sound of the trumpets then is the rallying cry that helps every Israelite concentrate on what is expected of him. Such dedication is required both at the commencement of an activity and at its conclusion, therefore the Torah repeats על פי ה' יסעו, ועל פי ה' יחנו, "they would journey at the command of G–d, and they would make camp at the command of G–d," in 9,18, whereas in 9,23, we have the same instructions in the reverse order, i.e. על פי ה' יחנו, ועל פי ה' יסעו. The Torah informed us that the departure and the arrival at a site were motivated by the same intentions, namely to carry out G–d's will.
  The Torah now resumes its narrative of the Israelites' journeys from Mount Sinai, the first such journey having as its objective entrance into the Holy Land, which substitutes for the original גן עדן into which original Adam had been placed. This was in line with the promise recorded in Ezekiel 36,35, concerning the future: "This very land which was desolate has become a Garden of Eden." The advantages of ארץ ישראל are described in the next paragraph (10,29), when חובב בן רעואל in, Moses's father-in-law, is invited to remain with the Jewish people with the unusual words "we are travelling towards the place of which G–d has said: "I will give it to you." The difficulty in this episode is that originally Moses had told his father-in-law that if he would remain with the people, they would let him share the good that G–d had said that He would bestow on the people. Yitro had declined this offer, saying he preferred to return to his own land and birthplace. When Moses repeats his invitation, he describes this טוב, goodness, that G–d would bestow upon the people as something that they in turn would bestow on him (10,32). In what way was Moses' second invitation designed to sway his father-in-law? What did he offer that he had not offered previously? Another difficulty is the repetition of the word טוב אשר ייטיב, "the good which G–d will do good?" A third difficulty is the clumsy wording in verse 29. It would have sufficed to speak of כי ה' דבר טוב על ישראל, "for G–d has spoken well concerning the future of Israel." Why did Moses have to say first "which G–d had said "I will give it to you?"
  Berachot 5a tells us in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai that G–d had given three precious gifts to Israel, but that the acquisition of each one of them involved painful experiences, יסורים. The three gifts referred to are: "Torah, the land of Israel, and the Hereafter, i.e. an ideal world on this earth." This statement is difficult in itself, since we perceive (at least halachically) that anyone who gives something away is motivated by a generous impulse, i.e. הנותן בעין יפה נותן. Why then should these gifts be attainable only through suffering? (Baba Batra 53a), This is not really a difficulty, since the very sufferings a person experiences refine his body and enable him to achieve closeness to G–d, דבקות השם. The type of יסורים experienced, are in the nature of making us appreciate the gift even more after we have endured the suffering leading up to it. The slavery of the Israelites in Egypt was such a prelude. Once having endured this bondage they would find the yoke of Torah so much easier to bear by comparison that they would welcome it as a gift. This is the reason the Torah is replete with statements such as אשר הוצאתיך מבית עבדים, "who has taken you out of the house of bondage." 
  Similarly, before Israel received the gift of the Holy Land, they underwent a period of tiresome wandering in the desert dependent on the largess of G–d on a daily basis. The desert experience was a sample of the sanctity of ארץ ישראל. Our sages said that the Tabernacle itself was also called מקדש, Temple (Eruvin 2a). This may account for the fact that whenever the Israelites sinned, punishment followed at once. In line with this is the statement that no one was allowed to spend the night in Jerusalem while in a state of sin, i.e. his sin had to be atoned for before nightfall through immediate יסורים, afflictions of some kind (Bamidbar Rabbah 21). Isaiah 1,21, says of Jerusalem: "צדק ילין בה," righteousness would spend the night there. What is meant is "justice and righteousness" should prevail there, but G–d collected His debt only in installments, a little at a time in order to fulfill His promise of רק אתכם ידעתי מכל משפחות האדמה, על כן אפקוד עליכם על כל עונותיכם, "Only you I have singled out from all the families of the earth; therefore I will call you to account for all your iniquities" (Amos 3,2).
  Before we shall receive the gift of עולם הבא G–d will subject us to the four exiles in order to save us the experience of גיהנם, purgatory, and in order for us to merit life in the world to come. The suffering during exile will refine us, and those people who will not need much refining, will be shown what is in store for them already in this world.
  The difficulty in the statement of our sages concerning all this is why they said "all of them (those gifts) can be attained only through suffering." The statement should have read as follows: "G–d has given Israel three gifts which are attained by way of suffering." The truth is that in this case our sages "said one thing but wanted us to hear two things," as per Psalms 62,12. Each one of those gifts is really composed of multiple gifts.
  First of all let me explain that there is a difference between the meaning of the word טוב when it is spelled with the vowel חולם and when it is spelled with the vowel שורוק. The former spelling is employed when the visible "good" i.e. the נגלה, only is revealed. When the word is spelled with the vowel שורוק, however, the good that is meant is also the intrinsic good, that which is not visible. We observe this principle when checking the spellings of these three "gifts." When referring to Torah, Psalms 119,72, we have טוב לי תורת פיך מאלפי זהב וכסף, "The Torah of Your mouth I prefer to thousands of pieces of gold and silver." The word טוב in this case is spelled with the vowel חולם. On the other hand, six verses earlier in Psalms 119,66, we find טוב טעם ודעת למדני, "teach me good sense and knowledge," and the word טוב is spelled with the vowel שורוק. Similarly we find ארץ ישראל described as ארץ טובה, with the vowel חולם, on occasion (Exodus 3,8), whereas in Isaiah 1,19, we read "אם תאבו ושמעתם, טוב הארץ תאכלו," "if you agree and listen, you will eat of the good of the land." In this case the word טוב is again spelled with the vowel שורוק. Concerning this verse our sages have said that Isaiah speaks of "the world which is totally good," since they could not understand what other justification there could be for the different spellings. They concluded that in that distant future there will no longer be a difference between the hidden aspects of טוב, and the part which is visible to all. At that time, a blessing will no longer contain also those elements that are not good. A reference to something intrinsic is appropriate only if the same gift described contains both external and internal features. This is why they described that future as one that is כלו טוב, i.e. "totally good." 
  Concerning this future Psalms 31,20 says: טובך אשר צפנת ליראיך, "How abundant is the good that You have in store (have hidden away) for those who revere You, etc." The verse continues: פעלת לחוסים בך נגד בני אדם. "You do this in full view of men, for those who take refuge in You." The meaning is that in this world the "good" is concealed, i.e. spelled with the vowel שורוק, since it is only internal, a hidden light, and the elite have to keep searching for it. However, in the future, this "good" will be clearly revealed before all of mankind, since the world of the future is one in which everything is "good." טוב, when applied to Torah, when spelled with the regular חולם, refers to the commandments, the revealed "good" of the Torah, that which helps us in our lives in this world. When we find it spelled the other way, it is a reference to knowledge of the "hidden" aspects of Torah. Since in the world of the future everything will be spiritual and totally "good," the word טוב has to be spelled with the vowel שורוק. טוב when applied to ארץ ישראל follows the same rule. When טוב is spelled with the חולם, the terrestrial aspects of the land are referred to, the Holy Temple, etc. When it is spelled the other way the reference is to the ארץ ישראל של מעלה. We know that there is a Sanctuary in the Celestial Spheres "opposite" the Sanctuary down here on earth. In the future everything will be spiritual and everything will be "good," since G–d will bring "down" this Celestial Sanctuary to earth, and He will build the third Temple. In the world of this future, there is a גן עדן למטה, Paradise on earth, as well as a גן עדן למעלה, a "Paradise" in the Celestial Spheres which is more spiritual in nature. When describing that future as טוב, both spellings are used interchangeably. I have elaborated on this further elsewhere.
  We are now in a position to explain what Moses meant when he said to his father-in-law Chovav "we are about to journey to the place G–d has spoken of" (10,29). He hinted to him that there are two categories of טוב, good, depending on the way this word is spelled. He hinted that G–d would not only bring the Jewish people to the Holy Land, a land that was visibly good, but that He would eventually bring the Jewish people to the מקום, place of which G–d had said in Parshat Mishpatim, ולהביאך אל המקום אשר הכינותי, "and to bring you to the Place which I have prepared" (Exodus 23,20). On this verse, Rashi says that the word המקום is an allusion to the Sanctuary in the Celestial Spheres which is "opposite" the Sanctuary on earth. Moses continued: "Go with us, and we will deal generously with you, for G–d has spoken well concerning Israel." He told his father-in-law that G–d's promise extended only to Israel, but not to the pious Gentiles. However, Moses intimated that by reason of attaching himself to Israel, he, Chovav would benefit from G–d's promise indirectly. 
  The basis for all this is the verse in Exodus 15,17, "the Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established." The "hands" of G–d mentioned are an allusion to matters celestial, i.e the ten fingers on the hands symbolize the ten emanations (Sefer Yetzirah 1,5). The ten toes on the feet symbolize a lower level than the ten fingers on the hands. I have explained elsewhere that the allusion to this is found in Deut. 33,3, אף חובב עמים כל קודשיו בידך, והם תוכו לרגלך ישא מדברותיך. "Even if G–d likes other nations, i.e. the pious among them, there is still a difference between G–d's love for those and G–d's love for Israel, since the "holy ones of Israel" are attached to the fingers of Your hands, whereas the pious ones of other nations are only at Your feet, i.e. attached to the toes of Your feet." It is this message that Moses conveyed to his father-in-law in our verse....
   This is the reason the name used for Yitro in this connection is חובב, just like the word חובב, in Deut. 33,3, that we just quoted. He hinted to him that by attaching himself to the Jewish people the same benefits that would accrue to them would also accrue to him. The reason Moses had to spell this out was because it had not been promised directly by G–d. His promise had been made only to the Jewish people. When Yitro said "I will not go," he revealed that he had misunderstood Moses, and had believed that the only thing that Moses had referred to was the land of Israel in this material world, not also its counterpart in the celestial, spiritual domains. He had understood that from a legal point of view the land of Israel had been given only to the Jewish people, that proselytes had no share in it. He had understood the words of Moses “והטבנו לך,” as something that Moses and Israel volunteered to do, but something that was not legally binding. To this offer Yitro responded "I will not go," i.e. I do not need to depend on your favors. He said "I have my own country that I can go to, one in which I have legal rights." He implied that if the major attraction of the land of Israel were the מצות which could only be performed on that sacred soil, this did not apply to him at that time, since he was returning to his birthplace, מולדתי, in order to proselytize the other members of his family. This he felt surely rated as an important מצוה at that moment. In this we follow Rashi's commentary on Exodus 18,27, וילך לו אל ארצו.
  Moses, in characteristic modesty, said to him "please don't abandon us," to indicate that his father-in-law had not understood him properly. He reminded his father-in-law that the latter was so well versed in all that was going on in the camp of the Israelites that he knew full well that there was a celestial counterpart to the camps of the Israelites and to their flags down here on earth. This is what is meant by the words על כן אתה ידעת חנותינו במדבר. 
  When Moses repeated his offer to Yitro, he added an important nuance by using the preposition עמנו, whereas in verse 29, he had spoken of אתנו. The former expression indicates a far closer relationship, attachment, than the word אתנו. He suggested that as a result of this closer affinity of his father-in-law to the Jewish people, by remaining with them, he would also partake in the future of all those aspects of the "good" G–d had in store for the Jewish people that had remained hidden, in reserve, so far. This is the meaning of אשר ייטיב ה' עמנו, "which G–d will still bestow on us in the future."
  So far about the first journey, which was meant to lead the people to the land of Israel, which in turn was compared to being a גן השם, a "garden of G–d." The Jewish people again became corrupted, however; they committed a sin similar in nature to that which had been committed by Adam at the time, inasmuch as it involved eating forbidden food. They התאוו תאוה (11,4), induced lust, greed in themselves demanding to be fed a diet of meat. They found themselves in a situation similar to Eve in Gan Eden, where the serpent was the seducer with the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Now Satan seduced the people. The Torah describes this as שטו, the letters of which when re-arranged spell ושט, "and spread out, lengthened." When you spread out the last letter, i.e. the letter ו, is perceived as having turned into a Nun, and reads שטן, Satan. The שלחן, table, that was לפני השם, in the Presence of the Lord, i.e. the altar, turned לנחש, into a serpent, the classical seducer, by a similar re-arrangement of the identical letters. I have discussed this at length when writing about the significance of the letter ק, in connection with the word and meaning of קדושה. The author refers to his section called שער האותיות in אות קו"ף – קדושה.
  The Torah writes in 11,33, הבשר עודנו בין שניהם טרם יכרת, ואף ה' וכו'. "The meat was still between their teeth, had not been chewed up yet, when the anger of the Lord was kindled, etc." We know that the world is based on תורה ועבודה, Torah study and service of the Lord. I have found an interesting commentary by the Rekanati on Song of Songs 6,6. We find in that verse that the teeth are described as שכולם מתאימות, "all of them like twins,” and in the next half of the verse ושכלה אין בהם, "none of them has suffered a bereavement.” The overall description is that of a flock of ewes which these teeth are compared to. A similar verse in Song of Songs 4,2, compares these teeth to a flock that has come up from being well washed. The verses are understood to describe aspects of Torah and Avodah. When Abraham had asked G–d: “How will I know that I will inherit it? (Genesis 15,8), he was told that the merit of the sacrifices or even the recital of the sacrificial service when there is no Temple would ensure that G–d could fulfil His promise (compare Megillah 31b). It is a scientific fact that every Jew has 32 teeth, 16 upper ones and 16 lower ones. The statement that שניך כעדר הרחלים, "your teeth are like a flock of ewes,” refers to the 16 public offerings consisting of sheep that were offered in the holy Temple every week, 12 on weekdays and the regular 2 plus an extra 2 on the Sabbath. This is what we call עבודה. 
  The other verse which describes these teeth as similar to עדר הקצובות refers to the reading of the Torah in its divisions during the week. We read i.e. “call up” 7 people on Sabbath mornings, 3 at the afternoon service, and 3 each on Mondays and Thursdays. This makes a total of 16. The word הקצובות, refers to those readings that are “fixed,” i.e. repeated each and every week. It follows that a person has to be careful to keep his teeth holy, seeing that he needs them to read the portions from the Holy Torah. On the other hand, when dealing with the actual Temple service, the Priests ate (with their teeth), whereas the owners of the animals that had been offered received their atonement. The Israelites who did not employ their teeth wholesomely, died as atonement for having abused their teeth in this fashion.
  As soon as the Israelites had committed this sin, the plan that this journey should have brought them to the Holy Land under the leadership of Moses, was abandoned. They had now become "expelled" from this land which was "like a garden of G–d," just as Adam had been expelled from Gan Eden. Hence the prophecy of Eldod and Meydod who predicted the death of Moses before entry into the Holy Land, and the assumption of leadership of the people by Joshua, was appropriately recorded at this juncture (compare Sanhedrin 17a).  The fact that the 70 elders plus Moses and Aaron made a total of 72, constituted a partial rehabilitation for this sin, seeing that the number 72, i.e. the name of G–d of 72 letters has its origin in the emanation of חסד, which equals 72 in numerical value. In the future the Sanhedrin would always contain 70 elders plus the so called אב בית הדין and the נשיא, President.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  Bamidbar
  
  שאו את ראש בני ישראל . The purpose of the count was to enable the שכינה to take up residence among the Jewish people. Everyone should become aware of his personal value by having been counted. He was encouraged to think that everything depended on his personal activity and contribution. This is why the sages have said that a person should always consider himself as if mankind's merits and demerits were in perfect balance, and his very next action would tilt the scales giving him a chance to determine the world's fate. A single good deed by him would enable the world to endure (Kidushin 40).
  איש על דגלו . The Arizal used to say that just as there were four flags in the camp of the Israelites, so the Jewish people are made up of four "classes," each one observing their own respective customs. He divided them into the Sefardim, Ashkenazim, Catalonians and Italians. Each group remains loyal to the customs handed down by its ancestors, and each set of customs is valued equally in the eyes of G–d.
  ואלה תולדות אהרון ומשה .  This teaches us that anyone who teaches Torah to his friend's son is considered as if he had given birth to him (Sanhedrin 19b). You should not interpret this as if it were only a figure of speech, but rather as if he had sired him actually; the parents of that individual have only contributed his body, whereas his teacher contributes and shapes his soul, as we have described at length elsewhere. Therefore, hail to the person who does indeed instruct his neighbors children in Torah. When he does so without charge, his reward will be twofold.
  והיו לי הלוים . Anyone whose roots are in a holy domain must also sanctify himself in an increased measure. This is why the tribe of Levi who was chosen specifically underwent an additional sanctification. G–d had previously said in Exodus 22,30, of all the Israelites "ואנשי קודש תהיו לי," "you shall be holy people to Me!" Afterwards G–d sanctified the Levites and added "the Levites will belong to Me." Since G–d had done this at that time, it behooves the Levites to apply stricter rules of sanctity to themselves also in our times.
  
  Nasso
  
  וישלחו מן המחנה . What is meant is that והיה מחניך קדוש, the impure, should be sent from all three camps, as the situation required, in order to comply with the Torah's instructions in Deut. 23,15, והיה מחניך קדוש, "your camp shall remain holy." The Zohar there explains that the reference is to the 248 limbs of a person which make up his skeleton and which must retain their sanctity. This is hinted at in our paragraph. There are three camps and they represent respectively the head, the heart, and the stomach. The head is the seat of the brain and of all thoughts, and this domain must not be polluted by even the most minor degree of impurity. Our sages have already taught us that the הרהורי עבירה, impure thoughts and intentions, are more dangerous morally than the actual impurity caused by committing the sin (Yuma 29a). There follows the camp of the Levites, which is comparable to the heart of man. Obviously a good and pure heart is to be maintained at all times. The third camp is comparable to man's stomach and intestines, an area vital for converting food into energy, and discharge of that which cannot be used constructively. This area is somewhat ugly; it reminds us constantly of the bodily aspects of man and our tragic inability to remain alive without the body. Nonetheless, anyone who suffers from severe types of impurity must leave even that part of the camp. The moral lesson of all this is to sanctify oneself by means of one's food intake or abstention from it. The Jew is commanded to observe modesty even when he performs biological functions that are necessary, such as excretions of undigested food. All of these rules are designed to expel serious impurities.
  והתודו את חטאתם . The Sefer HaChinuch writes that we are commanded to confess all our sins before G–d as soon as we feel sorry to have committed such sins. The manner in which this is done is that the sinner recites: "O Lord, I have sinned inadvertently, knowingly, or even out of feelings of rebelliousness," followed by a list of the sins committed. It is necessary to spell out each sin as explicitly as one is capable of, and beg for forgiveness. The procedure should not be something cursory. Our sages add that even sins that can be atoned for by the bringing of a sacrifice must be spelled out at the time the sacrifice is offered. Concerning such sins, the Torah says in Numbers 5,6: "Speak to the children of Israel, any man or woman who will commit any of the sins one is apt to commit against one's fellow man thus breaking faith with G–d, and that person becomes aware of his guilt, he shall confess their sins which they have committed." The Mechilta there comments that the words in Leviticus 5,5: והתודה אשר חטא עליה, indicate that the confession must take place before the sin offering has been slaughtered. 
  They also said that we learn from there that this requirement to confess includes people who have entered the Temple in a state of impurity or who have defiled things that had previously been sanctified in the Temple. The verse quoted from Leviticus applied to specific sins; the verse in our paragraph which is phrased more generally, refers to the need for confession of all other categories of sins. Whence do we know that even sins which carry the death penalty either by human tribunal or by Heavenly decree also need to be confessed? We learn this from the confession of Aaron in Parshat Acharey Mot, Leviticus 16,21: "Aaron confessed all the iniquities of the children of Israel, etc." The Mechilta uses every occurrence of the word "confession," to include even a further category of sin, the non-performance of positive commandments. 
  
  The only exception is the individual who has been condemned to die by the testimony of false witnesses, עדים זוממים. The word ואשמה, "that that person is guilty," restricts confessions to instances where a wrong has been committed. When a convicted person proclaims his innocence he does not lose by not confessing to a sin he had not committed. 
  
  Since atonement for sins by means of a sacrifice is possible only in ארץ ישראל we could have concluded that outside the Holy Land there is no need for that confession. To tell us that this is not so the Torah writes והתודו את עונם, "they shall confess their sins." This is written in Leviticus 26,40, a paragraph that describes the Jews as already in exile. Daniel 9,7 said: לך ה' הצדקה ולנו בושת הפנים, "Yours is righteousness O Lord, whereas shame is on us, etc." Daniel, of course, lived outside the land of Israel.
  From all the above it is clear that confession is a מצוה all by itself, that it is applicable in any place. The Sifra adds that the word ve-hit-vadah, refers to a verbal confession (Levit. 5,5).
  Spelling out what one has done wrong reveals one's inner thoughts, and makes it less likely that such a sin would be committed again. It reveals one's belief that G–d is aware of all his deeds. Having admitted that one had been foolish in sinning and resolving not to do so again, helps to secure G–d's goodwill. G–d, after all, is most interested in the welfare of His creatures. So far the Sefer Hachinuch.
  The Rekanati on our verse explains that the importance of the verbal confession is also stressed by Solomon in Proverbs 28,13: ומודה ועזב ירוחם, "but he who confesses and abandons [sin] will find mercy." Confession is part of the attribute of mercy, and repentance helps to restore things to the way they had been prior to the sin, i.e. to remove the forces of impurity from the house of G–d, and to enable G–d to "irrigate" it with the waters of kindness and mercy. I have seen opinions expressed which claim that all that is needed is forsaking sin, remorse, confession and a resolution to do better in the future. Those people hold that there is no need to impose any sufferings on oneself in order to expiate for one's sins. I feel strongly that I must oppose such misconceptions. It is clearly the intent of the Torah and the position of all our sages who are loyal to the Torah that every repentant sinner has to flagellate himself, to fast, and to cause himself such pain as is commensurate with the severity of his sin and the satisfaction the sin had afforded him when he committed it. 
  One must remember what I have pointed out already repeatedly, that man is but a reflection of אדם העליון, "man" in the Celestial Regions. By sinning with even a single one of his organs man impairs the stature of that אדם עליון. This is the reason he must take action to repair what he has damaged. Since all sins are due to faulty intentions of the heart, the process of repentance has to involve the heart of the sinner. This is what is meant by Jeremiah 4,18, זאת רעך כי מר, כי נגע עד לבך, "This is your evil, it is bitter; it touched your very heart." Our sages said that it is G–d who is called "the heart of Israel." He wants to humble him who has maintained an arrogant posture and to convince him that his path has been a futile one. He is telling the Jew "how will you be able to give an accounting of your conduct on the day of judgment when the King's scribes will be called in and they will shock you when they present the bill you owe?" 
  After that preamble, the individual has to think about the organ that he committed his respective sin with, whether it involved marital infidelity, sexual union with a Gentile, masturbation or the like. Each of these sins is most severe, since it involves the יסוד העולם, the foundation of the world, the "seal" of the Holy One, blessed be His name, who had concluded His covenant with Abraham on this very organ. The location of the circumcision is called אות ברית קודש, "the sign of the sacred covenant." By giving us the commandment of circumcision G–d removes the forces of impurity which are resident in the foreskin, and enables the seed that comes forth out of that organ to become holy seed. Sinning with that organ then is equivalent to denying the holy covenant between G–d and us. Emitting semen for reasons other than procreation with one's lawful wife, is creating forces of impurity, equivalent to assisting other "deities." The sin is doubly severe, since G–d in His great kindness has removed these sources of impurity from us, and enabled us to produce holy seed. Now you will understand the significance of a dream in which the person dreaming it sees semen, i.e. what we call today "a wet dream," and why such a person contracts a degree of impurity, necessitating his bathing himself in a ritual bath before attending to holy tasks. 
  When such semen has been used in sleeping with a married woman (other than his wife), and a child is the result of such a union, it cannot become part of the Jewish nation, but is a Mamzer since it represents a denial of the father's covenant with G–d, and is the quintessence of impurity. The issue of such a union would certainly not be provided with a נפש originating in a region of purity.
  The Zohar, Parshat Lech Lecha item 400 (Sullam edition), commenting on the verse in Psalms 27,3 בזאת אני בוטח, says that the word בזאת refers to the sign of the covenant concluded between G–d and Abraham at the circumcision. This is an ever present sign, since it is part of man's body. It is compared to the emanation מלכות This is what is meant by זאת אות הברית or זאת בריתי, "this is the sign of My covenant, or this is My covenant." We have learned that the expression זה refers to the emanation יסוד, whereas the expression זאת, refers to the emanation מלכות. Since the two always appear linked together, this means that זה and זאת are of the same rank. Because there was a time when David did not observe the requirements of that זאת implied in מלכות, this very מלכות was denied him during the flight from Absalom. At the time when David sinned with Bat Sheva a heavenly voice announced that he would be punished in a manner appropriate to his sin. Since he had transgressed against the spiritual ideal implied in זאת-מלכות, this very מלכות would be denied him. If a man of King David's caliber could become guilty of such a sin, how much more so is this possible for ordinary individuals?
  What is the meaning of David saying in Samuel II 15,25: והראני אותו ואת נוהו, "if I find favor, He will let me see Him and His abode?" Who is able to see G–d? What is meant is that when David realized that his punishment was due to his conduct with Bat Sheva, he realized that anyone who does not observe this sacred covenant in its full implications cannot be called righteous. This is why he prayed. The word אותו, refers to the city of Jerusalem which is inextricably linked with מלכות. The two are linked by the אות ברית. Since David had lost מלכות through his indiscretion, he was bound to lose ירושלים, by corollary. This is the reason he linked Jerusalem and מלכות, in the prayer we quoted from the book of Samuel. So far from the Zohar.
  Let us now return to our subject. Anyone who sleeps with a Gentile woman has desecrated the holy covenant through introducing forces of impurity. This is the deeper meaning of ובעל בת אל נכר, "who has slept with the daughter of an [adherent] of an alien religion" (Malachi 2,11). In practice this means, that the sinner has put his own G–d and other deities on the same footing. The same applies concerning sins committed with other organs. Repentance needs to commence with confession, remorse, etc. We must appreciate the statement in Sanhedrin 37 that גלות מכפרת עון, "exile achieves atonement for sins committed." This means that the sinner should move to a place where he is not known. By cutting himself off from his home, he is considered as having imposed upon himself the penalty of כרת הנפש, a penalty which fits the crime of his נפש having attached himself to someone totally alien. We understand then why exile can cure the disease for which it has been decreed. By imposing upon his body the kind of penalty that really should have been inflicted on his soul, he demonstrates that his repentance is based on love for G–d. Such repentance is accepted far more readily than the repentance of a person who has to be disciplined by G–d against his will. This is what our sages meant when they said: "hail to the person who suffers afflictions, and suppresses his strength, and does not complain against the attribute of Justice at the time of suffering afflictions." If Job had done so at the time he was subjected to his afflictions he would have risen to a higher moral level. If Job had not challenged the ways of G–d when he suffered his afflictions we would have included his righteousness alongside that of the patriarchs in our daily prayers, i.e. אלוקי אברהם … אלוקי איוב (Torat Kohanim 18). Taanit 8a, interprets Isaiah 64,4, בהם עולם ונושע, "through them the world can be saved," to mean that those who enjoy their afflictions help bring redemption to the world. 
  Books have been written on the subject, and I do not propose to deal with this except to debunk those who say that the whole point of doing Teshuvah is to obtain forgiveness for one's sins, and to head off afflictions. One must not approach repentance from that aspect, but one must confess the sins committed with each specific organ. Only when one does so will repentance "tear up all evil decrees in the world." This is the true meaning of our verse (5,7) והשיב את אשמו בראשו, "and bring back his guilt on his own head."
  The reason that repentance is such a powerful tool is that it ranks higher than all the accusers [in the Celestial Spheres], and those who address themselves to that "power" need not be afraid of any evil forces in the world. We know this from such verses as Isaiah 14,27: כי ה' צבאות יעץ ומי יפר, וידו הנטויה ומי ישיבנה. "For the Lord of Hosts has planned it, who could possibly foil it? We also read in Nachum 1,6:לפני זעמו מי יעמוד! "Who can stand up to His wrath!" The word Mee in both these verses refers to the institution of repentance. We know this from Isaiah 40,26: "שאו מרום עיניכם וראו מי ברא אלה" as well as from Isaiah 40,14: "את מי נועץ ויבינהו?" "Raise your eyes heavenwards and behold, who has created all these?" Or, "With whom did He consult, and who taught Him?". We have the verse מי א-ל בשמים ובארץ, which means that the Lord of Heaven and earth is called מי, "Who", seeing no one can comprehend His Essence. This is the mystical dimension of the word מי. When the prophet Isaiah 41,4 says: מי פעל ועשה, "Who has labored and brought to fruition," he reveals a deep secret. Heavenly decrees are reconsidered in the upper emanation of בינה or in the lower emanations of נצח and הוד respectively. The latter regions are known as G–d's צבאות. A righteous person who wants to annul someone else's vow concentrates on the region in which G–d annuls such decrees. Eicha Rabbah 3, explains the verse in Lamentations 3,44, סכותה בענן לך מעבור תפלה, "You have screened Yourself off with a cloud, so that no prayer may pass through." Our sages refer to the story involving Rabbi Chanina bar Papa. This rabbi approached Rabbi Samuel who had a reputation of being an expert in homiletics, asking him to explain this verse to him. The latter explained that the verse means that there are times when the gates of prayer are locked, and other times when they are open. He quoted Rabbi Yossi ben Chalafta who had said that there are times when it is propitious to offer prayer, based on the verse in Psalms 69,14: "As for me, may my prayer come to You My Lord, at a favorable moment." The gates of repentance however, are never locked, since repentance is compared to the ocean which is never sealed, and accepts waters from the rivers at all times.
  The reason that Kabbalists call only the emanation בינה Teshuvah, is twofold. Firstly, it is the place to which everything returns in the "great" Jubilee, i.e. the completion of the world's cycle of 7000 years. We are familiar with the basic concept from the Torah's יובל, the jubilee year legislation. The second reason is that a certain "inner spirit" reposes in that region. This is a spirit which comes directly from the emanation חכמה, which in turn is fed by the אין סוף, the ultimate of all causes, G–d's Essence, at all times. The philological origin of the expression תשובה, is derived from Isaiah 30,15, בשובה ונחת תושעון, "Through returning and rest will you be saved." 
  Before G–d had begun to create the universe, He had already created the instrument called תשובה, as we know from the verse טרם הרים יולדו, "Before the mountains had been born" (Psalms 90,2). The reason is simply because G–d had been aware of how things would develop. By creating the instrument of repentance G–d created an instrument that "overrode" all things created later. This is why G–d had been able to say already to Cain: "Surely, if you do right, there is a lifting up, i.e. rehabilitation" (Genesis 4,7). 
  This is the gist of the meaning of our sages' statement that originally G–d had contemplated to run the universe with the attribute of Justice. When He saw that the universe would not be able to endure on that basis, He made the attribute of Mercy precede the attribute of Justice, and co-opted it to the attribute of Justice. This is what produced the instrument called סליחה, forgiveness. The act that triggers this forgiveness is repentance. It could not therefore have been created as an afterthought (Bereshit Rabbah 12).
  
  וכפר עליו מאשר חטא על הנפש . Rashi says on this verse (6,11), that this procedure was necessary in the event the Nazirite had inadvertently defiled himself with a corpse. Rabbi Eliezer Hakappor says that the atonement was necessary because the Nazirite had caused himself unnecessary pain by vowing not to drink wine, something that the Torah had permitted him to do. Many people who read this statement by Rabbi Eliezer Hakappor use it as an excuse to indulge in wine, quoting the great scholar Rabbi Eliezer in support of their lifestyle. As a result, they are liable to die in a state of sinful befuddlement. I believe therefore that it is in order for me to clarify this matter in order to open the door to repentance. 
  I refer to all that has been written about this in the Talmud and the commentaries of the Tosafot on Taanit 11a and I will add my own comments. The discussion commences with Samuel stating that anyone who observes Fast-Days [that have not been proclaimed] is guilty of a misdemeanor. He agrees with Rabbi Eliezer Hakappor who interpreted our verse above as demonstrating that denying oneself the use of wine is sinful. Samuel argued, that if merely denying oneself wine is sinful, then surely it must be even more sinful to deny oneself food and drink altogether! Rabbi Eleazar countered that on the contrary, anyone imposing fasts upon himself is called "holy." He quotes from our section of the Torah (6,5) קדוש יהיה גדל פרע שער ראשו, "holy shall be he who allows his hair to grow wild on his head." His argument runs as follows: "If a person who merely abstains from wine is called "holy" by the Torah, surely a person who denies himself other pleasures such as food and drink must be considered "holy!" The Talmud asks: "How can Samuel refute the argument of Rabbi Eleazar?" Samuel responds by saying that the Torah calls the person who allows his hair to grow wild "holy". The term "holy," does not, however, apply to someone who vowed not to drink wine. To this Rabbi Eleazar responds that the only one who is called "sinner," i.e. in need of atonement, is the Nazirite who defiled himself during the currency of his vow, seeing that he was not allowed to become impure. The Talmud goes on to ask if Rabbi Eleazar is consistent in his viewpoint, seeing he is on record as saying that a person ought to conduct himself at all times as if something sacred resided within him, and he must not harm such sacred material, since the prophet Hoseah 11,9, states: "Something holy is in your midst, and I will not come into the city!" This surely means that a person must not fast voluntarily! The Talmud answers that this is really not a contradiction within the views expressed by Rabbi Eleazar. In the case where a person knows that the fast does not harm his health, he is allowed to fast. When he has reason to believe that the fast is harmful to him, he must not fast. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish describes the person who imposes Fast-Days upon himself as "pious" rather than as "holy."
  Tosafot raise the question that since the Talmud in Baba Kama 91b, says that one may inflict injury upon oneself, whereas others who inflict injury upon a person are guilty of punishment, and Samuel there states that the kind of injury that is meant is the imposition of fasts upon oneself, we see that Samuel does not hold the opinion that someone who fasts voluntarily is a sinner! The answer given to this apparent contradiction in Samuel's statements is that such a person is called "a sinner." The proof is deduced from the case of the Nazirite as we have stated above. In answer to this apparent contradiction, we have to say that we deal here with a person who both performs a מצוה, by vowing to become a Nazirite and who at the same time commits a sin in subjecting his body to unnecessary painful and therefore harmful experiences. In this particular case the performance of the מצוה outweighs that of the sin committed. We know that fasting is sinful since if someone fasts on the Sabbath as an antidote to a bad dream, the sages rule that since he chose to fast on the Sabbath he must fast on another occasion as a penance, even though the original fast may have annulled the evil decree that he had seen in his dream and which had caused him to fast in the first place.
  The example quoted from Baba Kama 91b, may also allow an easy solution. At first glance the Nazir described there who has afflicted himself by denying himself the use of wine may be one who has remained "pure" throughout the currency of his vow, and even such a Nazirite is described as a sinner for having abstained from wine. We have another place in the Talmud (Nazir 19a) where Rabbi Eleazar Hakappor is apparently on record that a "pure" Nazirite is remiss for having made a vow to abstain from wine. After various discussions both there and elsewhere, the Talmud concludes that Rabbi Eliezer Hakappor considers the vow of abstention from wine sinful only if the Nazirite has been remiss in the other conditions he has imposed upon himself, i.e. has defiled himself. Rabbeinu Tam there comments that the statement that the Nazirite is not a "sinner," is to be understood as relative to the מצוה he has performed, but not as an absolute statement. In either case the מצוה of assuming these vows stems from the position of the paragraph of the Nazirite in the Torah immediately after the legislation dealing with the debasement of the סוטה and the statement of the rabbis there that anyone who observes what happened to such a woman has good reason to become a Nazirite in order to fortify himself against the evil urge which might have tempted him to commit infidelities.
  At this point I would like to add my own comments while maintaining the utmost respect for the views expressed by the Tosafists I have quoted. Their answers seem rather forced in this matter. I am convinced that Samuel also admits that a person who has committed some wrong needs to flagellate himself and may certainly impose fasting upon himself as a means of self-flagellation. He may continue to do so until he is sure that such self-flagellation has removed the taint of sin from him. We have King David on record as saying: "my knees have given way from fasting" (Psalms 109,24). The Talmud is on record that the teeth of Rabbi Joshua had become blackened due to too much fasting. Here the author proceeds to list numerous similar examples of great scholars who had imposed fasting as well as other means of self-flagellation upon themselves. The author feels that it is clear that what Samuel had said applied only to people who are certain that they have not committed any sin. Such a person would be remiss if he subjected himself to fasts voluntarily. When Samuel said that a person may inflict injury upon himself [through fasting] he obviously referred to the kind of person who used this to atone for sin. In such a case it is not only permitted, but is a מצוה. If Samuel nonetheless uses the expression that it is "permissible," this is only since the Talmud wanted to contrast the expression with the case of other persons who are "forbidden" to impose such flagellation upon him.
  To return to our verse which states "אשר חטא על הנפש": A person who imposes restrictions upon himself has certainly given thought to the amount of time he needs to refine himself by means of those restrictions. Observing these restrictions during that period is a מצוה. When that period has elapsed, he will not continue to deny himself use of wine, etc. If he comes into contact with a dead body, the days he had so far observed as a Nazirite are no longer counted, and he has to start counting anew. We find therefore that through his contact with a dead body he has caused himself more pain and discomfort than he had counted on originally. This additional pain is accounted as a sin for that Nazirite. Rabbi Eliezer who disagrees with Samuel, feels that even someone who is pure, free from sin and wants to impose fasts upon himself in order to achieve a still higher degree of sanctity of his body is called "holy," whereas Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish feels such a person is called "pious."
  Concerning the Talmud's statement that whoever sees a סוטה in her state of disgrace should abstain from wine, it is quite possible that also Samuel would agree that this applies even to a pious or "holy" man provided that such a person is physically able to sustain such pain without ill effects to his health. Having seen what he did prompts him to perform the "מצוה" of causing himself some pain. Thus he uses the vow as insurance against his own moral decline. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish hold that such vows are acceptable at all times, and make such a person "pious" or "holy" respectively, provided such restrictions are not harmful to such a person's health. If however, a person is pure, and has not seen a Sotah in her state of disgrace, he has no special reason to cause himself the pain of abstention from wine. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish is on record as saying that a Torah scholar must not observe fasts, since by doing so he undermines his ability to study Torah. This consideration applies to someone who is not aware of any sins he has committed. Anybody, however, who has some sins to atone for, will do well to flagellate himself, especially so in our generation when people unfortunately have so much to flagellate themselves for. I have no doubt that even Samuel would strongly urge such people to flagellate themselves by observing fasts.
  Now the words of Tosafot make much better sense. Rabbi Eliezer made some statements concerning a pure Nazirite, whereas other times he spoke about a Nazirite who had become impure. Rabbi Eliezer Hakappor speaks of someone who is free from sin and imposes the vows of the Nazirite upon himself merely in order to attain a higher level of holiness. According to the view of Samuel, he would commit a sin even if the pain he inflicts upon himself is not detrimental to his health. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish and Rabbi Rabbi Eleazar, however, feel that such a vow is only acceptable, if those vowing it know that they do not thereby undermine their health. If the cause of the vow, however, had been to cleanse oneself of some sin, it is a מצוה, provided one does not undermine one's health. If he flagellates himself beyond what he believes his body can tolerate without damage to his health, at least the excess pain he causes himself is sinful. Therefore, since he became impure during the currency of his vow and has now to continue his vows beyond the time he had estimated himself capable of doing so without harm to his health, he has committed a sin.
  [At this point the author continues to discuss various fine halachic points in a פלפול. Since this discussion covers several pages, I have decided to omit it.  Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  A person has to conduct himself at all times in such a way that he does not arouse the suspicion of transgressing laws either vis-a-vis G–d or vis-a-vis his fellow man. The example of the Sotah teaches this lesson, since she had to undergo public embarrassment in order to prove her innocence. The Zohar there says that the whole of Israel was treated in a like manner by Moses at Marah. When the Israelites came out of Egypt and they came to Marah and found the water unfit to drink they were given the kind of מים המאררים that one gives to a woman suspected of unproven marital infidelity. All the Egyptians had been saying that the children of the Israelites who left Egypt were in reality the offspring of Egyptians who had slept with Jewish women. As a result of such accusations a number of Jewish husbands suspected their wives of infidelities committed in Egypt. Also Jewish wives suspected their husbands of infidelities committed with Egyptian women. This is why G–d told Moses to examine the truth of these accusations by means of these waters, to eliminate unfounded suspicions. After that episode G–d gave them חוק ומשפט ושם נסהו, "there He gave them statutes and social laws, and there He examined them" (Exodus 15,25). The Torah attests to this by calling the tribes “שבטי י-ה עדות לישראל” that all these accusations had been unfounded. An allusion to this can be found in our verses in the peculiar description of the tribes as הראובני, השמעוני, etc, instead of ראובן, שמעון, etc. The extra letters ה and י, spell the two lettered name of G–d, י-ה, and indicate that all the tribes were pure, no one had committed any infidelity, otherwise the Torah would not bestow this compliment on them. When the Priest examines the Sotah in our paragraph, the purpose is similar to that of Moses at the time.
  הרואה סוטה בקלקולה יזיר עצמו מהיין "If someone sees a סוטה in her state of disgrace, he should resolve to abstain from wine." I have written previously that the reason the woman becomes a curse, i.e. והיתה האשה לאלה, is because of the pollutant of the original serpent which had contaminated Eve. The Nazirite has to abstain from wine since Eve had squeezed out the juice from a cluster of grapes. Once this תקון, correction, has been made, the curse is converted into a blessing. This is why the ברכת כהנים, is written in the Torah following the paragraph of the Nazirite.
  The author quotes the Tzror Hamor as saying that the 22-lettered Name of G–d also is featured in the ברכת כהנים, and that reciting it is an effective protection against a variety of things. The reader is referred to the יהי רצון prayer printed in our סדורים at the end of the ברכת כהנים. The version of that Name given here is: אנקתם, פסתם, פספסים, דיונסים, followed by the formula ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד.
  קח מאתם …. ונתת אותם אל הלוים . Why are the Levites suddenly mentioned here again in 7,5,? At this point the Levites had not yet been chosen. They had only been chosen after the Israelites had been counted, and that count had not taken place until the first day of lyar. Only then had G–d said: "Do not count the tribe of Levi with the other tribes," and had said that they would be counted separately. The offerings that the Princes brought had been brought a month earlier, on the first day of Nissan. The fact is that G–d had already then given Moses an indication that in the future He would appoint the Levites to perform the Service involving the Tabernacle. This is similar to what we read in Parshat Tetzaveh, where the Torah speaks about Aaron lighting the candelabrum, the kind of oil to be used, etc., and the Torah says: "Bring close Aaron your brother and his sons from the midst of the children of Israel, etc." (Exodus 28,1). Rashi explains there that the appointment of Aaron and his sons, and his daily duties, etc., did not become a commandment until after the completion of the building of the tabernacle, though the Torah wrote it in this connection. Actually we find the commandment as such only at the end of Parshat Emor at the beginning of chapter 24. Nonetheless G–d had informed Moses much earlier of what was to become a commandment at a later stage, so that preparations could be made. We find the same thing regarding the appointment of the Levites. 
  G–d hinted to Moses that He would select the Levites at a future date in order that they could prepare themselves spiritually for that task and become purified. It is also in line with what our sages have said, that if a person takes some steps to sanctify himself while here on earth, then much more sanctity is added to him from the Heavenly Regions (Yuma 39). The Levites needed this preparation even though they had been predestined for their task from the day they had been born, as we know from the statement of Jacob when he forbade Levi to be among his pallbearers (compare Rashi on Genesis 50,13). If nonetheless they needed to prepare themselves for their task, this shows how much a person always has to sanctify himself in order that sanctity should be added for him from Heaven.
  
  Beha'alotcha
  
  אל מול פני המנורה יאירו שבעת הנרות . We read in Proverbs 20,27, נר ה' נשמת אדם, that "the soul of man is the light of G–d." One needs to see to it constantly that one's soul is lit up through the study of Torah and the performance of מצות. The body of man is somewhat like the shape of the candelabrum. The Menorah had three protrusions on its stem, the arms that extended from its center. It also had a small elevation as its platform. In a similar fashion man's feet, arms and ears are three protrusions. The torso containing the heart is similar to the stem of the Menorah. Its height of 18 handbreadths is equal to the average height of a fully grown person, as stated in Tosaphot in the Talmud Shabbat 92a. 
  It had to be constructed in one solid piece. It could not be pieced together. This is an allusion to the close ties that ought to exist naturally between all Jews. Their affinity to one another should be natural. This explains why Rashi says that the verse telling us that Aaron did as he was told (8,2), was a compliment to him, commending him for not having departed from G–d's instructions. We could have assumed that it was natural for him to do what G–d had said, and why only here does the Torah state that he carried out his instructions? However, what the Torah wanted to stress is that Aaron was singularly suited to be the High Priest since he did not depart from the essence of what the Menorah symbolised, the unity of the Jewish people. In his capacity of being an אוהב שלום ורודף שלום, "a lover of peace and someone who actively pursued peace," he represented exactly what was needed.
  על פי ה' יסעו, ועל פי ה' יחנו . Immediately after this, we read that the Israelites made camp at the instruction of G–d and that they broke camp at the command of G–d. The reason that the Torah repeats these reports of how the children of Israelites behaved is to teach us that we should not make a move in life without prefacing it with a remark that indicates that we hope that what we are about to do meets with G–d's approval. Whenever we arrive at our destination or complete an undertaking we are to mention that we hope that what we accomplished meets with G–d's approval, and to thank Him for having enabled us to carry out what we set out to do. By doing this our awareness of G–d will be constant, both when we set out to do something, while we are involved in it, and when we have completed it.
  ואם ככה את עושה לי, הרגני נא הרוג . Concerning this request of Moses in 11,15, the Zohar comments that the reason Moses addressed G–d using the feminine term for את, "You," is because at that time the power of the attribute of Justice was in the ascendancy, and, as we know, the emanation גבורה, or "Justice," is to the left of the emanation of חסד. Death had begun to rule the universe, concerning which it says in Proverbs 5,5: "her feet go down to death, her steps support she'ol."This is why Moses said: "kill me." G–d immediately said to Moses: "gather for Me seventy men, etc." (11,16). G–d continued to upbraid Moses for always asking to die, and as a result He decided to give some of Moses' spirit to these seventy men, thus partially fulfilling Moses' request. It was then that Moses realized he was going to die before he would see the Holy Land. He realized that what Eldad and Meidad had prophesied was indeed true.
  This episode teaches us that a person must not curse himself, since there are many "angels" who only wait for such opportunity of hearing someone cursing himself, i.e. his fate. All of this would not have happened to Moses had he not cursed himself. One part of his punishment was that his name is never mentioned in connection with the work of the Tabernacle, as is Aaron's or the names of the Princes at the time the Tabernacle was consecrated. The reason is that he had made the mistake of saying to G–d (even conditionally) "if not, wipe me out from Your book" (Exodus 32,32). We find that King David was extremely careful about this in Psalms 39,2, when he says: "I resolved I would watch my step, lest I offend by my speech. I will keep my mouth muzzled while the wicked man is in my presence." The "wicked man" that David refers to here is the angel who waits anxiously to respond "Amen," when man curses himself. 
  Moses had not been careful in this respect, had said "please kill me." The previous occasion had not been so serious, since Moses asked to die if G–d would not forgive the Jewish people for their involvement in the golden calf. It was part of his prayer for someone else. This is why his punishment at that time consisted only of his name not being mentioned when the work of the Tabernacle was carried out. This time, however, there were no such extenuating circumstances. The reason that caused Joshua to report to Moses what Eldad and Meydad had said, was that they did so within the camp. He asked Moses to prevent them from prophesying. The word כלאם is the same as in Genesis 8,2, or in Exodus 36,6. In either case it means that something was prevented from happening. Moses did not want to prevent them from saying what was on their minds, and said to Joshua: "why are you jealous on my behalf?"
  עד אשר יצא מאפכם והיה לכם לזרא . When we observe how severely those people who knew no bounds to their greed were punished we learn the lesson that we should restrain our appetites even when it pertains to matters that are permissible. We should learn from our patriarch Jacob who had asked only for "bread to eat and clothes to wear" (Genesis 28,20).
  והאיש משה עניו מאד מכל האדם . "Moses was more humble than any other human being." We can appreciate the value of the virtue of humility after we see that the only praise the Torah accords Moses, the father of all prophets, the man who maintained closer contact with G–d than anyone before him or since, is the reference to his humility. This teaches us to try and practice this virtue to the extreme. We are reminded of the Mishnah (Avot 4,4) which says: "be very very humble." When the Torah here says "more than any other human," we know of three humble people, Moses and Aaron who had said of themselves: "נחנו מה," who are we? (Exodus 16,7); then there was Abraham who said of himself: ואנכי עפר ואפר, "and I am only dust and ashes," (Genesis 18,27). Finally, there was King David, who said of himself: ואנכי תולעת, "and I am a worm." The most humble one of them all was Moses, since he did not even compare himself to anything else, but said:"We are nothing!" This is what the Torah meant when it said “מכל האדם”. The three letters in the word אדם, are the first letters respectively of אברהם, דוד, משה.
  ויחר אף ה' בם, וילך . It is difficult to understand why G–d's anger is mentioned only here, after He had already dressed down Miriam and Aaron (12,4). The reason is that as soon as Miriam and Aaron had heard from G–d Himself that they had sinned, they should have confessed their sin, as David had done when the prophet Nathan told him he had committed a wrong with Bat Sheva (Samuel II 12,13).
  והנה מרים מצורעת כשלג . Here we see the severity of the sin of gossiping. Look at what happened to the prophetess Miriam who had indulged in an ordinary conversation with her brother Aaron, making some remark about her brother Moses! We are reminded to recite the verse זכור את אשר עשה ה' אלוקיך למרים בדרך בצאתכם ממצרים, "Remember what the Lord your G–d has done to Miriam on the way when you had come out of Egypt" (Deut. 24,8). It is one of the six זכירות, commemorations, a person is to recite daily.
  והעם לא נסע עד האסף מרים . They accorded her honor by not moving on until she had been healed and released from quarantine (12,15). We learn from here that if one sees a Torah scholar or other righteous person suffering from an affliction or poverty one should show such a person increased respect, since G–d disciplines those whom He loves. Unfortunately in our days people do the very reverse. Nowadays people look down on a Torah scholar who is poor. Woe to the people who so insult Torah! He who cherishes the word of G–d will display even more respect for Torah scholars who are poor and thereby honor both G–d and Torah. 
  
  Sh'lach
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named זכירה.
  Commandment 385 is the setting aside of חלה from the dough.
  Commandment 386 is the making of fringes on the corners of four cornered garments.
  Commandment 387 is not to follow the inclination of one's eyes or heart, since the Torah commands in 15,39: "so that you do not follow the inclinations of your eyes or your heart which you are in the habit of following after. This prohibition concerns our not adopting attitudes that are at variance with Torah principles. Once one concentrates on such ideas, one easily errs in one's practice also. The moment one feels persuaded by such alien ideas one must desist from pursuing them, and change back to contemplate what Torah views are on the subject matter concerned. It amounts to a warning not to pursue desires that are of a transient nature if fulfilled and which are bound to lead one to an unhappy end. This is what our sages had in mind when they said that the meaning of the words "after your hearts," is not to pursue heresy. The meaning of "after your eyes" is not to indulge in sexual licentiousness (Berachot 12b). We have an allusion to this when the book of Judges 14,3, says of Samson "he said to his father: "take this one for me for she is good in my eyes."
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  These commandments concern themselves with the refinement of body and soul. Concerning חלה, i.e. bread, the Torah tells us in Deut. 8,3: that "man does not live by bread alone, rather on all that emanates from the mouth of G–d." I have explained at length elsewhere in the name of the Arizal, that this verse explains the efforts made by scientists to find out how it is that through the intake of certain foods the soul remains attached to the body, although the soul by definition does not need to eat. The answer to this problem is that food is both something physical as well as something spiritual. There simply is nothing on this earth that does not contain some spiritual input from the "higher" regions. Heavenly forces cause that spiritual potential to be activated down here on earth. This is why the soul can also benefit from those spiritual ingredients in food, just like the body derives strength from the nutrients in the food consumed. Because of this, the soul remains attached to the body as long as the body receives sufficient food of the right kind. This is what is meant by the above quoted statement that man does not live by bread alone. It means that the body is maintained by the physical composition of the food, i.e. bread, as one can see. Over and above that, life is maintained, i.e. the soul is kept going, by the invisible spiritual elements in food, i.e. G–d's command, מוצא פי ה', for those spiritual elements to become active within the person in question. The Torah therefore commanded us to set aside the חלה, the portion to be given to the priest; by fulfilling this commandment the spiritual element in the bread should be "awakened" and contribute its share to maintaining our souls. Since the priest represents holiness, he is given this "holy" part of the bread. Since, ideally, this חלה is set aside when the bread has not yet been baked but is merely dough, it is a method of refining our bread by adding sanctity to it before it is even baked. The bread thereby acts as a refining agent for both body and soul. The first man, Adam was considered as the חלה of the universe (Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat 2). He was perfect in mind and body until he sinned and caused the curse, and the Torah said concerning the earth קוץ ודרדר תמציח לך, ובזיעת אפך תאכל לחם "It will sprout thorns and thistles for you,…. by the sweat of your brow will you eat bread." The net effect on the bread after Challah has been set aside and has been given to the כהן, is for a person to qualify for the blessing inherent in the verse "ולחם לבב אנוש יסעד, bread will sustain man's life" (Psalms 104,15).
  The commandment of ציצית fulfills a similar function. It is directed to all four directions of the globe, and the total numerical value of the word, adding the eight threads of the actual fringes plus the five knots we tie when attaching them to the garment, give us a total of 613, i.e. reminds us of all the commandments of the Torah. They also act as reminder of the Celestial Regions, a reminder of the soul which originates immediately beneath the "throne of G–d." Our sages in Chullin 89, have phrased it thus: "The blue wool resembles the ocean, the ocean resembles the colour of the sky, the sky resembles the purity of the sapphire, and the sapphire resembles the throne of G–d." We find therefore that this commandment is an instrument designed to refine the non-material, spiritual part of man, his נפש. The two prohibitions then are designed to prevent mental and physical excesses, to ensure that the Jew has a pure mind and body.
  Both the commandment of ציצית and that of חלה, are described as ראשית , "heads." In the case of חלה, the Torah speaks about מראשית עריסותיכם, that it is to be taken "from the first part of your doughs" (15,21). Bereshit Rabbah explains that word as meaning "on account of the Challah." The Rekanati describes the mystical dimension of this commandment as being the fact that Israel the nation is called ראשית relative to other nations. This does not only mean that Israel is first, but also that Israel is separate from other nations. It is necessary when putting the dough inside the oven to separate the חלה from the flames of the oven so as not to confront the מדת הדין הקשה, the attribute of Justice in its greatest intensity. This is the meaning of the expression תרומה לה', i.e. a gift to the attribute of Mercy which is mentioned in 15,21. This is the deeper meaning of the statement in the Midrash i.e. "בראשית" on account of that gift which is called ראשחץ. Blessing devolves upon the world because of the fulfillment of this commandment. The reason the חלה is to be given to the כהן is so that blessing will come to rest on your houses. Thus far the Rekanati.
  The commandment to make ציצית also alludes to ראשית, namely ראשית חכמה יראת ה', that the beginning of all wisdom is a measure of reverence for G–d (Psalms 111,10). They are made up of 32 strings, which in turn symbolize the 32 נתיבות, paths which G–d employed in bringing this universe into being, as we know from the first Mishnah in the Sefer Yetzirah. I have elaborated on this theme in my commentary on Massechet Chullin. The detailed rules about the performance of this commandment are discussed there. The word בראשית itself contains an allusion to חכמה, since the Targum Yerushalmi even translates that word as "with wisdom."
  Broadly speaking the use of these terms is an allusion to Him who is the beginning of all existence, prior to whom there is no other ראשית. When G–d was about to reveal His being G–d and create the universe the very beginning of such thoughts was synonymous with the final completion of the execution of His plan. In Kabbalistic emanations, these two stages are separated by two different terms being employed for them. The ראשית המחשבה is described as the emanation of חכמה, or חכמה עליונה, whereas the סוף מעשה the completion of the state of execution, is called מלכות, or חכמה תתאה, the "lower" wisdom. The wisdom of King Solomon was described as being equivalent to this חכמת תתאה. It is also written (Psalms 104,24) מה רבו מעשיך ה', כולם בחכמה עשית, "how great are Your works O Lord, You have executed them all with wisdom" The 32 strings of the ציציות allude to this חכמה עילאה. The beginning of חכמה תתאה is the domain of כנסת ישראל, the concept involved in the phenomenon of the Jewish people.
  The objective of these commandments is to refine body and soul, and the purpose of that refinement is to establish, or better re-establish a close relationship with one's roots, ראשית. Since we have traversed many stages, ספירות, from the original roots, ראשית, this is a difficult task. Nonetheless as the Torah testifies in Deut. 4,4, it can be done, and it confers a superior quality of life on one. דבקות can be defined as the return of the branch to the stem, to the root. However far removed one has been from the source, the Torah exhorts us never to forget our roots, i.e.: וזכרת כי ה' אלוקיך הוא הנותן לך כח לעשות חיל. "You shall remember that it is the Lord your G–d who gives you strength to do valiantly." (Deut. 8,18). The fact that the מצוה of ציצית also features the exhortation וזכרתם, "you shall remember," demonstrates that a similar purpose underlies that commandment. When we follow accepted methods of exegesis, we have both the similar sounding words, i.e. גזרה שוה, present in those two מצות, as well as the references to לדורותיכם, "throughout your generations," which, when applied to former generations, is similar in meaning to ראשית, beginning, or root. The thrust of all this is to remind us that ultimately all our capabilities are rooted in G–d.
  A number of questions pertaining to the sending out of the spies:
  1) The first question asked by all the commentators and foremost by Nachmanides, is what sin the spies actually committed since Moses had told them to examine the country, its people, whether they were strong or weak, numerous or sparse, whether they lived in open or fortified cities, etc. Surely their report had to include answers to all these questions! What was so serious about their saying: "however the people are a tough people?" (13,28). Did Moses send them on their mission in order for them to report untruthfully? We must not think that their sin was only that they described ארץ ישראל as a land that consumes its inhabitants (13,32), since they had quarreled with Caleb and Joshua already prior to that statement, and the Torah reports concerning them in Deut 1,28: "Our brothers have made our hearts melt saying that a great and mighty people live there in great cities fortified to the heavens, etc." Here the Torah reports all the Israelites as being afraid of death by the sword, that their wives and children would be taken prisoner (14,3). If that had been their sin, how was Moses able to describe the inhabitants of the land of Canaan in even more frightening terms, when he said to them in Deut. 9,1: "Hear O Israel, you are about to cross the Jordan to go in and conquer nations greater and more numerous than you; great cities with walls sky-high. A people great and tall, the Anakites of whom you have heard it said: "who can stand up to the children of Anak!" If the sin of the spies had been that they undermined Jewish morale, surely Moses had been guilty of the same thing in an even greater measure when he addressed the younger generation in similar fashion almost forty years later! This is the question raised by Nachmanides.
  He writes subsequently that their sin consisted of the word אפס, that though they had spoken truthfully, and had reported on what they had been asked to report, that word means "zero," in the sense that the chances of accomplishing one's objective were "zero," non existent. 
  Compare the author of the Akeidat Yitzchak on that subject. He describes the word as similar in meaning to אך, or רק, similar to Deut. 15,4, אפס כי יהיה בך אביון, "but there will be amongst you someone who is destitute, etc." 
  The בעל עקידה also sees the sin in the use by the spies of the word אפס. He construes it somewhat differently, however, by saying that the spies had been appointed as messengers not as advisers. By arrogating to themselves the role of advisers they had sinned. It would have been perfectly in order for them to have reported עז העם הזה. By adding an interpretation of what this toughness of the Canaanites implied for the Jewish people, they had become advisers. According to this interpretation they would have been just as guilty if they had employed the word רק, instead of אפס.
  On the face of it this is a very satisfactory explanation. On further reflection, however, his words are also not totally satisfying. They would have been adequate if G–d had not previously assured the Jewish people many times that the land of Canaan was indeed a good land. Since, however, the fact that the land was good surely should not have required the spies to confirm it, and their very mission had only been due to the people not having believed G–d's assurances on that score, they were dispatched to see if the land was good at all. Since this was the purpose of their mission, they were correct in reporting that G–d's description of the land had indeed been fair, but that there were other problems, such as the toughness of the land's inhabitants. In view of this, we are back to our original question. 
  Another difficulty is: What was Israel's sin in asking for these spies to be sent out? Our sages claim that G–d tripped them up intentionally, since they should never have demanded such a mission. Furthermore, why is the fact that Israel initiated this mission by asking Moses to send spies, not reported here but only when Moses summarizes the events of the forty years before his death? (Deut. 1,22). Another problem is why several descriptions of the spies' mission are used such as לתור, לרגל, and לחפור. Besides, why did Moses have to send out twelve spies, would not two spies have been sufficient just as when Joshua sent two spies to Jericho?
  A most puzzling aspect is the fact that all these twelve men at the time when they commenced their mission were obviously suitable, highly thought of, else Moses would not have selected them. What happened to change the outlook of these people? When the Torah in 13,26 states וילכו, ויבאו, this is to tell us that just as they were corrupt when they returned, they had already been corrupt when they set out. How is that possible? We must conclude that they were indeed wicked to start with, but since they occupied positions which the Torah has described as ראשי בני ישראל, leaders among the people (12,3), they were presumed to be righteous, since Moses did not have the ability to look into their hearts.
  On the other hand, if Moses presumed them to be righteous, why did he pray only for Joshua, i.e. change his name? Why did he not at least also pray for Caleb? After all the latter was his brother-in-law! Another difficulty is the repetition of the names of these spies. It says in 13,4: "these are their names," followed by a list of their names, and in verse 16, the Torah again says: "these are their names, etc." Besides, what need was there to appoint new leaders, seeing that we know there were twelve distinguished princes, the ones who had offered the oxen, wagons, etc. in Parshat Nasso. Surely they had not all died in the brief interval of two months!
  We also note that the spies appear to contradict themselves when they say on the one hand that the land consumes its inhabitants, whereas on the other hand they point to the giants that they had seen there. Surely a land that produces giants does not consume its inhabitants! Or did they mean to say that if the land even consumed giants, how much more deadly was the climate for normal people?! Although we know that a sinner falls victim to a foolish notion, or he would not sin, we must still ask ourselves how the evil urge could seduce these men, since remaining in the desert was certainly not an attractive alternative either!
  We must assume that there were three approaches as to whether to dispatch the spies: The approach of the righteous, the approach of the average person, and the approach of the sinners. G–d the Righteous, authorized the righteous Moses to dispatch the spies to demonstrate through the very fact that the inhabitants of the land would be perceived as powerful, how great G–d's assistance was, in that He would nonetheless bring the Jewish people to that land and make them inherit it. They would then realize once more ה' איש מלחמה, that G–d was indeed a mighty warrior, and that the conquest would be something supernatural, something miraculous. This is precisely what Moses' message was in Deut. 9,1, when he painted such a frightening picture. The whole exercise was designed to strengthen the people's belief in G–d and His powers. 
  This is the way this matter is explained in the book Ma'asseh Hashem on Deut. 7,17: "When you will say: "these nations are very numerous, how can I possibly drive them out?" G–d's answer was: "Do not be afraid of them" (verse 18), meaning that when you have these doubts and fears, what is meant is that if G–d were not to be on your side, you would have ample reason to think in those terms. When you rely on G–d, you will be fearless. If, however, you ascribe your success to your own efforts and prowess, then you will become very frightened when facing such people in battle. The word כי at the beginning of verse 17, is quite clear then and Rashi would not need to trouble himself to explain it as meaning "maybe." At any rate, this was G–d's purpose in authorising the despatch of the spies and His hope of strengthening the Jewish people's belief in Him. Moses, of course, had every reason to agree then. This is the reason that both G–d and Moses employ the term ויתורו as describing the function of the spies. This word is usually used when there is a concensus between the heart and the mind. An example is the last pragraph in the קריאת שמע, where we are warned לא תתורו אחרי לבבכם "not to follow your hearts."
  The second group of people, average Israelites, had a different attitude to the matter of sending spies. They had no negative intentions, they only wanted to find out the true state of affairs, whether it would be feasible to conquer that land by natural means. They did not think of the need for G–d to perform miracles at all. They did not think that they were meant to rely on miracles. This is why they wanted to gather all the information that would further the chances of a successful invasion, such as knowing the best route to take. 
  Of course, their attitude could not be described as pious, although Joshua had acted in a similar fashion prior to the capture of Ai (Joshua 7,2). The difference was that Joshua would not forego the command of G–d just because there were what appeared to be insurmountable natural difficulties. It was not in order for instance, to inquire which route should be taken, since up to now, G–d's pillar of cloud had taken care of that chore, and they had never sent a spy to show them the way in the desert. Even the matter of mountains and valleys was something that the Israelites in the desert did not need to concern themselves with, since the pillar of cloud made their route level, regardless. 
  This was however, not the case after Moses had died, and Joshua therefore was entitled to reconnoiter the land in the manner that he did. Of course, the Alshich says that Joshua knew beforehand exactly what the spies would report, but he wanted the people to have the feeling that he had done everything humanly possible, read: "by natural means," to ensure the success of their mission. Gideon was another leader who, though relying on G–d's help, made it appear as if every possible means at man's disposal had been exploited. The author feels that Joshua had to send out the spies since ever since Aaron's death there had been no pillar of cloud, and he would not have known the way without reconnaissance. This is the reason that these Israelites use the expression ויחפרו "so they will dig up" (information), when they describe the purpose of the spies' mission. They wanted these men to discover the weakness of the country and its inhabitants, if indeed there should be such. Rabbi Chiyah in Talmud Sotah 34b, says that the sole intention of the spies was to find fault with the land. He understands the word יחפרו as analogous to Isaiah saying (24,23) "וחפרה הלבנה ובושה החמה," meaning that the moon will be shamefaced, and the sun will be abashed." Applied to our situation, the spies then were to find the points the land of Israel had to be ashamed of. However, the Israelites had not made up their minds, they only wanted to know if there was truth to negative comments about the land of Israel.
  The third group of people, the spies themselves, were thoroughly wicked. Their objective was to make Israel remain in the desert. They began inventing stories to bring about a delay. When that did not work, they were forced to come out publicly with slander about the land. Their motive may have been the very fact that the princes such as Nachshon ben Aminadav and his colleagues had not been sent on this mission in order to ensure that they would enter the Holy Land as princes. No doubt this would have been the case, had not G–d decreed death in the desert on that whole generation. The spies thought that as long as Israel would remain outside the boundaries of the Holy Land, their own position as heads of the people would continue, that they certainly would not be demoted. Perhaps this is the meaning of the sages who claim the men were כשרים באותה שעה, (Bamidbar Rabbah 16) suitable and fit for their mission at the time they had been dispatched. This means that the moral level required to qualify for leadership outside the land of Israel is inferior to the moral level required for leadership within the Holy Land.
  After having written these lines, I have found in the Zohar the following comment. "Why did they counsel as they did? They said: "as long as Israel remains in the desert, we will retain our position. Once Israel crosses into the Holy Land we will be replaced by other leaders." 
  At that point they had not yet formulated the thought of slandering the land of Israel, they had merely hoped that the conditions would be such that conquest by natural means would not be feasible. Since, as we know, one sin brings other sins in its wake, the spies became trapped by their personal ambitions. This is the reason that the Torah describes their activities as וירגלו, similar to Psalms 15,3: "his tongue was not generally given to evil." 
  When we had said earlier that the juxtaposition of the words וילכו ויבואו, indicates that their return was similar to their departure, i.e. that they had been sinful already at the time they set out on their mission, this has to be understood differently. It would mean that potentially they were ready to sin already at the time they set out on their mission, though they had not yet formulated such a plan. Their potential corruption was all due to their desire to be honored. It was similar to the desire for honor that led Bileam to sin, as we shall discuss in the context of that Parshah. Our Rabbis have already pointed out that the modus operandi of Satan is not to get you to commit the most serious sin all at once. Rather, he tells you to do something relatively insignificant, gradually enmeshing you further and further, until in the end he gets you to commit idolatry. Even though the victim was not aware of it, Satan's plan had always been to get his victim to wind up serving idolatry. All previous stages are regarded only as steps leading in the direction of the sin of idol worship. When the spies are also described as going לתור את הארץ, this is to allude to the cause of their corruption, namely following the inclinations of their hearts, as discussed.
  They commenced sinning by considering their personal standing in the community. What concerned them was that Joshua was among those who had been selected to be spies. We know of Joshua that he never moved from the tent of Moses, was his personal valet, etc. (compare Exodus 24,13, and 33,11). The spies reasoned that his inclusion could only be because he would lead Israel in battle to conquer the Holy Land, and that on account of this Moses had also sent him on this mission. G–d had done something similar when He had told Abraham to traverse the land of Canaan (Genesis 13,17), since it would be given to his descendants. Abraham was to be a model for his children, etc. This thought had occurred to the spies only after they had heard Eldad and Meidad prophesy about Moses dying and Joshua leading the Jewish people. This is the reason this portion follows the report of the selection of the seventy elders without an introduction about Israel having requested this mission, as reported in Deuteronomy. Rashi had pointed out already in Exodus 17,14, when G–d instructs Moses to “put it in the ears of Joshua,” that there will be an ongoing war between G–d and Amalaek, but that G–d will wipe out every vestige of Amalek. The reason it was necessary for Joshua to know all this first hand, was a hint to Moses that Joshua would one day become the leader. The eventual mission of the spies was already being prepared at that time. 
  When G–d said to Moses שלח לך, send for you, it meant that just as G–d's intention had been constructive, so also Moses was guided by constructive ideas when he consented to arrange this mission. The meaning of וישלח אותם על פי ה', means with the consent of G–d, and not because of the demand of the spies or the people. Moses understood part of this allusion, and though he did not foresee how these spies would report individually, he did have a notion of how the horoscope they were born under might influence them. This is why the Torah reports Moses as studying the individual names of these people for clues to their character. This is why the Torah repeats in 13,17: "these are the names of the men whom Moses sent out, etc." The Talmud in Sotah 34, says that we have a tradition that their names reflected their deeds, however, according to Rabbi Yitzchak, only in the case of the prince of Asher סתור בן מיכאל, does the Talmud manage to elaborate. Rabbi Yochanan also provides such a rationale in the case of the prince of Naftali, נחבי בן ופסי, claiming that the name means he hid from G–d, or that he cleverly hid his true intentions. His father's name ופסי is an allusion to פסע, skipping, i.e. reporting G–d's words only out of context, not completely. When Moses began to suspect that possibly these people harbored unworthy thoughts, seeing their names could be so construed, he renamed Hoshea, calling him Joshua, the implication being that G–d should assist him not to adopt the counsel of the other spies (Bamidbar Rabbah 16,9, on 13,16). The reason Moses employed the two-lettered name of G–d in doing so was that it had been employed when describing G–d's struggle against Amalek, at which time Joshua's eventual role had first been hinted at. The reason Caleb was the one who silenced the spies in the middle of their report, was that Joshua was afraid to say עלה נעלה, we can certainly ascend," i.e. conquer the land (13,30), since this might be construed as Joshua's personal ambition to lead the people.
  The spies commenced their report very deviously by referring to Amalek, whom they described as inhabiting the South of the land (13,29), thereby hinting at the role promised Joshua at the time he had led the battle against Amalek. What they meant to convey was that since Moses was alive and well, it was clear that the time to attempt to dislodge Amalek had not yet come, since that was to be Joshua's task only after Moses had died. Another reason they did so was that the very name of Amalek conjured up the time Israel had sinned when they had questioned G–d's presence in their midst, as a result of which Amalek had attacked them (see Rashi on Exodus 17,8). By mentioning Amalek they hinted that Israel was too enmeshed in sin to emerge victorious at this time from an encounter with Amalek. Concerning the Canaanites themselves the spies reported that they were אנשי מדות, i.e. people of considerable virtues, as we shall explain. Since G–d had told the people that the conquest of the land would not be on account of Israel's superior virtues, but on account of the inhabitants' moral inferiority, it was clear that the sin of the Emorite which was the precondition of successful battle against them had not yet reached the desired measure (comp. Genesis 15,16, and Deut. 9,5).
  This was also the reason they told about the ילידי ענק ראינו שם, "we have seen the Anakites there" (13,28). These were some of the נפילים, disgraced angels, who had dropped from the heavens, and who still continued to live, having survived the deluge, a tribute to their virtues which they must have brought with them from the Celestial Regions. These people were still perceived to be part angels, since their parentage was partially angels. (Compare Genesis 6,2, and the statement of Rabbi Yossi in the Zohar on this verse, identifying them as two specific angels called Azza and Azza'el respectively.) Concerning this phenomenon the spies described the land as ארץ אוכלת יושביה היא, a land that consumes its inhabitants, meaning that it does not tolerate morally inferior inhabitants, which explained why the survivors in that land were the ones that possess superior virtues. They tried to prove this by saying that though they had been observed spying, giving the inhabitants every legal right to kill or otherwise punish them, these had not bothered to do so out of the goodness of their hearts, though they had ample provocation and could have treated them like hostile grasshoppers (compare 13,33).
  We observe that the spies made strenuous efforts to cause Israel to remain in the desert at this time by alluding to the moral superority of the Canaanites and contrasting this with allusions to the moral inferiority of the Jewish people by reminding Israel of Amalek. What they really hinted at was that the conquest would only come under Joshua. Since we have the principle that אין מלכות נוגעת בחברתה, that during the currency of one kingdom the next kingdom must not encroach upon the previous kingdom by as much as a hair's breadth (Berachot 48), they extended this to include the entire present generation who were viewed as Moses' subjects. We know that there was some substance to this argument since the reason Moses was not allowed to enter the Holy Land was because his generation had not been allowed to do so. The Midrash explains this by saying that it would be like a servant maid who had dropped a brass pail into a well and stood by the well crying. When the king's maid servant came along she dropped a golden pail into the same well. Thereupon the first servant maid started laughing and rejoicing. Upon being asked what reason she had to be happy at the king's maid servant's distress, she told her that the reason was that her pail was golden. Whoever would come to retrieve the golden pail, could at no extra effort also retrieve the brass pail. So far the Midrash. [The idea seems to be that once the time for resurrection had come, and G–d would resurrect Moses, He could also resurrect his generation with no extra effort. Ed.] Rabbi Menachem Azaryah in his book Asarah Ma'amarot, writes that this matter is alluded to in the Torah itself in Deut. 1,37, when Moses said גם בי התאנף ה' בגללכם, G–d had also been angry at me on your account." The letters in the words גם בי are the first letters respectively in גרשוני מהסתפח בנחלת י"י, "He has prevented me from attaching myself to the inheritance of G–d."
  Joshua and Caleb countered that whatever deity had protected the people of Canaan thus far had already departed from them, i.e. סר צלם מעליהם (14,9), and they had no longer any merits which would act as protection for them. The measure of guilt of the Emorite was by now such that it no longer could be a hindrance to Israel. The expression סר צלם, may be interpreted according to the Zohar on Genesis 18,4: "and recline under the tree." The significance of that tree was that Abraham could tell by it who was truly loyal to G–d, and who cleaved to idol worship. The tree would extend its branches towards those who believed in G–d and would envelop them in its shade. The same branches would withdraw when a person worshiping idols sat under it. Abraham would notice this and begin to engage such a person in a religious dialogue, pointing out the futility of worshiping idols. He would not move from there until he had converted the person in question. Similarly the tree would welcome those who were ritually pure, while rejecting those who were not. There was a well underneath that tree. The waters in the well would rise towards a person in need of purification. As soon as Abraham noticed, he would purify them by ritually pure water. What Moses had commanded the spies about investigating "a tree" (13,20), referred to the tradition mentioned in the Zohar. He wanted to find out how that tree would react when the spies were under it, if it would offer its shade, i.e. a sign that the spies were sincere, if it did not, it would signal the sinful motives of these people.
  In their report the ten spies did not relate to that tree at all; only Joshua and Caleb testified that that tree had already stopped giving shade to the local inhabitants, a sign that they were not meritorious. In contrast to that, they were able to report that the tree had provided shade for them. In this way we can understand what motivated Moses to ask whether a specific tree existed there.
  The spies reversed the true state of affairs by reporting that the inhabitants had merits, implying Israel did not have sufficient merits. They committed one sin after another, until in the end they denied the virtues of G–d by implying that these inhabitants were mightier than G–d Himself, when they said in 13,31: "for it is stronger than He," (referring to G–d when they said ממנו.) When Joshua sent out his spies, they repaired the damage done by the ten spies in our story. That is the deeper significance of the red line that they demanded that Rahab should suspend the rope outside her window (Joshua 2,18).
  At this point I want to tell you what G–d has revealed to me concerning the metaphysical aspects of the spies' mission. The mission never was intended to pave the way for conquest by natural means. On the contrary, it was to pave the way for conquest by employing supernatural forces. The twelve spies represented the twelve tribes of G–d, who in turn corresponded to the twelve possible permutations of the four-lettered ineffable name of G–d as we have explained elsewhere. Celestial forces descend to earth via twelve "lines", the letter ו represents a line. Six of these lines emanate from the left side of the emanations, i.e, from the attribute of Justice, the other six from the right side, i.e. the attribute of Love, חסד. This is in line with the concept which we refer to often when we speak about G–d as השם אלוקינו, השם אחד own, meaning both of G–d's attributes. All of the above is alluded to when the letter ו is spelled as a word, i.e. ואו. The two letters ו, represent the attribute of דין and חסד respectively, whereas the letter א establishes the bond between them. I have explained elsewhere on the verse in Genesis 1,5, ויהי ערב, ויהי בוקר יום אחד that the first six hours of the night are under the aegis of the attribute דין, Justice, whereas the remaining six hours from midnight on gradually switch to being under the aegis of רחמים, Mercy. By day, on the other hand, as long as the amount of light keeps increasing, the first six hours are under the aegis of רחמים, whereas from noon on they switch towards the attribute of דין, Justice. At any rate, the 24 hours consecutively together form one day. The letter ואו, i.e. spelled as a word, totals 13 in numerical value, the same as the word אחד. The idea of the “line,” or better "lines," that act as the ducts for emanations from Celestial Spheres are symbolized by the external appearance of the letter ו, which is after all a "line." This is further symbolized by the verse שמע ישראל ה' אלוקינו ה' אחד a verse containing six words. (ו=6) The verse we recite immediately afterwards, i.e. ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד, also contains six words. The combined twelve words comprise the twelve horoscopes, of which six are above the horizon at any one time, whereas the other six are below the horizon. The book Beer Mayim Chayim, points out that the verse שמע ישראל is made up of 25 letters, whereas the verse ברוך שם כבוד וכו' is also made up of 25 letters. Between them they represent the 49 שערי בינה, plus the “hidden” 50th gate (which has not been revealed to man) which enables all the others to be joined together.
   This is the metaphysical aspect of the word אמת, that we find mentioned by Joshua's spies; it is the measuring line described as the "תקות החוט" (see Joshua 2,14 for the word אמת, and 2,18, for the red line)ץ When the letter ו is written as a word, it symbolizes אמונה, faith, loyalty, since the middle letter א joins the two letters ו together. By so doing it creates a bond between דין and רחמים. Since the א also means “one,” this means that either group of six tribes is always joined with the אלוקי יעקב, "the Lord G–d of Israel”. Each group of six represents half the permutations of the ineffable name of G–d. The specific attribute for Jacob is that of תפארת, the sixth of the ten emanations, ספירות. This corresponds to the letter ו in the Ineffable Name. This is what Joshua's spies had in mind when they spoke about the אות אמת. We also know that Jacob and אמת are inextricably linked, since it says תתן אמת ליעקב, You have given "truth" to Jacob (Michah 7,20). If, G–d forbid this א would be separated from its respective ו, this would point at a universe in which more than one authority would rule, as the heretics claim. Their argument is that it is inconceivable that the power that created light should be the same as that which created darkness. This amounts to a denial of the verse: "It was evening, it was morning, one day (Genesis 1,5)."
  The sin of these spies can be understood, when the Torah reported them as carrying the grapes "במוט בשנים." Every rod looks basically like the letter ו, is a line. When they removed the א that creates the bond between the two ווים, what was left were two disjointed, separate lines, i.e. שניות, or dichotomy. This is what the expression במוט בשנים alludes to. When you remove the letter ו from the word מוט, you are left with מט, i.e. 49. This is like saying that the צדיק, righteous person, has fallen, been ruined, i.e. מט before the רשע, the wicked person. The reason this is so is because the 49 letters in the שמע ישראל and the ברוך שם כבוד have been separated, i.e. their unity has been broken. Most of what I have just outlined was taken from the book באר מים חיים.
  The righteous spies that Joshua sent out repaired the metaphysical damage caused by ten of the original spies whom Moses had sent out. The "hope" for the future of the Jewish people was summarized by the תקות חוט השני, whereas the damage caused by the original spies can be described as symbolizing the statement of our sages that תקות אנוש רימה, that the only thing humans have to look forward to is to become worms (man's body in the grave). All this because they abused their power of speech to libel G–d and the land of Israel. At the root of their corruption lay their desire to occupy positions of influence within the nation. All that the above teaches is to follow very carefully the advice of our sages in Avot 4,4, "be very very humble, seeing that man's prospects are only to decay!" The spies who had started out by being described as אנשים, i.e. men of stature, ended up by being considered "אנוש," the lowest appellation of humans.
  Let us now return to the subject. The spies had recalled Israel's sins, whereas they had extolled the virtues of the Canaanites. Joshua and Caleb, however, reported that their experience had shown them the exact reverse as being the case. They stated that the local inhabitants had already forfeited any protection from celestial sources they had ever enjoyed, whereas Israel had G–d on their side. The meaning of סר צלם מעליהם could also be explained in a different vein, as a string of supernatural events. G–d had only agreed to the dispatch of the spies in order that they may witness all these supernatural events and be strengthened in their conviction that conquest of these people was not only possible, but would be easy. 
  While explaining this we will also answer the question why twelve spies had been needed for that missionץ Another question that needs to be dealt with is why the Torah had to tell us that the time the spies went on their mission was the beginning of the grape harvest (13,20). Another difficulty that we plan to explain is the comment of Rashi that the local inhabitants when observing the spies said to one another: "there are some ants in the vineyards" (Rashi on 13,33). Where did Rashi get this from? A further difficulty is the wording of Caleb interrupting the majority report in 13,30, when the Torah says: "Caleb silenced the people before Moses." What great wisdom did Caleb pronounce when he told the people that with the help of G–d they would be able to inherit the land? One did not have to be a member of the spy team to come up with this kind of elementary wisdom! Any righteous person could have pointed this out at once!
  The reason that Moses sent out twelve spies and that he did so at the beginning of the season of the grape harvest was that at that time the watchmen are constantly alert. It would demonstrate the help of G–d if one reflected that in spite of the vineyards being constantly under the scrutiny of their owners twelve men had been able to travel the country unchallenged, had helped themselves to fruit which needed eight people to carry it, and yet no one had dared object. Two men might have escaped detection, but it is inconceivable that a group of twelve men had not been observed at some stage. The deviousness of the spies is seen by the fact that they chose to deny the miraculous aspect of this, and to claim that just as the owners did not notice or pay attention to a few ants whose ability to harm their vineyards was insignificant, so they paid no heed to the spies. They chose to ignore the fact that the very fact that they escaped detection as humans was miraculous in itself, a demonstration of how G–d could and would help. Caleb and Joshua were able to report on their experiences in this regard, and demonstrate that the spies' interpretation of the facts had been tendentious. Kabbalists have taught us that shortly before a person dies, he no longer casts a shadow. Caleb and Joshua may have intended to convey exactly this when they said that these people already no longer cast a shadow, i.e. that their demise could not be far off. It seems clear that it had been both G–d's and Moses' intention that the dispatch of the spies and their subsequent report would show that the land could be conquered only through the help of G–d, through invoking miracles. 
  The author here quotes Rashi as explaining that the words עלה נעלה, "we will surely ascend," meant that even if they had to climb up to the heavens, with the help of G–d this would all be possible –
  – and that Rashi's subsequent comment that the words "חזק הוא ממנו," "he is stronger than we," really refer to G–d Himself. The whole world asks where Rashi got his homiletics from. Perhaps the words all have to be understood quite simply and there is no place for homiletics. The answer is simply that though the spies were wicked, they were certainly not ordinary fools. They reported about the strength of the land's inhabitants and the fortified cities they had seen. When Caleb made the statement that ascent was possible, he did not deny anything the others had said. It would not have been clever to do so. He silenced the others by agreeing that indeed their report was factual, the people were strong, the cities seemed impregnable. He added that in spite of all this, with the help of G–d, "עלה נעלה" we will ascend, even if it involves building ladders as high as the sky at G–d's command, etc. Since this is so, the statement by the other spies subsequently "we will not be able to ascend," can certainly not be interpreted at face value, meaning that the reason they could not ascend was the prowess of the inhabitants. Had they merely meant this they need not have troubled themselves, seeing that Caleb had previously conceded that point. The spies had therefore been goaded into saying that the inhabitants of the land were stronger even than G–d. Rashi's comments are therefore very appropriate. This latter statement of the spies constituted the ultimate libel against the land of Israel in the Celestial Regions (the counterpart to what we have on earth). That land is generally called ארץ החיים "the land of the living,” as is well known to students of metaphysics. When the spies were cut off this earth down here, they simultaneously lost their share in the ארץ החיים. The statement in 14,38, that Joshua and Caleb were the only ones among those men who חיו, lived, means that they received their share both in the land down here, and in its counterpart in the Celestial Regions. The צדיק receives the portion that had been allocated to him as well as the portion forfeited by the רשע, the evil person.
  Just as the inhabitants of the land of Canaan had "lost their shadow," so the ten spies now lost their own shadow and died without being under G–d's protective shadow. Bamidbar Rabbah, 16,4, says concerning the verse in Proverbs 10,26, "As vinegar is to the teeth, and smoke to the eyes, so is the lazy man to those who send him on a mission," that this describes the mission of the spies. We also read in Proverbs 6,6, "Go to the ant, you lazybones, study its ways and wise up!" Ants love the shade. These men lost their shade. The intent of the spies had been that Israel should become lazy in realizing its objective of inheriting the land of Canaan. Their purpose had been to remain in their position longer. The allusion of the Midrash to the verse in Proverbs is then quite appropriate.
  We read in the Talmud Shabbat 111a, that someone who has a toothache should not sip vinegar on the Sabbath, since it is good as a remedy. The Talmud queries this by quoting the verse in Proverbs 10,26, as proof that vinegar is not only no remedy, but on the contrary, is harmful. The Talmud there answers that it depends on the kind of vinegar. If it is made from unripe grapes, it is indeed harmful, otherwise it is beneficial.
  We have learned in Avot 4,21, that "jealousy, lust, greed, and ego (i.e. the desire for public recognition) drive man from this world." These very negative virtues had driven Adam from the world. There was the jealousy of the serpent of Adam possessing Eve, its pursuit to gratify its lust, and the pursuit of ego, i.e. Adam and Eve wanted to usurp the unique place of G–d in the universe, since they responded to the lure והייתם כאלוקים, "you will be like G–d." Eve had squeezed out a cluster of grapes, ate it, found that they were unripe. This suggests that in this material world one must not pursue honor. Honor will be inherited by the scholars in the world to come. At that time what is written in Isaiah 24,23: "G–d's Presence will be revealed to His elders," will be fulfilled. This is what is meant when the sages describe יין המשומר, "well aged wine," as being part of the reward in store for the righteous in the future. Concerning what happens to the wicked at that time, it is written in Malachi 3,19: "For lo! that day is at hand, burning like a furnace.. All the arrogant and doers of evil shall be straw, etc." It also says in Samuel II 22,9: "smoke rose from His nostrils," i.e. when G–d was angry, and burned those whom He was angry at." Since we have shown that what happens on earth has its counterpart in the heavens, the Torah reports that the season the spies were dispatched was when the grape harvest commences on earth, i.e. a hint that many grapes are not ripe yet. The spies ignored the items mentioned in Avot as destructive. They ate unripe grapes, i.e they were greedy, they were concerned with their own honor and glory, hence they had to suffer what is described in Proverbs 10,26.
  Let us get back now to the three approaches that we have described vis-a-vis the mission of the spies. The spies themselves were motivated by excessive desire for personal honor, and that is why they became enmeshed in one sin after another, until finally they denied G–d and lost both their future on earth and their future in the World to Come. Then there was the attitude of the people, who wanted to get a report about the land, not necessarily a negative report, but a truthful one. They wanted this in order to evaluate whether conquest by natural means was feasible. This too was displeasing in the eyes of G–d and of Moses, since G–d had authorized the mission only to demonstrate that conquest by natural means was not even under discussion, but that they would be shown how dependent they were on His active assistance.
  Now we can understand the sin the spies committed even before they libeled the land by saying that it consumes its inhabitants. The words אפס כי עז העם הזה, are indeed crucial. The reason, however, is not like Nachmanides writes, nor even like the view of the Akeidat Yitzchak. Rather, by use of the word אפס, they had reversed G–d's intention by using their impressions as a reason to desist from the entire plan to conquer the land at this time. G–d had wanted that the very toughness of the people would make the Israelites concentrate on the need for His help, the need for G–d to perform miracles in order for them to inherit that land. In that way His name would have been aggrandized.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  
  From this portion we can learn how great is the penalty for indulging in evil gossip. By doing so, a person causes harm to himself as well as to the world at large. The spies caused harm to the whole nation of Israel, but the greatest harm they caused themselves. Our sages in Pesikta Zutra Metzora, comment that if people who only spread lies about stones and and trees were subjected to such punishments, how much more serious is it to spread lies about human beings, about one's fellow man!
  ועתה יגדל נא כח אדנ"י . Both the Pesikta and the Yalkut mention on the verse צור ילדך תשי, "you neglected, or "weakened" the Rock that begot you" (Deut. 32,18), that as long as Israel perform G–d's will, they add to His Power and strength, since Moses has said here: "Now let the Power of G–d become great," (14,17). On the other hand, any time they act contrary to G–d's will, anger Him, they are diminishing His Power, as is evident from that verse in Deuteronomy. This teaches us the tremendous impact human actions have.
  
  וכי תשגו ולא תעשו את כל המצות האלה . Midrash Tanchuma as well as the Yalkut Shimoni, have the following comment on Leviticus 4,2: "When a person unknowingly commits a transgression in respect of any of G–d's negative commandments, etc." They say that this verse teaches us that transgression of any prohibition is equivalent to transgression of all of the Torah's commandments. Conversely, the Reishit Chochmah writes in Parshat Nasso, that if one performs a single positive commandment in all its pertinent details, it is as if one had performed all 248 positive commandments. The reason of course, is that there is no מצוה that does not contain some element of all the other מצות. Having said this, we understand why transgression of a single negative commandment is viewed as if one had transgressed all of them, seeing that it involved negation of those particular elements of all the other negative commandments that were associated with the single negative commandment one has flouted. This is the real meaning of the wording of the verse quoted above in 15,22. 
  It teaches us that intellectually alert people who conduct themselves with the proper degree of discretion and caution will assure themselves of the blessing in Daniel 12,3: "The wise will shine like the radiance of the firmament, and those who make the many righteous, like the stars, forever and ever."
  
  Korach
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named במקום גדולים אל תעמוד.
  Commandment 388 imposes the duty on the Priests and Levites to guard the Tabernacle and its courtyards, etc., by day and night. This is due to considerations of respect and reverence for its sacred nature, not because of fear of intruders. The Torah writes: "They shall discharge their duties towards the Tent of Appointment" (Numbers 18,4). The Sifri interprets the words "you and your sons with you in front of the Tent of Meeting," as instructing the Priests to perform this guard duty inside the structure, whereas the Levites were to mount guard outside of it and to walk around it (18,2).
  Commandment 389 enjoins the Priests from performing the duties of the Levites, and vice versa. The Torah warns first in 18,1; and since the Torah writes concerning the Levites in 18,3: "but they must not approach the furnishings of the Ark nor the Altar lest both you and they die," it is clear that the warning includes even Priests who perform the duties of the Levites.
  Commandment 390 prohibits all members of other tribes from performing sacrificial service in the Tabernacle (Temple). The Torah writes in 18,4: "Any stranger must not approach you."
  Commandment 391 makes it a transgression to cancel the guard of honour of the Temple, since the Torah writes: "ושמרתם את משמרת הקדש," and whenever the verb שמר is used, it implies a negative commandment, i.e. culpability if that שמירה is neglected.
  Commandment 392 deals with redeeming firstborn male human beings, since the Torah writes: אך פדה תפדה את בכור אדם, "But you must redeem the firstborn person" (18,15).
  Commandment 393 prohibits redemption of firstborn pure animals, since the latter have to be offered as a sacrifice on the Altar. The Torah writes: "But you must not redeem the firstborn ox, sheep or goat, since they are holy" (18,17).
  Commandment 394 requires the Levites to perform the daily service in the Sanctuary by singing and accompanying the sacrificial service with music (compare 18,23, ועבד הלוי הוא את עבודת אהל מועד, וכו'). The same commandment is repeated in different language in Deut. 18,7: "He shall perform service in the name of the Lord His G–d, just like all his brothers the Levites who stand there in the presence of the Lord." The Talmud in Erchin 11 says that the service referred to is singing.
  Commandment 395 is the duty of the Israelites to give a tithe of ten per cent of their harvests to the Levites, since the Torah states: "For the tithe of the Israelites which they are to give as a gift to G–d, I have given to the Levites as an inheritance; this is why I have said to them that they shall not inherit amongst the children of Israel" (18,24).
  Commandment 396 is the duty of the Levites to give to the Priests ten per cent of the tithes they have received from the Israelites since the Torah says: "You shall elevate from it a gift to G–d, a tithe of the tithe" (18,26).
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The Torah is called "light," because it enlightens. It is also called אש, fire. Just as one benefits from its warmth when keeping a certain distance from it, but becomes burned when approaching too closely, so it is with the "secrets" of the Torah. If someone approaches too closely to the Temple, over and beyond what his station in life entitles him to, he is liable to be hurt or even killed when he beholds what is not his to behold. We have explained this in connection with the death of two of the sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, who were described as having approached the Presence of G–d (Leviticus 16,1). The Torah did not choose to say בהקריבם, which would have meant "when they offered a sacrifice." The expression the Torah uses, indicates that these sons entered an area that was beyond their station in life. As a result, they died. Something similar occurred when the people who wanted to behold G–d died at קבברות התאוה, according to an explanation given in the book Brit Menuchah. We should learn from this that one must not attempt to occupy the position of someone who is greater than oneself in the presence of that personage. You would not be able to maintain such a posture; you are therefore well advised not to abandon your present place.
  You should remember that the Jewish people numbered six hundred thousand, and the Kabbalists say that they were six hundred thousand souls who had originated in the six hundred thousand letters in the Torah. The spirituality of Torah consists of the souls of Israel, and thus it is appropriate that the generation who received the Torah consisted of six hundred thousand souls. All subsequent generations and their souls are to be viewed as "branches" of those six hundred thousand souls. This raises the obvious question of where the souls of the Levites originated, since the number six hundred thousand had already been used up when the other tribes were counted? Was not the tribe of Levi the choicest of them all? Where did their souls emanate from?
  Remember that the first of the thirteen principles used for exegesis of the Torah, is the principle of כלל ופרט. [In our daily recitation of these thirteen principles, this one is listed as number four. Ed.] We are told there that the כלל, general rule, cannot include anything which has not been alluded to in the description of the פרט, the detailed example of what is meant by the כלל. It is common knowledge that these thirteen principles are not something conjured up by human intelligence, but that they are principles by which G–d operates both in areas visible to us, i.e. נגלה, and in domains that are completely hidden from us, i.e. נסתר. The overriding rule to remember is that the כלל, whole, does not contain anything which is totally foreign to the פרט, part. When it is part of the פרט, it is נגלה, revealed, visible, whereas when it is part of the כלל, it may remain hidden, invisible to our eyes or faculties. Our sages, when discussing aspects of the מעשה בראשית, the work of creation, have already said with regard to the creation of the physical universe that every little detail that would ultimately be revealed was already part of the matter created on the first day. As creation proceeded these various פרטים, details, were revealed and became functional day after day. Rashi has explained all this in his commentary on Genesis (Genesis 1,14, and 1,24). Philosophers called this first physical existence Hiyuli, the world's raw material. All other elements are derived from that matter called Hiyuli. Something parallel happened in the Celestial Regions. The original Cause, i.e. idea of G–d to create the universe, is what we call the כלל. All other thoughts and plans of G–d are פרטים, "details," by comparison.
  We can view the six hundred thousand letters in the Torah in a similar manner. They are the פרטים, whereas the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew Alphabet are the כלל. That this comparison is appropriate is demonstrated by the fact that all the six hundred thousand letters or words in the Torah are merely a repetition or permutation of these twenty-two letters in the אלף בית. The twenty-two letters in the Alphabet in turn are פרטים of the basic letter אלף. All the letters have their origin in the letter אלף, and "return" to the letter אלף. In this case the letter א, stands for the word Eleph, i.e. one thousand. Thus we begin with the letters א"ב, ג"ד, etc., until we get to the letter ת. This letter has a numerical value of 400, as we all know. The first of the "final" letters, the ך, equals 500. The "final ם equals 600, the "final" ן equals 700, the "final" ף equals 800, and the "final" ץ equals 900. After that we are back to "square one," i.e. the letter אלף, read 1000. The number "one thousand," is basically the same as the number "one" seeing that it differs only by the addition of zeros. Just as the letter א is unique amongst the lesser units (up to one thousand), so the number 1000 is unique amongst the numbers that are multiples of a thousand.
  This whole concept is reflected in the fact that the Levites who were counted amounted to precisely 22000. As such, they are the כלל to the six hundred thousand Israelites. The Israelites then are but פרטים of the כלל called Levites. Aaron was not counted according to Rashi on Numbers 3,39, since there are dots over his name in that verse. This means that he was to the Levites as the Levites were to the remainder of the Israelites, i.e. the כלל to the פרט. All of this is very similar to the way we have described Israel as the secret dimension of נפש, the Levites as the secret dimension of רוח, and the Priests as the secret dimension of נשמה in our commentary on the first three פרשיות of the book of Numbers. When the Torah instructs the giving of a tithe of ten percent to the Levites, and in turn the giving to the priests of a tithe of that ten per cent by the recipients of the first ten per cent, i.e. the Levites, we are confronted with the relationships of 1-10-100, or 2-20-200 respectively. By the priest receiving "one" out of the original "hundred", it becomes clear that he is the כלל, and the Levites and Israelites respectively, are varying kinds of פרט. That relationship is similar to the relationship of נשמה to נפש, etc.
  It was the Levites' task to stand guard outside the tabernacle, whereas the guard duty inside the precincts of the tabernacle was performed by the priests. The reason that a זר, non-priest or Levite, was not allowed to perform service in the Tabernacle was simply that the "cause" must not be confused with the "effect," since it is not his assigned place. Conversely, a priest must not perform his duties outside the Tabernacle, since that too is not the place assigned to him, and it would not befit his position in the scheme of things, i.e. לא לפי כבודו. The definition of what is חוץ למקומו, outside one's assigned place, is twofold. One is that one must not physically step outside the area assigned to one to perform one's duties. The other is that one must not enter the Holy of Holies, i.e. enter the inner sanctum. This is the meaning of Kohelet 10,4: "do not leave your place."
   Therein lies the secret of why the Priest must not perform the duties of the Levite, or vice versa. The Priests are the more important ones, their position vis-a-vis the Levites is like that of the firstborn in an ordinary family. The word בכור, firstborn, carries the connotation of גדולה, greatness, distinction, as we know from "אף אני בכור אתהו," "I too will appoint him as firstborn, highest of the kings of the earth" (Psalms 89,28). To signify that they occupied this position, they were awarded the firstborn of the pure animals born to the other tribes. This is also why the silver for redeeming the firstborn sons was awarded to them. The Levites were the "redemption" for the firstborn Israelites in accordance with their number.
   The underlying secret dimension of the principle of the relationship of כלל to פרט is the principle governing the relationship of cause and effect, or Creator and creature. These relationships must not be reversed. It is interesting that the Talmud Chullin 133a, tells us that the 24 portions that have been assigned to the Priests are all based on the principle of כלל ופרט, and that he who observes the "covenant of the salt," is considered as having observed the principle of כלל ופרט, whereas he who fails to observe it is as if he had violated the principle of כלל ופרט. I have explained elsewhere the deeper meaning of the relationship of כלל and פרט. The 24 gifts that are assigned to the Priests correspond to the 24 books of the Bible. The Torah in its entirety (the 24 books of the Bible), is the soul of the Jewish nation, and the Priests represent the נשמה of that nation. The written Torah, with its six hundred thousand letters, represents the כלל, whereas the 24 books represent the פרט in that combination. The "covenant of salt," symbolises the attribute of "peace" of which Aaron was the foremost exponent, since he has been described by our sages as being an אוהב שלום ורודף שלום, a lover and active searcher for peace. (Avot 1,12) It is a well known fact that the "lower" waters complained about having been relegated from the "upper" waters [second day of Creation], and that in order to pacify them G–d ordered the ceremony of נסוך המים, the libations of waters which were offered on the altar during the festival of Tabernacles to compensate them (Numbers 29,16 et al). [Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi explains that salt is only congealed water, hence water and salt are viewed as identical. This helps explain the Rashi we quote in the next paragraph. Ed.] Rashi explains on Leviticus 2,13, that the salt which was offered with every sacrifice is an expression of this Covenant made between G–d and the "lower" waters which had been separated from their counterparts. Since all the ways of Torah are pleasantness (Proverbs 3,17), i.e. דרכיה דרכי נועם וכל נתיבותיה שלום, it is only natural that the Priests and the Levites were charged with instructing the people, i.e. יורו משפטיך ליעקב, ותורתך לישראל, "They shall teach Your social laws to Jacob, and Your Torah to Israel" (Deut. 33,10).
  We find that Korach quarrelled with the Priests and the Levites. He was jealous of Elitzafan son of Uzziel having been appointed to the position of prince of the Levites, and of Aaron having been appointed High Priest. The two hundred and fifty men who supported him all violated the principle of trying to usurp the superior positions occupied by others, as we have already explained. This is similar to the Rabbis saying that במופלא ממך אל תדרוש, במכוסה ממך אל תחקור (Chagigah 13), "that which is too difficult for you, do not investigate, and that which is concealed from you do not seek it out."
  ויקח קרח . We would have expected the Torah to write ויקחו, "they took." Another difficulty is the expression קריאי מועד, אנשי שם, "men who had been appointed, men of distinguished reputation" (16,2). Why should these men be mentioned favourably when the Tosaphot Talmud Shabbat 12 says: "Shevna a man from Jerusalem," etc. Rabbeinu Tam crosses out the title "a man from Jerusalem," (or omits his name altogether) of this man, seeing he was a confirmed sinner and we do not dignify such sinners by mentioning their titles or even their names. We have a tradition that "the name of sinners should rot" (Proverbs 7,10), based on Yoma 38b. Even according to the view of Rabbi Yitzchak cited there, that if, say, a sinner is called "Abraham," we surely cannot stop calling everybody "Abraham" on account of the one sinful Abraham, at the very least such a person should not be accorded his title! Here the Torah seems to go out of its way to describe how these people had earned their titles! Moreover, in Sanhedrin 110, we are told that these men had outstanding abilities, knowing when to add an extra month to the calendar, etc. It says there that the expression אנשי שם, means that their reputation was international.
  Another problem is that Rashi writes that the prince Elitzur ben Shedeyur and some of his asscociates of the tribe of Reuben, was one of these two hundred and fifty men! Rabbeynu Bachyah writes on this subject that even the princes who had offered the 12 offerings described in Parshat Nasso were part of the two hundred and fifty men. Our sages further point out that in one place these men were described as קריאי מועד, and in another place as נשיאי העדה. In Parshat Bamidbar 1,16, they are referred to as קרואי העדה, נשיאי מטות אבותם. We know from Numbers 26,9, that the term קריאי העדה is used by the Torah for people who had provoked Israel into rebellion against G–d. It is certainly mindboggling to think that people of such calibre who had witnessed all these miracles should forfeit their standing as holy people by joining such a self-seeking rebellion. When we think of someone like Nachshon ben Aminadav who had risked his life being the first to enter the sea before it had even split, it is quite inconceivable that he should have lowered himself to such a degree! On the contrary, we find that Nachshon's merit even helped his descendants long afterwards, since our sages say that it did not prove helpful anymore to Elimelech the husband of Naomi in the book of Ruth, since the latter emigrated from the land of Israel (Baba Batra 91a).
  Another difficulty is the Torah saying: "Moses heard and fell on his face" (16,4). Sanhedrin 110, asks what it was precisely that Moses had heard, and Rabbi Samuel son of Nachmeyni says that he had heard that these people suspected him of committing adultery, since we read in Psalms 106,16: "ויקנאו למשה במחנה," which is interpreted by Rabbi Shmuel bar Vitzchak that each Jewish husband suspected Moses of a adultery with his wife, since the Torah had stated that "Moses took his tent and put it up outside the camp" (Exodus 33,7). The question arises that even granted the Jewish people were sinful, how could they have suspected Moses of adultery?! After all, Miriam had criticised Moses for not even living with his own wife, much less with other husbands' wives! What possible reason could these people have had to suspect Moses of something so patently absurd? Many commentators have written that this accusation is not to be taken at face value, but rather that the rebels denied the quality of Moses' prophetic insights, claiming that it was not, as stated, of a פנים אל פנים variety as described in Deut. 34,10, i.e. qualitatively superior to the prophetic powers of other prophets. The rebels claimed that these other angels by means of whom prophetic images are transmitted are known as "אישים," "men," meaning that they are the means by which humans receive intelligence from celestial sources. The recipient would then be described as אשת איש, "a married lady", much as a wife describes herself as such, seeing she is the "passive" part of her husband. Their intention then was to deny Moses his special relationship with G–d. It was this special relationship which Maimonides describes. In his Moreh Nevuchim he describes the people protesting Moses' arrogant behavior in claiming special status!
  I fail to understand how Maimonides, i.e. the Talmud, wants to prove this from Psalms quoted earlier. The language employed there is one describing "jealousy!" This lends more credence to those who understand the accusation levelled against Moses as being meant literally! They were supposedly saying that the reason Moses appointed Aaron and his sons as Priests was to avoid being involved in the procedure of the מים המאררים that a wife suspected of infidelity has to drink, seeing the Priest was his blood relation, and as such unable to administer the procedure (compare Sotah legislation in Numbers chapter 5,11-end). The quarrel was directed at Aaron. This is why these men reasoned that there must be substance to the people's suspicions. One cannot argue that since Moses had taken his tent out of the camp, this occurred before Aaron ever began his function as a High Priest, seeing that Moses removed his tent on the morrow of the Day of Atonement, when the Tabernacle had not yet existed. It is a fact that as soon as Moses gave instructions to collect materials for the building of the Tabernacle and the weaving of the Priests' garments, he had also announced who was to wear those garments, i.e. Aaron and his sons. There were grounds then for the suspicions, and Moses removed his tent to silence these suspicions. This is what Rashi explains there. Now that a quarrel had surfaced these suspicions were voiced openly, and that is why Moses fell on his face when he "heard." This is how one has to explain the plain meaning of the verse.
  Another difficulty is the verse בוקר ויודע ה' את אשר לו, "In the morning G–d will announce who is His, etc," and Rashi's comment in the name of Bamidbar Rabbah that the morning is a suitable time. The evening, a time when we have drunk wine, is not a suitable time to appear in front of G–d. Moses intended to delay matters in the hope that they would change their minds, and desist. One has to understand what this so called עת שכרות, “a time for drunkenness" is all about. The Midrash there also has Moses arguing that Korach committed an effrontery by changing what was as established a pattern by G–d as the division between evening and morning, light and dark, etc. It compared the selection of Aaron as High Priest as something similar to a law of nature! The Midrash bases that on a verse in Chronicles I 23,13: "ויבדל אהרון להקדישו בקדש הקדשים, "Aaron was set apart to sanctify him to be in the inner sanctum," where G–d uses the same expression for the distinction of Aaron as He had used when separating day and night. How could Rashi or the Midrash respectively, make such a comparison? Was Aaron's selection comparable to an Act of Creation?
  Another difficulty in the instructions in 16,21, to separate themselves from Korach, etc, is Moses' comment: "one man has sinned and You are going to be angry at the whole congregation?" According to Rashi G–d changed His mind and agreed with Moses (16,22). Are we to assume that Moses was smarter than G–d? Some commentators have explained appropriately that originally Moses had misunderstood G–d's intentions, and that this is why he posed the question of "האיש אחד יחטא" G–d had meant that they should separate only from the community of Korach, whereas Moses had thought that G–d had meant for Moses and Aaron to separate themselves from the entire people. This answer is not satisfactory, since we know that G–d knows what goes on in our minds. Why then did He allow Moses to make such an error instead of expressing Himself in a manner Moses would understand correctly? When two human beings argue with one another, it is perfectly normal to say that one misunderstood the other, and that this is the reason they argued, but surely G–d knew how Moses would react to His comments?
  A further problem is the expression העלו מסביב למשכן קרח, דתן ואבירם, in verse 24. Why were the other rebels not mentioned at this juncture? 
  Besides, why were these 250 men not swallowed by the earth as were Korach and family who descended into the bowels of the earth while still alive? The 250 were only burned as a result of their offering incense which it had not been their place to offer, just as the two sons of Aaron had been burned to death on that account. .
  Another question is the strange fact that the censers of these men who had offered the incense were used to make covers for the altar. Rashi says that they attained the status of כלי שרת, consecrated vessels for use in the Tabernacle (17,2). How are we to understand this, seeing they had been used to commit a sin? 
  If it was alright to convert these censers into holy vessels, why was this instruction limited to the censers of these 250 men, and the censer of Korach was not accorded the same treatment? The answer cannot be that Korach and all that was his was swallowed by the earth, since if these censers qualified as כלי שרת, holy vessels, they obviously were not Korach's personal property.
  A further difficulty is that Israel said to Moses and Aaron the day after Korach and his rebels had died "you have caused the death of the people of G–d." How could they accuse Moses and Aaron of such a thing, seeing they had witnessed G–d perform a special miracle? 
  The Yalkut Shimoni quotes a Midrash Tehillim 1,15, on Psalms 1,1, that the person who is praised there as not following in the footsteps of the wicked, refers to the sons of Korach who did not follow in the footsteps of their father, since the Torah said: סורו נא מעל אהלי אנשים הרשעים, "Please stand clear of the tents of these wicked people" (16,26). The next statement in that same Psalm, i.e. ובדרך חטאים לא עמד, "and he did not stand in the path of the sinners," is a reference to the מחתות החטאים האלה בנפשותם, "the censers of those sinners who had forfeited their souls" (17,3). The third statement in that verse in Psalms is supposed to refer to Korach himself, i.e. ובמושב לצים לא ישב, "he did not sit amongst the scoffers," i.e. he who did not sit amongst those scoffers is to be congratulated. The latter had been scoffing at Moses and Aaron. The Midrash here quotes an example of the apparently oppressive nature of Torah legislation which Korach is supposed to have used to show that Moses and Aaron were insensitive to the plight of widows and orphans. Verse two of that same Psalm in which it says such a praisewothy person took delight in the teaching of the Lord, is applied to the sons of Korach, who sang the praises of G–d, refusing to quarrel with Moses, etc. The remainder of that verse extolling people who study Torah day and night is also applied to the sons of Korach. Verse three, which describes such people as comparable to trees planted near an abundant supply of water, is applied to the sons of Korach who after they saw what had happened to Korach, Datan and Aviram were found standing tall like the mast of a ship, since the Torah says ויהיו לנס, "and the became like a flag." [another meaning of that word could be "mast", at any rate something compelling one's attention. Ed.] Verse 4 in that same Psalm continues: "not so the wicked," which is again applied by the Midrash to Korach and his companions. The statement following in the Psalm in verse 6: "for G–d knows the way of the righteous," is applied to the sons of Korach also, and finally the end of that verse "the path of the wicked is doomed," is another reference to Korach and his congregation. So far the Midrash.
  We note that the Psalmist mentions three distinct subjects in the first verse: 1) עצת רשעים, "the advice or counsel of the wicked;" 2) דרך חטאים, "the way of the sinners;" 3) מושב לצים, "an assembly of scoffers." In the closing verses of that Psalm three distinct subjects are also mentioned, 1) לא כן הרשעים, 2לא יקמומו הרשעים, 3) ודרך הרשעים. We should also note that in the scoffing Korach had indulged in as quoted by the Midrash, he had only cited examples from Torah legislation that dealt with laws pertaining to the earth, such as various gifts to the poor the farmer has to leave, prohibitions of mixing certain species, etc. 
  We have learned in Avot 4,21, in the name of Rabbi Eleazar Hakappor, that the three things which cause man to depart from this world are "jealousy, greed, and the quest for personal glory." Why were these sins singled out by that Rabbi more than any others, many of which carry a mandatory death sentence at the hands of Heaven? 
  We know from Proverbs 14,30, "envy is iike rottenness of the bones," that ordinarily, jealousy is a natural cause of death. Greed, lust, cause man's death, while he remains unsated, since "man dies while half his desires remain unfulfilled" (Kohelet Rabbah 1,34). We also have the statement of our sages that "he who chases after glory and honour, glory and honour flee from him" (Jerusalem Talmud Avodah Zarah 3,1). On this the sages comment that he dies one hundred deaths from jealousy and not just one. Rashi explains the Mishnah in Avot by Rabbi Elazar Hakappor as applying to Adam; it was these negative virtues that caused him to become mortal. He describes the angels who had to serve him delicacies in גן עדן as becoming jealous of his status, his כבוד, honor. He cites Adam's greed to eat from the tree of knowledge as contributing to his death. The honour he enjoyed in Gan Eden caused him to be expelled. He quotes other opinions that apply this Mishnah to the jealousy displayed by Korach versus Moses and Aaron. Actually we have to view these three evils as the root causes of all impurities, i.e. טומאות, which include all negative virtues. When these three characteristics are used positively, they in turn are the root causes of all positive virtues. Concerning this fact, Ben Zoma asks at the beginning of that chapter in Avot "Who is a wise man? He who is willing to learn from any person. Who is a hero? He who is able to restrain his passions. Who is wealthy? He who is satisfied with his lot." "Heroism" is an aspect of "jealousy," as we know from Jeremiah 46,12, גבור בגבור כמותן, "for hero encounters a hero of similar stature" [the competitive element is the jealousy]. We also have Rashi's comment on Numbers 25,11, בקנאו את קנאתי בתוכם, "when he displayed jealousy on My behalf," that this "jealousy" displayed by Pinchas was the retribution G–d was entitled to exact from Zimri, i.e. it was נקמה. We know that קנאת סופרים, a competitive spirit between scholars is laudable, since it means that a person battles his evil urge, trying to excel in good deeds and character traits. This is the most important battle a person has to fight in his life. We have the story of the philosopher who encountered soldiers returning from a great conquest. He told them: "you did win a minor battle, but you have failed to win the major battle, namely man's battle with his evil urge." The reason it is called "the great battle," is that it is a never-ending battle. Concerning that battle, Ben Zoma said that the true hero is he who vanquishes his evil urge. The statement "who is wealthy, he who is satisfied with his lot," is the exact opposite of the negative virtue of תאוה, greed, i.e. never being satisfied. This is why the rabbis said that a person who is afflicted with the disease of being greedy dies before he has achieved even half of what he had hoped for. Lastly Ben Zoma described the חכם, wise person, as someone who is willing to learn from anybody else. The true meaning of honour is to be considered a wise man, as we know from Proverbs 3,35: "The wise shall inherit honour." When a person does not chase after glory it is liable to pursue him. Rabbi Yossi is on record as saying: "I have learned a great deal from my teachers; I have learned even more from my friends; but most of all have I learned from my students" (Taanit 7).
   The prophet Jeremiah 9,22, says concerning these three attributes: "Let not the wise boast of his wisdom, nor the hero of his valour, nor the rich of his wealth." What the prophet means is that if these virtues are merely physical attributes, they are nothing but being vainglorious, greedy and jealous, i.e. קנאה, תאוה, כבוד. However, כי עם בזאת יתהלל המתהלל, "but if these three attributes are spiritual in nature, then such a person may boast of his close relationship with Me." 
  The words השכל וידוע אותי in that verse, mean that "when these attributes originate with Me, then they are something worth boasting about." The fact that the prophet seems to repeat himself by saying השכל וידוע, may be an allusion to the perfection of these attributes personified by our patriarch Jacob, of whom the Torah testified in Genesis 33,18, that he arrived at the city of Shechem שלם, perfect, which Rashi there interprets as whole in body, i.e. physical prowess, גבורה; whole in money, i.e. he was well satisfied with his lot, i.e. עשיר; and finally, whole in his Torah, i.e. he was a חכם. These three kinds of perfection or wholeness, are also described in Deut. 6,5, which tells us how to love G–d, i.e. בכל לבבך, ובכל נפשך, ובכל מאדך. The heart represents physical life, and it was Yehudah ben Teima who when he said "be mighty like the lion," referred to performing G–d's commandments with all the power of one's heart, according to the introduction of Tur Orach Chayim. When the Torah continues: “בכל נפשך,” the reference is to the abstract life-force, the mind. This means that the mind, which normally craves recognition, should be put at the disposal of G–d's commands. The expression "ובכל מאדך," refers to one's financial wealth, i.e. putting that which is normally subject to one's greed at G–d's disposal. We find that these attributes can be employed in one's relationship with G–d, since many of the commandments of religious ritual require the expenditure of money, such as contributions to Temple maintenance, purchase of communal sacrifices, etc. Other commandments require that one exerts one's body, such as all the laws involving forbidden foods. Still other commandments can be performed only if one uses one's mental faculties.
  Similarly, the same three attributes are also to be employed in one's performing those commandments which regulate our relationships with our fellow man. The Torah uses the term ואהבת, "you shall love," for your relationship with your fellow-man, just as it uses that expression to describe the optimal relationship between you and your Creator. You may have to exert your body in order to save your fellow-man's life. Every deed of loving kindness performed involves use of one's body to fulfil the commandment; further examples are the need to rise before an aged person or to help an enemy unload his beast of burden, etc, etc. One's money is involved when one does not charge or accept interest on loans, performs acts of charity. Finally, one's mind is involved when one teaches one's neighbor's child Torah, etc.
  We have been commanded to perform the above mentioned three commandments in order to achieve a degree of perfection, as our sages have pointed out that anyone who wears the fringes on his garment, the phylacteries on his head and arm, and whose door posts are adorned with mezzuzot, falls under the category of people concerning whom it has been said "that the threefold thread will not break easily" (Kohelet 4,12 quoted in Menachot 43). The ציציות surround a person's body from all four sides, and allude to its being whole. The מזוזה on his house symbolises that all is well with him financially. Whatever a person owns he keeps in his house and closes the door, allowing the presence of the מזוזה to act as his protection. This is why it is called מזוזה, i.e "it prevents it from being moved." It is man's demonstration that he believes that whatever he owns originates from G–d and has to be devoted to His service. The phylacteries on a man's head allude to his serving G–d with his mind, the ones on his arm are positioned opposite the heart, a source of his thought processes. Mental activity is the combined result of brain and heart. This alludes then to the wholeness of his Torah. I have already mentioned that these three areas of "wholeness," are the ones referred to earlier as חכם, גבור, עשיר.
   Ben Zoma concludes his statement in the Mishnah quoted above by saying: "Who is truly honored? He who honors G–ds creatures" [human beings]. He tells us that just as we have to do our duty by G–d, so we have to do our duty by our fellow human beings. Both obligations rank equally. The same three attributes are also the qualifications that are prerequisites for a person who aspires to become a prophet. Our sages have phrased it thus: "Prophetic spirit does not come to rest on a person who does not combine within himself wisdom, valour and wealth." (Shabbat 92) The source for these requirements is Moses himself who possessed all these attributes. Prophets also need to learn from Moses not to boast about possession of these attributes. Practising humility is an acknowledgment that one does not "possess" these attributes, but has been endowed with them by G–d. The greater the degree of prophecy a man displays, the greater the amount of humility he must practise. This is why Moses could be described as the most humble of all people. The true leader displays these virtues both vis-a-vis G–d and vis-a-vis his contemporaries. Studying Torah in order to be called "Rabbi," etc., is frowned upon. Neither, of course, should one be motivated by the desire to become rich or the desire to exercise authority over people.
  The general rule is that wherever you find true greatness you find humility. Our sages went so far as to say that "wherever you find the greatness of G–d described you will find His humility described at the same time" (Megillah 31a). Examples of this rule are written in the Torah, repeated in the Books of the Prophets and again repeated in the Hagiographa. We read in Deut. 10,17: "The Lord your G–d is the G–d of all gods, Master of all masters, the Great G–d, the Powerful One, the Awesome One, who does not show favoritism nor accept bribes." This is followed immediately by the statement "who upholds the cause of the orphan, the widow, who loves the proselyte (stranger) to provide him with bread and clothing." We read in Isaiah 57,15: "For thus says He who high aloft dwells forever, whose name is holy; I dwell on high, in holiness; yet with the contrite and the lowly in spirit- reviving the spirits of the lowly, reviving the hearts of the contrite." We read in Psalms 68,5: "Sing to G–d, chant hymns to His name; extol Him who rides the clouds; the Lord is His name. Exult in His Presence--the father of orphans, the champion of widows, G–d in His Holy Habitation. G–d restores the lonely to their homes, sets free the imprisoned safe and sound, etc."
  The language used in the introductory quotation: "It is written in the Torah, repeated in the Books of Prophets, and thrice repeated in the Hagiographa," deserves our attention. It would have sufficed to say that "we find this in Torah, the Books of the Prophets and the Hagiographa." The fact is that we are not simply dealing with a repetition of the same thing three times, but that different subjects are in fact mentioned each time. Concerning the first subject, the term used is: "it is written," concerning the second subject, the term used is "it is taught in the Books of the prophets," and concerning the third subject it says: "it has been thrice stated." Accordingly, each statement has to be explained while having in mind how it has been phrased.
  The threefold statement refers to the three areas of achievement of a person, concerning which Jeremiah has warned a person not to boast. If a person should feel inclined to boast of his wealth, i.e. עושר, the Torah says that G–d is Master of all, and all success is due only to His influence. G–d is the supreme Judge who does not accept bribes or in any way does things for His personal advantage. When a human judge has to operate in such a fashion, i.e. not get paid for his troubles nor receive other recognition, he is liable to decline the tiresome burden of presiding over litigation, seeing that there is nothing in it for him. Not so G–d. He looks after the litigation of the orphan, the widow, etc., those who have no money to offer. Neither does He engage in favoritism, since the claimants He looks after have nothing to offer in terms of honour either. G–d does what He does simply because He wants to see true justice done.
  The second quotation introduced by the words: "שנוי בנביאים, is different from the first, as indicated by the expression Shinnuy, i.e. "different." It is the matter of גבורה, which is alluded to in the quotation taken from one of the Books of Prophets. When applied to a leader, this means that such a leader is capable of enforcing his will by sheer superior force. The prophet makes the point that G–d is superior, stronger than anyone or anything, and in spite of this He concerns Himself with the helpless, etc. This is the meaning of ואוהב גר לתת לו לחם ושמלה, that "He loves the stranger to give him bread and clothing." This is a true example of humility. We are to learn from G–d's example how to conquer our passions and desires, seeing "man's heart, by nature is evil," he is naturally haughty. 
  "Thrice repeated in the hagiographa," refers to the subject of wisdom, i.e. חכמה, that the prophet says one should not boast of. A wise man should not use his standing in the community to demand extra consideration, preferential treatment, etc. We are to observe how G–d who is praised, sung to, exalted as the One who "rides in the heavens," and who would have every reason not to concern Himself with the lowly to delegate such activity to creatures of inferior rank, nevertheless undertakes personally to act as אבי יתומים, father of the orphans He even describes His function as such.
   On Proverbs 6,32, נואף אשה חסר לב, "anyone who commits adultery with a woman lacks undertanding," the Midrash comments that anyone who accepts the mantle of authority thinking he would benefit therefrom is no better than an adulterer who enjoys the body of a woman. Rabbi Menachem son of Yaakov makes the same point based on Proverbs 25,8, אל תצא לריב מהר, "do not be in a hurry to get involved in a quarrel!" He points out that the word Riv, quarrel, is spelled without the letter Yud and can be read as Rav i.e. Rabbi, or leader. The verse in Proverbs there continues "for what will you do in the end, when your neighbour has shamed you? What will you answer them when they ask you questions on the morrow?" Rabbi Zeyrah tries to prove the point from the third command-ment not to swear a false oath (Exodus 20,7). He reasons that if that verse were to prohibit perjury, the Torah had already written "do not swear falsely in My name!" (Leviticus 19,12). The meaning of the verse in Exodus then must be that a person should not seek to assume office involving authority over people, unless he is fit for such a position. [The commentary is obviously based on the expression תשא, meaning "to elevate," in this case to elevate oneself, לשוא, inappropriately, vaingloriously. Ed.] Rabbi Abahu said, quoting G–d, "I have been called קדוש, holy, and you the Jewish people, have been called "holy." Unless you possess all My attributes, do not seek out positions of authority." Why did we need four different statements purporting to prove the same point? In which respect is one different from the other? 
  The first Rabbi quoted makes it plain that he speaks of a person who seeks such a position for his personal gratification. He views it as his due for having studied a great deal of Torah. The objection to the appointment of such a person is that it is forbidden to seek personal gratification and advantage from words of Torah. We are told in Sotah 4 in the name of Rabbi Chiyah bar Abba in reference to Proverbs 6,26, that "a married woman can ensnare even a prestigious man," that a haughty person will sooner or later commit the sin of adultery. Haughtiness could be the result of someone having studied Torah. The reason that one must not become boastful even if one has studied a great deal of Torah, is that we are told in Avot 2,8, that "if you have studied much Torah do not take credit for this, for after all you have only done what you have been created for." If not for Torah, man would have been no better than the smelly drop of semen which is his origin. Torah converts this smelly drop into a waterproof cistern which does not lose anything that is put into it. Under such conditions the words of Torah have a chance to increase and multiply. This is why we have a tradition that words of Torah are compared to seedlings. Just as seedlings increase and multiply, so do words of Torah multiply. Torah has been called אשה, "wife," as we know from Deut. 33,4, where the expression מורשה קהלת יעקב, is also interpreted as מאורסה, i.e. she is Israel's "betrothed." When one uses one's Torah knowledge to boast, then this "betrothed" is considered as an alien woman (compare Pessachim 49). Such a woman is like a vessel full of excrement, though everybody runs after her. Hence the drop of semen becomes an evil smelling drop.
  Rabbi Menachem son of Yaakov speaks of the situation when someone studies Torah in order to acquire the title "Rabbi," which is the same as wanting to become rich through Torah study. The desire of such a person to become rich through Torah nullifies the value of his studies, and this is why the Rabbi asked rhetorically, "how will he respond to those who question him tomorrow?" Rabbi Zeyrah refers to a person who studies Torah in order to be regarded as "an elder." He does so in order to possess authority and exert influence over his contemporaries. This is why he adds "you are not fit to assume the mantle of authority," since משפט לאלוהים הוא, "justice is G–d's alone." The expression אלוהים, always refers to experts who enjoy ordination as judges. I have explained elsewhere that the only completely true judge is G–d Himself, since only He can combine within Himself the function of witness as well as judge. However, G–d had given permission to Moses to perform the functions of a judge, and this is why He referred to Moses as אלוהים, such as when the Torah describes him as משה איש האלוהים. This is equivalent to G–d having ordained Moses as judge (Deut 33,1). Afterwards, Moses ordained Joshua by placing his hands upon him. This transfer of ordination continued throughout the generations. The transfer by G–d of His authority, was not an abandonment by G–d of His own authority, He only "lent" this authority to those who were ordained. The ordained Rabbi or judge acts only as G–d's deputy. In order to make this point, Rabbi Zeyrah says that G–d is called "holy," קדוש. This means that He is apart, in a class by Himself. This is why we proclaim in the קדושה prayer that He is קדוש, קדוש, קדוש, three times, i.e. He is separate from all the three worlds, the עולם הבריאה, עולם היצירה, and the עולם העשיה. Nonetheless, (as continued in that prayer) מלא כל הארץ כבודו, the whole universe is full of His glory.
  Moses, of course, possessed all the necessary attributes, i.e. חכמה, גבורה, עושר, as our sages have stated on several occasions. However, Korach and his group suspected Moses of desiring all these attributes for his own ends. Since they suspected him of having appointed Aaron as High Priest and Aaron's sons as his deputies for his own benefit, they also suspected him of committing actual adultery as we described earlier. They thought that one negative virtue leads to another, that he who pursues positions of power is compared to someone who enjoys the body of a woman married to someone else. Korach and his group committed a great sin by denying Moses' level of prophecy. They downgraded the institution of prophecy as such; we have demonstrated already that prophets have to excel in these three virtues in order to qualify for the gift of prophecy.
   Our sages (Tanchuma Korach 5) have said that Korach was deceived by his mental eye, since he foresaw a chain of illustrious descendants among his offspring including the prophet Samuel. He did not realise that these descendants excelled exactly in the reverse characteristics he himself had displayed. Whereas Korach engaged in quarrels with Moses and G–d, Samuel was a man who was on a good footing with both man and G–d. He practiced the virtues of Aaron rather than those of his forebear. I have explained already that these three virtues have to be practiced both vis-a-vis G–d and vis-a-vis man. This is the meaning of ומצא חן ושכל טוב בעיני אלוקים ואדם, "and you will find favour and high esteem in the eyes of G–d and man" (Proverbs 3,4). This is what is meant that Samuel was טוב עם אלוקים ועם אנשים, that Samuel was "good to G–d and to men." This also explains what חנה meant when she prayed to G–d that He should grant her זרע אנשים, which our sages explained to mean that she asked for a son who would combine within himself the virtues of Moses and Aaron (Samuel I 1,11). We also find that Moses and Aaron are compared to Samuel in Psalms 99,6: "Moses and Aaron among His priests and Samuel among those who call on His name, and He answers them." How do we reconcile all this with the statement in Deut. 34,10, that "no prophet ever arose again who could compare to Moses who had known G–d face to face?" The answer is simply that Samuel possessed some of the virtues of Moses and Aaron, since Moses in his closeness to G–d had concentrated almost exclusively on devoting himself to G–d so that he did not have much time left for private matters. This too is what is meant when he is described as איש האלוקים. Aaron, on the other hand, concentrated on the virtue of "peace." He was always busy pursuing peace, trying to restore harmonious relations between husband and wife, etc. In other words, he was primarily טוב לאנשים, good towards people. The prophet Samuel concentrated on practising the two outstanding virtues of both Moses and Aaron. We find that he travelled from town to town in order to perform acts of justice, truth and peace (Samuel I 7,16).
  Let us now explain our Parshah. There were three distinct groups of people involved in the quarrel. The central contender was Korach. He was the scoffer about whom the Psalmist had said that one should not sit in the company of scoffers, as we have explained earlier. Datan and Aviram were wicked people, as we know from Moses saying in Numbers 16,25/26: "Moses went to Datan and Aviram followed by the elders of Israel. He said to the congregation: "Please depart from around the tents of these wicked people, etc." Concerning Datan and Aviram, the Psalmist had said in the same verse: "Hail to whoever has not followed the counsel of the wicked people." The third group were the two hundred and fifty men who sinned against their souls, as we know from 17,3: "and take the censers of these people who have sinned against their souls, etc." Concerning those people our Psalm said "hail to whoever did not stand on the path of the sinful ones." The scoffer Korach, used matters connected with the soil as his subjects. Later, he made fun of Torah legislation involving sheep, etc., as mentioned in the Midrash quoted earlier. In all this he paralleled the behaviour of Cain, who had first brought a gift of פרי האדמה, the fruit of the earth. Abel, on the other hand, had brought an offering from the firstborn of his sheep. Cain had brought flax, Abel had brought wool. We know that there was a great deal of difference between the offering of Cain and the offering of Abel; G–d refused to accept the offering of Cain. This is why a mixture of wool and flax (linen), is considered כלאים, and is forbidden to be worn together in Jewish law (Leviticus 19,19). I have elaborated on this elsewhere.
   it is well known that Kabbalists have said that Korach was the re-incarnation (גלגול) of Cain. Cain had to undergo three גלגולים, one each for his נפש, his רוח, and his נשמה. They were the Egyptian whom Moses had slain; Yitro, Moses' father-in-law,as alluded to in Judges 4,17. In that verse Yael is described as the wife of Chever Hakeyni, the word "Hakeyni" being a reference to her being descended from Cain." He reappeared in the guise of Korach. Moses, on the other hand, was a re-incarnation of Abel whom Cain had killed. Moses took revenge on behalf of Abel on three separate occasions. 1) When he killed the Egytian who was the re-incarnation of Cain's נפש. This is hinted at in the wording ויך את המצרי. The numerical value of ויך, when you add one digit for the word itself, equals the numerical value of הבל, i.e. 37. The word המצרי, equals the numerical value of משה, i.e. 345. 2) Yitro deferred to Moses by giving him his daughter Tzipporah as a wife. She was the (גלגול) of the extra twin that had been born with Abel, on whose account Cain had slain Abel out of jealousy. When Korach now started a quarrel he simply reverted to the pattern in which his original ancestor Cain had acted. 3) Moses then killed him (i.e. caused his death), fulfilling the Torah's commandment that if someone has shed innocent blood, his own blood will be spilled by human hand (Genesis 9,6). We must understand that verse as telling us that the very person who had been slain, will in due course slay his murderer. This is why we find Moses, who was in reality the re-incarnation of Abel, slaying Korach who was the re-incarnation of Cain. The fact that Korach's death was due to the earth swallowing him was also an example of the punishment fitting the crime, since the same earth had been remiss when it opened to hide the evil deed that Cain had committed, and "covered" his blood (compare Genesis 4, 10/11). All this is explained by the Tziyoni.
  The Zohar refers to Cain as "unclean jealousy, jealousy of menstruation," and he describes the very birth of Cain as due to the pollutant the serpent had injected into Eve. The serpent's motivation had been its jealousy of Eve. Similarly Korach was jealous of the appointment of Elitzafan to the position of prince of the Kehatites. We find therefore that Korach had been infected with this pollutant of the original serpent.
  The three groups of rebels we have mentioned represented the three negative virtues of קנאה, תאוה, and כבוד, jealousy, greed, and craving for honour. These are the traits that contribute to man losing his life (both here and in the Hereafter). They are the very opposites of the good characteristics described earlier. Korach was afflicted by jealousy, Datan and Aviram were affected by greed, and the two hundred and fifty men suffered from the desire to achieve higher status. We shall now elaborate on this: Korach's jealousy was a trait due to the original serpent. The serpent had denied creation ex nihilo by holding out the hope that Eve would become like G–d, and suggesting that G–d had created the universe only after having eaten from that tree. Anyone who denies creatio ex nihilo, is in effect denying the existence of G–d and the existence of a system of justice and fairness, and therefore accountability, supervised by the Creator. When Cain had started his quarrel with Abel he had said that there was no judge, no justice, and no Hereafter, as is evident from the Targum Yonathan on Bereshit 4,8. Korach also denied the prophetic powers of Moses, that the Torah originated in Heaven and that the earth had been created because of the merit of Moses, as we have been told בראשית, בשביל משה, שנאמר וירא ראשית לו (Deut 33,21). Moses represented the very opposite of jealousy as we know from when he said to Joshua: "Are you going to practice jealousy on my behalf?" (Numbers 11,29) He was anxious that the spirit of prophecy should proliferate throughout the Jewish nation.
  The reason that the Torah reports the quarrel of Korach immediately after having taught us the laws about ציצית is explained by Rashi, who says that ציצית teaches the unity of G–d, His existence, and that He created the world ex nihilo. It also teaches that the origin of Torah is in Heaven, that it is not man made. It teaches that there is a system of reward and punishment which operates in this world. Concerning ציצית the Torah says in Numbers 15,39: "when you see Him i.e. אותו, etc." There are eight threads above the blue thread and eight threads below the blue thread which is threaded through the corner of the garment. [4 threads on each corner of the 4- cornered garment, before the threads are bent double. Ed.] Subsequently we attach five knots, each one being a double knot making a total of ten. Thus we arrive at a total of sixteen threads and ten knots, the numerical value of the Ineffable Name of G–d. This name teaches that He is, was, and will be, and that He is the Cause of all Existence.
  The legislative details of the commandment of ציצית allude to the metaphysical symbol of "One," אחד, the letter ח representing the eight threads, the letter ד the four fringes, and the letter א referring to the upper knot which is a scriptural requirement according to הלכה; it also alludes to חדוש העולם, creatio ex nihilo. The four directions of the earth are represented by the four fringes which are suspended on the outer garment, a reference to Psalms 93,1, that "G–d is robed in grandeur;" all the directions are directly dependent on Him and emanate from Him. The total of thirty-two threads on the fringes are reminiscent of the thirty two times the name אלוקים occurs in the Torah's report of the creation. It also teaches that the Torah is of Divine origin, since the numerical value of the word ציצית plus the eight threads and 5 knots combine to make a total of 613, i.e. the number of commandments in the Torah. The commandment also alludes to the system of reward and punishment, as explained by scholars of the Kabbalah since תכלת, azure blue, is an allusion to the attribute of Justice, whereas לבן, white, refers to the attribute of Mercy. This is the true meaning of his statement in 16,3, ובתוכם ה', meaning "G–d is among them," i.e. "one of many," his denial of G–d's supremacy.
  This is the reason Moses was forced to demonstrate that G–d was able, even at this late stage, to produce an entirely new phenomenon, בריאה חדשה. Moses hinted at the fact that Korach's sin originated in that "menstrual pollutant" that we have referred to earlier as having been injected into Eve by the serpent when he deferred G–d's decision by saying that "in the morning G–d will make known who is on His side and holy, and will bring that person close to Him" (16,5), since the night was a time for drunkenness as the Midrash had stated. We had explained that the serpent had used the fruit of the grapevine to seduce Eve with. The difference between that kind of wine, and יין המשומר, the kind of wine G–d will offer the righteous to drink in the world to come, is that the former is liable to intoxicate (those that drink it), whereas the latter causes pure joy (to those who imbibe it).
  The expression הבדלו, "become separate!" which Moses used in 16,21, also alludes to the "separation" of waters that took place during the second day of Creation (Genesis 1,7). "Separations" are indications of creational activity. Originally, all of Creation had been for the sake of "Adam". Since Adam however, grew apart from G–d, Aaron was brought "close to G–d" in his place when he became the High Priest. We have explained all this based on the Midrash in our commentary on the portions that comprise תורת כהנים.
  Jealousy caused Korach to "robe himself" in haughtiness, caused him to aspire to greatness. This is why the expression ויקח קרח, should be understood as "he took the fact that he was the son of Yitzhar into consideration, and decided he was entitled to higher rank than had been accorded him so far. We know that Bamidbar Rabbah quotes Rabbi Levi as saying that Korach considered the fact that he was the son of יצהר, [another name for oil], and that oil always floats on top. Furthermore, he considered the fact that he was also the grandson of Kehat who had been found worthy to found the family that would carry the Holy Ark. By dwelling on these points he convinced himself that the position of leadership of the Kehatites should have belonged to him, and not to Elitzafan who was only fourth in line. These were the considerations which resulted in his being deprived of his life and his future.
  What were Datan and Aviram's considerations? They first considered that as descendants of Reuben, the firstborn amongst the tribes, they were entitled to high positions. As a result they perverted justice by denying that Moses was a prophet, i.e. his having been appointed as leader rightfully. Their sin was the greed which causes a person to lose his life in this world and the World to Come, the exact reverse of the recipe for riches: counting one's blessings, as we have learned from Ben Zoma in Avot. They had thought that Moses had secured his leadership position only to enrich himself and his family, that he appointed Aaron and his sons Priests and the members of his tribe as Levites only so they could live off the various gifts that the Israelites had to hand over to them. They also thought that they had wanted to monopolise these positions since the bringing of incense enriches those who offer it (Yuma 26). This is why they complained saying: "did you give us the inheritance of field or vineyard" (16,14)? This is the meaning of: "they assumed an upright position at the entrance of their tent, etc." (16,27). They failed to remember that the mezuzah's metaphysical dimension is sufficient to assure financial security, as pointed out earlier. I have already outlined that the three negative virtues of jealousy, greed, and the pursuit of personal honour, correspond to the problems associated with power, wealth, and wisdom respectively. The three areas in which man has to achieve a degree of perfection are his body, his financial resources, and his spiritual resources (his soul). The three commandments which provide help in achieveing these perfections are ציצית, מזוזה, and תפילין. By garbing himself in the mantle of jealousy Korach scoffed at the commandment of ציצית. Datan and Aviram who garbed themselves in greed had failed to pay attention to their מזוזה and what it stood for. The two hundred and fifty men erred in respect of the commandment of תפילין, as we shall explain.
  Datan and Aviram accused Moses and Aaron of misleading the people when they said in 16,14: "should you gouge out those men's eyes? we will not come!" These words alluded to a metaphysical dimension, that Korach was the reincarnation of Cain. All our commentators say that when Moses slew the Egyptian (who was part of Cain's reincarnation as we have explained), it was Datan and Aviram who told on him and who made an issue of Moses' taking the law into his own hands, etc. (Exodus 2, 13/14). Now they concentrated on their greed for money. This was because, according to tradition, they had become impoverished as a result of having reported Moses' action to Pharaoh. When Moses had been bidden to return to Egypt the Torah said that all the people who had sought his death had already died (Exodus 4,19). Since Datan and Aviram were obviously still "alive," this meant that they had lost their influence to cause harm, since "poor people, childless people, leprous people, and blind people are considered dead people" (Zohar Beha-alotcha 153, Nedarim 64). Our sages also say that while in Egypt both Datan and Aviram were childless, and not like the other Jews who had been blessed with an abundance of children. They now lost the children they had fathered since the Exodus, due to their rebellious behaviour. It is almost certain that they were afflicted with צרעת, seeing that this is the standard penalty for malicious gossip, something they had certainly been guilty of. Even if their bodies had not been afflicted by that disease, certainly their souls had become afflicted by it. The Zohar explains Proverbs 21,23, "He who guards his mouth and tongue guards his soul from troubles," i.e. מצרות נפשו. He says we should read instead מצרעת נפשו, from afflicting his soul with "leprosy." By sarcastically asking: "Are you going to gouge out the eyes of these men, etc.?" Datan and Aviram described a method of "death" of someone who is compared to the dead since he does not possess eyesight. This explains Rashi's comment on Exodus 4,19, where he quotes Nedarim 64 that the poor are considered as if dead. Their sin consisted of greed, the opposite of the virtue of enjoying one's share, which is the true wealth.
  The two hundred and fifty men, amongst whom there were also the princes, were motivated by good intent. They did not act out of wickedness, but erred. They believed that their quarrel was לשם שמים, in order to advance the will of Heaven. They did not in any way commit an act of heresy. They believed firmly both in G–d and in Moses as G–d's appointed leader. They were well aware that everything Moses had done had been at the behest of G–d. They only disagreed with Moses having appointed Aaron and his sons. They believed that this had come about in response to Moses' request to G–d. They believed that Moses had prayed that the honour he enjoyed should not depart from his house, i.e. his family and his tribe. Since we know that G–d "רצון יראיו יעשה, will fulfil the wishes of those who fear Him," they assumed that this is what Moses had done, and decided to aspire to high positions likewise. They wanted "real" honour, not what passes for such without being the real thing. In other words, they aspired to recognition of their spiritual level. They were fully aware that the kind of authority G–d grants, is the sharing His own glory with those who revere Him. They knew therefore, that such glory has nothing to do with physical attributes, is totally spiritual in nature, and means that G–d's spirit comes to rest on a person. The purpose of being appointed to a high position is to enable one to better fulfil G–d's commandments, to be closer to the Kingdom of Heaven; promotion of such people reflects that they have achieved a higher level of holiness. Since they had already achieved a level of wisdom which enabled them to decide when adjustments had to be made to the calendar, as we stated earlier, and that involves being privy to one of G–d's most profound secrets, they are called by the Torah קריאי מועד ואנשי שם. They had wanted that this kind of כבוד should extend to all of them, i.e. that they would all become privy to this degree of חכמה, wisdom.
   This then is the deeper meaning of the words החטאים האלה בנפשותם, "these people who had sinned against their souls." The word חוטא, is usually applied to someone who commits an unintentional sin. The intention of these people had been to improve their spiritual level, i.e. "בנפשותם." In this respect they were not much different from Nadav and Avihu, who had been referred to as גדולי ישראל, great men among Israel, and concerning whom Moses himself had quoted G–d as saying בקרובי אקדש, "I must be sanctified by those who are close to Me" (Leviticus 10,3). Rashi explains there that Moses described these two people as superior to himself and to Aaron. We are told in Sanhedrin 52a, that Nadav and Avihu anxiously awaited the death of Moses and Aaron in order to become heirs to their lofty positions. At first glance, that statement suggests that their desire was criminal. The truth is, however, that they committed a sin לשמה, for a higher purpose, they yearned for this position in order to come closer to G–d. This is why the Torah describes their death as בקרבתם לפני ה' "because of their closeness to G–d" (Leviticus 16,1). Were it not so, the Torah should have written בהקריבם, "when they offered, etc." The Torah wanted us to understand, however, that what happened was due to their offering themselves before G–d. They died while bringing incense, which is of a spiritual dimension [since only the fragrance is of the essence]. The function of the incense is to create a close relationship between the "upper"' and the "lower" world. The fact that only their souls and not their bodies were burned testifies to the nature of their error. What happened to the two hundred and fifty men who offered incense was quite similar. Their sin, too, just as the death of Nadav and Avihu was due to their desire to elevate their souls, נפשותם. Their death was due too to their having offered incense.
  We have to ask ourselves why these men were described as חטאים, whereas the Torah does not refer thus to the sons of Aaron. The answer is that they made common cause with Korach. Had they pursued their noble intentions without swelling the ranks of Korach and Datan and Aviram, they would not have been described as חוטאים, sinners at all. The Baal Haturim already alludes to this by quoting the number 250 as being the letters in the first word of Proverbs 13,9, ונר רשעים ידעך, that "the lamp of the wicked will be extinguished."
  The two verses commencing with ויקומו, and ending with the words על קהל ה' by (16,3), lend themselves to two different interpretations. When Korach and Datan and Aviram spoke these words, they were criminal words. When the two hundred and fifty men spoke the same words, their intentions were honourable. In the case of Korach and Co. it means they elevated themselves, rose against Moses and Aaron. Targum Yonathan interprets: they spoke with חוצפה. Rashi says that they claimed there was no cause for Moses and Aaron to feel superior since the entire nation had heard G–d speak the first two of the Ten Commandments directly. Their evil intention was to deny Moses' standing as a prophet. They sought to prove that the whole nation qualified for the same spiritual level, and that anything over and beyond Moses had said in the name of G–d had really been his own invention. They argued that if all these other pronouncements had really emanated from G–d, G–d Himself would have communicated them to the people directly. It follows that Moses had also acted high--handedly when he appointed Aaron as High Priest. The appointment of Elitzafan as head of the Kehatites had been at Moses' own initiative. Even though Korach and Datan and Aviram respectively agreed in this particular denial of the truth, the latter's agreement was still not identical to that of Korach. Korach spoke out against the prophetic status of Moses and at the same time he also spoke out against G–d, suggesting that since G–d had only spoken the first two commandments, He had obviously only had His own honour and glory in mind. When Kidushin 31a described the nations of the world as approving of the Ten Commandments, according respect to G–d, such respect was based on G–d commanding us to honour our parents. Since Korach did not allow that the commandment to honour father and mother was of Divine origin, he obviously distorted G–d's intentions when revealing the first two commandments. We see that Korach only scoffed when he referred to what the people had heard from the mouth of G–d. Afterwards he proceeded to deny the prinicple as well as the details. Datan and Aviram, though denying basic truths, did not do so to the extent Korach had done. They only suspected Moses of having appointed Aaron, his sons, and Elitzafan without having been instructed by G–d to do so. They believed that if these appointments had been at the command of G–d, He would have told Israel about it, just as He had told them about His own position as Lord and Master of the Jewish people. Moreover, we have a principle אין ממנים פרנס על הציבור אלא מדעת הציבור, "one must not appoint an administrator for the community unless that community had approved of that appointment" (Berachot 55). At any rate, both of them made common cause with Korach, challenging Moses.
  The two hundred and fifty men whose intentions were honorable since they wanted to elevate themselves spiritually, also spoke rebelliously despite their good intentions. We must not be too surprised at this, since we find in Gittin 57a, in connection with reports of the war that resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Holy Temple, that there was a man called Bar Deroma who could jump a mile and a half and kill while jumping. The Roman Caesar, realising the danger this man represented to his army, placed his crown on the ground, and prayed to G–d (our G–d) not to deliver his army into the hands of this man. At that moment this Bar Deroma caused his own downfall by quoting a verse from Psalms 60,12: "Have You O G–d not forsaken us? You do not march with our armies!" When the Talmud asks that David had been guilty of similar statements and nothing had happened, the answer given is that when David said this it was a question, whereas in the case of Bar Deroma it was said as a statement. What happened with the two hundred and fifty men was similar. They were part of the ויקומו, the rebellious attitude, though their intent was different from that of Korach. We can compare them to a student who stands before his teacher in a very upright position, not deferentially. It was their demand that the whole congregation should be holy, that the mantle of holiness should not be restricted to selected individuals. They justified their demand by saying that the whole nation had been found worthy to be addressed directly by G–d at the Revelation at Mount Sinai. By using the singular when saying אנכי ה'אלוקיך, G–d supposedly included everybody as being part of the same category. Otherwise He could have said אלוקיכם. This proved that G–d is indeed בתוכנו, "amongst us all." When G–d promises the Jewish people good fortune in the future in Leviticus 26,12, He says "והתהלכתי בתוככם," since He refers to a period when the world will be full of the knowledge of G–d. That is the period of which Isaiah 11,9, has said: "The earth will be filled with knowledge of G–d." These men were eager to cleave to G–d, as had been the sons of Aaron when they brought the incense in the Holy of Holies and who had died as a result. Precisely the same happened to the two hundred and fifty men.
  We now understand Moses saying בוקר ויודע ה', "in the morning G–d will make known, etc." The regulations about the offering of the incense contain the phrase בבוקר בבוקר בהטיבו את הנרות יקטירון, "morning after morning, when cleaning out the lamps he shall burn it up" (Exodus 30,7). The sin of all these people was not intentional, they did not quarrel with the appointments Moses had made, were certain that these appointments had been approved by G–d Himself. However, they felt that originally, Moses had initiated the request to make these appointments, and G–d had complied with his wishes. The truth, however, is that these appointments had been made at the request of G–d. This is why Moses said "the man whom G–d will select, etc." (16,5). He stressed that the selection rather than the confirmation of the appointments had been made by G–d.
  On 16,28, בזאת תדעון כי ה' שלחנו כי לא מלבי, "By this you will know that G–d has sent me to do all these things, that they did not originate with me," Bamidbar Rabbah 12 says something very curious. The Midrash compares what happened to the bridal attendant of a princess who holds the proof of her virginity. One of the people at the party curses that attendant, claiming that the kings' daughter had not been a virgin. Thereupon the bridal attendant says to the king: "if you do not execute this slanderer and thereby protect your own honour, I will say that your daughter had not been found a virgin." The king immediately realized that it was better to execute the slanderer than to allow the bridal attendant to spread evil gossip about his daughter. Korach's quarrelling with Moses was similar. He claimed that Moses' appointments were totally unauthorized. Thereupon Moses said to G–d: "If all these people are allowed to die in bed like normal people, and doctors attend them and attest to their deaths after having examined them, etc., then I too will join the heretics saying that G–d has not appointed me, that I have done whatever I did out of my own initiative."
  How could the Midrash impute words to Moses which would make him deny himself and make a heretic out of him! Is not Moses' status as a prophet one of the most important dogmas in our religion?! The Midrash does not present a problem when you consider the way in which I have explained what transpired. Moses knew full well that it had never occurred to him to seek any special privileges for members of his family or his tribe. He thought that possibly G–d had arranged this in order to honor him, although it did not necessarily mean that in principle none other than Aaron could qualify to be High Priest, or that no tribe other than his own could be fit to perform the service in the Temple. Moses, concerned about such a possibility, said to G–d: "if You do perform justice on those wicked people, I will know that the appointment of Aaron and the tribe of Levi is something due to objective considerations, and has nothing to do with me. If, however, You do not perform such an act of justice, then I too will be forced to conclude that "G–d has not sent me on this mission," i.e. that this appointment of Aaron, Elitzafan, etc. was not founded on objective considerations, but was influenced by the desire to flatter Moses.
  To return to the matter of the two hundred and fifty men: Their sin consisted neither of an act of insurrection, nor of belittling the honor of G–d or of Moses his prophet. On the contrary, they strove to be accorded the kind of honour and glory that is traditionally reserved for the sages once they enter the World to Come. They endeavoured to come close to G–d and died while coming too close to G–d prematurely. Since incense is a symbol of a close relationship with G–d, their censers became sanctified, not like those of Korach whose incense was equivalent to idol worship. We can read this out of the verses which do not tell us that G–d had commanded to take "the censers and convert them into a covering for the altar." The Torah stresses that only "the censers of those who had sinned with their souls," i.e. the two hundred and fifty men, should be used. Of those censers it had been said כי קדשו, "for they had become sanctified" [they had become holy vessels, fit only for usage in a holy setting].
  This also enables us to understand how the surviving Israelites, having observed this great miracle, could say to Moses and Aaron: "you caused the death of G–d's people" (17,6)! They did not refer to Korach, his family, or Datan and Aviram. They referred only to those two hundred and fifty well intentioned people. Their complaint against Moses was that he should not have been in such a hurry to advise these men to offer incense as a result of which they died. They felt that Moses should have waited to give them an opportunity to reconsider. Actually, whatever Moses did, he did at G–d's bidding, since G–d brings immediate retribution to those who challenge the institution of the Priesthood. G–d demonstrated this by the speed with which the staff of Aaron sprouted, produced blossoms and bore almonds (17,23). Rashi explains that the reason the fruit were almonds is because almonds ripen sooner than any other fruit after the winter season. This is to serve as a warning that anyone challen-ging the system of the priesthood will experience immediate retribution. A case in point is Uzziah the king of Yehudah who although a member of the tribe of Yehudah, arrogated to himself priestly functions such as the offering of incense. (Chronicles II 26,16/21). Having seen how Aaron's staff performed, the people finally acquiesced.
  We can now answer another difficulty. When the Jewish people said to Moses and Aaron: "You have killed the people of G–d,” the Torah reports in 17,11, that Moses asked Aaron to "take the censer, place fire and incense on it, walk quickly amongst the people, כי יצא הקצף החל הנגף for the wrath has gone forth, the plague has started" (17,11). Our sages have said that when Moses was in heaven every angel revealed some secret to him. The contribution of the angel of death was that incense can prevail against the spread of the plague. This statement is attributed to Rabbi Joshua ben Levi in Shabbat 89. Rashi also quotes this in his commentary. If Moses was in possession of this secret, why does Rashi have to explain in verse 13, that the meaning of "he stood between the dead and the living and the plague stopped," means that Moses himself had to restrain the angel of death? Rashi there describes an argument in which the angel of death describes himself as G–d's direct messenger, whereas Aaron is described as only Moses' messenger, i.e. an indirect messenger of G–d. Aaron told the angel of death that he was well aware that Moses never does something unless instructed by G–d. He challenged the angel of death to look for confirmation by observing both G–d and Moses at the entrance of the Tabernacle. He invited the angel of death to accompany him to that spot and to ask G–d personally. This is the meaning of the words "Aaron returned to the entrance of the tent to Moses, and the plague had stopped" (17,15). Why would the angel of death kill by means of the plague, when he himself had revealed to Moses how he could be stopped?
  If we want to answer this in a simple way, all we have to know is that there is no remedy against G–d's own decree. Once G–d personally has decreed that so and so is going to die, no incense or other remedy can prevail against such a decree. The secret that the angel of death revealed to Moses, concerned matters not decreed by G–d directly, but which the angel of death saw fit to include in his general authority to kill, without regard to guilt and innocence, but within the area of his authority. In the plague described here there were many people whose death had been decreed by G–d personally. The angel of death had come to kill these people. Aaron tried to stop him, but to no avail. This is why we are told how the angel of death responded to Aaron's attempts to restrain him by telling Aaron about individuals whom he was empowered to kill. His argument was that he killed these people at the specific instruction of His Employer. He told him that no incense can prevail in situations such as these. He claimed that the secret he had revealed to Moses was effective only when he was not killing at the specific command of G–d, but only within his own general authority. Aaron countered that the authority of Moses was such that he had succeeded on previous occasions to reverse fatal decrees that had been issued by G–d directly and specifically, and that most likely he could also do so in this case. He therefore pleaded with the angel of death to wait. This would be an appropriate explanation, except for the fact that in our situation the very sin had involved use of, or rather misuse of, incense. Therefore incense was not thought to be effective here to ward off the angel of death. The Israelites then complained to Moses that he had neutralized the very secret that the angel of death had revealed to him by advising the two hundred and fifty men to prove their case by offering incense.
  To sum up: Korach died because of his jealousy, because he ridiculed the laws of ציצית, which serve as an antidote against that negative attribute. Datan and Aviram died because of greed, because they assumed an erect posture at the entrance of their tents ignoring the meaning of the commandment of the מזוזה, which serves as an antidote against the negative attribute of greed.
  The two hundred and fifty men died because of their craving for personal honor. Theirs had been a well-intentioned craving for the kind of honor only scholars inherit at the end of their lives. They had meant to adorn themselves in phylacteries, the symbol of the Jewish people's glory. It is said of the תפילין של ראש, the phylacteries worn on the head, וראו כל עמי הארץ כי שם ה' נקרא עליך "and all the nations of the earth will see that the name of the Lord is proclaimed over you" (Deut. 28,10). This is what they had in mind when they said that "the whole community is holy." They had erred, however. They violated the principle not to aspire to what was to remained concealed from them, i.e. "מופלא ממך אל תדרוש, ובמכוסה ממך אל תחקור." This is why they died during their quest. 
  When the Talmud in Sanhedrin 108, debates whether Korach and family will be resurrected when the time comes, the expression עדת קרח used there does not include these two hundred and fifty men. They will certainly qualify for resurrection, seeing theirs had been a noble intention. We can deduce this also from the wording in the Mishnah there which reads: עדת קרח אינה עתידה לעלות, which is proven from the verse: ותכס עליהם הארץ, "the earth covered them," an expression of finality (which clearly refers only to those who were swallowed by the earth).
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  The episode of Korach's rebellion teaches us what strenuous efforts one has to make to avoid strife and quarrels. Consider what terrible punishment Korach suffered, and the fact that none of his illustrious forbears' merits saved him from any part of that punishment. Not even the fact that he left behind worthy children, grandchildren, etc, has any effect on his eventual rehabilitation. The same fate happened to Datan and Aviram as well as to their children. Although we have a general rule that the Celestial Court does not judge people below the age of twenty, our sages are on record that in this case even under-age children became the victims of the misdeeds of their parents. From here we have to learn that we must always (endeavor to) hold on to peace. Aaron's behavior in this episode is the most remarkable, seeing that though he had been the principal object of contention, he never uttered a word during the whole episode. A person should try to be guided by whatever reason he can find to maintain peaceful relations and to extinguish the flames of strife. Take a cue from Moses himself, who was the greatest of all the prophets, who occupied the position of king, and who personally went to to Datan and Aviram after the latter had rebelled and had refused to come to him. He took all the elders with him. All of this in the interest of maintaining or restoring peace!
  לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי . The prophet Samuel also made a similar statement when he challenged the people asking "whose donkey have I taken, etc." (Samuel I 22,19)? I have elaborated on the lessons to be learned from theses statements in my commentary on מסכת ראש השנה.
  כל חלב יצהר וכל חלב תירוש ודגן .  "All the best of the new oil, wine, grain, etc." We have the Torah on record here that he who gives the Priests his dues should give them of the best of his respective produce to show that he wishes to fulfill that commandment sincerely. Similarly, when giving charity, [at a time when the coins in circulation sometimes had worn off and their value was somewhat questionable] he should give only coins which are in mint condition.
  
  Chukat
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named פרשת פרה.
  Commandment 397 concerns the burning of the red heifer.
  Commandment 398 deals with regulations of a person who has defiled himself through contact with the dead, since the Torah says: אדם כי ימות באהל.
  Commandment 399 discusses the need for a person so defiled, to sprinkle himself with water containing the ash of the red heifer on himself, so as to set in motion his purification. The Torah says: והזה הטהור על הטמא.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Seeing that the metaphysical reasons of this legislation are totally obscure, and even commentators of the earlier generations who did have a measure of understanding have treated it as something sealed with many seals and have not explained it adequately, I have decided to print something that I have said in my younger days. This is a treatise that is close to the plain meaning of the text. I have included it to fulfill my duty not to skip this portion entirely:
  זאת חקת התורה .  Why did the Torah need this introduction? This is adequately explained by Eliyahu Mizrachi. There are numerous occasions in the Torah when such an introduction is used, e.g. זאת חקת הפסח, in Exodus 12,43. Even though the law is not in the nature of גזרה היא מלפני, "it is a decree that I have decreed," seeing that the reasons for this legislation have been explained, the Torah's expression here is in a class by itself since we have both the expression חוק and תורה. Surely one of these words is unnecessary. Later, while still discussing the same subject matter, the Torah writes: זאת התורה, אדם כי ימות באהל "This is the Torah concerning a person who dies in a tent, etc." (19,14). At the beginning of our פרשה, it would also have sufficed to write only one of these expressions. In the example before us, the words “Torat,” or “Chukat,” mean that the Torah is about to reveal certain commandments to us. I believe that this question is answered adequately without the Mizrachi pointing out that we are faced here with what seems to be a repetition. We read in Exodus 12, 14: חקת עולם תחגהו, "you shall celebrate is as a statute forever." The Torah sometimes speaks of the Passover as חקת הפסח. This means the expression חק is also tied to certain time frames such as חקך וחק בניך, in Leviticus 10,13, where the consumption of certain sacrifices is discussed. In that instance the time this statute applies is limited. Similarly the statute of the Passover is severely limited in the time it applies. We find the expression חק, even when dealing with social laws, משפטים, such as in Exodus 18,16, where Moses tells his father-in-law that he explains the Torah's litigation laws to those who approach him with complaints. The word חק implies something fixed, whether in quantity or time.
  Since there are so many difficulties in this whole legislation, there seems little point in listing another question. However, permission has been granted to try and understand to the extent that it is possible. Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan, whose words Rashi quotes, proves that Moses himself had said: "I wished to become wise, but it has remained far from me" i.e. והיא רחוקה ממני (Kohelet 7,23). It is interesting that he had not said: "I did not acquire wisdom, i.e. לא חכמתי." What is meant is that though study of that subject results in successively better appreciation of the many allusions contained in the text, the essential logic keeps eluding the scholar who delves into it. We read words similar to those quoted in the name of Rabbi Moshe HaDarshan by Rabbi Yitzchak in Bamidbar Rabbah 3, who concludes his commentary by saying that Solomon was satisfied that he had a thorough understanding of the entire Torah except for this portion. He quotes Solomon as saying that he had been studying and examining this portion without penetrating to its essence. This was in contrast to the rest of the Torah, which he felt he thoroughly understood. In view of what others have done, I too will make whatever little contribution I can to the better understanding of our פרשה.
  A rather striking problem in the text is the description of the purifying waters as מד נדה, "waters of a menstruant," surely a very derogatory term in view of the purpose of these waters! And especially, since the Torah on occasion uses clumsy language in order to avoid describing something in derogatory terms (Rabbi Joshua ben Levi in Bamidbar Rabbah 19,2). It is also unusual that the Torah does not report that "Israel and Eleazar did so," as is the case after similar instructions in the Torah on other occasions. The expression in 19,14, זאת התורה אדם כי ימות באהל, is unusual, as is the statement of our sages that it teaches that "the words of Torah are fulfilled only on people who are prepared to kill themselves on its behalf" (Berachot 43). How does this comment apply in this connection? Defilement through contact with the dead is usually involuntary!
  Rabbi Joshua of Sakinin in the name of Rabbi Levi in Bamidbar Rabbah 19,5, says that there are four laws in the Torah described as חק which Satan focuses on when he wants to undermine our faith. One is the law that although one must not marry a sister-in-law, the legislation of the levirate marriage contradicts that principle. Another is the legislation of כלאים, the mixing, cross-breeding or grafting of certain fabrics, animals or seeds. A third is the scapegoat that is killed on the Day of Atonement; the fourth is the legislation involving the use of the ashes of the red heifer in our portion. In connection with the prohibition of marrying a sister-in-law it is written ושמרתם את חקתי, Lev. 18,5. Nonetheless, this prohibition is set aside when one's brother had died without children. The exception to the law of לא תלבש שעטנז, in Deut. 22,11, not to wear a mixture of wool and linen, is the permission to override that principle when wearing such a mixture as part of a prayer-shawl, טלית. The exception to the principle of the ashes of the red heifer purifying a person, is that the clothing of the person or persons who actually are involved in the procedure of preparing these ashes becomes defiled even though in a state of ritual purity (19,8). The ash of the red heifer itself purifies impure clothing. There is, of course, a lot that can be queried about the whole procedure of the scapegoat. Why did Rabbi Joshua not mention other instances where the expression חק is used, without contradictory aspects to such acts of legislation? 
  Rashi tells us in Genesis 26,5, that the term חק is used in the Torah when the legislation is such that it offers Satan an opportunity to challenge its logic. He quotes the prohibition of eating pork as an additional example.
  Another difficulty: If G–d has told us that these laws offer Satan an opportunity to challenge the logic of His laws, why did He not tell us how to answer Satan?
  An even greater difficulty is that here the Midrash portrays the nations of the world, i.e. Satan, as challenging the חוקים, whereas in Deut. 4,6, the Torah itself describes these nations as extolling these very חוקים as the source of our wisdom and insight!
  Yalkut Shimoni on our portion describes the פרה, heifer, as symbolizing Egypt, since Egypt is referred to as עגלה יפיפיה מצרים, "Egypt is a beautiful calf," in Jeremiah 46,20. He goes on to say that the word אדומה, red, refers to Babylonia which is described in Daniel 2,38, as "you are the head of gold." The word תמימה, symbolizes Media. Rabbi Chiyah bar Abba said that the kings of Media were תמימים, sincere. The only complaint G–d has against them is that they served idols, a practice they had learned from their forbears. The words אשר אין בה מום, "which is totally unblemished," refer to Greece. When Alexander the Great saw Shimon the Just he rose on his feet and praised the Lord of Shimon the Just. His palace attendants were incredulous that their king should accord this kind of honor to a Jew. Alexander told them that this man had appeared to him whenever he was about to enter battle, and was victorious. The words אשר לא עלה עליה עול, "which has never borne a yoke," refer to wicked Edom who had refused to accept the yoke of G–d. Not only had he not accepted it, but he had blasphemed by saying: "whom have I in the Heavens!" So far the Yalkut. Why does the Yalkut understand all these references as being to different nations? After all, they ridicule us, wish to cause us frustration!
  There is also another Midrash which describes the heifer as symbolizing Israel, comparing Israel to a stubborn, defiant cow. Again, also the word אדומה is interpreted by that Midrash as referring to Israel who are redder than pearls. תמימה refers to Israel who are compared to יונתי תמתי, "My perfect turtle dove," in Song of Songs 6,9. The words אשר אין בה מום, "which is totally unblemished," are also a reference to Israel, since the verse quoted above describes that turtle dove. In this way the words אשר לא עלה עליה עול, "which has never accepted a yoke," are a reference to Israel during the period of Jeremiah, when Israel refused to accept the Yoke of Heaven. This Midrash is almost the reverse of the Yalkut! Besides, why does the Midrash continually repeat the words "this refers to Israel?"
  In Bamidbar Rabbah at the beginning of our portion Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai is quoted as telling his students that it is not the dead body which imparts impurity, and not the waters which impart purity, but it is a decree by G–d that this should be so. We are not permitted to transgress G–d's decrees since the Torah states: "This is the statute of the Torah!" How could Rabbi Yochanan say that it is not the dead body which causes impurity when the Torah has said that it does!? The Torah has also said specifically that the "waters of menstruation cleanse!"
  Generally speaking, the term גזרת המקום, a Heavenly Decree, is understood to mean something that cannot be explained rationally. This is also the way Maimonides explains this term in the Mishnah in Berachot 5,3, where we are told that if someone claims that the law of chasing away the mother-bird prior to taking its young (Deut. 22,6), is an expression of G–d's mercy on the birds, such a person must be stopped in his tracks, since we must not interpret G–d's laws as being based on human sensitivities. G–d's laws do not need a rationale in order for us to observe and cherish them. Maimonides was attacked for having made such a statement, as is well known. At any rate, if it is as Maimonides says, then all the commandments are merely decrees that need not be investigated as to their specific rationale! We have another Midrash which compares the legislation of the red heifer to a king who enters a country, and to whom his subjects say: "please impose some decrees upon us!" The king replies: "Once you accept me as your sovereign, I will begin to make decrees." Similarly G–d said to Israel: "Since you have accepted My sovereignty when I said: "I am the Lord your G–d, etc., now accept My decree not to have any other deities!" 
  What is meant is that the entire Torah, all its laws and their spiritual impact, are the very soul of Israel, as I have explained at length on numerous occasions. This enables us to explain the various Midrashim on the paragraph. We read in Bamidbar Rabbah 19,7, that when Moses ascended to heaven he heard the voice of G–d expounding the law of the red heifer, quoting: "My son Eliezer says that the heifer has to be two years old, (the expression פרה, cow, means a minimum age of two years), whereas when the Torah uses the term עגלה, calf, this refers to a one year old animal." When Moses heard this, he said: "how is it possible that You, O G–d who owns heaven and earth, are sitting expounding Your Torah and quoting a human being as proof that Torah has been interpreted correctly!" G–d answered that at some point in the future a righteous person would arise who would commence his discourse on this portion by citing these words and his name would be Rabbi Eliezer, etc." Moses thereupon expressed the wish that the person in question should be one of his descendants. G–d immediately told him that his wish had been granted. This is the meaning of Exodus 18,4: "and the name of the one was Eliezer," when describing Moses' other son. The name of this special "son" of whom the Torah writes "האחד" is the Rabbi Eliezer whom G–d had quoted. He is the one who discoursed on the law of the red heifer.
  The reason all the מצות are called גזרות, "pieces," or "sections," is that they are like the souls, each one of which is a "section" of the Divine though separated from G–d Himself. Similarly then מצוות are like the egg laid by a hen that is about to be slaughtered for human consumption (compare Beitzah 2A). In other words, the commandments are an integral part of G–d though separated from Him. The word גזר is used in this way in Psalms 136,13: "Who divided the sea into pieces." We have the same meaning in Genesis 15,17, at the "covenant between the pieces, "where G–d (a pillar of fire) is described as passing between הגזרים, the pieces. We learn there what the כריתת הברית, making of the covenant between G–d and Abraham, G–d laying phylacteries, robing Himself in ציצית, studying Torah, etc., is all about. All these activities which our sages attribute to G–d are not merely symbolisms, but reflect the fact that we, our souls, are part of the Divine, and that what we are asked to do in this physical world is basically no different from what G–d does in the spiritual counterpart of our world. It is wrong to attribute the legislation of chasing away the mother-bird to considerations involving the welfare of the bird. What G–d wishes to teach us by means of the מצות, is something for our sake, something that makes it easier for us to operate on His "wavelength." We are to train ourselves to wear "His garments," to adopt His attributes. It is not surprising then that these גזרות are difficult to understand, and the same applies to the restrictive ordinances, גזרות, imposed by Rabbinic law which are designed to prevent our infringing Sinaitic law. We sometimes fail to see the rationale in some of these ordinances.
  I will try to explain the whole subject which the Midrash calls חקה חקקתי, גזרה גזרתי, by means of a short introduction. A look at the totality of the commandments reveals that they are divided into four categories, as explained in the ספר יצירה. Kabbalistic literature in which the גלוי עולמות, the revelation of various worlds, is discussed bases this division on the verse כי הוא אמר ויהי (Psalms 33,9). The terms used are רשי"מו, חקי"קה, חצי"בה, שי"ה. First, there was the will, רצון, to create the universe, which is referred to in that verse as כי הוא אמר. 
  Next, G–d proceeded to the stage of ויהי. The creation of the original raw material, the אין or <i>hiyuli</i> in Greek. Next, came the transformation of this <i>hiyuli</i> into what we call יש, i.e. "something." Last, there occurred the transformation of one kind of יש, something, into a whole variety of יש. When we examine it more closely, we will find that the first two categories i.e. רשימו and חקיקה, are actually much like twin brothers in that they are both parts of a totally abstract, spiritual world. In order to be converted into a physical, pulsating world such as we inhabit and perceive, the energies of these abstract spiritual worlds were transformed through the insertion of a layer of what we call the עולם הגלגלים, the world of the planets. The מצות, too, are divided into four different "worlds." Some are of a totally rational, functional nature, which even the nations of the world are not only able but willing to perform. Examples are legislation against stealing, murdering, adultery, the duty of honoring father and mother and others. Similarly we find Gentile philosophers postulating ethical mores, virtues to be acquired, etc. The rationale underlying all those philosophies is known, available to all, in other words "revealed." Those מצות are the ones we consider as belonging to the category of עשיה. Secondly, we have the category of מצות that contain symbolisms though performance of specific deeds is commanded. They include such commandments as the Passover lamb legislation, the eating of unleavened bread, the eating of bitter herbs, the building of and dwelling in huts on the festival of Tabernacles, etc. These commandments fall under the heading חציבה. The third category are other commandments which we cannot understand in their entirety, or even their essence. These are the category called חקיקה דק מאד, "legislation of a spiritually very refined nature." Finally, there is the fourth category, the law of פרה אדומה, the meaning of which has not been revealed to any person while alive with the exception of Moses and Rabbi Akiva. This is what is known as רשימו. The latter must be described as דק היטב הדק, "something infinitely refined." Rabbi Yossi son of Rabbi Chaninah in his commentary Bamidbar Rabbah 19,6, explains the words in 19,3: "they shall take to you an unblemished red heifer,” as meaning that G–d had said to Moses: "To you I shall reveal the deeper meaning of this law, whereas to others it shall remain a חק. He bases this on an interpretation by Rav Huna of Psalms 75,3: "At the time I choose, I will judge equitably." It is also written in Zechariah 14,6: "On that day there shall be neither sunlight nor cold moonlight." Since the prophet does not say קפאון, but וקפאון, and the spelling is יקפאון, this is an indication that matters which are concealed from you in this world will be revealed to you when the time arrives which the prophet discusses in that paragraph. This is in line with Isaiah 42,16: "I shall guide the blind by a road they did not know, and I will make them walk by paths they never knew." The same verse continues: "These are the things I have done [promised] and I will not forsake them." The remarkable thing is that the prophet, i.e. G–d, does not speak about אעשה, i.e. "I shall do," but he speaks about עשיתם, "I have done them." What is meant is that G–d had already done this for Rabbi Akiva and the likes of him. [revealed the mystery of the red heifer legislation]. Matters that I have not revealed to Moses, I have revealed to him, and he has seen everything that is precious to Me. So far Rabbi Yossi son of Rabbi Chanina.
  How can we reconcile all this with the Torah's statement in Deut. 34,10, that "there never arose another prophet in Israel such as Moses, with whom G–d communicated face to face?" Besides, this is in direct opposition to the explanation we have quoted on the word אליך, in 19,2,? We must certainly assume that Moses' intellectual capacity of comprehending the deeper meaning of the red heifer legislation exceeded that of any one after him. This is also the meaning of Bamidbar Rabbah 19,6, that "all the red heifers have been named after Moses; when all other red heifers are gone, the one Moses made will still remain." All that this means is that all the red heifers that have ever been made holy through being burned, etc., were able to perform the function assigned to them only because Moses had burned the golden calf and used its ashes, just as later generations used the ashes of the red heifer. What we must keep in mind is that the main concern when relating to all the commandments is to comprehend their meaning in their metaphysical significance, i.e. סוד, and there was certainly no one who knew and appreciated these meanings as Moses did. Now we understand why the "red heifer of Moses was the one that lent sanctity to all other red heifers."
  In order to understand the apparently conflicting views expressed in the Midrash, we need to define the terms חק and גזרה, respectively. When we referred to the first stage of Creation, the one called רשימה, which was the domain of רצון of G–d to create a universe, we already explained that the spiritual part of the virtues is the soul, the input of G–d which illuminates the personality of the צדיק. It makes him aware of his G–d, as explained by the Zohar. The soul itself consists of two parts. The "upper" part concerns itself with perceiving the essence of G–d, whereas the "lower part" of the soul perceives other things, latches on to the צדיק. We use the term חק, to describe the "upper" part of the soul; it refers to the "truth," something unchangeable, as in חק ולא יעבור, "an unalterable and unchangeable statute" (Job 14,5). The "lower" part of the soul which perceives what is in the universe is called גזרה גזורה, "portions which have been separated, cut off," detached from G–d." Both these parts however, are part of the domain which we called רצון. When the Midrash quotes G–d as saying חקה חקקתי, this is a reference to the sparks of understanding that Moses received from the domain of חק. When the Midrash goes on to say in the name of G–d, גזרה גזרתי, this refers to the sparks of understanding which Rabbi Akiva received and which emanated from the domain of גזרה. Both emanated from the metaphysical domain that we have called רשימה. Since the domain of חק, is more remote than the domain of גזרה, it follows that something was revealed to Rabbi Akiva which was not revealed to Moses, though that something was no greater. The Midrash never said that something greater or additional had been revealed to Rabbi Akiva. All the Midrash meant to tell us was that Rabbi Akiva had a closer connection with the domain of גזרה, a domain specializing in גלוי, matters that are revealed, whereas Moses had a closer connection with the domain of חק, the domain of the נעלם, the domain of matters not given to revelation. In order to understand this, imagine an angel, who can certainly better understand a fellow angel than he can understand the workings of the human mind. Similarly a human being can better understand the workings of the mind of a fellow human being. The way a Moses relates to such phenomena as חק and גזרה respectively is therefore in exactly the reverse ratio to Rabbi Akiva relating to the same phenomena, and vice versa. For Rabbi Akiva as well as for Israel at large the legislation of the red heifer is in the class of a חק קבוע, something fixed, not to be touched or moved; we must not even speculate about matters in the domain of the נעלם, areas where our powers of perception are not operative, viz: במופלא ממך אל תדרוש "matters that are too difficult for you, do not investigate, etc." (Chagigah 13a). This does not mean, however, that it is forbidden to speculate on the reason why G–d has commanded us laws the meaning of which we do not understand. It relates only to our accepting the legislation. 
  Our sages have stated this best when interpreting Psalms 81,5: כי חק לישראל הוא, "it is a statute as far as Israel is concerned," but משפט לאלוקי יעקב, "it certainly makes sense to the G–d of Jacob." The word "'לאלוקי," in that verse is an allusion to Moses, whom we know as the איש האלוקים. The word "יעקב," in the same verse is an allusion to Rabbi Akiva who represents the best in Jacob. 
  The numerical values of the names משה, and the name עקיבא, when we ignore the zeros, i.e use the system of מספר קטן, are identical. We would write it thus: משה=300+40+5=12. עקיבא=70+100+10+2+1=12. When you use the regular system of arriving at numerical values, you will, of course, find that the name משה=345, adds up to more than the name עקיבא=183.
  Let us return to the statement of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, that it is not the dead body that confers impurity. What he meant was that the impurity is not caused by the physical body that we come in contact with, but impurity is rooted in the very concept of death. The fact that the body is inhabited by Samael enables a body to become impure at some stage. The same is true of the purifying powers of waters sprinkled with the ash of the red heifer. Though, technically speaking, these waters remove impurity from the person they are sprinkled on, the reason why they have such power is something that is inscrutable for us, and is known only in those domains which are beyond our powers of investigation. It is true then that what confers purity is not the waters we see but their metaphysical dimension in the regions beyond our powers of perception. The Midrash imputed this to G–d when it said חקה חקקתי, this law must not be violated.
  The Torah writes in Deut. 4,5: “ראה למדתי אתכם חקים ומשפטים,” "See I have taught you statutes and social laws, etc." G–d has taught us both the kind of laws the meaning of which it is given to us to perceive, and others whose meaning is not given to us to perceive. The reason why we have been taught laws the meaning of which we are able to understand, is so that we should be ready to accept on trust those laws which are beyond our understanding. Put differently: the very nature of גזרות, those laws detached from direct contact with the highest domain of רשימה, lead us to faith in the validity of חק. Now we will explain the 4 domains briefly referred to when we first introduced the Midrash on the meaning of the red heifer legislation. "Torah" is referred to in four different expressions, i.e. 1) תורת ה'; 2) תורת אלוקים, as we know from Nechemiah 8,8: ויקראו בספר בתורת האלוקים מפורש, ושום שכל, ויבינו במקרא, "They read from the book of the Lord's Torah, and explained it, putting their mind to it, and they understood the reading." 3) We find Torah referred to as תורת אמת; 4) We find Torah referred to as תורת האדם. These four expressions are in reality four nuances of what are basically two "Torahs." The first two are נסתרות, concealed matters, whereas the last two are נגלות, aspects of Torah whose meaning has been revealed. Each category has its subcategories. The first concealed "names" of Torah refer to the respective meanings of the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d, as well as to the meaning of the name אלוקים. The former contains the secret of ה' אחד ושמו אחד; as such it is applicable to the abstract spiritual world. The latter, on the other hand, which is equal in numerical value to the word הטבע, "nature," clearly describes G–d or Torah respectively being manifest in our physical world. In Exodus 18,11, we find that Yitro said עתה ידעתי כי גדול י-ה-ו-ה מכל האלוקים. He had realized that the dimension of G–d when He is called Yedud, (we will use this description when we mean the four-lettered Ineffable Name) is beyond the one when He manifests Himself as אלוקים. 2) We find in Exodus 9,16, that G–d told Moses that the purpose of the final three plagues was "למען ספר שמי," and the "name" referred to was Yedud. 3) G–d describes His name as Yedud in Exodus 6,3. In that instance, He makes it plain that this had been an aspect of Him that had not previously been revealed. 4) When the activities of Moses are described in the concluding verses of the Torah (Deut. 34,11), Moses is described as the messenger of the Yedud dimension of G–d. His function in performing the miracles referred to there had been to expand Israel's consciousness of G–d as the Master of טבע, i.e. the dimension of אלוקים, and to teach them that there are dimensions to G–d which are far beyond that realm. This aspect of G–d we have earlier referred to as רשימו.
  The second name of Torah, i.e. תורת אלוקים, concerns know-ledge of matters abstract. It indicates that G–d made known His name to the intellectual elite of His people, the בני ישראל, through what is written in the Torah. This we have referred to above as חקיקה. When we read in Psalms 91,14, כי בי חשק ואפלטהו אשגבהו כי ידע שמי, "because he was devoted to Me I will deliver him; I will keep him safe, for he knows My Name;" this means that by one's special love for G–d one may bring about knowledge of His Name. We find that the vowels in the name י-ה-ו-ה, are the pattern cholam, sheva, kamatz. On occasion, especially in the Books of Prophets, this vowel pattern is ignored, and instead we read the name that is spelled ח-ה-ו-ה, as if it had been spelled אלוקים. This is a mystery which is part of the domain חקיקה. The numerical value of the name אלוקים, is 86. The numerical value of the Ineffable Name spelled with letters only is 26. When the Ineffable Name is spelled in word form instead of in letters, (something Kabbalists call <i>miluim</i>) the number is 45. The word would then have been spelled thus: יוד, הא, ואו, הא. The numerical values for each letter then would be 20,6,13,6, respectively. We observe that there are open and concealed meanings to the same term. Now to the "hidden" and "open" aspects of the last two names that we have for Torah, i.e. תורת אמת, and תורת האדם. The former is applied to those commandments whose meaning and value is evident to all. The latter refers to the intellectual, spiritual values of Torah.
  The benedictions we recite before reading from the Torah also reflect these different aspects of Torah. The benedictions we recite prior to reading from the Torah refer to the first two dimensions of Torah. When we say in ונתן לנו את תורתו, we refer to the "hidden" aspect of that Torah; when we continue נותן התורה, we refer to the "revealed" part of that aspect of Torah. Here we thank G–d for having revealed to us mystical, hidden parts of the Torah. In the benedictions recited after having read from the Torah, the formula is a) תורת אמת, followed by b) חיי עולם. The message is that everything proceeds towards one single place, and finds its way back to the original נסתר, hidden spiritual domain. This is what is meant when the Psalmist in Psalm 19,8, says of Torah that תורת ידוד תמימה. 
  This is also what is alluded to in Deut. 4,5, ראה למדתי אתכם חקים ומשפטים, "see I have taught you statutes and social laws." The Torah compares the statutes to the social laws. The message is that just as there are easily appreci-ated reasons for the social legislation of Torah, so we must believe that the reasons underlying the חקים are equally good. They are not רק, empty, devoid of logic. On the contrary: if that is our impression, it proves that we are devoid of reason and good sense, are empty (compare Deut. 32,47). In the same verse, the משפטים, social laws are compared to the חקים, statutes, to make us appreciate that there are hidden meanings to these social laws which failed to meet the eye when we read them and thought we had understood their total meaning.
  When Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi edited tractate Avot, the only tractate in the Mishnah that deals with ethical rather than halachic matters, he prefaced it with the words משה קבל תורה מסיני, that "Moses received the Torah on Mount Sinai." At first glance this sounds like an insult to our intelligence. Every pupil in any Jewish elementary school is aware of that. Rabbi Yehudah, however, did so because the Jewish people are not the only people who possess a book of ethics. Aristotle's book of ethics was well known, presumably also in the land of Israel long before the tractate Avot was completed. Rabbi Yehudah wanted to remind us that it is their origin which distinguishes our ethics from the "ethics" of the Gentiles. Our ethics are not man-made. They originate in Sinai, and therefore the meaning of these teachings is not exhausted by what is written down, but there are also hidden aspects to it, aspects which directly link us to a higher domain of spiritual regions. The Talmud does not tire of reminding us that human attributes cannot serve as a yardstick in our efforts to understand G–d. On the contrary, because His attributes are different, we have to learn from what He has revealed about His attributes when we attempt to become model human beings. All this is what Rabbi Yehudah wants to remind us of when he tells us that everything in Torah, including מדות, is of Sinaitic origin, is Divine. Now we understand that every accomplishment, be it material or spiritual, if it originates with man, is called חיי שעה, a transient value, just like a transient life, whereas every accomplishment which originates in Torah is called חיי עולם, an enduring value, eternal life. Hence in the benediction we recite after having read from the Torah we thank G–d for having implanted in us חיי עולם. When we conclude the benediction with the words ברוך אתה ידוד נותן התורה, we include both the hidden and the revealed aspects of the commandments and ethical lessons in Torah. 
  If Rabbi Yehudah chose "Moses received the Torah," as his introductory words to that tractate, he wanted to emphasize that it was the humility of a Moses that enabled him to "receive" the Torah in all its aspects. G–d's example of humility had inspired Moses to model himself after that example. This is the major challenge of ethics as we understand it. What Moses "received," is what our sages call אספקלריא מאירה, "a clear, unblurred vision." We have it on good authority that the attributes of Rabbi Akiva were essentially the same as those of Moses. In Gittin 67a Rabbi Shimon tells his students: "study my מדות, attributes, for my attributes are a tiny fraction of the attributes of Rabbi Akiva." [Clearly, even if we accept Rashi who explains the word מדות there to mean תורה, it is clear that Rabbi Akiva is held up as the ultimate model to follow. Ed.]
  Seeing that there are six facets to earth i.e. the four compass directions, East, North, West and South, as well as what is above or below us, the author now interprets Psalm 19, 8-10, as dividing Torah into six facets corresponding to the six directions.
  "תורת השם תמימה", "G–d's Torah is perfect," refers to the aspect of Torah we have previously called רשימו, a category of נשמה, actually "the soul of souls." This "soul" is absent in our lives, since we have explained that our souls are souls which have parted [temporarily] from the original all-embracing soul. Only in the future, will Torah be able to become manifest in that degree of perfection, תמימות. An example of the "perfection" that is lacking in Torah while we are here on earth is the תמימה aspect of the red heifer that the Torah prescribes, but that we cannot comply with because of the exalted and mystical nature of that legislation. Once that stage is reached, the משפטי ה' צדקו יחדו level, also the most profound aspects of the social legislation of Torah will become known, and we shall have attained that spiritual niveau. It sounds strange that Torah should have been presented in a sequence which requires much of it to be restudied as we reach higher intellectual and spiritual levels. When we examine Torah legislation there actually is no such thing as "earlier" and "later" in terms of time. We must not make the mistake of thinking that certain parts of Torah should have preceded other parts. In the highest realms, the hidden mystical domains, there is no such thing as "time," i.e. "before" and "after." Everything is צדקו יחדו.
  Torah is perfect, the question is only when this perfection will be revealed to us all. Concerning that question, the Psalmist says משיבת נפש, when the soul has reached the stage where even in this world it can be called נשמה, rather than merely נפש. This will occur once this soul returns to the domain it has been "hewn" from, the domain we had earlier called חציבה. There were two human beings, Moses and Rabbi Akiva respectively, who happily had an understanding and personal experience of these eventual developments, these goals of the future, even while they still lived on this earth. They are the עדים, witnesses that there are indeed hidden meanings to Torah laws. This is what the Psalmist refers to when he says in the second half of verse eight, "עדות השם נאמנה מחכימת פתי," that there is testimony that G–d makes the simpletons wise. Moses, of whom it is said בכל ביתי נאמן הוא, "he is trusted in all parts of My house" (Numbers 12,7), is such "testimony." When Rabbi Akiva entered the פרדס, the spiritual and mystical domain of סוד, and emerged unharmed, as opposed to his three colleagues, he too had to face the opposition of the ministering angels who are residents of that region, just as Moses faced opposition of the angels when he came to take the Torah from the Heavens (compare Chagigah 14b). They wanted to deny him these spiritual visions by either harming him physically, or causing him to become insane. G–d came to his rescue. This is what the Psalmist had described as מחכימת פתי, when referring to the part of Torah called תורת אלוקים.
  When the Psalmist goes on to say פקודי ה' ישרים, משמחי לב, this is in the same spirit as ולבי ראה הרבה חכמה, "and my heart has seen much wisdom," in Kohelet 1,16. The great spiritual visions of a prophetic nature are usually the result of feelings of joy. The expression "פקודי" used by the Psalmist alludes to a מפקד, supervisor, suggesting that G–d has appointed a פקיד, clerk, to make direct access to Torah difficult.
  The next half of verse 9, מצות ה' ברה, refers to the third aspect of Torah, those commandments the meanings of which are revealed. The words מאירת עינים allude to the fourth aspect of Torah, the one that recommends itself even to the Gentiles. This is the meaning of מאירת עינים. The verse יראת ה' טהורה, עומדת לעד, alludes to Moses having received the Torah from Sinai, since it is followed by the words עומדת לעד, that it endures forever, something we have previously described as חיי עולם, eternal life.
  Regarding the second half of this verse, משפטי ה' אמת צדקו יחדו, we refer the reader to the Alshich's comment on Parshat Mishpatim in which he explains that even if different judgments in various litigations are correct individually, collectively they may still be wrong. Example: If you ask a Gentile what is the penalty for murder, he will tell you that it is execution of the murderer. This is the correct answer. If you now ask another Gentile what is the penalty for stealing, he will tell you that it is death, giving a number of reasons why this should be so. If you ask the same Gentile what is the penalty for stealing and murdering, he will realize that it is an insult to our intelligence to decree the same punishment for theft as for murder. Our Torah legislation however, draws a distinction between its punishment of a murderer and that of a thief, the latter only having to pay twice the value of what he has stolen. In either case the criminal is deprived of what he has robbed his victim of (compare this Editor's translation of Torat Moshe by the Alshich, page 376).
  Let us now return to the four aspects of Torah which address themselves to four categories of the Jewish people. These are known as 1) עם, 2) קהל, 3) עדה, and 4) קהל השם. The first category which shares a certain level of intelligence includes the ערב רב, the mixed multitude of nations that became fellow travelers when the Jewish people left Egypt. By joining the Jewish people, they acquired a degree of holiness over and beyond their original intellectual capacity. The category of קהל is spiritually superior to that of עם. Our sages say that a community of proselytes, קהל גרים, is called a קהל, meaning that they are capable of understanding the commandments and their reasons (Yevamot 57a). עדה is a level superior to קהל, a level of people who are able to understand the meaning of His Holy Name, קהל ה', finally, is a reference to people whose soul is of such a level that it can re-unite with the original soul from which it had been parted. 
  When we look at what happened at מי מריבה, "the waters of strife," in the passage beginning in Numbers 20,7 we are faced with many difficulties, and there are many commentators offering all kinds of reasons. Rabbi Yitzchak Abravanel alone cites ten different explanations offered on this strange passage. Later commentators have added their own comments. I shall add my own comments also, seeing that anyone has the right to claim the "crown" of Torah. I have heard a beautiful commentary on this passage in the name of Rabbi Moshe Isserless, better known as the famous Rema, commentator on the שלחן ערוך. I will quote it and add a personal thought. This will answer why the names עם and בני ישראל are used in that passage in what appears to be a haphazard fashion. It will also explain why Moses called the people מורים, "rebellious," in conjunction with my explanation of the nature of Moses' and Aaron's sin. If we were to follow Maimonides in his commentary שמונה פרקים, we would have to say that Moses' only error was that he called the people מורים. I hope to prove that Moses did not commit an error by calling the people מורים. 
  I have already published on that subject when explaining Deut. 34,11, which describes all the wonders and miracles that Moses performed as remaining forever unparalleled, that Moses' great מעלה, merit, was that the miracles he performed were under the aegis of the Ineffable Name of G–d, and that therefore the people at large were not able to recognize this as they had not attained that spiritual level. Only the elite of the people would be able to perceive the spiritual domain from which the miracles performed by Moses had originated. Such miracles were to be performed only for the eyes of a holy nation that were true servants of the Lord, not before the eyes of those who denied His powers and were not firmly attached to G–d. On this occasion an עדה שלימה who had access to the level of Torah that we had described as תורת ידוד תמימה congregated with others of the caliber קהל ה' and the Torah thereupon refers to both groups jointly as בני ישראל. The Torah commences its report in 20,3, with the words: וירב העם, "The people quarreled with Moses, saying if only we had died in the desert with our brothers in the presence of G–d." In other words, the lowest group of people, the ones who had originally been fellow travelers, started the quarrel. They continued: "Why did you bring the congregation of G–d to this desert that we might die there, both we and our beasts?" They tried to gain support, by making it appear that their main concern was the קהל ה', the spiritual elite of the nation. They accused Moses and Aaron of indifference to the fate of the spiritual elite of the Jewish people. By reading the next verse as a continuation of verse 5, we see their true meaning: "Moses and Aaron came to the entrance of the tent of meeting on account of the קהל," meaning that Moses interceded even on account of the קהל. At this point, G–d commanded Moses and Aaron to assemble the עדה, i.e. a level of people lower than the קהל ידוד, the spiritual elite, and of course also the קהל ידוד, who were on a higher spiritual niveau than the עדה, as pointed out earlier, and who were certainly worthy to witness the miracle about to be performed. It would appear that the sin of Moses and Aaron was that they had approached G–d even for the sake of the קהל, the group inferior to the עדה, (who had felt the lack of water as described in verse 2). Moses did not sin then by calling the people מורים. The only people whom he called מורים, were descendants of Gentiles, not the descendants of Abraham. It certainly was not sinful to call people who regressed to their spiritual level prior to their conversion "rebellious." When punishing Moses and Aaron, G–d says in 20,12: לא תביאו את הקהל הזה אל הארץ, "Because you did not keep faith with Me, you will not lead this congregation to the land." This means that Moses was not going to be worthy to lead the category of קהל to the Holy land, much less the spiritually higher categories of the people such as עדה. Moses was no longer considered fit to lead even the קהל, a spiritually inferior group of people, who, though they would live in the Holy Land, would not receive a hereditary share therein. Moses and Aaron would accordingly no longer be considered suitable to lead the עדה and קהל ידוד sections of the people. The words אשר נתתי להם, "to whom I have given the land," refer to these upper echelons of the people. This creates the impression that the majority of the people qualified as בני ישראל rather than as goy or קהל. On the other hand, and from various other occasions, we are entitled to conclude that the עם were the most numerous section of the nation. I have explained elsewhere the meaning of the statement attributed to Rav Huna that a person is remarkably insensitive to the help he receives from G–d. Saul was considered personally more pious than David, as we know from the statement by G–d that "if you had been Saul, and he had been David, I would have killed many Davids on his account." 
  We are dealing with a Divine decree that was issued already prior to this incident, but the execution of which had been delayed pending certain actions by the human beings to whom it was to apply. The decree concerned the coming into being of the kingdom of David and all that this entailed. A single error of Saul sufficed to trigger its execution, whereas on the other hand when David committed several sins, this did not have fatal consequences for his dynasty (compare the discussion in Yuma 22b). What occurred here, was of a similar nature. G–d told Moses already in Exodus 6,1, after the latter had complained that his mission had resulted in additional hardships for the people he had been sent to liberate, עתה תראה, now you will see!" Sanhedrin 111, comments on this that it had already then been decreed that Moses would not lead the Jewish people into the Holy Land, that he would only experience the deliverance of the people from Egypt. A similar decree existed due to the conduct of the people, i.e. that that generation also would not see the Holy Land. This was because they did not deserve all the miracles that would be performed for them at the time of their entering the Holy Land. Had Moses led them then, the miracles he would have performed would have outclassed those performed when Joshua defeated the thirty-one kings, and the people simply would not have deserved such miracles. The Ralbag explains all this in connection with Joshua, 1,2, when G–d told Joshua: "My servant Moses has died, and now arise and cross this river Jordan!"
   In view of this we can also understand Deut. 1,37, when Moses said: "G–d was also angry with me on your account." Moses employs the expression בי, against me. We find the same expression here when G–d said to him יען כי לא האמנתם בי להקדישני, "because you did not have enough faith in Me to sanctify Me" (20,12). In Deut. 1,32, however, the wording is ובדבר הזה אינכם מאמינים. The true significance is as I have explained, that a decree already existed, but the actions needed to trigger this decree had not yet occurred. Because of a previous sin Moses had committed, G–d had already become angry at Moses on account of Israel. Now this anger, i.e. decree, became translated into effective reality. This is the reason why the Torah stresses המה מי מריבה אשר רבו בני ישראל, "these are the very same waters of strife the children of Israel quarreled (already previously)." If it were not so, the expression המה, would be uncalled for. Now the various commentaries that have been offered on this passage. 
  The four categories רשימו, חקיקה, חציבה, עשיה, discussed previously also represent four levels of perceptive capacity by various sections of the Jewish people. The perceptive powers of Moses towered above the four levels granted to the different groups of Israelites. The four are actually two, each with a sub-category. Different perceptive powers operated at different times, such as the time when the first Temple had been built, when it was destroyed, when the second Temple was completed, and when the second Temple was destroyed. Corresponding to these various epochs we have prophecy of the first level, prophecy of the second level, "Holy Spirit," i.e. רוח הקודש, and finally a lesser degree of holy spirit which we will call סוף רוח הקודש. The first two categories are in the domain that we have referred to as נעלמות," concealed," the latter two are in the domain that we have called נגלות, "revealed. As long as the first Temple was functioning the prophecy that existed was rooted in the domain of רשימו, in the nature of "sparks" dating back to what Moses had imparted. At the time of the Babylonian exile this kind of prophecy came to an end. There was no more direct drawing on the domain of רשימו. 
  Maimonides writes in chapter 45, section 2, of his Moreh Nevuchim that Daniel was not a prophet, this appears confirmed in the Talmud Megillah 3a on the verse in Daniel 10,7: "and I Daniel alone saw the vision; the people that were with me did not see the vision. However, a great fear befell them." In answer to the question who Daniel's companions were the Talmud says that they were the prophets Chagai, Zecharyah and Malachi. The Talmud adds that in some respects Daniel was greater than those prophets, whereas in other respects they were superior to him. Their superiority consisted in the fact that they were prophets, whereas he was not. On the other hand, he was superior in having had the vision, whereas they did not.
  Abravanel disagrees with this contention of Maimonides in the beginning of his work Ma'ayeney HaYeshuah, citing Seder Olam, an ancient history book, which includes Daniel in the list of prophets enumerated. Besides, he reasons "how is it possible to exclude Daniel when we consider the numerous and profound prophecies recorded by him?" He feels that, on the contrary, this is proof of his standing, seeing that his companions did not see any of these visions! He says that when the Talmud calls the companions "prophets," this only means they had been instructed by G–d to transmit certain messages to the Jewish people. The word נביא, "prophet," has its root in the Hebrew expression ניב שפתים, "heartening, comforting words" (Isaiah 57,19). When Aaron is described as Moses' prophet, ואהרון אחיך יהיה נביאך, "and your brother Aaron will be your prophet," the point made is that he will be Moses' mouthpiece (Exodus 7,1). Although Daniel had achieved superior status, he had not been instructed to impart these messages to Israel; this is why the Talmud does not refer to him as a prophet. Should you ask why he was not chosen to convey these messages to the Jewish people, the answer is that the three prophets mentioned returned to the Holy Land with the Israelites who went to settle there again and to build the second Temple. There was a need therefore, to become G–d's messengers, which was not the case with Daniel who did not make עליה. The Torah reports in Genesis 15,1, והנה דבר ה' אל אברהם במחזה לאמור, "here the word of G–d came to Abraham in a vision to say, etc." The meaning seems to be that Abraham was on the level of prophecy. If nonetheless he is not numbered among the prophets, this is only because G–d had not sent him with a message to His people. This is the approach of the Abravanel to our problem. It is my personal view that both Maimonides and Abravanel are on the right track, אלו ואלו דברי אלוקים חיים. Daniel was indeed a prophet, but he belonged to the category that we previously described as סוף נבואה. This was still part of the domain of רשימו.
  The second period: During the period of the Persian and Median empires, the lifetime of Mordechai, the redemption under the aegis of the domain חקיקה commenced. The period is characterised by רוח הקודש, holy spirit which is rooted in that domain, just as Moses' prophecy was rooted in the domain רשימו. That this indeed is so, is alluded to in Midrash Rabbah on Mordechai and Esther, which describes the Holy Spirit available at that time as "below," compared to the Holy Spirit avaiable at the time of Moses which is called "above." The Midrash expresses this in connection with Esther 9,27: קימו וקבלו היהודים עליהם ועל זרעם, "The Jews confirmed and undertook upon themselves and their future generations to observe the days of Purim, etc." The Midrash interprets the words קימו וקבלו to mean "they preserved above what they had accepted below." How do we know that Mordechai himself possessed רוח הקודש? Our sages said that the whole Book of Esther was composed under the influence of the Holy Spirit. (Megillah 7a).
  The third period, the one we described as commencing with the establishment of the second Temple, commenced with Shimon Hatzaddik, and continued during the entire period of the reign of the Greeks, and is called the domain of חציבה. Shimon Hatzaddik himself is described in Avot 1,2, as משירי אנשי כנסת הגדולה, "as a member of the remnants of the men of the Great Assembly, the period during which the last of the Books of the Bible were edited. The Holy Spirit that was available during those years continued to decrease until the destruction of the second Temple.
  The fourth period, the one we have termed עשיה, commenced with the exile of Edom (Roman exile), when the only communications from Celestial Regions were what the Talmud refers to as בת קול, heavenly echoes. Such communications emanate from the domain עשיה. This period lasted until the conclusion of the Talmud. Henceforth the only source of our illumination would be the Torah itself, i.e. what we attain by studying it. We can now understand the comments of the Talmud in Avodah Zarah 5a concerning the role of the red heifer in purification rites required after incurring impurity through contact with a dead body. Rabbi Yossi says there that the only reason the Jewish people received the Torah was to overcome the sovereignty of the angel of death, of other nations or tongues. We know this from Psalms 82,6/7: אמרתי אלוקים אתם ובני עליון כולכם, אכן כאדם תמותו וכאחד השרים תפולו, "I had considered you divine beings, sons of the Most High, all of you; but you shall die as men do, fall like any prince."
  When Israel was freed from the dominance of the angel of death while it received the Torah at Mount Sinai, and lost this freedom due to the sin of the golden calf, the angel Mattatarmolin with the face of an ox took up position on Israel's left, and Satan and the nations of the world started counting the people. Once the sin had been redressed by means of, amongst other things, the ashes of the red heifer, Torah was restored to being perfect, i.e תורת ידוד תמימה, so that even the מלאך רע יענה אמן, the angel that normally negates, portends evil, had to approve of Israel's rehabilitation. When this condition does not exist our situation is reversed and all our adversaries are waiting in the wings to applaud our downfall. In the introduction of Midrash Rabbah on Eichah, we find the comment on Daniel 8,12, וצבא תנתן על התמיד בפשע, "and a set time (army) will be allotted to the daily sacrifice because of sin." צבא means Malchiyut, i.e. dominance by other nations. We know this from Isaiah 24,21, יפקוד ה' על צבא המרום במרום "In that day the Lord will punish the host of heaven in heaven and the kings of earth on earth." The תמיד we referred to in Daniel, is a reference to Israel, since it is written והגית בו יומם ולילה, “occupy yourself with it by day and by night,” i.e. תמיד, constantly (Joshua 1,8). The word בפשע refers to the sin of neglecting Torah. Any time Israel throws Torah to the ground, other nations will prevail over us, since it says ותשלך אמת ארצה "when it throws truth to the ground." We know that אמת, truth, is a reference to Torah: אמת קנה ואל תמכור, "buy the truth, never sell it!" (Proverbs 23,23). If you throw words of Torah to the ground other nations will immediately prevail against you. Confirmation of this is found in Daniel 8,12, ועשתה והצליחה, "it will act and succeed." Since Gentiles do not have Torah, the verse must refer to the Gentiles prevailing over Israel.
  On the other hand we have the assurance by Midrash Rabbah (end of Parshat Shemini, section 13), that Torah will never be completely forgotten by Israel, while the Midrash understands the words in Leviticus 11,4, את הגמל "and the camel," as a reference to the exile in Babylonia. The camel is described there as מעלה גרה, (normally translated as chewing the cud) which is a reference to the distinction Daniel would achieve in that kingdom. It is based on Daniel 2,49, that "Daniel was at the king's gate” (was his confidant). The Midrash continues in this vein, interpreting the words in Levit. 11,4 את השפן, as applying to the exile under the Medes, when Mordechai rose to grandeur. Similarly the word ארנבת, is understood as referring to the rule of the Greeks, when Alexander displayed great respect for the Jewish sages. The Torah repeated in the case of all the foregoing: כי מעלה גרה הוא, which is lacking when the Torah describes the pig, hence the Midrash sees in the pig a reference to the exile under the Romans, who not only did not elevate Torah scholars to high positions, but killed them. This is confirmed by the verse in Isaiah 47,6: "I was angry at My people, I defiled My heritage (נחלתי); I put them into your hands (Romans) but you showed them no mercy." According to the Midrash the word נחלתי, refers to Rabbi Akiva and his companions. 
  This Midrash has much in common with our Midrash. פרה, the red heifer, symbolizes Egypt, where Moses towers above all other prophets. אדומה, red, refers to Babylonia where Daniel rose to eminence, תמימה, refers to Media, where Mordechai rose to become Prime Minister, אין בה מום, refers to the period of Greek domination, when Shimon Hatzadik was so highly regarded by Alexander. לא עלה עליה עול, is an allusion to the Midrash in which we had quoted Rabbi Joshua of Sakinin say that Torah's words can be fulfilled only on people who are prepared to kill themselves for it (Berachot 43). In other words, he who refuses to accept the yoke of Heaven will be worn down by the yoke of דרך ארץ, bureaucracy, civilization's demands. 
  Rabbi Joshua of Sakinin had cited four laws as the focus of Satan and the Gentiles when pointing out inconsistencies in Torah legislation. Our Midrash, describing certain inconsistencies of the treatment by the Gentiles of a defeated humbled Jewish nation in exile, is the answer to these comments by Satan.
  There is an illuminating comment by the Maharam from Padua, on the Sefer Hamada of Maimonides, commenting on the miracle by which the world was created and how strange (contradictory) it is that certain stars are sources of light, while others only reflect light, having none of their own to give. Some stars race around the universe, others travel at a leisurely pace. Some natural phenomena exude heat, others cold. All these phenomena are examples of contradictions. Nonetheless they are all part of the same universe. What is so strange then if the Torah contains some laws that appear contradictory? On the contrary, nothing could be a greater proof of the Divine authenticity of Torah than these so called contradictions. Had Torah been man made legislation, surely it would have reflected the lawgiver's "consistency!" Surely, when G–d created nature, He did so with intelligence! This then must be our answer when confronted by the Gentiles who claim that the Torah's commandments are devoid of reason, only intended to assert G–d's authority over His creatures. Our answer to such accusations must be that this would be a very poor way for G–d to win adherents to His law. Surely, if He had only wanted to secure our obedience, He would have legislated only laws that we could comprehend, and which by their logic would make us accept Him as our supreme authority! The only reason then that He legislated such apparently illogical laws must be that they are good for us, though we do not realize it, a condition due to the limitation of our perceptive faculties!
  Once we follow this approach the verses in Deuteronomy which appeared strange, begin to make sense. Moses first said: "See I have given you חקים and משפטים, i.e. statutes devoid of rationale as well as laws that commend themselves to your reason." Immediately afterwards The Torah quotes the Gentiles as basing their assessment of the Jewish people as a wise and intelligent people on the fact that we perform all these commandments faithfully (compare Deut. 4,5/6). Their argument is that surely just as there are good reasons for the משפטים which have been revealed, there must be equally good reasons for the חקים which He has not seen fit to reveal. These חקים emanate in the domain רשימו. The meaning of the word רק in the verse רק עם חכם ונבון הגוי הגדול הזה, "this nation is a great and intelligent people," then is ריק, empty, i.e. "these commandments cannot be empty, devoid of intellectual content." As long as the people of Israel hold on to Torah and perform its commandments it is complimented by the nations of the world. This is what the Midrash alluded to when it said cryptically, פרה=ישראל, אדומה=ישראל, תמימה=ישראל, אשר לא עלה עליה עול=ישראל. This means that Israel is superior to the nations of the world in four respects, hence the grudging respect of Satan and the rest of the world. If we fail to demonstrate our superiority by heeding those four areas from which Torah values are transmitted to us, we would – G–d forbid! – become victims of the four kingdoms that rule over us in the four exiles. The degree of mystery surrounding these four examples of Torah legislation that Satan and the nations had quoted, varies. The red heifer legislation is the most mystifying, since its true reason is available only to those who have access to the domain of רשימו. The scapegoat on the Day of Atonement is a little less mystifying, as explained in the Zohar, in its commentary on the words איש עתי, Leviticus 16,21. The true reason for that legislation is reserved for those who have access to the domain of חקיקה. The domain חציבה holds the mystery of the levirate marriage legislation, whereas the domain of עשיה contains the answer to the mystery of the כלאים legislation. We have shown why this Parshah in pointing to the mystical domain of רשימו is really the root of all Torah legislation. 
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  I have already explained that it is impossible to penetrate the true meaning of the red heifer legislation. In order to find meanings, however, we must explore it to the best of our abilities. These meanings are usually true, though they may not have been the prime considerations of the Law-giver. No doubt more profound meanings escape us. 
  One of the most perplexing aspects of the legislation is that while it purifies the impure when they are sprinkled with the ash of the red heifer, the person who busies himself with preparing the red heifer until it is fit to perform its function becomes defiled while he is so engaged. The lessons of a moral and ethical nature we can derive from this fact are twofold: both their application to our practical lives as well as their application to our Torah study. Regarding the latter the lesson is that we must strive to understand spiritual values to the best of our intellectual ability. By doing so we sanctify the physical matter that our body is made of. When man strives to model himself according to his perception of the Divine, he purifies his body, i.e. that which is impure. If however, he overreaches himself, wants to know more than his perceptive faculties have been equipped to understand, he is like a person who insists on looking directly into the sun when the sun is at its strongest, and he blinds himself as a result. This is like the aspect of the red heifer legislation that "defiles the pure." So far regarding the moral lesson of our Torah study.
  As to lessons for one's practical life, Maimonides has already dealt with this at length in the fourth chapter of his volume "Eight Chapters." Concerning one's virtues, he explains that man must practice the golden mean. If by chance man has erred by swerving too far to the left or to the right of the golden mean, his repentance must consist of bending in the opposite direction over and beyond the golden mean, so that he can compensate for the deviation he had practiced once. [This accounts for the many בעלי תשובה that we observe practicing what to the ordinary onlooker appears to be an extremist approach to religion. Ed.] From the above it follows that if someone was sincere and consistent in his conduct and views, had walked the golden mean, but now suddenly swerves to the right or left, he is in fact defiling what had previously been pure. By the same token, if someone had been practicing an extremely secular lifestyle or practiced negative virtues such as being extremely self centered, and he now changes to an extremely pious lifestyle or to the practice of positive virtues bordering on self effacement, this is an example of purifying what had been impure.
  הנוגע במת … הוא יתחטא בו ביום השלישי . This verse contains a clear allusion to the fact that even at times when the ash of the red heifer is not at our disposal man can purify himself by cleaving steadfastly to Torah. If he studies Torah in order to in turn instruct others, to perform the מצות he has studied, to keep all the laws that he has been in the habit of observing, he will certainly achieve purity. Our sages said that "a single day in the calendar of G–d is equivalent to one thousand years in our calendar" (Bereshit Rabbah 8,2). What they intended to convey was that the seven days during which G–d created the universe, refer to a period of six thousand years of regular existence and one thousand years during which the earth would be desolate, destroyed. This is another way of alluding to a period which is totally like the Sabbath, during which no progress of a physical kind is made. Each of the six days indicates one thousand years, as Nachmanides explains at length in his commentary on Parshat Bereshit (compare page 31 Ramban, edition Rabbi Chavell). 
  Torah was given in the third millenium. He who performs the rites of purification on the "third day", i.e. by studying the Torah which was given us on the equivalent of the third day, will find that by the seventh day, יום השביעי יטהר, he will achieve purity. His purity will be completed in the world to come which is all שבת. If he should G–d forbid, fail to cleanse himself on the "third day," he will not become pure, for only "he who toils on the Sabbath eve will eat on the Sabbath."
  It is the opinion of Maimonides that the sin of Moses at the "waters of strife" had been that he deviated from the golden mean by becoming angry, when he addressed the people saying to them שמעו נא המורים, "listen you rebellious ones!" G–d dealt with him in a very exacting manner since a man of his caliber should not give way to expressions of anger. By doing so a man of such stature discredits his Maker, since everyone models himself on the conduct of people such as these.. (compare chapter four of שמונה פרקים). From this we all have to learn how important it is to practice good character traits.
  ויעש משה נחש נחושת . The Tzror Hamor, in his commentary on Parshat Bo, in connection with the מזוזות ומשקוף, describes how jealous G–d was of the honor of the righteous, more so even than of His own honor. This is why the word מזוזות, plural, is mentioned first (corresponding to Moses and Aaron), whereas the word משקוף, lintel (which is above the מזוזות which corresponds to G–d), is mentioned last. Moses was unwilling to have that which symbolized G–d mentioned last, therefore when relaying the command, he mentioned the word משקוף first (compare Exodus 12,7, when G–d commands Moses, and Exodus 12,22, where Moses relays these instructions to Israel). We have a similar situation here in chapter 21,5-9. The people spoke up against G–d and against Moses. G–d dispatched נחשים ושרפים against them, the נחשים because they had spoken out against G–d, the שרפים because of their having criticized Moses who is compared to an angel of the שרף variety. Therefore, after the people repented, G–d told Moses to make a שרף for himself to put it on a pole, etc. Moses however, did not make a שרף; he rather made a נחש, seeing that he considered restoring G–d's honor as more important than restoring his own honor, even though a שרף was what G–d had instructed him to make. From all this we learn to what extent we must be careful not to besmirch the honor of Torah scholars, righteous people, etc. 
  
  Balak
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named לברכה ולא לקללה.
  Although there is not a single one of the 613 commandments listed in this פרשה, the famous blessing of מה טובו אהליך יעקב משכנותיך ישראל "How goodly are your tents O Jacob, your dwellings O Israel," is contained in our portion. Our sages have said that the expression "your tents," refers to periods when Israel is at peace in its homeland, whereas the word "your dwellings," refers even to periods when the Land and Temple of Israel is in ruins (24,5). Rashi explains that משכון is also "pledge", that even when there is no "temple," its very ruins are the guarantee that Israel will try to qualify for atonement. He quotes Eychah Rabbah on Lamentations 4,11 as his support.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  We must always remember that nothing evil descends upon Israel from the Celestial Regions, since Israel remains at all times in the category of בנים אתם לה' אלוקיכם, "you are children of the Lord your G–d" (Deut. 14,1). Even when G–d is angry at Israel, such as when He allows the destruction of the Temple and Israel's dispersion among the nations of the earth, this is only for Israel's good. Just as the discipline a father administers to his son is due to his love for him, so the Lord disciplines us, and it is all for our own good. Such discipline aims to refine us who are His first born among all the nations. He aims to cleanse us of the stains of sins and iniquity, and thereby cause us to return to Him in penitence, so that ultimately we will be totally pure, without any blemish. We will explain this when we discuss the portions that are usually read in public during the period between the 17th day of Tammuz and the 9th day of Av, the anniversary of the destruction of the Holy Temple. When that objective will have been reached, the prophecy contained in Psalms 30,2: "I will extol You, O Lord, for You have lifted me up and not let my enemies rejoice over me, "will be fulfilled. The word דליתנו can mean one of two things. It could be explained as coming from the root דל, "poor," or it could be an expression denoting "elevation." Poverty and troubles may be the causes that bring us a surfeit of light, over and beyond the light we enjoyed prior to our having been plunged into darkness (through exile, etc.). This great light emanates from the very darkness into which G–d has plunged us, so that thereby great enlightenment may emerge, a process similar to blood which eventually is converted into milk that is pure white. In a similar fashion, G–d turned the curse (of Bileam) into a blessing. The curse was not replaced by a blessing, but eventually became a blessing. Thus the destruction of the Temple is actually the beginning of its restoration. It was the catalyst that alone would lead to the condition of תם עונך בת ציון, "Your iniquity is expiated, Fair Zion; He will exile you no longer" (Lamentations 4,22). At that time, the great Temple, the everlasting one will be built. Because חורבן is the commencement of rebuilding, we conduct ourselves with dignity just as we did when the Temple was still standing; destruction is the true cause of an enduring Temple, i.e. the true ישוב. Halachah recognizes this phenomenon. We are culpable for certain kinds of destructive activities on the Sabbath despite the rule of כל המקלקלים פטורים, "all who ruin something on the Sabbath are not culpable" (Shabbat 106). The exceptions are destructive activities which are a necessary precondition to constructive activities, such as the tearing down of a structure in order to enable a new structure to rise in its place (compare Shabbat 31b). Our prophets have assured us that the fast-days we observe nowadays on the 17th of Tammuz and the 9th of Av respectively will become great holidays on the reconstruction of the Temple (Zecharyah 8,19).
  There is an allusion to this in the Torah: When Aaron said (concerning the next day which was the 17th of Tammuz) חג לה' מחר "tomorrow there will be a holiday to G–d" (Exodus 32,5). The term מחר, need not always refer to the day immediately following it. It may, on occasion, refer to a time in the distant future. Aaron hinted that the time would come when even a day that is a fast-day today, such as the day that Moses had occasion to smash the tablets with the Ten Commandments G–d had given him, i.e. the day after Aaron's pronouncement, would be turned into a happy occasion. It is no accident then that our calendar is arranged in such a way that the ninth day of Av always occurs on the same day of the week as the first day of Passover, the day we commemorate the Exodus from Egypt. That redemption had been the real beginning of the eventual and enduring redemption of the Jewish people. This is why the prophet Michah (7,15) says כימי צאתך מארץ מצרים "just as during the days when you came out of Egypt." The prophet introduces a vision of the redemption of the future by speaking of great miracles yet to be performed.
  This statement resolves a major problem that arises from Deut. 28,63: "And as G–d once delighted in making you prosperous and many, so will He now delight in causing you to perish and in wiping you out." Our sages wonder: How can one describe G–d as actually enjoying our misery? Do we not have repeated statements describing G–d's pain and discomfiture whenever the Jewish people undergo afflictions (Megillah 10b)? Rabbi Eliezer answers that it is not G–d Himself who delights in our misfortunes, but rather He causes others to. This answer is supported by the grammatical meaning of the word "Yassis," used by the Torah. If the Torah were to describe G–d's personal delight, it would have written “Yassos” instead. Rabbi Eliezer's answer is difficult, seeing the Torah states explicitly כן ישיש עליך ה' אלוקיך, which clearly means that He Himself derives pleasure from what is happening! Why then the strange combination of ישיש with עליך? We also find the wording שוש אשיש, meaning: "I will personally rejoice" (Isaiah 61,10). Hence we cannot explain the expression ישיש as meaning something other than deriving personal joy. We also have Deut. 30,9, in which after describing the penitence of the Jewish people, the Torah says of G–d: "He will once again delight in your well-being, etc," and the expression used is “La-ssus”. We must conclude that the construction Yassis, therefore can have two meanings. On occasion it is a Hiphil, transitive, and would mean making others rejoice, whereas on other occasions it is used intransitively and means to derive personal joy.
  Having said all this, we still need to explain why in Deut. 28,63 this expression is used transitively. Why should this word have different meanings? According to what we have written previously, we can understand this quite well, seeing that both meanings are really part of the same derivation. When G–d causes the other nations to delight in our sufferings, He causes us to turn back to Him so that in the end He can personally delight in our spiritual and physical rehabilitation. The curse then develops into a blessing. 
  As a confirmation we need only look at Lamentations 3,31/32: כי אם הוגה ורחם. It should really have said וירחם, "He will pardon. "The plain meaning of the full verse is: "For the Lord does not reject forever, but first afflicts, then pardons (displays mercy) in His abundant kindness, for He does not willfully bring grief." The homiletical meaning is that the very הוגה is the cause of the רחמים.
  By following this approach we can also understand the Midrash in Eichah Rabbati, 2,6, on Lamentations 2,3: "He has cut down in blazing anger כל קרן ישראל, all the might of Israel." The Midrash comments that there are ten קרנות, i.e. "strongholds" termed Keren. Abraham is one such קרן; he is referred to in Isaiah 5,1, as כרם היה לידידי בקרן בן שמן, "My beloved had a vineyard on a fruitful hill." Isaac is also known as a קרן, in Genesis 22,13 נאחז בסבך בקרניו, "caught in the thicket by its horns." We find a reference to Joseph as קרן in Deut. 33,17 where his קרן is described as וקרני ראם קרניו וכו' "He has thorns like the horns of a wild ox." Moses is referred to as קרן in Exodus 34,29: כי קרן עור פניו, "for the skin of his face emitted rays (like a horn)." The Torah is also described as קרן, since we read in Chabakuk 3,4: קרנים מידו לו, "it gives off rays of light in every direction." Priesthood is referred to as קרן, in Psalms 112,9, קרנו תרום בכבוד, "his horn is exalted in honor." (Possibly the word כבוד, used here which is also used in connection with the garments of the High Priest, is the reason the Midrash interprets this verse as alluding to the priesthood.) The Levites collectively are referred to as קרן in Chronicles 1 25,5: כל אלה בנים להימן חוזה המלך בדברי האלוקים להרים קרן. [The chapter traces the genealogy of the tribe of Levi Ed.] Prophecy is called קרן, in Samuel I 2,6: רמה קרני בה'. (Hannah prophesies about Samuel's future). The Holy Temple is also described as קרן, as in Psalms 22,22: מקרני רמים עניתני. Israel itself is also described as קרן in Psalms 148,14: וירם קרן לעמו. Some people add that the קרן of the Messiah should also be included, per Samuel I 2,10: ויתן עוז למלכו, וירם קרן משיחו. The Midrash continues that all of these "horns" were placed on the heads of the Jewish people, but they forfeited them due to their sins. This is alluded to in the verse we quoted earlier from Lamentations 2,3 that in His blazing anger G–d cut down every קרן of Israel. These "horns" subsequently were given to the Gentile nations, as is written in Daniel 7,20: ועל קרניא עשר די בראשה ואחרי די סלקת ונפלו מן קדמיה. "About the ten horns which were on its head, and the other one which came and fell." In verse 24 of the same chapter Daniel speaks about ten kings and kingdoms arising from the fallen horns. Provided Israel repents, G–d will restore these horns to their rightful place viz. Psalms 75,11: "And I will cut off all the horns of the wicked, but the horns of the righteous will be lifted up." This refers to the horns that the “Righteous One of the world,” i.e. G–d, had cut off. When is the time that He will restore them to their righful position? It is when G–d will raise the horn of His anointed: "He will raise the horn of His anointed" (Samuel I 2,10). Thus far the Midrash in Eychah Rabbati.
  According to this Midrash G–d would hand over the Priesthood, the Holy Temple, and the institution of the Levites to the nations of the world after Israel had forfeited those "horns!" Do those nations then possess a Holy Temple? Are there among them people who perform the duties of the Priesthood, etc.? The Midrash means that our attainment of these "horns" will a consequence of our prior dispersal in exile among the nations. Only through experiencing the humbling and refining experience of exile can we eventually experience the great light in store for us in our future. This is similar to what Rabbi Joshua in Sanhedrin 97 said to Rabbi Eliezer, that if Israel will not do penitence (of their own volition) they will not experience redemption, but G–d will allow a ruler to rule them whose decrees will match those of Haman in cruelty, and who will lead them back to being loyal to G–d.
  In interpreting the verse in Lamentations 4,22: תם עונך בת ציון, "your iniquity is expiated, daughter of Zion," Rabbi Chelbo quoting Rabbi Yochanan said that Pharaoh's withdrawing his "ring" (protection) from the people of Israel while the latter were in Egypt, was better for them than the forty years Moses kept prophesying for them in the desert, since only the former resulted in redemption whereas the latter did not. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said that the withdrawal of Ahasverus' ring was better than the six hundred thousand prophets who prophesied in the days of Elijah, because the former resulted in repentance and subsequent redemption. The Rabbis also said that the scroll of Lamentations was better for Israel than the forty years the prophet Jeremiah spent predicting the destruction of the Temple, since the former resulted in repentance. This is the meaning of the above mentioned verse in Lamentations that Israel's sins have been expiated (Eichah Rabbah, end of fourth chapter). All of the foregoing is an example of Judges 14,14: ומעז יצא מתוק, "out of the strong came something sweet." I have elaborated on the meaning of this elsewhere. 
  Concerning the above mentioned matters, the Torah wrote in Deut. 30,1: "It will be when all these things befall you, the blessing and the curse that I have set before you, and you take them to heart amidst the various nations to which the Lord your G–d has banished you, and you return to the Lord your G–d, etc." Why did the Torah see fit to mention הברכה, "the blessing," in that verse? All that needed to be mentioned is the curse which eventually would lead to repentance! We therefore see, that the Torah wanted to make the point that the curse itself is really a dimension of the blessing. This is parallel to the verse in Nechemiah 13,2: ויהפוך אלוקינו הקללה לברכה"" Our G–d turned the curse into a blessing." Bileam, who had come prepared to curse, was forced to bless instead. The angel who delights in evil was forced to give his consent to the blessings; the accuser was turned into an advocate for the defense.
  There was a cosmic necessity for Bileam to become the instrument of G–d in this case. He, after all, was the prophet of the Gentile nations, and he was the spiritual head of all the nations. 
  When our sages commented on Deut. 34,10 "that there never did arise in Israel a prophet like Moses etc.," they said that among the other nations there did arise someone comparable to Moses, i.e. Bileam (compare Sifri on that verse). It is totally absurd to believe that a money-grabbing magician such as Bileam should have been equated by our sages with Moses! Surely they did not mean to compare Moses to Bileam as being equal or similar in holiness, character qualities, relationship with G–d, etc!
  The Zohar (Sullam edition Balak page 64), is very explicit in describing Bileam's low character, giving many examples of his appearing to credit himself with great insights and thereby misleading those who considered him a great Seer. Here are a few quotes from that passage in the Zohar "This wicked man took great pride in claiming to know everything. By doing so he misled people into believing that he had attained a very high stature. He blew up every little achievement of his. Whatever he said concerned the domain of the forces of impurity. He spoke the truth, literally speaking. Anyone listening to him would form the impression that he was the most outstanding of the prophets of the world. When he described himself as שומע אמרי קל, ויודע דעת עליון, "privy to the words of G–d, aware of the knowledge of the Supreme One," the impression is formed that he spoke about the G–d in Heaven, whereas in fact he was privy only to אמרי קל, as distinct from אמרי הקל. Had the Torah added the letter ה, we would have credited Bileam with being addressed directly by G–d. As it is, he communicated with the forces of טומאה, forces considered by the nations as deities, though they really were אל אחר, forces of nature that are no better than idols. When he speaks about knowing the דעת עלין, the listener forms the impression that Bileam claimed to be privy to G–d's range of knowledge, whereas in fact he was privy only to the עליון "the highest" of the forces of impurity that G–d has allowed to govern part of nature. Bileam, technically speaking, spoke truthfully, since he was privy to a power which in its field was considered supreme. However, the listener did not know that this power had no independent authority at all but was only an agent of G–d. When Bileam described himself in 24,4 as אשר מחזה שדי יחזה "someone who has visions of G–d, a reader would assume that this was really so, that Bileam could see what no one else could see. However the term מחזה שדי refers to a branch of the three branches that originate in the name Shaddai, corresponding to the three letters in that word. He would have some access to the domains of חסד, גבורה, תפארת. The Zohar continues that עמלק employed these three spiritual domains in his attack against Israel, and that Balak, whose name contained the last two letters of עמלק, felt encouraged that it would help him in his confrontation with the Patron of Israel.
  Thus Bileam is not perceived by the Zohar as having even come close to "prophetic parity" with Moses, as suggested by the statement in the Sifri.
  I am nonetheless inclined to go more deeply into the meaning of that statement in the Sifri and to take it literally. We will find that it is quite possible to understand it. In this connection we need to consider a statement that we find in Baba Batra 14b, that "Moses wrote his book and that of Bileam and Job." How are we to understand this? Is there a single letter in the Torah that is not "Torah," not of Divine origin? If so, what could the Talmud have had in mind with that statement? Rashi comments on this: "His prophecies and parables, even though Moses did not need to, and the Torah would have been complete without them." I have not understood this comment of Rashi. All the stories in the Torah e.g. the slaying of Abel by Cain, are all at first glance not "necessary" parts of the Torah, and yet they are all part of the fabric of תורת השם תמימה, "that the Torah of G–d is complete, perfect", i.e. there is nothing in it that is redundant. Our sages usually point to Genesis 36,12: "and Timnah was the concubine of Esau's son Eliphaz" as an example that there is no word in the Torah that is not of enduring and meaningful significance. Sanhedrin 99, even concludes that we are to learn from this that it is better to be a lowly maidservant to a nation that has blood ties with Israel than to be a Lady in a family that has no ties with the Jewish people. Timnah the daughter of a nobleman, had chosen to demote herself in order to be associated with Abraham's descendants in some way. This verse in the Torah is equal in importance to the "Hear O Israel the Lord our G–d the Lord is One."
  In order to understand this passage in the Talmud, let us begin with a short introduction: We know that there are two paths that emanate from the עולם הבריאה. One is called the סטרא אחרא, the path that contains everything that is impure as distinct from the "right" path. When tracing both paths upwards (in the direction of the ultimate spiritual source), we note that they merge. In the last analysis they both originate from קדושה, holiness. We normally refer to the "correct path" as the סטרא דימינא, the "right" path, whereas the other path is known as סטרא דשמאלא, the "left" path. Moses proceeded along the "right" path, seeing he possessed all the virtues a prophet is capable of possessing. Bileam however, pursued the path of impurity, employing charms and other oracles. He managed to spiritually wrestle his way upwards close to the Holy Source, "higher" than any other prophets. However, he thereupon descended and defiled himself by resorting to all kinds of magic. Therefore it is fair to say of him that just as Moses, he קם, "arose," though once he had come close to the source, he failed to become suffused with its sanctity. Whereas the holiness that Moses "touched," permeated him, Bileam defiled himself. Moses had achieved what Bileam had achieved, whereas Bileam had not achieved what Moses had achieved.. He kept distancing himself further away from that Holy Source.
  Now we understand what is meant by the Talmud that "Moses wrote his own book and the book of Bileam." Do not err to think that only because G–d taught him did Moses reach levels Bileam had reached, and that his learning was vicarious, second hand. Rather, Moses had attained the levels Bileam had attained by his own independent intellectual and spiritual efforts. The Talmud tells us that Moses learned all this as an experience, not like we learn history, i.e. from books describing what happened once to someone else.. Whatever Bileam had been able to work out by himself concerning Israel's future, Moses had been able to work out without special assists from G–d. What the Talmud means is that actually the whole portion of Bileam could just as easily have been recorded by Moses without instruction from G–d. There would have been no need for Bileam to pronounce blessings to enable us to learn all the lessons that our sages derive from them. The only "novelty" in the whole phenomenon is the fact that the קטיגור, "counselor for the prosecution," turned into a סניגור, "attorney for the defense." This is something that could only have occurred through Bileam, since he was Moses' counterpart among the nations. We have now illustrated the statement we set out from. The סטרא אחרא is bound to become a source of blessing if one only traces it far enough towards its holy source. We have described this earlier as "blood turning into milk." It follows (again as we have tried to describe earlier) that it is the Gentile nations who are in reality the source of Israel's refinement and consequently of its redemption.
  Now we understand the meaning of Proverbs 27,6: "Wounds inflicted by a loved one are long lasting; the kisses of an enemy are profuse." Taanit 20a explains this verse by saying that the curse that Achiyah Hashiloni cursed Israel with (Kings I 14,15), was better (more beneficial) than all the blessings that Bileam conferred upon it. Achiyah cursed Israel by referring to it as a "reed in water." Just as such a reed can stand in water, its stem can grow back and develop many roots, so that all the winds of the world will not uproot it, but it will bend in the direction the wind blows until the wind has stopped blowing and resume its original posture, so Israel will recover from such storms. Not so the blessings of Bileam the wicked. He compares Israel to the cedar (24,6). A cedar cannot survive in water, its roots are few, its trunk does not grow back once it has been cut. Even though it is strong enough to resist all the storms in the world, a South wind will dislocate it immediately. Comparing Israel to a cedar was not really a blessing. Not only this, but if need be, one can make a quill from the reed to write a ספר תורה, which cannot be done with the remains of a cedar. So far the Talmud on our subject.
  We must ask why Rashi comments on the comparison of Israel to the cedars by saying that these are not Bileam's words at all, but that the שכינה inserted those words! Moreover, all the comparisons drawn by Bileam in these blessings such as the rivulets etc. in 24,6, are all viewed by the Aggadah as having been said by the שכינה! For instance, when Bileam described Israel as similar to גנות, "like gardens," the שכינה is supposed to have added עלי נהר, "along the river." The reason the שכינה added these variations was to rob the previous term of its possible negative connotation. This is a wonderful explanation and enables us to solve a different difficulty, namely the comment of Rashi that neither the honey nor the sting of the hornet is welcome, (based on Bamidbar Rabbah 20,10: לא מדובשך ולא מעוקצך, "spare me your honey and your sting!") How is this an appropriate comparison seeing that in the Midrash the positive, i.e. the honey is mentioned first, whereas Bileam mentioned the negative aspects first? The answer must be that the whole comment is addressed to Bileam's blessings. The Midrash draws our attention to the fact that each blessing contained a deliberate, though not obvious, negative side. This is why the Midrash said that G–d told Bileam, who had offered to bless Israel, seeing that he had not been allowed to curse them, that just as one does not want to have anything to do with the hornet, preferring to forego its honey, so Bileam should not trouble himself to bless Israel.
  If that is so, however, how did Bileam dare transgress what G–d had forbidden him? Did not G–d say to him that he could only say what He would put in his mouth (22,35)? Why did Bileam not add the words עלי מים, "by the waters," himself? Why did the שכינה have to add these words? Another difficulty is that if Bileam thought of the damaging effect of a South wind on cedars, why did the Midrash emphasize the positive aspects first, namely that the cedars can withstand all other winds? Another problem is why the Midrash mentions that one can make quills to write a ספר תורה with the remains of the stem of a reed? 
  Altogether, the impression one forms from the Midrash is that the blessings of Bileam were altogether no blessings unless amended! Yalkut Shimoni claims on the other hand, that the blessings of Bileam were greater than the ones Jacob bestowed on his children on his death bed, and even greater than the blessing Moses blessed the children of Israel with before he died! It is quite true that Bileam's blessings surpassed all the other blessings. This is simply because not only were his blessings fulfilled, but also his curses were converted into blessings as explained earlier. The very fact that Bileam's "blessings" had been phrased so that they could be curses in disguise, i.e. that he himself had pronounced curses in an oblique fashion, enabled these curses to be converted into blessings for Israel, thus giving each blessing an extra dimension not contained in the blessings of either Jacob or Moses. All of this occurred according to G–d's will. 
  It may well be that this is what Rashi meant when he described the שכינה as supplying extra attributes to each of these blessings. When Rashi comments in Sanhedrin 106, that a בת קול, a "heavenly echo," added the words נטע השם in 24,6, this need not be meant literally, but refers to a prophetic insight granted Bileam by G–d at the time, which he was forced to express. Since it had been his original intention to employ the formula of blessing as a curse, the term בת קול used by Rashi is quite appropriate. Just as an echo is a follow-up to the original sound, so these words were "follow-ups" to the first part of the blessing. In the discussion of the Talmud of Bileam's blessings on folio 105, Rabbi Eleazar says that the words וישם השם דבר בפי בלעם, refers to an angel who instructed Bileam, whereas Rabbi Yonathan says that G–d put a fishhook in Bileam's mouth, i.e. He had to pronounce this prophecy whether he liked it or not. 
  G–d wanted him to wait a little after saying the word כארזים, "like cedars," so that it would be noticed that it was meant as a curse, not a pious wish. [The tone sign Tipcha, which is a tone sign that separates from what follows, is somewhat unexpectedly under the word ארזים, supports the thesis of the author. Ed.] It also hints at the "separation" of Israel from its roots, i.e. exile, and that is why the Talmud in Taanit says that Achiyah's curse, which did not envisage separation of the Jewish people from its homeland was more beneficial than Bileam's blessing. The South wind, which is capable of "dislocating" the cedar is a reference to Israel in exile, i.e. the cedar that has been "dislocated." The dislocation is for Israel's good however, enabling it to become refined, cleansed from sin. We see the curse as a coin with two sides, one of which contains a great blessing. All of this is predicted in the Torah's "reproofs," in Leviticus 26,44: "Yet, even then, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or spurn them, etc." This is the blessing in disguise that we have talked about.
  Now Bileam concludes the blessing with the words עלי מים, words of which G–d fully approves, and he grants Him Divine insight, so that he can say that nothing will actually destroy such a cedar. A cedar planted on the waters is superior to a reed that stands in the water, since it is far stronger. It is impervious to all winds, whereas the reed is bent over by most winds. This is a clear allusion to the fact that something that was once subjected to a curse emerges much stronger than before it had been cursed. Even while the curse, i.e. exile, was the fate of the Jewish people, only the South wind, could affect it; other winds did not prove harmful.
  The "winds" mentioned in the Midrash are references to the dispersal of Israel among the nations. We know this from Zecharyah 2,10: "For I have scattered you like the four winds." Rashi on Genesis 25,21, explains the word ויעתר to mean repeating, multiplying; he cites Proverbs 27,26: "the kisses of the enemy are profuse," in support of this. We already said that this verse in Proverbs alludes to the curses turning into blessings, i.e. the "enemy" showers you with kisses. Another thoroughly treacherous aspect of Bileam comparing Israel to cedars prior to adding the words עלי מים, is that the ארזים are always a symbol for the Patriarchs. The merit of the Patriarchs has always stood by Israel and saved it from destruction. Bileam wanted them to rely on that merit, thus make them feel they did not have to repent while in exile. This is why he emphasizes "there is no harm in sight for Jacob, no woe in view for Israel" (23,21). By lulling Israel into complacency with these flattering comments he hoped to prevent Israel from returning to G–d in penitence. If someone truly loves a person, has his real interests at heart, he will reprove him rather than flatter him, and will draw attention to any blemish such a person may suffer from. The word ארזים, cedars, also has a connotation of stubbornness as we know from Taanit 20b, that "a person should strive to be soft as a reed and not hard like a cedar. The remedy to such hardness lies in one's humbling oneself." Words of Torah are compared to water, since just as water starts in a high place and flows downwards, i.e. water is content to "lower" itself, so words of Torah which originate in high places cannot be fulfilled except by people who are first prepared to humble themselves (Taanit 7a). In light of the foregoing, the comparison to "cedars" is a great blessing indeed. It means that we ourselves are now comparable to the Patriarchs who in turn had been compared to the "cedars of Lebanon."
  To return to the subject that it was a cosmic necessity that the cursed Bileam pronounce these blessings rather than anyone else. In order to be converted into a blessing they first had to be intended as a curse. When Bileam claimed that he wished himself an end like that of the Jewish people, ותהי אחריתי כמוהו, he indicated awareness that though his "beginnings" had been similar to that of the Jewish people, namely holy, his end was not likely to be. Hence he prayed that in spite of everything he had done he should be rehabilitated after death (23,10).
  There is another mystical dimension namely that only Bileam was the one who could turn curse into blessing. Just as he was the head of the nations who suffer from being accursed, so he was simultaneously the head of the tribes of the Jewish people who are blessed. This is why only his curse could become the source of the most effective blessings the Jewish people ever received.
  The Tziyoni explains it thus: Numbers 22,24, describes the she-ass of Bileam being hemmed in through גדר מזה וגדר מזה, "a fence on one side and a fence on the other side." Rashi describes these fences as ordinary fences. The Kabbalists, however, believe that the wicked also experience migration of their souls, re-incarnations, etc. They base this on both Jacob and Laban building a גל, stone heap, when they part from one another the last time in Genesis 31,52. The word עד used there is an allusion to עדות השם נאמנה, that the testimony of G–d is true, and that יד העדים תהיה בו בראשונה that "the witnesses have to be the first to carry out the judgment by their own hands" (Deut. 17,7). We have the example of the weasel and the pit in Taanit 8.[The story about the weasel and the pit: A young man had rescued a maiden from a pit, and they had promised to be married to each other, and had selected witnesses to confirm their agreement, namely the pit, and a weasel which happened to be passing at that moment. After a while, the young man forgot about his promise and married another woman and had children by her. His oldest son died by falling into a pit, whereas the second one was torn to shreds by a weasel. At that point the young man realized why this tragedy had befallen him and he returned to the girl whom he had promised to wed.] So far the Tziyoni. He means to say that Jacob and Laban concluded a covenant not to cross that pile of stones with hostile intentions towards the other, and that they would consider that pile of stones as witness to their covenant. The stone fence that the she-ass became aware of, was that very יגר שהדותא, as Laban had called that stone-heap in Genesis 31,47. The she-ass squeezed the leg of Bileam, the re-incarnation of Laban, since the "hands of the witnesses have to be the first ones to execute the judgment" if someone violated the covenant. According to Sanhedrin 105a, בעור, Bileam's father is not really Bileam's father but "בן" in that context means that he was also identical with כושן רשעתיים, who in turn is identical with לבן הארמי. Incidentally, the first letters of these names spell כלב, dog. בעור, is supposed to allude to the fact that that man בא על הבעיר, had sexual relations with a beast. He was also called כושן רשעתיים, to indicate he had committed two wrongs against Israel; one in the time of Jacob, the other during the reign of the Judges. What was his real name? לבן הארמי. So far the quote from Sanhedrin 105a. The Talmud then considers Bileam identical with (or rather a re-incarnation of) Laban. The other comments all pertain to the characteristics of Bileam, who had been accused on the same folio of having used his she-ass as his sexual outlet. When Rashi writes on that folio that the word בעור refers to Bileam's father, this is clearly some printer's error, since the same line of Rashi concludes by calling כושן רשעתיים as identical with Laban. The Targum Yonathan also hints in Deut.26,5: ארמי אובד אבי וירד מצרימה, "my father was a wandering Arami who descended to Egypt," that the meaning is that Bileam and Laban were identical, i.e. one was the re-incarnation of the other. It means that because of two wrongs committed by Laban, Jacob, i.e. the Jewish people, wound up in exile in Egypt. The two wrongs were that at first Laban tried to destroy Jacob and his family; later, having moved to Egypt, he became an advisor to Pharaoh advising him on how to harm the Jewish people. Sanhedrin there explains that Pharaoh had three such advisors, namely Yitro, Bileam and Job. Bileam was the one who advised killing Moses outright as a baby, since one could not be sure he would not be the saviour of the Jews. The Targum Yonathan spells this out on Numbers 22,5. From all the foregoing, we see that the entire family of Jacob originated with Bileam (the latter having been Laban the father of all of Jacob's wives). This lineage was reinforced further through Balak who as king of Moab was also the ancestor of Ruth who became the great grandmother of King David, who embodies everything that Israel is proud of and looks up to including the Messiah.
  The Zohar (Sullam edition page 92), puts it as follows: When Balak in 22,6 referred to Israel as כי עצום הוא ממני, "for it is mightier than I;" how did Balak know this? Had he ever fought a battle with Israel? – The answer is that the wicked Balak was also very wise and foresaw the distant future. He realized that David who would be descended through Ruth the Moabite would be a mighty and heroic king, and would perform many deeds of valor on the battlefield. He would also defeat Moab and vanquish it. This is why he used the expression עצום הוא, "he, (singular) is mighty." He referred to the one king who would be descended from Ruth who would be mighty. His whole point was that David as his descendant, would derive power directly from him, Balak – ממני.
  Since several fine points in this portion have become clearer through what I have written so far, I will add a few more points:
  When we look at the first two verses, 20 and 21, we wonder why Balak referred to Israel by three expressions, i.e. ישראל, העם, בני ישראל. A little while later, in verse 4, he uses yet another description of Israel – קהל. 
  Another difficulty is the whole question of Bileam cursing the people. What possible difference could it make to G–d if Bileam did or did not curse Israel, seeing that G–d Himself had blessed the nation with peace? – Let us look at the way the Talmud in Berachot 7a, and in Sanhedrin 105b, treats the statement by the prophet Michah 6,5: "My people, remember what Balak king of Moab plotted against you; and how Bileam son of Be'or responded to him. Recall your passage from Shittim to Gilgal, and you will become aware of the gracious acts of the Lord." In response to the question of what is meant by the "gracious acts of the Lord," Rabbi Eliezer said that Israel should recognize how kindly G–d had dealt with them by not being angry at Israel during the period Bileam had been called to curse them. Had G–d at that time allowed Himself to be angry at Israel, not a shred of it would have been left. This is why Bileam begins by saying: "How can I curse where G–d has not seen fit to curse, how can I damn whom G–d has not damned" (23,8)! According to Berachot 7a Bileam knew the exact moment when G–d was angry. He had wanted to capitalize on the precise moment of the presence of the attribute of Justice within the greater presence of the attribute of Mercy. During that period however, G–d did not allow the attribute of Justice to accompany any part of the attribute of Mercy. Hence Bileam felt stymied This is his lament, "how can I curse when G–d failed to allow for such a possibility?" According to Tosaphot on that folio, Bileam would have been able to condense all his curses by uttering the word כלם "destroy them," into the "רגע," moment, that G–d's anger would have lasted. If however, we say that G–d converted the curses into blessings, the situation becomes quite different. He re-arranged the letters in that word to read “מלך,” and that would have been the reversal of what Tosaphot suggested he could have done. This is the deeper meaning of 23,21: ותרועת מלך בו, "and their king's acclaim is in its midst." As a result, there is no need to say that G–d reversed His usual method of allowing a minor presence of the opposite attribute when another attribute was in the ascendancy. The reason that we do not accept the premise of Ibn Ezra that once G–d's זעם, anger, is active there is no trace of mercy, is that the Torah itself describes G–d as practicing justice and mercy at one and the same time in Exodus 15,6: "Your right hand O Lord, glorious in power, Your right hand O G–d, shatters the foe." While G–d metes out justice to Israel's enemies, He practices mercy with His people. Rashi says specifically that the same right hand, i.e. the same attribute which saves Israel, annihilates its enemies.
  Why does Bileam keep changing the terms he uses for curses such as קבה, ארה, זעם, and does not conform to the request made of him by Balak his employer? Furthermore, what do קסמים, charms, have to do with prophecy? Once Bileam boasts of employing his prophetic powers, why does he consult קסמים?
  Why did Bileam say: "I cannot contravene the word of G–d to do little or a lot? If he could not do a "little" against the command of G–d, surely he would not be able to do "a lot?"
  When Bileam repeats to Balak that he had told his messengers: "if Balak were to give me a house full of silver and gold, I could not transgress the word of G–d to do good or evil," why the change from "little" and "a lot", to "good" and "evil" (compare 24,13, and 22,18)?
  Another question is why the second set of Balak's messengers, the ones who were supposedly of higher rank than the first, are called עבדים, servants, whereas the first delegation is called שרים, princes, though they were of inferior rank to the subsequent delegation (compare 22,13 with 22,18)?
  Most difficult of all is the problem how G–d could become angry at Bileam for accompanying the messengers of Balak, seeing He Himself had authorized him to go in 22,20? Our sages in Sanhedrin 105a conclude חוצפא אפילו כלפי שמיא מהניא, "insolence pays even if it is directed against Heaven."
  We must also be perplexed by G–d's enquiry of Bileam in 22,20: "If these men came to call you, you may go with them." Surely G–d knew full well why these men had come; why pretend that He did not? Rashi comments that G–d had intended to deceive Bileam. However, we fail to see how this comment is relevant to the words.
  There cannot be a question of G–d intentionally misleading anyone. What is frequently the case is that someone deceives himself. Hosea 14,10, writes: כי ישרים דרכי השם, וצדיקים ילכו בם, ופושעים יכשלו בם, "For the ways of the Lord are upright, and the just walk on them, whereas the sinners will stumble on them." The prophet is quite explicit in placing the blame on the sinners, not on G–d or His ways. Here too G–d intended to enter into dialogue with Bileam when He asked him about "these men." Bileam the wicked, jumped to the conclusion that G–d did not know everything, else He would not have asked, and used this to try and deceive G–d. Rashi's comment here that G–d wanted to deceive Bileam seems to contradict his comment on Genesis 3,9, when G–d asks Adam: "Where are you?," and Rashi says that G–d knew full well where Adam was, but wanted to enter into dialogue with him without frightening him by punishing him without preamble. One must understand therefore, that when Rashi wrote on our verse: "in order to mislead him," the subject of "him" is not G–d but the invitation of these men to curse Israel. The invitation of Balak was the מכשול, the stumbling block which caused Bileam's sins to deceive him into thinking he could deceive G–d. He did not understand the truth of G–d's intentions when He asked him rhetorically: "who are these men?" This whole incident is similar to one recorded in the Talmud Yuma 87a, when the great scholar Rav went to the house of a butcher on the eve of the Day of Atonement in order to give that butcher a chance to apologise for something that had occurred between them. This was unusual, since the butcher should have come to Rav to beg his forgiveness for the wrong he had committed. On the way he met Rabbi Hunna his disciple who asked Rav where the latter was going. When told that he was on his way to reconciliation with a certain butcher, Rabbi Hunna said "Rav went to kill a person," for he could not imagine that a butcher who had insulted Rav should not be punished. When Rav arrived at that butcher's he found him busy cutting off the head of an animal. The butcher raised his eyes and exclaimed in wonderment "you are Abba! Go away! I do not want to have anything to do with you!" At that moment a bone from that animal hit the butcher in his neck causing his death. Therefore, if the butcher died, it was his obstinacy in refusing to accept Rav's offer at reconciliation that made him a candidate for death, since in such circumstances the Day of Atonement would not protect him from the judgment due him. Rabbi Hunna's having said that his teacher was on his way to kill someone certainly was not the cause of this butcher's death. The same explanation applies to Rashi's comment in Parshat Korach, 16,6 that the incense contained a lethal poison. Mistaking the function of incense would lead to the death of the person who willfully abused that instrument of service to G–d. G–d's intent in asking Bileam was fair.
  Balak and Bileam were both very clever and learned people who used their knowledge to evil purpose. They were both well aware of the close relationship that existed between Israel and its G–d. Balak was even wiser than Bileam. He was privy to the great chain of the dynasty of David and how it would eventually result in the Messiah's descent from David. He knew that this very strength of Israel was rooted in himself, i.e. עצום ממני, as we have outlined. The reason he was afraid was that he realized that purity can emerge from an impure source, that the good can have an evil source, in order that the מלאך רע would have to say אמן, as we have explained above. This is why his mind worked overtime to devise a plan to sever this close relationship between Israel and its G–d. He wanted to reverse the relationship. He thought that if he were to succeed all the deeds of valour that would be performed by David in the future would accrue to his own people instead of to Israel. This is why the paragraph starts by telling us "Balak son of Tzippor saw all that Israel had done to the Emorite." The three names by which Balak refers to Israel represent three distinct merits or advantages of Israel. He called them עם, because they were very numerous, since G–d had blessed them to become as "numerous as the stars in the sky" (Genesis 22,17). The description בני ישראל, implies an even closer relationship with G–d. When Balak referred to Israel as ישראל he described their highest level, the level that we hope to attain when we all qualify to be the elite. The word בני, "sons of," implies that we are only branches of something just as children are branches, offshoots of their parents. ישראל on the other hand is the trunk that these offshoots come from, the place in which the image of the original Israel, the fighter for G–d, our patriarch, is engraved, the throne of G–d Himself. That is the source from which all souls are "hewn" as from a quarry. As mentioned, Balak was well aware of the cosmic forces and the role Israel played in that constellation. In order to loosen the bond between Israel and G–d he wanted Bileam to curse them at the precise moment in time when G–d is "angry." The significance of a curse is to reinforce the voice of the accuser who brings Israel's iniquities to G–d's attention at that moment when G–d allows Himself to become angry, i.e. the רגע של זעם. Since Bileam was a יודע דעת עליון, privy to G–d's mind, he knew the right time and he also knew how to present an unfavorable picture of someone. He was the ideal man for this task. Balak had a vision of an imminent sin Israel would commit, as proved indeed the case when they sinned shortly thereafter by becoming seduced by the daughters of Moab. This is why he urged Bileam ועתה לך ארה לי, "curse them for me now," seeing that their punishment by G–d would follow almost immediately. Balak had seen the expression of G–d's closeness to Israel by the many miracles G–d had performed for that people. All this is reflected in the Torah's stating וירא בלק את כל אשר עשה ישראל לאמורי, "Balak saw all that Israel had done to the Emorite." He realised that only a people who enjoyed such a lofty spiritual status as indicated by the name ישראל, could have accomplished that feat. Although Balak had witnessed the defeat of the Emorite, seeing that he had been one of the princes of the Emorite, his people had not seen it, had only heard about it. Hence when describing the feelings of his people, the term used for Israel is simply "העם." Nonetheless, even the people of Moab were aware that there existed a special relationship between Israel and its G–d; hence ויקץ מואב מפני בני ישראל. When the Moabites discussed what to do with the elders of Midian who were not aware of the special relationship between G–d and Israel, they emphasized the numerical strength of the Jewish people by referring to them as קהל, meaning that every individual tribe qualified for the description עם, and that they were as described in Genesis 35,11, גוי וקהל גוים ממך יצאו, "a nation as well as a community of nations will come out of you." The expression קהל then emphasizes the twelve tribes that between them made up this nation.
  This explains why the Midianites brought their קסמים, enchantments, with them before setting out on their mission to Bileam (22,7). The purpose of these enchantments is to call down to earth the influence that various horoscopic constellations exert on our fates. Balak was superior to Bileam in that field. The significance of נחשים, on the other hand is, that they are instruments which deny that G–d has an entourage who act as His agents. Neither of these devices would prove harmful to Israel as long as the latter carried out the will of their Father in Heaven. The Jewish people's fate is not governed by the forces of nature, i.e. מזל. Horoscopes are something that G–d granted the nations in lieu of השגחה פרטית, G–d's personal supervision and intervention in our affairs. All other magic devices are quite ineffective against Israel as long as Israel are on the level of דביקות לה', "cleaving to G–d." The Talmud in Chullin 7, relates that a woman tried to remove some earth from under the feet of Rabbi Chaninah. Rabbi Chaninah told her to go ahead, that it would not help her to perform her magic since it is written in Deut. 4,35: "there is no one beside Him." How can this be? Do we not have a statement by Rabbi Yochanan who said that the reason sorcery is called כשפים, is because it is a denial of the forces of G–d! The Talmud answers that the case of Rabbi Chaninah is special, because he had so many personal merits that protected him. So far the Talmud on the subject. Concerning the above, Bileam said: "There is no נחש in Jacob, i.e. it is powerless against Jacob, and there is no a קסם that prevails against Israel (Numbers 23,23). Bileam was well versed in all these disciplines including his remarkable awareness of how G–d operates. He knew when to make a curse effective and draw forth G–ds wrath on someone. This is why he commenced by employing instruments of sanctity such as the building of seven altars, offering sacrifices on them, etc. He built as many altars in one single day as the patriarchs had built in their combined life times, as Rashi points out on 23,4. When he realized that G–d had not become angry at Israel and that his accusations had proved futile, he resorted to magic: הוא הלך לקראת נחשים, he forsook the approach via the sacred and turned to the profane. His attitude was that he would mention Israel's shortcomings regardless of whether G–d would react to this negatively or not. He hoped that the curse would attach itself to the mention of their sins (Rashi). Bileam abandoned recourse to the נחשים only from 24,1 onwards. He had become afraid that the merits of Israel were too great, hence he turned his attention towards the "desert," i.e. he recalled the sin of the golden calf which Israel had made in the desert and from the consequences of which G–d had saved it. When the Torah writes “ותהי עליו רוח אלוקים,” this refers to the Divine spirit resting on Israel, not on Bileam, see Zohar on 24,2.
  Now let us explain the difference between the terms קבה, and ארה respectively, though both are forms of curses. The word קבה means to possess the power to curse with one's mouth at the moment G–d is angry. The word ארה has two meanings. One meaning is also a form of curse, the other is derived from כמלא אורה וסלו, "like the space required by the collector (of figs) to fill his basket" (Mishnah Shvi-it 1,2). In other words, it means "collection." The Zohar (Sullam edition Balak, page 92) explains that this expression alludes to Balak asking Bileam to gather different herbs used by the most competent sorcerers, put them in a witches' brew, etc. Once he realised that Bileam's power was greater when he employed his mouth, he reverted to ask Bileam “קבה לי” (22,17)! On the first mission Balak sent the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian, seeing they were the experts on sorcery. He commanded them to ask Bileam to employ ארה, seeing that the dual meaning of that expression would include the curse by mouth and the curse by means of sorcery. He made sure the Midianites had their charms and the Moabites their respective instruments of magic. Since the Midianites had no knowledge of the closeness that existed between Israel and G–d, he did not want to affront them and therefore he sent the tools necessary for sorcery. Balak's principal intention was that Bileam curse the people by mouth. Bileam understood Balak's intention thoroughly, and that is why he mentioned קבה when G–d asked him what these men had wanted from him (22,11). The second mission, which did not include a delegation of Midianites, as Rashi has explained, comprised שרים רבים ונכבדים מאלה, "more princes of higher rank than the previous ones." The word נכבדים, refers to Moabite theologians who were aware of the close relationship that existed between G–d and Israel. This is why the emphasis is on קבה, curse by mouth, the only thing which might loosen this closeness between G–d and Israel. Whereas the first delegation consisted of politically more distinguished people, who are therefore referred to by Bileam as "princes," the second delegation did not contain such politically highly placed individuals, though those people were far more learned in the ways of magic and sorcery. Bileam referred to them as עבדי בלק, their political standing in the Moabite hierarchy. Bileam quoted the words of the Moabite man on the street who knew only that Israel had resided many hundreds of years in Egypt, the center of witchcraft and sorcery. They were therefore concerned with fighting Israel by more powerful witchcraft. Balak, who knew better, was aware that Israel did not operate witchcraft and sorcery, referred to them as גוי, an allusion to G–d having orchestrated the whole Exodus by separating גוי מקרב גוי, "one nation from the midst of another nation," as we know from Deut. 4,34. He knew that at that time Israel had discarded all their former relationship to sorcery, and assumed a close relationship with G–d instead.
  The word קבה refers to an effort to separate this relationship between G–d and Israel by securing G–d's goodwill for this process. The word ארה, on the other hand, also contains nuances of sorcery, the forces which deny G–d's agents in this world. Now we understand why once Bileam referred to his inability to perform "a little thing" or "a big thing" against the will of G–d. The "little" thing refers to the sorcery element at his disposal; the "big thing," means to accomplish something by means of קבה, seeing the latter is a procedure that requires G–d's approval. Bileam means that he can do neither. Not only can he not do something "big" of his own initiative, but he cannot even initiate something "small," insignificant. Not only can he not do something that is against the will of G–d, i.e. ארה, by employing ניחוש, he cannot even prevail upon G–d to change His attitude towards this people by cursing them as form of punishment for any misdeeds they might have committed. Bileam made these statements while the Holy Spirit still rested upon him. When he noticed subsequently that the Holy Spirit had departed from him, and he had been reduced to being like any ordinary person, he resorted to consulting sorcery, i.e. הלך לקראת נחשים. 
  This also explains why in 22,18 he spoke about "doing something small or big," whereas in 24,13 he said that he cannot contravene G–d's command to do either "good or evil." "Good and evil" respectively, are equivalent to "small and big" in 22,18 i.e. the  ניחושים. Bileam knew how to time his remarks precisely at those moments when they would have their greatest effect. Since Balak's main concern was to tear asunder the דבקות, attachment that existed between Israel and G–d by choosing the right moment to do so, Bileam would also resort to sorcery in order to achieve this aim in order to accomplish what Balak had hired him to do. When Balak had complimented Bileam by saying "I know that whosoever you bless is blessed (retains his blessing), and whosoever you curse will be cursed" (22,6), this is what he had had in mind. 
  He therefore appropriately used the expression מבורך, which is past tense, instead of saying that such a person יבורך, would become blessed as a result, i.e. future tense. The term used by Balak for someone suffering a curse at the hands of Bileam is יואר, "he will be cursed." Balak referred to himself, seeing he had already been blessed, by achieving the status of King in Moab, though he himself was a Midianite. He begged Bileam to employ sorcery to assure himself of retaining this blessing. He hoped that Israel's present state of blessing would be transformed into a state of being accursed through the proper timing of such a curse. Balak did not wish sorcery to be the means by which Israel would be cursed. He wanted these means to be employed only to ensure his own continued success. As far as Israel was concerned, he wanted to sever the attachment between Israel and G-d.  Bileam, who hated Israel far more than Balak did, used all the pretexts available to him when he saw that the holy spirit had departed from him. This is why he also resorted to נחשים against Israel. He was frustrated however, in that "ותהי עליו רוח אלוקים," that the spirit of G–d remained on it, i.e. on Israel (24,2). Balak had not requested the use of sorcery except for his own benefit. Against Israel he had requested the curse called קבה. This proves that the word קטנה is equivalent to טובה, whereas גדולה is equivalent to רעה.
  Concerning 22,20, where G–d says to Bileam: "אם לקרא לך באו האנשים, קום לך אתם," "if the men have come to call you, arise and go with them," we can accept Rashi who renders this as "if the call is yours," i.e. "if this is a chance for you to earn a fee," but we must re-phrase this a little. We know that everything is in the hands of Heaven, except certain things such as the contracting of the common cold, etc" (Berachot 33b). This means that though man has been given freedom of choice concerning an endeavor he sets out on, there is no guarantee that he will achieve the objective he has set his heart on. G–d asked Bileam concerning his objectives, stating that if his objectives in the matter were honorable, then he was certainly welcome to pursue them. Honorable objectives as referred to by Rashi meant that the enterprise was one that concerned Bileam himself, not some political machination of a third party such as Balak. It was Bileam's attribute to be gifted with prophetic insight. If he planned to employ his prophetic insight in the service of G–d who had granted it to him, he was indeed encouraged by G–d to do so – "קום לך אתם." If, however, he chose to operate in a manner not specifically his province, namely to employ sorcery to bless or confirm Balak's blessing and would make common cause with the people who came with their charms in their hands, as outlined in 22,7, this would not be part of his calling, especially, since Balak had more expertise in the use of קסמים than Bileam himself. Balak also had more expertise in the consulting of charms. All these methods of divining, manipulating nature, etc., were not within Bileam's G–d-granted province, and therefore were not included in the statement by G–d that he was welcome to go with these men. Bileam's province, i.e. his G–d-given function was, as he says himself, bp שומע אמרי קל, "someone who was used to hear the words of the Lord (24,4)." G–d's words meant that if the men had come to use those services of Bileam that G–d had endowed him with, and that only he could render, he was welcome to go. He was warned however, to do only what G–d would tell him to, as we read in 22,20. This was a reminder of what G–d told Bileam when he had consulted him when Balak's first messengers had arrived and Bileam had been told not to curse that nation (22,12). He had never been forbidden to go, he had only been forbidden to go. After this, Bileam went with Balak's messengers intent on employing both his prophetic insights and his powers of manipulating natural processes in order to cause harm to the Jewish people. He felt that in the event G–d would not let him use his prophetic powers to curse the people, he would at least be able to employ his other powers. He would make use of powers that existed in the universe as forces opposing the Creator and His entourage. The proof that he did so was that he rode the she-ass, i.e. he defiled himself, as described in the Talmud Sanhedrin 105a. 
  All this caused G–d to become angry at him. Rashi quotes a Midrash Tanchumah on 22,24: "The angel of G–d stood, etc." The Midrash explains the reason why the angel positioned himself in the three locations mentioned in the Torah, as being a warning to conduct himself as the patriarchs had done, and not in any other way. None of the patriarchs had ever relied on charms and similar sorcery-like manipulations. This is why Bileam himself acknowledges that neither Jacob nor Israel had ever employed such means in order to advance their fortunes (23,23). The reason that Bileam quoted Jacob/Israel as the example for not employing sorcery is that Jacob was the only patriarch who succeeded in training all his children to remain loyal to his teachings. The words משעל הכרמים (22,24), is a veiled reference to Abraham of whom it is said כרם היה לידידי, "My beloved had a vineyard etc." (Isaiah 5,1). The words והיה גדר מזה וגדר מזה, are a reference to the two unfit sons produced by Abraham and Isaac respectively (ibid). The purpose of the fences was to prevent attacks by the "serpent." Ishmael is understood to have emanated from Abraham's "right" whereas Esau emanated from Isaac's "left". The latter is referred to by the line describing the she-ass as ותלחץ אל הקיר, "she pressed herself against the wall." When the angel is described as "standing" in a narrow place (22,26), this is a reference to Jacob who did not deviate to the left or to the right, and who therefore represents the "central pillar" of the Patriarchs.
  Afterwards, as a result of Bileam "walking" i.e. setting out on an errand that was meant to harm the Jewish people, G–d transformed the intended curses into blessings in inverse ratio to the wickedness intended by him. As Solomon says in Proverbs 10,24: "The fear of the wicked will come upon him; the desire of the righteous will be granted." When Bileam next announces "ואדעה מה יוסף ה' דבר עמי," "I will know what else G–d will speak to me" (22,19), he is already inadvertently hinting that he will become the instrument by means of which G–d will bless Israel. An example of this additional blessing can be seen in the words "how goodly are your tents O Jacob, your dwellings O Israel." Whereas, originally the blessing was valid only while Israel was secure in its land, the additional words referring to temporary abodes of Israel, i.e. משכנותיך, include periods during which Israel will be exiled (24,5). The very exile is a source of blessing, since it produces repentance and subsequently a rejuvenation of the Jewish people. This is why the name Jacob, and the temporary nature of the dwellings called "huts," is associated with the former temporary residence of the Jewish people, on their own land, whereas "Israel," the choicest of names for this people, as well as "dwellings," is employed when it describes-paradoxically,-its state of exile. The Talmud in Baba Metzia 68a, in trying to define a mortgage which is called in Aramaic <i>mashkanta</i>, a word resembling the Hebrew Mishkan, dwelling, describes it as something that constantly “dwells” with the owner of the field against which a loan has been made. The constant awareness of one's dependence acts as a spur to rid oneself of such an obligation. The exile experience of the Jewish people is meant to do the same, to imbue us with the urgent desire to do all in our power to become worthy of redemption. At that time G–d's promise (Leviticus 26,11) ונתתי משכני בתוככם "I will give My dwelling to be in your midst," will be fulfilled. The destruction of the Temple and the Jewish state was a necessary prelude to building a better Jewish nation. This is the meaning of the prophecy וירד מיעקב והאביד שריד מעיר, "A victor will issue forth from Jacob to wipe out what is left of ‘lr’" (24,19). Bileam saw a vision of the greatness of the Messiah, someone greater than himself. What he did not appreciate was that purity could be rooted in impurity, just as Abraham came forth out of a Terach. When the Messiah arrives, the last vestiges of the dross remaining from former efforts at distilling the pure out of the impure will vanish. The מלאך רע, "evil angel," who is personified by Bileam, had to acknowledge this, i.e. say Amen" to this concept. Bileam expanded on this theme of redemption when he said: "What I see for them is not yet, what I behold will not be soon" (24,17). He seems to be repeating himself. Another difficulty in Bileam's words is the fact that they seem to be contradictory. First he says: "I can see it," suggesting a clear vision, whereas immediately afterwards he describes this as in the distant future, i.e. not being so clear. What is meant is that every single day that passes contains elements of the eventual total Redemption. This is what Bileam realises clearly. What he does not see so clearly is the date on which this process will be complete. Our Rabbis have described this process as "a single sheep resides amongst seventy wolves. These wolves attempt daily to devour the sheep, but the Almighty saves it from their clutches," as in Pessikta Rabbah 9,2. The very fact that the Jewish nation continues to exist is part of the proof that the Redemption is an ongoing process. G–d is busy performing such miracles without the person for whom such miracles are being performed even becoming aware of them. This is why Bileam says "I see it," i.e. as an ongoing process, "but not now," i.e. the true Redemption, the arrival of the Messiah, has not yet come to pass. Subsequently, Bileam turns to the vision of the Redemption, of which he says: "I see it, but not in the near future." He reveals that there is a date that G–d has fixed for it, though if the people were deserving that date could be advanced. This is parallel to the explanation of the sages on the apparent paradox in Isaiah 60,22, "at its appointed time, I will hasten it." The meaning is that though there is an appointed time beyond which the Redemption will not be delayed, it may occur sooner if Israel deserves it (Sanhedrin 98a). אשורנו, means "I can see it if Israel does penitence," whereas ולא קרוב, means that if they were not worthy then that Redemption would not be in the near future. It is at that time that all previous curses will turn into blessings, for the Redemption was brought about sooner as a result of Israel responding positively to the curses it has had to suffer. We read in Deuteronomy 23,6: "G–d transformed the curse (Bileam's) into a blessing for you, for the Lord your G–d loves you." The last words seem superfluous, since no one would assume that someone who hates you turns your curses into blessings. The meaning, however, may be that repentance is "great," since it has the power to convert former misdeeds into merits. Such repentance indeed has such power when it is the result of love of G–d and not the fear of punishment. Curses may be a hidden display of G–d's love, for once they have fulfilled their purpose, they eventually enable Him to turn them into blessings. Love for G–d by the repentant sinner is reciprocated by Him so that what used to be demerits are accounted as merits retroactively.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ועתה לך נא ארה לי. We learn from Balak inviting Bileam: "Now go and curse for me," how careful one has to be when one utters any words, even if one has no negative intention. Words have a habit of backfiring. Balak wound up cursing himself rather than Israel.
  We have learned in Tractate Avot 5,22, that the disciples of the Patriarch Abraham are distinguished by possesssing a generous eye, a self-deprecating manner and a humble spirit, whereas a person of the opposite characteristics is sure to be a disciple of Bileam. The behavioral traits described in the tractate quoted reveal the character traits of envy, greed and egotism which are at the core of causing man's self-destruction.
  חטאתי כי לא ידעתי .  At first glance it seems strange that if Bileam was not aware of the angel's presence, (which had impeded the she-ass's progress), how he could have sinned. Man is responsible for ignorance of certain laws however, if they were the ones he should have known. Otherwise there would be no point in G–d equipping us with a brain. Bileam's mental faculties were such that he should have seen the angel. If even his ass could see the angel, his own lack of awareness could only be due to a sinful outlook on his part. Man is duty-bound to always be on guard not to be the cause of something sinful.
  לא הביט און ביעקב . This is a reminder that even improper thoughts that have not surfaced, i.e. are "within Jacob," have not yet been translated into deeds, are frowned upon. We have elaborated elsewhere on this subject when we discussed the ten directives employed by G–d in creating the universe.
  
  Pinchas
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named פנחס הוא אליהו.
  Commandment 400 deals with the rules governing the laws of inheritance.
  Commandment 401 deals with the daily communal sacrifices to be offered in the Temple.
  Commandment 402 deals with the additonal communal sacrifice to be offered on each Sabbath.
  Commandment 403 deals with the additional communal sacrifices to be offered on the first of each month.
  Commandment 404 deals with the additional communal sacrifice offered on the festival of Shavuot.
  Commandment 405 enjoins us to blow the Shofar on New Year's Day.
  There are additional sacrifices mentioned in this portion of the Torah. Seeing that they have already been mentioned and enumerated as laws in Parshat Emor, we have not listed them here.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Blessed be He who has equipped man with wisdom, who has so refined both our bodies and our Divine souls that they can work together at achieving דבקות ה', a truly close relationship with G–d so that man may live forever. Man was created for this in this world. Unfortunately man has destroyed this ideal state, and his body has become an inferior material. The only way this state of affairs can be remedied is through the death of the body, i.e. the destruction of the vessel, and its eventual resurrection at the time of Mashiach, for then mankind will return to the pristine state of innocence that existed immediately after the creation of Adam, and G–d will rejoice in man's deeds.
  We find hints of such a future in the statement of Rabbi Yochanan in Tractate Pesachim 88a: "The day when the exiled will be gathered in is as great as the day on which heaven and earth were created, as described in Hosea 2,2: 'The people of Yehudah and the people of Israel will assemble together and appoint a single head [leader] for themselves; they shall rise from the ground, for marvelous shall be the day of Jezreel.'" It is also written: "It was evening it was morning, one day" (Genesis 1,5) [the day of Jezreel is a reference to the first day in Genesis]. When the true ingathering of the exiles takes place, at the time our righteous Messiah appears, Creation itself will renew itself; a new "light" will emerge. At that time body and soul will be able to fuse. Also the earth itself, though purely matter, will be full of knowledge; thus together with the perfection existing "down here," the full extent of G–d's blessings from "above" will be experienced, so that body and soul may live forever. At the time of creation man was described as אדם ביקר בל ילין, "unable to last the night despite his precious qualities." (Psalms 49,13). Man had corrupted his potential so that mortality was decreed upon him. G–d however, has given us the Torah by means of which we can acquire the merit we need to assure us of an everlasting future. He has given us commandments which teach us that this is indeed the case, for they provide the clue to the eventual immortality of the body, in addition to that of the soul. At the present time, the "eternity" of man's body is restricted to man as a species. דור הול ודור בא, "one generation goes and another comes in its place" (Kohelet 1,4). Man's soul, however, enjoys eternal life even in these times, for every individual soul survives the death of its body. Whereas nowadays the body's "life" is considered as incidental, its death is permanent; the soul's life is however, eternal, its "death" being merely incidental [apparent, seeing it can no longer function within the body. Ed.].
  The Talmud Berachot 31a relates that when Rabbi Hamenuna the Younger was asked to sing for the assembled guests at a wedding party of the son of Ravina, he said to them: "woe to us that we have to die, woe to us that we have to die!" They responded by asking what kind of a refrain they were supposed to sing to that. He answered: "there are Torah and the commandments which protect us." The Rabbi meant that the whole justification for lightheartedness at a wedding is to inspire fulfillment of the commandment to be fruitful and to multiply. Were it not for this, the fact that we are headed for death does not really encourage any merriness at all. This statement in the Talmud is followed by Rabbi Yochanan's comment that one must not fill one's mouth with laughter in this world. This indicates that we have correctly understood Rabbi Hamenunah's meaning. Whereas Rabbi Hamenunah justified merriment by the fact that man, at least as a species, is eternal, his colleagues added that seeing that each individual soul lives on by the merit of having performed the Torah's commandments, there is additional justification for such merriment. The true "wedding" of body and soul will take place in the future, as we say daily when putting on our phylacteries: וארשתיך לי לעולם, "I shall espouse you forever" (Hoseah 2,21). The prophet continues that this will be a faithful union, "באמונה." At that time, body and soul will have achieved a partnership of infinite duration. The Torah next legislates the procedures for inheritance, something described as משפט, social legislation. It tells us that, notwithstanding the original sin of man induced by the serpent, which brought mortality into the world, the property which mortal man leaves behind on this earth is transferred to his nearest surviving relative. Death notwithstanding, the bonds of blood relationship are not severed by a person's death. This proves that there is a "relationship" between the נפש of the deceased and the נפשות of his survivors. The various souls involved may be viewed as branches of the same tree. The closer the branch is to the root the more nourishing sap it receives from it. The Torah introduces the laws of inheritance with the words: "When a man dies and does not leave behind a son" (27,8), to teach us the order of priorities in which other surviving family members are viewed relative to the soul of the deceased. Since the rules mentioned apply to instances where there is no surviving issue of the deceased they are described by the Torah as חוקת משפט, legislation that contains elements that are not arrived at through logic.
  Following these laws the Torah commands the details of the daily communal offerings known as תמידים. These offerings correspond to the close attachment of the soul to its Maker. The expression עולת תמיד for this sacrifice indicates that it symbolizes the soul that always "ascends" (עולה) to the Celestial Regions. The "address" of this sacrifice is the attribute of G–d represented by the Ineffable four-lettered Name. When the sacrifice "rises," it unites the soul of those who have offered it with G–d Himself. This idea is first mentioned when the Torah says in Leviticus 1,3: "When an Adam, (the Torah's word for the most superior type of human being) wishes to achieve closeness with the four-lettered attribute of G–d (through presentation of a sacrifice)" [Editor's translation]. In our portion the word אשי in the verse “את קרבני לחמי לאשי,” hints that the Torah speaks of these select people, viz, אנשי (28,2). The Torah describes certain people as achieving this closeness, קרבות through the daily תמידים. All this is part of the mystical dimension of גלגול, the soul's travels during its incarnations within different bodies. The offering of these sacrifices helps these incarnations achieve their purpose. They are refined and cleansed through these קרבנות.
  The present-day wording of our עמידה prayer in which we ask: "and restore the sacrificial service to the Devir of Your House as well as the <i>Ishey Yisrael</i>," is justified by the Midrash which says that even nowadays when we have no Temple to offer sacrifices in, the archangel Michael offers the souls of the righteous as sacrifices on the Celestial Altar (compare Tur Orach Chayim Siman 120). 
  These "souls" are the ones who have become elevated through the sacrifices offered in our world, (at the time the Temple stood) as students of the Kabbalah will be quick to appreciate. These Kabbalists are aware that the spiritual part of man, commonly known as "soul," exists on five different levels. These levels known in ascending order as נפש, רוח, נשמה, חיה and יחידה. The נפש level we experience on ראש חודש and חול המועד, the רוח level on festivals; the נשמה level on the Day of Atonement, the level חיה every Sabbath. The highest level, that of יחידה we will only experience in the World to Come. The additional sacrifices, called מוספים, which are offered on all the days we have just mentioned, represent the completion of judgment, whereas the daily קרבן תמיד represents the commencement of the judgment process. The קרבן מוסף on שבת consists of two sheep because there are two aspects to the Sabbath the negative as well as the positive commandments. Our sages have called this זכור ושמור בדבור אחד, i.e. that the legislation of the Sabbath in its dual form was expressed in the same words at the time the Ten Commandments were given to the Jewish people. We may also view this phenomenon of the dual nature of the Sabbath as referring respectively to the Sabbath in our world and the Sabbath in the World to Come. In this latter "world" the Sabbath is ever-present, or “שכולו שבת,” in the words of our sages. The Torah next discusses the commandment of blowing the Shofar on New Year's Day, something which is designed to confuse Satan, our accuser. At the appropriate time in the future G–d will slaughter Satan, the Angel of Death. The prophet Isaiah (27,13) describes that time as: "On that day a great ram's horn shall be sounded." 
  Every addition of holiness to our status has a mystical connection with the Additional Sacrifices and furthermore contains allusions to a future time. The Torah says in connection with ראש חודש: "This month shall be to you the first (head) of the months" (Exodus 12,2). It means that the Jewish people's calendar is patterned after the lunar cycle. Shemot Rabbah 15,26, comments on this that the great achievements of the Jewish people from the time of Abraham to that of King Solomon spanned 15 generations during which they rose to ever greater stature. At that point, when the light of the moon is at its most potent, "Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord" (Chronicles 1,29,23). Just as the light of the moon diminishes progressively from the fifteenth of the month onwards until it is totally extinct at the end of the month, so the generations of the Jewish people after Solomon progressively declined in greatness until, after another fifteen generations, the last Jewish King, Zedekiah was totally blinded, as stated in Kings II 25,7: "He blinded the eyes of Zedekiah." In the future, however, a new light will shine upon Zion, "and the brightness of the moon will match the brightness of the sun" (Isaiah 30, 26). The "light of the sun" referred to in that verse is the mystical dimension added by the offering of the מוסף-sacrifices on the days we celebrate the appearance of the New Moon. The mystical dimension provided by the Sabbath is the concept of a world which is constantly wrapped in the holiness represented by the concept of the Sabbath. The mystical dimension provided by the Passover sacrifice is that it is the anniversary of our original redemption from the bondage in Egypt, which is also the date of the month on which the redemption of the future will occur. (Rosh Hashanah 11) The scriptural source for this opinion is found in Michah 7,15: "I will show miracles as in the days when you departed from the land of Egypt." Israel will then become endowed with an additional level of רוח הקודש, Holy Spirit, and the earth will be filled with the knowledge of G–d. The festival of Tabernacles, devoted to our reposing in "shade" i.e. the shade offered by the covering of the huts being the spiritual equivalent of sitting under G–d's direct protection- will provide an even greater amount of the Holy Spirit. New Year's Day, of which it says in our מוסף prayer: "This day is the day that recalls the beginning of Your handiwork, a reminder of the first day of Creation," will become the date on which the work of Creation will be renewed once it will resume the direction envisioned by G–d originally. At that time G–d will truly enjoy His works (Psalms 104,31). יום כפור, of course, represents the day in the future when all sins will have been atoned for, and the time of which the prophet Jeremiah 50,20, says: "The sins of Israel shall be sought and there shall be none; the sins of Yehudah, and none shall be found; for I shall forgive those I allow to survive." In the future then these are "My holidays." As long as Israel was steeped in sin, however, we are told in Isaiah 1,16: "Your new moons and holidays fill Me with loathing; they have become a burden to Me." In contrast with this, they will be called: "Holy Convocations," proclaimed by a holy congregation, at a time when we shall have merited eternal life. At that time body and soul will have achieved the mystical union hinted at by the words אך אשר יאכל לכל נפש, in Exodus 12,16. "Eating" is a dimension of the body's needs. The word נפש in that verse describes a dimension of the soul. The "food" (nourishment) of that element of man then is "knowledge of the Lord," as we know from Isaiah 11,9. The verse in Exodus hints at a time when even the body, i.e. "secular" matter, will be filled with such knowledge of the Lord. At that time we will experience fulfilment of the promise or commandment "שאו את ראש," in Numbers 26,2, which is a moral imperative to the Jewish people to elevate themselves to the highest moral/ ethical level they are capable of. The people who were counted at that time were rightly described by our sages as דור דעה, a generation which possessed knowledge (of G–d). This count took place "after the plague," after all those involved in the sin of בעל פעור had died. The term "אחר המגפה" can be understood more broadly as also referring to that time in the future of which it is said in Isaiah 25,8: "He will destroy death forever." During the first count of the people in the desert, the attribute of Justice predominated over the Jewish people, seeing they were all going to die during their trek through the desert, and would not be found worthy to enter the Holy Land. [That count had taken place after the episode of the golden calf, Ed.] Of this latter count, however, it states: "To these (the people to be counted now) the land will be distributed as an inheritance" (26,53). The prophet Isaiah (60,21), has already said of this future ועמך כולם צדיקים, לעולם יירשו ארץ "And your people, all of them righteous, shall possess the land for all time." The story of Pinchas is an allusion to this point in the future. 
  This is what our sages had in mind when they said: "Pinchas is none other than the prophet Elijah" (Baba Metzia 114), for G–d has said: "Lo, I will send Elijah to you before the coming of the awesome fearful day of the Lord" (Malachi 3,23). Targum Yonathan renders Exodus 4,13, where Moses declines the mission of leading the Jewish people with the words שלח נא ביד אשר תשלח, "Please make someone else Your agent," as: "Send Pinchas to be that leader," (seeing that he is ready and willing to accept this mission of the future, being identical with Elijah). We need to understand what prompted Yonathan ben Uzziel to derive this conclusion based on the verse in Exodus quoted. 
  I believe that he found such an allusion in the word נא used by Moses when he declined to accept the mission himself. That word seems superfluous at first glance. The Zohar alludes to it in his commentary on our portion when he quotes Job 4,7: זכר נא מי הוא נקי אבד ואיפה ישרים נכחדות, "Consider, what innocent man ever perished? Where have the upright been destroyed?" The following is the text of that commentary: "When Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai studied this portion of the Torah, his son came to him and asked: 'What would have happened with the reincarnation of the souls of Nadav and Avihu if there had been a Pinchas in the world at the time they died (they were two sons of Aaron who died prematurely)? Had Pinchas been born after these sons of Aaron died, their souls could have been re-incarnated in Pinchas's body. Pinchas then could have rehabilitated these sons for whatever shortcomings they had displayed during their first life on earth. Assuming however, as we must, that Pinchas had been born prior to the death of Nadav and Avihu, and that he therefore already had been equipped with a soul, how could the souls of Nadav and Avihu have been re-incarnated within Pinchas?'" Rabbi Shimon answered his son that we are dealing here with a supremely guarded secret of the way G–d works, and that the truth is that at the time the two sons of Aaron died, their souls did not enjoy the protection of the "Holy Rock," i.e. the emanation called מלכות (lowest of the 10 emanations). We know this because the Torah makes a point of mentioning that they had no children at the time they died (Numbers 3,4). They had diminished G–d's image by not having married and sired children as was incumbent upon them. As a result, they were unfit to serve as High Priests. At the time, Pinchas proved his jealous concern for G–d's honor to the myriads of the Jewish people when he displayed the bodies of the adulterers he had speared with his lance, his soul fled from him when he saw the tribe of Shimon approach him in a threatening posture vowing to take revenge for their prince Zimri whom Pinchas had slain. The two unattached souls of Nadav and Avihu, which had not yet found a resting place, entered Pinchas and restored him to life. This enabled Pinchas's own soul to unite with the souls of Nadav and Avihu. In this way Nadav and Avihu attained the position of High Priest which they had been intended for if their lifestyle had justified it. Pinchas, as it were, benefitted from the souls of Nadav and Avihu, and this helped him become High Priest (after the death of his father Eleazar). This is what is alluded to in Job 4,7. "The innocent (Pinchas) had not perished, nor had the upright (Nadav and Avihu been destroyed)." This is also why the Torah in Numbers 25,11 and on some other occasions describes Pinchas as both the son of Eleazar (his father) and as the son of Aaron, i.e. the father of Nadav and Avihu.
  Pinchas was innocent (of murder), his soul did not perish. He was restored to physical life through the transfer of the souls of Nadav and Avihu. The word נא alludes to this since it is made up of the first letters in the name נדב and אביהו respectively. This stratagem of G–d is what is referrred to in Job when both the "innocent," נקי, and "the upright," ישרים are described as surviving. This is also why Pinchas is usually described in the Torah and the Book of Joshua as not only the son of Elazar, but as בן אהרון, to indicate that his soul was connected to the soul of the High Priest whose priesthood was confirmed by שמן המשחה, "the holy oil of anointing" (Exodus 29,7). The Torah also mentions Nadav and Avihu as having been the sons of Aaron on repeated occasions (Numbers 3,4; 26,61) after they had been reported as having died. Mentioning their names does not seem to contribute anything in the context of what the Torah then discusses. The reason must be that their souls were absorbed by Pinchas, that their deaths were not absolute. At first glance these comments of the Zohar appear contradictory to the commonly held opinion that the priesthood was conferred on Pinchas (25,13) only as a reward for his fearless loyalty to G–d in risking his life by executing Zimri the prince of the tribe of Shimon. Actually, Pinchas's elevation to the priesthood was not merely a reward for his conduct, but by his absorbing the souls of Nadav and Avihu whose priesthood had been something conferred upon them by the holy oil of anointing, Pinchas became a priest בעצם, i.e. in essence. The priesthood was not just an attribute of his, such as when it is conferred upon a person through heredity. In order to convey this to us the Torah, when describing Pinchas's elevation to the priesthood, says: "והיתה לו," not as we would have expected: "ותהי לו." The meaning of the former is: "he remained," whereas the meaning of the latter is: "he became."
  Now we also understand the word "לאמר" in 25,10. At first glance that word seems totally superfluous, since the Torah goes on to say in verse 12: "לכן אמר." I believe that the first time the Torah writes "לאמר," it is the instruction to inform Israel that Pinchas was of noble descent for he was the son of Eleazar who in turn was the son of Aaron. The second time was to tell Moses to inform the Jewish people that Pinchas was a priest of the Lord.
  Since I am already on the subject of explaining the need for the word "לאמר," I might as well include a comment about another time that the word "לאמר" appears superfluous. We read in 27,15 in our portion: "וידבר משה אל ה' לאמר, יפקד ה' אלוקי הרוחות לכל בשר, איש על העדה." "Moses said to G–d to say: "May the Lord, the G–d of the spirit of all flesh, appoint a man over the community." The word "לאמר" seems inappropriate, since it is not clear to whom G–d should convey Moses' request. Although Rashi addresses this problem and concludes that Moses wanted to know if G–d Himself would make the announcement of who would become Moses' successor, I feel I would like to show that both times the words "לאמר" I have mentioned can be explained in a parallel manner.
  The following Midrash will illustrate what I have in mind: "Moses said to G–d that the man who would be appointed his successor should "possess" the mind of all six hundred thousand Jews, since each one of them must be ready to accept him as his personal leader, seeing that no two Jews are of the same mind. G–d said to Moses: "Since you have spoken thus, I will show you all the future leaders of the Jewish people, all the Judges and Prophets I shall appoint for them from this time until the time of the Resurrection. Rabbi Simon said that this is the meaning of Deut.34,1: ויראהו ה' את כל הארץ, "G–d showed him the whole earth." He showed him Joshua who stood beneath him, Othniel who took over leadership of the Jewish people from Joshua, etc. G–d told Moses that all those people were of one mind and one spirit. Concerning what Moses had demanded at the very beginning however, namely, a man whose mind would evoke a 100% positive response from every Jew, such a man would not arise until the arrival of the Messiah of whom Isaiah (11,1) has written: "But a shoot shall grow out of Yishai, a twig shall sprout from his stock. The spirit of the Lord shall alight upon him, a spirit of wisdom and insight." This is also what is referred to in Job 28,25: לעשות לרוח משקל, "who can determine the weight of the spirit" (evaluate correctly the mind of every person). The Midrash describes Moses as saying to G–d that only He knows the minds of all His creatures. Since G–d is aware that each Jew has a mind of his own, seeing that he, Moses, is about to depart from the scene, he asks G–d to appoint someone who is able to put up with all these opinions represented by the Jewish nation. It is puzzling why such a well-meant request should be answered by G–d in the manner described by the Midrash. Why did G–d post-pone fulfilling Moses' request until the coming of the Messiah?
  Our sages in Baba Batra 75a comment on Numbers 27,20: ונתתה מהודך עליו, "you will invest him with some of your glory" (when Moses is told to appoint Joshua), that Moses was to invest Joshua only with part of his glory, not all of it. The elders of that generation are reported there as having compared Moses' face to that of the sun, whereas they compared Joshua's face to that of the moon. The change in the quality of leadership of the Jewish people was felt by these elders to be a shame and an affront. Why did G–d withhold some of His goodness from the people at that time? In the Midrash Shocher Tov 21, the author elaborates on the verse in Numbers 27,20 that Joshua experienced that part of Moses' glory granted to him on the occasion of the miraculous crossing of the river Jordan. We read in Joshua 4,14: "On that day the Lord exalted Joshua in the sight of all of Israel, so that they revered him all his days as they had revered Moses." The Midrash continues that the glory of the Messiah will equal that of teacher and disciple (Moses and Joshua), since it is said of him in Psalms 21,6: הוד והדר תשוה עליו, You have endowed him with splendor and glory." This statement obviously needs clarification. Besides, since "one hundred" is part of "two hundred," how does the addition of Joshua's glory increase the glory of the Messiah?
  We need to understand why G–d troubled Himself to show Moses all the Jewish leaders of the future and why this was of benefit to him. After all, did not all the generations experience a continual spiritual decline so that Moses became a witness to the decline of his nation, something that would have caused him pain rather than satisfaction?! We can answer this by saying that this is no more than a natural development, seeing that the further one is removed from the source of one's inspiration, the less the influence of that source which one experiences. Eventually that source might cease to have any influence altogether, G–d forbid. G–d demonstrated to Moses that all these future leaders acknowledged him as the source of their inspiration; Moses was thereby bound to be reassured. G–d showing him all those leaders in action set Moses' mind at rest. It showed him that all the branches continued to be firmly attached to the source, i.e. the trunk.
  The two words "לאמר" that we mentioned earlier as apparently superfluous, have something in common. The repeated "דבור" suggests that there was an exoteric (נגלה) as well as an esoteric (נסתר) element in what the Torah tells us here. In 25,10 the exoteric meaning is to inform the people of the noble lineage Pinchas was descended from, whereas in 25,12 they are to be informed of an additional dimension of Pinchas' greatness, i.e. that he is equated with the prophet Elijah. This is alluded to in the words "because he displayed jealous fervor on behalf of his G–d" (25,13). The letters in the expression “לאל-היו,” are identical with the word “לאליהו,” “to Elijah.” The latter also excelled by displaying jealousy on behalf of G–d, something that he himself is quoted as saying to G–d in Kings I 19,10. He referred to his having slain four hundred Jewish priests who had forsaken the Torah to serve the idol Baal instead. Elijah's performance on Mount Carmel was similar to that of Pinchas at Shittim. The name אליהו (which in the Bible is frequently spelled without the letter Vav at the end) contains two names of G–d, i.e. El and Ya-h. In his encounter with Zimri Pinchas restored the honor of the name El, since the Israelites at the time had been guilty of insulting that name of G–d by serving the El of the Moabites and Midianites, "וישתחוו לאלהיהן" (Numbers 24,2). The second of the Ten Commandments specifically prohibits a Jew prostrating himself before an alien deity (Exodus 20,4). Pinchas' deed restored the relations between G–d and Israel which the people's behaviour had upset. His deed, when analysed, consisted of discrediting a man and a woman who respectively were leaders of their tribes, or, in the case of Cozbi, whose father was an ancestral tribal head. The Torah emphasizes the word איש and אשה, when referring to these two both in 25,8, and in 26,14-15, although there is no need for this. We have mentioned repeatedly that the letters "י and ה" in the Hebrew for "man" and "woman" teach us that only when they remain aware of G–d's Presence in this world are they safe from burning up in the passion of their sexuality, seeing that without those letters of G–d's name their names would signal merely masculine and feminine "fire" respectively. The name of G–d contained in those two people whom Pinchas slew was Ya-h. These two had disgraced the name of G–d by their conduct. The Torah in order to draw our attention to all this repeats: …. ושם … איש … ושם האשה, (26,14, 26,15). Rashi already explained that at the count of the people after this episode the peculiarly worded names of the tribes i.e. ה-ראובנ-י, and not simply ראובן demonstrated that the name of each tribe contained the name of G–d. G–d thus personally testified-that the members of all these tribes were conceived while their respective parents maintained absolute chastity. This too is the meaning of Psalms 122,4: שבטי י-ה עדות לישראל, "Israel are G–d's tribes, as per G–d's personal testimony." The letter ו in the word שלום, is "amputated" in 25,12. Baal Haturim points out that the numerical value of that word equals זהו משיח, "this is the Messiah." By diminishing the size of that letter, it is as if one had not thought about the last letter in the name of אליהו. Elijah is the prophet who announces the imminent arrival of the Messiah and prepares people for that. Removing part of the letter ו is meant to convey to us that Elijah (as alluded to by the absence of the last letter in his name), will materialise when one least thinks of him.. The letters added to the names of the tribes during this count therefore can be viewed as making up the second name of G–d contained in the name אליה, the name Ya-h. The Torah informs us in Exodus 6,25 that Pinchas' father had married one of the daughters of Putiel, who according to Midrash Hagadol fattened (play on word Putiel) all the idols in the world and the other tribes despised him on account of his ancestry. Since the name פוטיאל concludes with the letters of the name of G–d, however, the Torah alerts us to the fact that he converted to monotheism, i.e. El Ya-h. The whole verse is an allusion to Joseph who controlled his desire in his involvement with the wife of his master Potiphar, whose similarly sounding name reminds us of what took place then. Just as Joseph preserved the holy covenant with G–d at that time, so Pinchas, his descendant maternally, restored the holy covenant with G–d by taking G–d's revenge on Zimri. As a result, G–d granted him "My covenant Peace." Targum Yonathan on that verse says that Pinchas was made into an angel who would live until he could announce the final redemption. It is further written (of Pinchas) that G–d's covenant of life and well-being was with him (Malachi 2,5), that "the true Torah was in his mouth. He walked with Me in peace and equity, nothing perverse was on his lips. He served Me with complete loyalty; he held many back from committing iniquity, for the lips of a priest guard knowledge and people seek Torah from his mouth, seeing that he is an angel of the Lord G–d of Hosts" (Ibid 6). This verse clearly alludes to Pinchas, since Pinchas became an angel, as our sages comment on Joshua 2,4, (Tanchuma quoted by Rashi). Since Pinchas held back many from sinning, he is described by the prophet as having the true Torah issuing forth from his mouth. "Truth" is an element that reinforces and strengthens religious belief and practice. It is not something merely personal, but is something that must be demonstrated to the community in order to be capable of convincing such a community to do penitence. Such a result is called אמת, truth. Truth is something of an everlasting nature. 
  Concerning such truth, the prophet Jeremiah (5,1) proclaims in the name of the Lord: "Roam the streets of Jerusalem, search its squares; look about and take note; you will not find a man. There is none who acts justly, who seeks integrity, that I should pardon her." This is surely a very remarkable statement. How could the existence of even a single such “איש” be questioned, when at that time there lived in Israel numerous prophets and pious men in Israel! Does not the same prophet in chapter 24,1 describe that G–d showed him a vision of the חרש והמסגר, two Torah scholars of renown, (Sanhedrin 38) who were exiled together with king Yechonyah (Kings II 24,16-17)? The answer is simply that these Torah scholars had failed to act publicly to call upon the masses to mend their ways, and return to the ways of the Torah. Jeremiah laments that there is not a single person in the courtyards of Jerusalem who has the moral courage to proclaim his convictions publicly! Rabbi Amram in Sanhedrin 119 states explicitly that Jersusalem was destroyed because the Torah scholars ignored the commandment to admonish their fellow Jews. (Leviticus 19,17) He derives this from the verse in Lamentations 1,6: היו שריה כאילים, לא מצאו מרעה. "Her leaders were like stags that found no pasture." The prophet there drew a parallel between the spiritual leaders of Israel and the stag whose head is usually down on the ground near its tail. The leaders of the Jewish people, similarly, buried their heads in the sand in order "to see no evil, hear no evil-etc." When contrasted with this kind of behaviour, Pinchas stood out as a man of truth in whom the jealousy for his G–d was paramount. This explains why he was rewarded with everlasting life, i.e. this is why the prophet Elijah did not experience death on this earth.
  Pinchas saw the letters of the word מת in his mind's eye, and this inspired him to be a barrier to "death." How did he do so? When commenting on the lance, רמח which Pinchas used to slay Zimri, the Zohar describes Pinchas as "garbing" himself with this lance in order to mete out justice here on earth so that mercy could be invoked in the parallel regions of Heaven. He saw his own name (numerical value 208) rise heavenwards, realising that his name had the same numerical value as that of "יצחק" the patriarch who personified the attribute of Justice on earth. He also saw the letter מ fly in the air. This letter is an allusion to death, מות. This allusion has already been commented on in Genesis 3,6: ותרא האשה כי טוב וגו' … ותקח מפריו ותאכל ותתן. "The woman saw that it was good,…she took from its fruit, ate, and gave" (to her husband). We find here four words commencing with the letter ות, and in the middle of these words a word commencing with the letter מ. When you join this letter מ to the four words which commence with the letters ות, you obtain the word מות, "death" each time. In other words "death" is present in all four compass directions. This is what the sages had in mind when they referred to Pinchas' mind's eye as seeing the letter מ "flying" in the air.
  The letter ת possesses another peculiarity, namely that it signifies death, written in blood, as we know from the statement of Rabbi Acha bar Chanina in Shabbat 55a. He tells us that G–d had never issued a favorable decree and reversed Himself except in a single instance, viz. the situation referred to in Ezekiel 9,4 when G–d told the angel Gabriel: "Pass in the midst of the city, in the midst of Jerusalem, and mark a sign on the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan for all the abominations that are done within it." G–d had instructed Gabriel to place on the foreheads of the righteous the letter ת in ink so that the Divinely appointed forces of destruction should not touch those people. The foreheads of the wicked people, however, were to be marked with the same letter written in blood, so that they would fall victim to the forces of destruction. The ministering angels challenged G–d on this decision, wanting to know in what way the former were better than the latter, seeing that they had failed to perform the commandment of admonishing their fellow-Jews. G–d answered these angels that He was well aware that even if the righteous people had admonished their compatriots it would have been to no avail. To this the angels replied that the fact that G–d was aware that such admonitions would have proved futile did not absolve the righteous from at least having tried, seeing that they had no way of knowing whether their attempts to admonish the people would prove successful. As a result of this, we read in verse 5 of the same chapter: "Then He said to these in my hearing (the prophet's) 'Follow him through the city and strike. Let your eyes neither spare nor show mercy. Old man, young man and maiden, children and women, massacre to utter destruction. But any man on whom is the sign do not approach. And begin from My Sanctuary' i.e, Mikdashay so they began with the old men who were in front of the House." Rabbi Yosef reads the word Mikdashay as Me-kudashay, i.e. "My holy ones," the people who observed all the commandments of the Torah from the letter Aleph, to the letter Tav. So far the quotation from the Talmud in Shabbat 55. A few lines further on the Talmud questions why the sign chosen for these markings had been the letter ת, and answers that this letter is the first letter of the word Tichyeh, i.e. "you will live," as well as the first letter of the word Tamut, i.e. "you will die." Shmuel said that the reason is that at that point the merit of the patriarchs had been exhausted and it no longer could be called upon to protect their descendants from G–ds anger. Rabbi Yochanan, however, feels that the letter ת symbolised that these people could be granted grace only through the merit of the patriarchs. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, also on that folio, says that that letter is the final letter in G–d's "seal," seeing that Rabbi Chanina taught that the "seal" of G–d is אמת, "Truth." At any rate, we know that the combination of the letters מ-ת spelled death, since there was a מגפה, a deadly plague, which killed twenty-four thousand Israelites at that time. The letter ת discussed in the Talmud is also known to have been written in blood on the foreheads of the wicked.
  Remember that the creation of the universe proceeded under the parole of "truth," since the final letters in the words בראשית ברא אלוקים combine to make the word אמת. At the end of G–d's creative activities we again find this symbol for "truth" when we look at Genesis 1,31: “וירא אלוקים את וגו'.” The universe was created for the sake of man, i.e. אדם, who represents the Maaser, tithe of אמת. (The letter מ =40, being 10% of ת=400 and the letter ד in אדם being one tenth of the letter מ in the word אמת. The letter א in אמת, is of course, irreducible). The serpent was the first to introduce the lie into the universe by claiming that G–d had eaten from the tree of knowledge before being able to create the universe. Proverbs 16,28 describes the serpent when saying: "a quarrelsome one alienates his friend." By removing the first letter of the word אמת, all that you are left with is מת, "dead." When you remove the first letter from the word אדם, on the other hand, you are left with the word דם, blood. Anyone who is able to protest wrongdoing with a chance of success and fails to do so has blood inscribed on his head. Those were the people who, though they are described as observing the commandments of the Torah from א-ת, were not pious in the true sense of the word since they failed to admonish the other members of their society. Under such circumstances the letter מ which ought to symbolise a letter from the word for truth, i.e. אמת, symbolizes the word מות, death, instead. When the Talmud describes their piety in this manner, i.e. א-ת, it merely wants to draw our attention to the missing letter מ in those people's piety. Hence the Angel of Death had unrestricted control even over such Torah- observing people..
  This brings us to the meaning of: השיב את חמתי, "he turned away My wrath" (25,11). When Pinchas saw the letter מ flying in the air, he took the lance, רמח, to publicly display his jealousy on behalf of G–d and succeeded in transforming חמתי G–d's wrath, i.e. the letters מת in that word into the other two letters in that word, i.e. into חי. This is why Pinchas became Elijah, an angel who goes on living forever.
  There is another aspect to equating Pinchas with Elijah the prophet. I have explained this when discussing the meaning of our saying the line: אמן יהא שמיה רבא מבורך, “Amen, may His great name be blessed,” a formula we use daily when reciting the Kaddish prayer. This can be applied to the name אליה"ו הנבי"א by spelling the name אליהו with the letter ו, and writing each letter as a word in either of the four possible versions called מילואים. These are the methods of writing the Ineffable Name of G–d practiced by Kabbalists. I have explained this on several occasions, notably in my commentary on Parshat Bamidbar, when I discussed the symbolism of the measurements of the tablets on which the Ten Commandments were inscribed. The result of such spelling is that the Ineffable Name amounts to 72, 63, 45 or 52 respectively, depending on whether the letters י, ה or א are used to write these letters as words. The name אליהו הנביא, spelled by using primarily the letter ה in order to convert letters into words, results in 52, (one of the ways of spelling the normally four-lettered Ineffable Name of G–d). By manipulating other letters in the combination, the other numerical values we know for the Ineffable Name can be obtained. Having combined the letters I have highlighted, the remaining letters of the word הנביא, i.e. נביא, equal 63, or another one of the numerical values of the Ineffable Name. The first two letters of the word אליהו, [the ones in front of what I have highlighted Ed.] are אל, and allude to the full-worded spelling of the Ineffable Name of 63, since that spelling contains 3 times the letter י, and one א, making a total of 31. The Ineffable Name spelled so that its numerical value totals 45 contains three times the letter א, plus once the letter י, equaling 13, or the numerical value of אחד. Put differently, we have here an allusion to El Echad, G–d is One. This is a veiled reference to Zachariah 14,9: "On that day, G–d will be One and His Name will be One. The prophet means that the Ineffable Name at that time will be complete in all its possible spellings, מילואיו. It follows that anyone who pronounces the line of אמן יהא שמיה רבא awakens in G–d an awareness of His people's exile, and of the need for their Redemption. Such a person will be assured of a share in the World to Come. Evil decrees pending over him may be cancelled; he also causes G–d to shake His head and say: “Hail to the One whose subjects praise Him in such a fashion” (Berachot 3, Shabbat 119, Berachot 57). When you combine the remaining totals of the other two מילואים of the Ineffable Name, namely 45 and 72, and add the numerical value of אמן, i.e. 91, you will get 208, i.e. the numerical value of the name פינחס.
  The following paragraph, dealing with the laws of inheritance, also contains allusions to the Ineffable Name of G–d. The Kabbalistic commentator Rekanati expresses it thus: "The verse commencing with: ואל בני ישראל תדבר לאמור, איש כי ימות ובן אין לו “Say to the children of Israel ‘if a man dies and he does not leave behind a son, etc.” (27,8), tells us that even laws covering such mundane matters as the inheritance laws and other laws concerning interpersonal relationships, depend on the מרכבה עליונה Divine entourage in the Celestial Regions. Their evolution and emanation are rooted in those regions. תפארת ישראל and שכינת עזו respectively, are called בן ובת, who inherit חכמה and בינה known as אב ואם. These four concepts are mystically part of the Ineffable four-lettered Name of G–d. Keeping this in mind you can understand why the בן, son, takes precedence over the daughter when inheriting the property of their father or mother, and why the son is obligated to provide for the daughter (his sister). Our sages called this system “the sons inherit, whereas the daughters are provided for” (Baba Batra 122b).
  
  Let us now return to the repeated use of the word לאמור or אמור in 25,10 and 25,12 respectively. We have already mentioned that the first such expression concerns the exoteric aspect of Pinchas' exploits, whereas the second concerns the esoteric aspect of his deed, namely that he became Elijah. 
  When Moses asks G–d to appoint a leader for the Jewish people (27,15) that would take his place seeing his death was imminent (27,13), he also asks for the appointment of someone visible now, i.e. יפקד איש. In verse 17, Moses repeats himself asking that this leader should perform two functions which sound alike, i.e. אשר יצא לפניהם ואשר יבא לפניהם, as well as ואשר יוציאם ואשר יביאם. What is the difference between these two requests? Do they not both mean "who will lead them in battle and bring them safely back home?" Actually, the first function of the leader Moses requests is one to be fulfilled immediately אשר יצא לפניהם. The second function referred to, ואשר יוציאם, refers to the ultimate redemption. G–d answered both of Moses' requests by telling him that the leader for the immediate future would be Joshua (27,18).  At the same time, G–d showed Moses all the ensuing generations and their respective leaders until the arrival of the Messiah, as we have quoted earlier from the Midrash. He showed Moses how the generations would suffer a continual spiritual decline until the arrival of the Messiah who would be equipped with all the possible intellectual and spiritual attributes. As a demonstration that the decline would set in immediately, G–d told Moses that Joshua would receive only part of his glory, i.e. מהודך, "part of your glory, but not all your glory." The very decline in the quality of successive generations and their leaders leads to the increase in spiritual rejuvenation at the time of the Redemption. An excess of light over darkness will remain until messianic times. This means that the light of the future, the אור חדש, will exceed in intensity the light that had existed at the time of creation, before the original sin, the light which had remained hidden ever since (Bereshit Rabbah 3,6). This subject-matter requires a detailed explanation; it has been touched upon in our commentary on Parshat Balak when we discussed the verse מה טובו אוהליך יעקב (24,5), and demonstrated how the very destruction of the Holy Temple is the cause of the eventual building of an even holier enduring Temple. Due to the increasing diffusion of the pollution introduced into the world by the serpent there was a need for the exile of the Jewish people and the spiritual light in the world kept decreasing. Once wickedness will cease completely, a great light will shine, as we have explained at length in Parshat Balak. This will be further dealt with in the two portions Mattot and Massay. I have devoted a great deal of space there to demonstrate the spiritual value of exile for the Jewish people. The exile experience leads to purification of the Jewish nation, so that the future will bring with it not only a purification of the spirit but also of the physical, i.e. of matter itself. The whole world will become filled with knowledge of [G–d]; everything will be אור, light. I believe that the same approach is correct when we evaluate the gradual spiritual decline of successive generations which is all due to the pollutant the serpent has introduced into the world which infests more and more of our universe. This decline will be reversed in the future and the halachic rule: אין מיעוט אחר מיעוט אלא לרבות, "when we find successive restrictions in the language of the Torah, the purpose is to teach us something of an expansionary nature instead," will apply. Applying this rule to the messianic age when it arrives, this means that the amount of light in the world will exceed even that which existed at the time it began to fade. It is this light which Isaiah (60,1) refers to when he says: קומי אורי כי בא אורך, "Arise, shine forth, for your light has dawned!" It is just because the darkness was so dense that there will be a compensating excess of light. 
  This is what G–d showed Moses before he died, since Moses could be considered the ראש העולם "the head of the world, and the opening word of the Torah is בראשית, meaning בשביל משה רבנו שנקרא ראשית, "the world was created on account of Moses who is called ראשית." G–d commenced the creative process with the directive "let there be light," a reference to the light emitted by the forehead of Moses (Exodus 34,29). This kind of light was hidden (after Moses died). Moses is also considered the סוף העולם, the "end" of the world, i.e. when the world will finally renew itself it will draw on the qualities possessed by Moses. Such a world will be more perfect than the original world. The Zohar on Deut. 3,24: אתה החילות comments that Moses represents the beginning of this process, i.e. the first perfect human being, and the Messiah will represent its conclusion. The generations between these two find themselves surrounded by varying degrees of darkness, to compensate for which they will experience this excess of light at the time of the Messiah.
  We read in Chronicles I 16,27: הוד והדר לפניו, עז וחדוה במקומו, "Glory and majesty are before Him, strength and joy are in His place." This verse contains a lesson about the exiles of the Jewish people, i.e. that they are for the good of the Jewish people. The chapter quoted describes an ongoing activity, i.e. בשרו מיום אל יום ישועתו, that even the redemption that has not occurred yet should be spoken of daily, or better still, it refers to a period of over one thousand years. Considering that in our eyes G–d's day is equal to a millenium, it follows that this is why Adam died on the day he ate from the tree (as he was warned he would in Genesis 2,17), though he lived close to one thousand years, the verse quoted in Chronicles, clearly refers to a period of exile. Lamentations 1,13, which describes the exile as already lasting כל היום,-at least one thousand years,- prompts the Zohar to comment that "my very glory," הודי, has proven to be my ruin." When you re-arrange the letter of the word הוד, you get דוה, as in כל היום דוה, "suffering constantly" (ibid.). I have already elaborated on this elsewhere, where I wrote that the word "הדר," is derived from "היפוך, i.e. "turning something around, reversing it," similar to the meaning of the expression "הדרן עלך," i.e. הפוך בה והפוך בה," (keep reviewing it, keep busy with it). What the Zohar meant was that the original "הוד," glory, will eventually lead to an even greater degree of "הוד" in the messianic future, just because that "הוד" had been converted to "דוה." We are told of that day in the future that ישמח ה' במעשיו, "that G–d will delight in His works" (Psalms 104,31). When you re-arrange the letters of the word ישמח, you have the word משיח, a reference to when that time will come. Concerning that day, the Midrash says that the Messiah will be given the combined “הוד, glory of Moses and הדר (its reversal) of Joshua, meaning that from the time of Joshua the spiritual decline set in, and the glory, הוד, kept turning into progressively more דוה, suffering. The הדר, decline would then reverse itself, i.e. the meaning of that term would no longer be negative. This process will lead to the cessation and disappearance of the iniquity due to the pollutants that the serpent spread throughout the world, and will enable the Messiah to make his appearance, and the new dimension of "light," the glory of the Messiah to manifest itself. The הדר (reduced measure of majesty in relation to Moses) of the new leader Joshua will be reversed at that time, a time described in Ezra 2,63 as the period when there is once again a High Priest who can stand in front of the אורים ותומים, the time when Elijah will have appeared. This period is alluded to when the Torah tells us in Numbers 27,21 that the new leader of the Jewish people will have to consult G–d by means of the אורים ותומים, i.e. the Ineffable Name worn by the High Priest Elazar in his breast plate. We also find an allusion to messianic times when the Jewish people are counted in our portion; the name of the son of Dan is given as שוחם (26,42), whereas in Parshat Vayigash, (Genesis 46,23) it is given as חשים. I have found that the Ari comments on this that the reason why the letter ו is missing in the spelling of that name in Genesis is to allude to the letters in the word משיח. In the time immediately preceding the arrival of the Messiah, one of the descendants of Dan will conduct a great battle. All this is mentioned in the Zohar's commentary on Parshat Balak (page 68-69, Sullam edition). It is based on Genesis 49,17: "Dan shall be a serpent (נחש) by the road, a viper (שפיפון) by the path, that bites the horse's heels so that its rider is thrown backwards." According to the Zohar, the "serpent" is a reference to Shimshon whereas the "viper" is a reference to Elijah who rescued Tzaliah a descendant of Dan when the latter "flew" in pursuit of Bileam. The latter, escaped by means of sorcery and Tzaliah was at a loss what to do. When Numbers 23,3 describes Bileam as וילך שפי, this is a reference to Bileam's profound identification with the negative forces in this world as symbolized by the serpent. Jacob's blessing to Dan referred to above and resulted in two descendants of Dan referred to as Tzaliah and Ira asserting mastery over the evil forces of this world. Ira was one of David's warriors. This is what is alluded to in Samuel II 8,4: "David hamstrung all the horses (of his adversary)…"The רכב referred to in that verse alludes to Genesis 49,17, i.e. an exploit of Dan. The words ויפול רוכבו אחור in that same verse refer to someone called Shalyah from the tribe of Dan who will assist the משיח בן יוסף in the war preceding the coming of the Messiah. The verse in Genesis concludes with the word לישועתך קויתי השם, to indicate that looking forward to imminent redemption at that time will be justified. The reason why the son of Dan here is referred to as שוחם is to express the hope that this descendant of Dan at the time mentioned will be equivalent to the משוח מלחמה, the Priest whose special task it was to accompany Israel in battle (Sotah 42 on Deuteronomy 20,2). [Active participation in war was certainly not the Priest's normal function. In fact any priest who had killed a person was no longer fit to perform Service in the Temple. Ed.] Pinchas too, seeing that he was descended maternally from the tribe of Joseph, whose descendants will play the leading role in the battle preceding the coming of the Messiah, was such a משוח מלחמה. At a later stage this very שוחם is "transformed" into a חומש. When someone has inadvertently used sacred property, i.e. Temple property, for personal or mundane purposes, he must make restitution of the principal amount plus twenty per cent so that the total amount paid back is twenty percent (חומש) larger than the original. The people of Israel are considered as קדש לשם "sacred to the Lord," as Rashi explains on Song of Songs 8,12: האלף לך שלמה, ומאתים לנוטרים את פריו. Israel is considered G–d's vineyard, and anything stolen from it must not only be replaced, but the חומש, in this case מאתים, must be added to make the restitution legal.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  בקנאו את קנאתי בתוכם .  We learn from this that when a person observes a public desecration of the name of G–d or His Holy Torah, he must display jealousy on their behalf. The reward Pinchas received is sufficient evidence of how highly G–d rated his action seeing that He granted him שלום.
  לאזני משפחת האזני . Rashi comments that Ozni is identical with אצבון (Genesis 46,16). Many commentators are puzzled by these various names mentioned, wanting to find some symbolism in them. I have heard that our rabbis have said that the fingers of man have been formed in the shape of pegs to enable him to put them inside his ears so as not to hear evil gossip. The word אצבעון is an allusion to this combination of finger and ear.
  ותעמודנה לפני משה ולפני אלעזר הכהן ולפני הנשיאים וכל העדה .  TheZohar on Parshat Balak queries the peculiar statement of the daughters of Tzelofchod who said (27,3) "our father has died in the desert." Did not hundreds of thousands of that generation die in the desert? Why did the daughters of Tzelofchod use such a preamble in their request for a share in the land of Israel? There are a variety of answers to this. Some say that they were asserting that their father's sin and cause of death had been associated with a particular activity in the desert, namely that he had collected firewood on the Sabbath (Numbers 15,32). They try to prove this by pointing out that his daughters had added the words כי בחטאו מת, "he died due to his personal sin" (not the collective sin of refusing to go up to the land of Canaan). Others claim that their father had been one of the people who had gone to war against the Canaanites after the episode of the spies, something that Moses had specifically prohibited (14,40-45). It is actually more likely that the argument of the daughters of Tzelofchod was that though their father was a head of the ancestral tribe of Joseph (ראש בית אב), he had never risen to the position of prince of that tribe due to his not possessing sufficient Torah knowledge. He had not been discreet enough and had spoken out in the presence of Moses. Concerning this, the Torah says "a great many people of Israel died" (21,6). The construction of that verse i.e. וימת, (singular) instead of וימותו (plural) is strange. We are entitled to assume therefore, that one important man, (רב) is the subject in this verse. It refers to Tzelofchod, who, because he was relatively ignorant, i.e. an עם הארץ, is described by the Torah as עם רב. The word רב may also refer to the fact that the man in question was a member of Menashe [of the tribe of Joseph], a tribe that is described elsewhere as particularly numerous. (Joshua 17,14) Tzelofchod's daughters were afraid that since their father had sinned in the desert by unseemly remarks, Moses would hold this against his family at the distribution of the land of Israel. This is why they made a point of appealing not only to Moses, but to all the other notables. They did not actually address Moses. Rather, they addressed all the other notables in Moses' presence. The lesson to be learned from the conduct of the daughters of Tzelofchod is, that if someone is afraid that a certain tribunal of judges may be prejudiced against him, he should ask for additional judges to be co-opted to that tribunal. Tzelofchod's daughters had been unaware of Moses' extreme humility and had no need to submit their argument to any additional judges. As soon as Moses realized what bothered the daughters of Tzelofchod, he immediately excused himself from the hearing. This is the true meaning of: ויקרב משה את השפטן לפני השם, "Moses brought their case before the Lord" (27,5). Whenever a litigant requests additional judges to hear his case, the judges who feel that they do not enjoy the confidence of the litigant must voluntarily disqualify themselves. Any judge who fails to do so is considered an עזות פנים, an arrogant person, one who displays the very reverse of Moses' qualities. 
  
  Matot, Masei, Devarim
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  The following section is named מלחמות השם.
  The following three פרשיות are usually read during the period between the 17th of Tammuz and the 9th of Av. I have decided therefore, to combine the commentary on them under the same heading.
  Parshat Matot
  Commandment 406 deals with conditions under which vows can be annulled, and by whom they can be annulled.
  Commandment 407 discusses the general rule that one must not break one's word.
  Parshat Masei
  Commandment 408 enjoins the people of Israel to set aside cities for the use of the Levites. These cities are also to act as cities of refuge for people guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
  Commandment 409 forbids the execution of a murderer until he has stood trial.
  Commandment 410 provides for the Court to send someone who has committed involuntary manslaughter to a city of refuge, and for the party concerned to go there.
  Commandment 411 forbids a witness who has testified in a case that may lead to capital punishment to act as a judge in the proceedings.
  Commandment 412 forbids the paying of a ransom to save a murderer from the death penalty. The Torah says: "You must not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of a capital crime; he must be put to death." (35,31)
  Commandment 413 forbids the accepting of a ransom from someone guilty of involuntary manslaughter in lieu of flight to a city of refuge (35,32).
  Parshat Devarim
  Commandment 414 forbids the appointment of a judge whose expertise does not include Torah law, even though he may be a recognized expert in other disciplines. This is based on Deut. 1,17: "You shall not be partial in judgment."
  Commandment 415 prohibits judges from being intimidated by litigants or their supporters. The Torah says: "Fear no man!" (ibid.)
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Parashat Matot
  These commandments are divided into three groups of which some aim at perfecting our souls, some at perfecting our bodies, and others at ensuring that our property will be "pure", i.e. that we will not be guilty of robbery and dishonesty. Concerning these three aspects of perfection, the Torah says: "Love the Lord your G–d with all your heart, i.e. the seat of your physical life, with all your soul, i.e. the seat of your spiritual life, and with all your might, i.e with all your economic assets" (Deut 6,4).
  In פרשת מטות the Torah deals with laws designed to perfect our souls, our spiritual development. The laws dealing with vows contain the warning to honor all our utterances, ככל היוצא מפיו יעשה "he must carry out all that crosses his lips" (Numbers 30,4). This is addressed to the soul, because the power of speech derives from the attribute of wisdom which itself is an outgrowth of the soul. Speech is only an externalized version of one's thoughts, something that elevates man above all other living creatures. Man is called a מדבר, "a talking creature." This is why he must not "profane" his word, "לא יחל דברו." We also find that Onkelos renders Genesis 2,7: ויהי האדם לנפש חיה as "man became a talking spirit." You are already aware that man has been designed along the superior lines of a higher world, that each one of his limbs is a branch of a "tree" in the Celestial Regions, and that the mouth he has been equipped with is meant only to enable him to proclaim the greatness of the Lord and to tell His praises. It is a vessel to be used only for the service of the Lord. This is what David meant when he said in Psalms 145,21: "My mouth shall utter the praise of the Lord."
  Students of esoteric meanings of the Torah are also aware that the root of roots of the soul reposes in the emanation בינה, as we know from ונשמת שדי תבינם, “and the soul of Shaddai that gives them (man) understanding” (Job 32,8). The three levels of our soul נפש-רוח-נשמה, correspond to the world on three different levels, the עולם העשיה, עולם היצירה,-and עולם הבריאה. In the still higher world of אצילות these parts of the soul are found in the emanations מלכות-תפארת,-and בינה respectively. The Kabbalists have explained at length that this is where the source of vows is found. The word שבועה oath, is closely linked to שבעה, i.e. the seven days of Creation. These seven days are the time frame of the “building” of the world, בנין, again a word almost identical with בינה. A vow, נדר, is called such when the person making the vow prefaces it with the words: הרי עלי וגו', meaning that it is an obligation over and beyond that which emanates from בנין. Our sages in Sifri Mattot 4, describe the difference between the relative strength of a vow and an oath as being that he who utters a vow is as if he swears by the “life of the king,” whereas he who utters an oath is as if he swears by “the king himself.” The author to buttress his contention, quotes Kings II 2, where Elisha says to Elijah: חי השם וחי נפשך אם אעזבך, “as the Lord lives, and as you live, I will not leave you!” This may be why the Talmud (Shabbat 32b) teaches that the death of one's under-aged children and possibly the death of one's wife are retribution for a person's failure to keep one's vows. All this is because בינה is the by אם על הבנים, “mother of the children.” When one violates that principle, either the mother or the children may disappear, i.e. die. Kabbalists have seen an acronym in the word נדר, dividing it into נ=50, and דר, “dwells.” The reference is to the emanation בינה, which is the source of the חמישים שערי בינה, “the fifty gates of insight.” We already stated that בינה is the location of נשמת שדי, and that the whole subject of נדרים) revolves around בינה which is the root of בנין, and that שבועה is part of בנין which is שבעה.
  Parashat Masei
   In this portion the Torah discusses matters that help perfect one's body. The body viewed as the sheath of the soul, has also been created in the image of G–d (Genesis 1,27). This is why if someone kills another creature created in G–d's image he himself will be killed as an appropriate act of retribution. By his deed he has separated a soul from its body, (sheath), hence his own soul will be separated from its sheath. The act of murder is viewed as if the murderer had also severed the life of the soul in the Celestial Regions from its "body" in those regions. Although such separation would have occurred sooner or later anyways [by the natural death of the victim. Ed.], the murderer is punished for having brought this about prematurely. Hence his own soul will not find its resting place until the murder has been avenged. This principle explains the strange story related in Kings I chapter 21 of the judicial murder of Navot through Jezebel and king Achav. We are told in Kings I 22,21, that the "spirit" of the slain Navot volunteered to seduce king Achav into sinning by listening to his false prophets and that the Heavenly Tribunal concurred in this act of deviousness by the "spirit" of Navot. As a result, Achav was killed in a battle with Aram which served the ostensibly patriotic purpose of recapturing the city of Yavesh Gilead (which the Aramites had wrested from the Jewish state some considerable period earlier). Clearly, the soul, i.e. רוח, of Navot had not been able to come to rest due to the premature death of its body, and this may be why the רוח was permitted to act in its own personal interest. Avenging the murdered person is the only means to restore the harmony that existed between body and soul prior to the murder. We can now understand why, even if the family of the victim or the court were to agree to it, payment of a ransom would not restore the equilibrium which had been upset previously.. As long as the victim of the murder has not been appeased, there can be no question of the deed having been atoned for. When the death of the victim is due to an unintentional act however, the Torah does not consider him guilty of bloodshed. Clearly, the death of the victim was an act of G–d, i.e. the attribute of Justice chose as its instrument someone who had committed some other undetected offense. The killer had unconsciously carried out G–d's design in all those cases where he had not planned to kill the victim with a lethal instrument. The killer has to flee to the city of refuge, one of the cities of the Levites. Those cities are regarded as sites of judgment. The Levites themselves represent the emanation גבורה in the pattern חסד-גבורה-תפארת, a pattern that corresponds to the respective levels of כהן-לוי-ישראל. This unintentional killer must remain in the city of refuge until the death of the High Priest (35,25). This is because when the body of the victim was slain, also his soul was taken from him and had to remain in exile until a time when G–d is in a favorable frame of mind. At the time the High Priest dies, when his soul ascends to the Celestial Regions, the soul of the murder victim is then also allowed to proceed to those regions. 
  We find that such is the case even when the souls in question had not been separated from their bodies through murder. A soul which is "exiled" may be released from such exile as a result of the death of a great person, i.e. a prominent צדיק. The Zohar Mekor Chokhmah finds an allusion to the statement of our sages that "the righteous may be granted children when they have died, though they had no children during their lifetime," in the words כי בעיר מקלטו ישב עד מות … "he has to remain in his city of refuge until the death." [This means that as long as the soul of the righteous was held captive by its body it could not become a parent. Ed.] This demonstrates retroactively that all G–d's actions are based on truth, and that He shows His mercy to all. A soul that is separated from its body and does not have any "clothing" to accompany it to the higher world (since it did not leave children behind in this world), and therefore lacks a גואל needs to remain for a while in the "city of refuge," i.e. a place where souls hover until the death of the High Priest who is the Torah scholar. He does not require a גואל. If the High Priest leaves a widow and no children, the levirate marriage rules do not apply to such widow (in the sense that she need not enter into a marriage with a brother of her late husband in order to perpetuate his name on this earth). If she does so nonetheless, it is for the benefit of other souls who are homeless in a region between this world and the world to come. These souls await the time when they can be suitably "dressed," in order to proceed to their ultimate destination. The High Priest widow's late husband's "continuity," שם, has been maintained even though he did not leave behind physical issue. So far the commentary of the Zohar Mekor Chokhmah. [The source in the Zohar for this seems to be in Parshat Vayeshev on 38,8, where Yehudah instructs Onan his son to marry Tamar the widow of his brother Er. Ed.]
  Parashat Devarim
  In פרשת דברים the Torah discusses financial matters, showing that it is possible to apply true justice not only when large amounts of money are the subject of a dispute, but also when only pennies are the subject of litigation. The Torah demands that fair judges be appointed, that a judge must not allow himself to be bullied.
  In matters involving capital punishment the Torah does not allow a person who has testified as a witness to also function as a judge, as we deduce from Numbers 35,30. The reason is that people should not think that the judge has a personal motive in the outcome of the case. Only the Lord Himself, in Whose power is life and death, can function as both witness and jury. This ruling does not apply in financial matters. All matters involving crimes carrying the death penalty require the utmost care. The tribunal must consist of more than twenty people in order to provide for עדה שופטת ועדה מצלת, "a quorum of ten judges who vote "guilty" and a like quorum of ten judges who vote "innocent." All this in order to give the accused the benefit of any possible arguments in his favor. The wording of the Torah suggests that judgment is not to be proclaimed until it has been proven that all arguments in favour of the defendant have been exhausted Even when the judges themselves have observed the crime committed, a murderer is not to be executed until after he has been properly tried.
  These three פרשיות are always read in the three weeks of mourning culminating in the fast of the Ninth of Av; their content is most appropriate at that time. The reason we have lost the Temple and have been sent into exile is because we were guilty of violating those Torah's laws designed to perfect our soul, body and financial dealings. Our sages have said that during the period of the first Temple Israel sinned by worshiping idols and by engaging in sexual licentiousness and murder (Jerusalem Talmud Yuma 1,1). Ever since the destruction of the first Temple, the damage done by committing these sins has not been repaired, not even when the second Temple was built. This is why five important manifestations of G–d's Presence [proof of a high spiritual level of the Jewish people], were missing during all the years that the second Temple functioned. Our sages found this alluded to in the defective spelling of the word (ה)ואכבד in Chagai 1,8: עלו ההר והביאו עצים ובנו בית, וארצה בו ואכבד אמר השם. "Go up to the mountain, get timber and rebuild the House; then I will look on it with favor and I will be glorified-thus said the Lord." The missing letter ה was the prophet's way of telling Israel that the second Temple would be inferior to the first in five respects (Yuma 21b). The sin of worshiping idols is essentially one of the soul; the very thought that there are other deities beside the Lord G–d is prohibited. Sexual licentiousness and perversion, is, of course, a sin committed by the body. There is no other sin that involves as many of one's limbs and organs simultaneously as engaging in sexual intercourse. Murder also involves all parts of the body; all the organs and limbs of the victim are rendered useless. Jerusalem had been guilty of that sin also, since the hands of the Jerusalemites are described as "filled with blood" (Isaiah 1,15). That same generation had also been guilty of unfair dealings in monetary matters, as described by Isaiah 1,23: "Your rulers are rogues and cronies of thieves; all of them greedy for bribes." The making of vows, or the failure to honor them, also involves one's soul. The immediate cause of Nebuchadnezzar's attack on Jerusalem was King's Zedekiah having broken his solemn oath to the king of Babylonia not to rebel against his rule (Kings II 25,1). This is why the elders of Zion are reported as having put dust on their heads and having lowered their heads to the ground (Lamentations 2,10). Eichah Rabbah 2,14 relates that the members of the Jewish Supreme Court at the time of King Zedekiah were executed as punishment for violation of their נדרים, vows. According to the Midrash the oath of loyalty had been taken on the golden altar, i.e. in the Sanctuary.
  One of the reasons the paragraph of vows (Numbers 30) is adjacent to the paragraph of the festivals (Numbers 28) is that the 9th of Av is also called a festival, מועד. The ראשי המטות are the Sanhedrin of the people, the Supreme Court. The laws governing vows were addressed to them specifically. The reason that the line "Moses spoke to the children of Israel," is inserted between the paragraph dealing with the festivals and the paragraph dealing with vows and oaths when the former had concluded with the words "Moses told the children of Israel all that G–d had told him to tell them" is in order to separate the two subjects (one disaster from another). Tragically, what happened to the Sanhedrin in the days of Zedekiah (who had accused them of annulling his vow to be loyal to Nebuchadnezzar) later also happened to the Jewish community at large due to our many iniquities i.e. those mentioned in Parshat Massay, the penalty for which is exile or execution. This is what the prophet Jeremiah 9,20 refers to when he says: כי עלה מות בחלונינו, ואשר לחרב לחרב (ibid. 15,2). The prophet refers to a variety of deaths experienced by the population. The former refers to pestilence, the latter to violent death. Still later in the same verse, the prophet speaks to those who have survived, telling them that they will experience exile, i.e. ואשר לשבי לשבי. The attribute of Justice mentioned in several instances in פרשת דברים, struck the Jewish nation subsequently, also making no distinction between the rich and the poor, the learned and the ignorant. G–d's judgments demonstrated that He certainly did not play favorites, a fault His representatives on earth had been guilty of. Due to our many sins the catastrophe also hit the site whence justice should have been dispensed, i.e. the seat of the Jewish Supreme Court within the Temple precincts. Rashi comments on Kohelet 3,16 ומקום הצדק שמה הרשע, "In the place of righteousness there is wickedness," that when Solomon describes this as something he had "seen," he refers to a vision of his which foretold of what the prophet Isaiah later on described (1,21): "Righteousness lodged in her, but now murders." Solomon also foresaw the retribution. The site became one where Nebuchadnezzar and his henchmen issued severe decrees against the Jews remaining in Jerusalem.
  The Levites' cities absorbed those forced to go into exile because of their having committed involuntary manslaughter. When disaster struck the nation, the Levites too were sent into exile as we know from Psalm 137,3 which tells of the Levites being asked to sing the songs they used to sing in Zion. They responded by refusing, claiming they could not possibly do so on foreign soil. Our sages (Midrash Tehillim 137,5) say that they amputated the tops of their fingers so as to be unable to play their instruments. Israel without a rebuilt Temple is compared to כאדם עברו ברית, "just as Adam who had violated the covenant with G–d," in the words of Hoseah 6,7. Midrash Eichah Rabbah elaborates on this, Rabbi Abahu saying that G–d describes how he had placed Adam into Gan Eden, commanded him a single commandment, which he transgressed. G–d consequently punished him with expulsion and personally elegized him with the word איכ-ה, Ayekkoh, (Genesis 3,9), which can be read as Eychah, an expression of mourning as in Lamentations, and also as used by Moses in Deut. 1,12 in the same sense, until He was able to bring the Jewish people into the Holy Land. Jeremiah 2,7 describes this in the words ואביא אתכם אל ארץ הכרמל לאכול את פריה. "I have brought you to the land of the Carmel to eat its fruit." Proof that G–d commanded Israel to observe commandments in the Holy Land is derived from Numbers 34,2: "Command the children of Israel, say to them…when you enter the land of Canaan, etc." Israel transgressed these commandments as described in Daniel 9, 9-11. Daniel includes the whole people as having violated G–d's teachings, as a result of which the curses in the Torah were poured out over them. Our exile, too, was a result of such conduct as is stated in Hoseah 9,9: "I will expel them from My House." The expulsion was not only to a country adjoining their homeland, but also to far off places as is indicated by Jeremiah 15,1: שלח מעל פני ויצאו, "Dismiss them from My Presence; let them go forth!" In His elegy, G–d refers to the lonely and isolated situation Zion finds itself in as a result; cf. Lamentations 1,1. Thus the introduction of Midrash Eicha.
  We find that Adam essentially violated three categories of sin: idol worship, sexual licentiousness, and bloodshed. He was also guilty of violating property rights, i.e. financial misdemeanors. Our sages describe Adam as a heretic in Sanhedrin 38. They describe him as "pulling his foreskin," (ibid. i.e. to make himself appear as if he had not been circumcised) He also cohabited with his wife who had previously been slept with by the serpent. As a result Adam's son Cain was infected with the pollutant of the serpent, the reason why he could become a murderer. [I recommend to the reader the commentary on this by Rabbeinu Chananel, who sees these accusations as being mouthed by the Gentiles, and who feels that the Talmud quotes them only in order to teach us how to respond to Biblical quotations taken out of context and used against us by our enemies. Ed.] As to Adam having sinned in property matters, this must be explained, seeing that the whole world belonged to him and he could not therefore become guilty of stealing, embezzling, etc. Rashi comments on Leviticus 1,2 that the reason why the Torah uses the word אדם as an example for someone who offers a sacrifice is, that just as Adam could not have brought a sacrifice from money which was not his, so anyone who offers a sacrifice is warned not to use stolen money for its purchase. Adam's sin consisted of his attitude to material things, described by the Torah as פורה ראש ולענה, "sprouting poison weed and wormwood" (Deut. 29,17). Adam displayed greed by eating from the tree of knowledge, which is described by the Torah as "inspiring desire in the eyes" (Genesis 3,6). He was a victim of the trait which our sages described when they said: "man does not leave this world without leaving behind half his desires unfulfilled, that having amassed his first million, a man already aims at the second million" (Kohelet Rabbah 1,34). Adam himself is alluded to in these three portions. Prior to his sin, Adam can be viewed as having been ראש המטות, "the (spiritual) head of all human tribes." Our sages describe the ministering angels surrounding Adam as paying homage to him, eager to hear his words of wisdom (Bereshit Rabbah 8,9). When the Torah says of the progress of the Jewish people in the desert in Numbers 33,2: "These are the departures of the Jewish people according to their journeys," this is a veiled reference to Adam who had been expelled from Paradise and forced to reside in various parts of the earth, a constant traveler. At the end of the same verse, the Torah reverses the description of these journeys by describing them as "their journeys according to the points of their departures." 
  This refers to the journeys that man has been sentenced to, both Adam and his descendants who were to be dispersed all over the globe. This is beneficial to them. Adam's task originally had only been "to work it and to preserve it intact," meaning that he was to observe G–d's laws simply in a contemplative fashion. As a result of the expulsion, knowledge of G–d would become widespread; wherever man would reside, sanctity would find a home. This is what is meant when the Torah describes Adam's expulsion in the words: "G–d sent him forth from Gan Eden, to work the soil he had been taken from" (Genesis 3,23). The term לעבוד, used for Adam's task henceforth is the same as the term the Torah uses when he had still been in Gan Eden. When Adam, i.e. Israel or mankind, fulfill their task in their respective journeys, i.e. מסעיהם, they will eventually return to their מוצאיהם, their point of departure, i.e. Gan Eden. The return referred to will be posthumous. This is why the Torah reversed the expressions in verse 2 of chapter 33.
  At the time Adam sinned G–d decreed not only expulsion from Gan Eden, but also mortality. The dual meaning of the expressions מסעיהם and מוצאיהם then is exile and death respectively. The decree was promulgated by the attribute of Justice, and the day that his expulsion occurred henceforth became the Day of Judgment, New Year's Day. This is the reason Parshat Devarim concerns itself with matters of דין, justice. It is filled with warnings, it alludes to G–d's "lamenting" the course man's history had taken with the איכה. It is symbolic that the numerical value of the word אלה, the opening word of the פרשה is 36, the same numerical value as that of the word איכה. It is no accident that Moses alluded to this when he said: איכה אשא לבדי, "how can I be expected to carry such a burden all by myself?" (1,12). Although this remark of Moses is significant in its own right, the fact remains that the death decreed on Adam was ultimately for his own good, since death has become the catalyst for rehabilitation (as I have explained at length on Parshat Nitzavim, as well as in my commentary on tractate Rosh Hashanah). 
  Furthermore, G–d's decision to send the Jewish people into exile is not only for our benefit but even, so to speak, for G–d's benefit. Israel were still called אדם when they sinned, since they shared the fate of אדם. They originally were ראשי המטות, superior people; they are also thus described in Lamentations 1,1: שרתי במדינות, "the princess among states." There followed a period when at best the Torah described their wanderings due to their sins, i.e. ….אלה מסעי למוצאיהם למסעיהם. These words refer to exile from the Holy Land to other countries, so that eventually they would be able on their travels to return to מוצאיהם, their point of departure, i.e. to ארץ ישראל. 
  Rabbi Eleazar tells us in Pesachim 87b that G–d sent Israel into exile among the nations so that we could proselytize members of our host countries since it says in Hoseah 2,25: וזרעתיה לי בארץ, "I will plant it (Israel) all over the earth for My sake." A person does not use a bushel of seed when he plants his field unless he hopes to get many times that amount in return. Placing Jews in exile was like seeding the nations of the world. G–d expects a substantial harvest of people who will embrace monotheism through contact with Jews. Rabbi Yochanan uses the second half of this verse to arrive at the same conclusion, i.e. ורחמתי את לא רוחמה, ואמרתי ללא עמי, עמי אתה והוא יאמר אלוקי, "I will have mercy with the one that was out of favor, and I will say to the one who was not My people "My people," and it will respond by saying "my G–d." Rashi comments that these are the converts that cleave to the Jewish people. Israel's dispersion therefore had the same purpose as Adam's expulsion from Paradise. More people will return to the Holy Land after the arrival of the Messiah than had ever been dispersed, since it will include those who have converted to Judaism in the interval.
  Israel's dispersion to many parts of the globe instead of exile to a single country held another advantage for us, as described by Rabbi Oshiyah on the same folio. He interpreted Judges 5,11: "G–d did Israel a favor by dispersing it." He based his interpretation on the remarks by a heathen to Rabbi Chaninah that they were superior to the Jews in religious tolerance. Whereas Yoav and his men killed all the male population of Edom in six months, as reported in Kings I 11,16, the Jews had been in exile amongst the Gentiles for many years and had not been harmed. Rabbi Chaninah delegated a student to engage in a discussion with this heathen, and Rabbi Oshiyah was the student chosen for that task. The latter told the heathen that they could not claim to be tolerant. They had not been able to kill all the Jews since the Jewish nation was dispersed all over the globe. Had they killed the Jews in one country, that country would have acquired a reputation of killing off its own citizens. The heathen was forced to admit that they did indeed have the problem of how to kill all the Jews. This incident illustrates how G–d did us a favor by dispersing us all over the globe.
  The words Alah, i.e. "curse," and the word Eyleh i.e. "these," contain the same letters in the same order, only the vowel pattern is different. The message of the Torah is that once the curses of both Leviticus chapter 27, and Deuteronomy chapter 29, have come to pass, the return of Israel to its roots will be signalled by conversion of the אלה, curse to אלה דברי הברית, "these are the words of the covenant," that the guilt of Israel will be at an end, that there will no longer be a need for exile and dispersion. Lamentations 4,22 refers to these sins of Zion having come to an end. All this is the direct result of expulsion, exile, dispersion. The author refers to his commentary on מסכת תענית, in which he has elaborated on this subject.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
   Parashat Matot
  לא יחל דברו, ככל היוצא מפיו יעשה . The last four words in this verse appear superfluous, since if we are prohibited from breaking a vow, we must obviously do according to what we have vowed. The moral lesson the Torah wishes to convey is therefore not connected to the laws of vows and oaths, rather the Torah emphasizes that we must keep our word even if what we have said was not said in the form of a promise or vow. Moses told the tribes of Gad and Reuben: "Carry out what you have said" (32,24). Rashi comments that Moses referred to their undertaking to be the spearhead of the Jewish army in their conquest and division of the Land of Canaan west of the Jordan river (32,18). The latter part was something that Moses had not demanded of them. Another statement of intent had been volunteered by those tribes which had not been part of the condition Moses imposed upon them in order to retain their possessions east of the Jordan. 
  This is also why Moses in his blessing of the tribe of Gad in Deut. 33,21 refers to that tribe as having performed צדקת ה' עשה ומשפטיו עם ישראל, "both a deed of righteousness vis-a-vis G–d and one of justice did he (the tribe) perform with Israel." From a legal point of view the tribe of Gad did only have to take part in the conquest of the land, something which took seven years. The additional seven years that were required to parcel out the land was an act of צדקה, something volunteered. By honoring this voluntary undertaking, the tribe qualified for Moses' unstinting praise. The Torah wishes us to apply such modes of behavior not only when it concerns utterances that may be financially costly for us, but also when such utterances imply undertakings by our souls, i.e. our religious conduct.
  וימסרו מאלפי ישראל .  "Thousands of Israelites were handed over, etc." (31,5); Rashi comments that "the Torah here informs you how beloved Israel's leaders were by their charges. As long as Israel had not heard that their leader Moses was about to die, they themselves sometimes assumed such a threatening posture that Moses said to G–d: "They are close to stoning me!" (Exodus 17,4) Now that they had been told that Moses was to die after the punitive expedition against Midian, they refused to undertake that expedition and had to be forced." Why does Rashi include the former statement of Moses "they are about to stone me!," as part of the praise Israel is entitled to? 
  Whenever we find Israel quarreling with Moses, such a quarrel can be viewed from two aspects, – negatively, that Israel was either ungrateful or too demanding, – or positively, that the very fact of Israel's constant demands represents a great compliment to Moses, for it showed that they looked upon him as a child does on his father, expecting the father to be able to fulfill every one of the child's wishes. As long as Israel did not refuse to go into battle after they had heard that doing so would hasten Moses' death, there was room to interpret their conduct in either direction. Now that they had refused to undertake a mission that would shorten Moses' life, it became clear that any negative character attributed to them was based only on their excessive expectations of Moses, whom they looked up to as a child would to his father.
  ויקצוף משה על פקודי החיל . "Moses was angry at the commanders of the army" (31,14). How could Moses be angry at these commanders seeing he had not commanded them to kill the women? There was no need to issue such a command since common sense should have told the commanders that the women who had been the chief seducers were to be the targets of that expedition. We find that even a Bileam acknowledges guilt when confronted by an angel whose presence he had not been aware of, and he says: חטאתי כי לא ידעתי, "I have sinned though I was unaware" (Numbers 22,34). Failure to use one's common sense is culpable. I have elaborated on this in my commentary on the last chapter of tractate Sanhedrin.
  גדרות צאן נבנה למקנינו פה, וערים לטפינו . "We shall build fences for our sheep and cattle here, as well as towns for our children." (3,16). Rashi points out that these tribes were more concerned with their property than with the safety of their families, seeing they first mentioned that they would build stables for their cattle, and only afterwards did they speak about building cities for their families. Moses told them that they had their priorities mixed up when he told them in 32,24 to build in the following order: "Cities for your children and enclosures for your sheep." They accepted Moses' rebuke and said afterwards in 32,26: "Our children, our wives our cattle and all our livestock will remain there in the cities of Gilead." Thus we learn that what a person says should reflect both common sense and moral values.
   Parashat Maasei
  אלה מסעי בני ישראל .  "These are the journeys of the children of Israel." Journeys are comparable to exiles in that they afford a person atonement for his sins. When someone decides to leave home in order to reside in a place where Torah learning is available, his journey may be described as at G–d's behest. It is not by accident that all the Torah scholars of earlier generations left home, i.e. exiled themselves in order to study. This principle can be summarized as צא ולמד, "leave home in order to study!"
   Parashat Devarim
  אלה הדברים . Moses admonished the Jewish people when he himself was close to death, even though he had taught and admonished them on a daily basis during all the years he had led them. Every leader of subsequent generations ought to model himself after Moses in this regard. Also every father and mother should treat his or her family as Jacob our patriarch did.
  יוסף עליכם ככם אלף פעמים .  "May the Lord increase you a thousand fold more" (1,11). I have discovered among the writing of the Arizal that he sees the numerical value of משה as equal to א-ל שדי (345) and that when that name is spelled fully (in words instead of in letters), that the total amounts to 1000. Rashi comments that this thousand-fold blessing is Moses' own, whereas G–d Himself would add an additional dimension to it. Rashi, in saying זו משלי, meant that he blessed them with all that was contained in his name i.e. 1000. (יוד ,434=דלת ,360=שין ,74=למד ,111=אלף=20 plus 1 for the name itself =1000).
  When Moses commenced to admonish the people, he spoke of their virtues and their accomplishments, that they were to present him with distinguished men who were to serve as judges, etc. (1,13). He did so because we know already from Solomon in Proverbs 9,8: אל תוכח לץ פן ישנאך, הוכח לחכם ויאהבך, "Do not rebuke the scoffer for he will hate you; rebuke a wise man and he will love you." You need to impress the person whom you wish to rebuke with the fact that you esteem him highly; otherwise he will not accept your rebuke. You must convince such a person that it is shameful for a person of his niveau to act in a manner that ruins his image.
  ותקרבון אלי כלכם .  Rashi comments that it was a mob that approached Moses. Later on, in 5,20, however, Moses says of the people ותקרבון אלי כל ראשי שבטיכם וזקניכם, "You approached me, all the heads of your tribes and your elders." At that time they asked Moses to become their intermediary since the people were afraid that being exposed to G–d's voice directly would become fatal for them. This latter approach (at the time of the revelation) was correct; children showed respect for their elders. Humility is one of the best traits a person can practice. Only by allowing others זכות קדימה, the right of precedence, can one prove that one deserves a measure of honour oneself.
  
  Vaetchanan
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named שלשה מתנות טובות.
  Commandment 416 enjoins us not to covet the possessions of our fellow-man because once one fixes one's mind on obtaining the possession coveted it will not be long before one initiates steps to execute such a wish. One's desire to possess the object one has focused on will not be suppressed by the owner's unwillingness to sell it or to accept some other form of compensation. One may not even desist in face of the owner physically defending his property against any takeover. One may eventually resort to violence to acquire the property coveted. This is why the Torah writes in 5,19: ולא תתאוה בית רעך וגו'.
  Maimonides writes that the different wording used here as compared to the Tenth Commandment in Exodus 20,14 are not to be viewed as a mere repetition of the same commandment differently worded. The prohibition of לא תתאוה is a separate prohibition. The prohibition of לא תחמוד enjoins one not to acquire someone else's possession either by paying for it or by not paying for it unless the owner voluntarily agrees to sell it. The additional prohibition in our פרשה refers to the contemplation of ownership of such objects of one's desire. We must not ask how the Torah can expect us to exercise control over our mind's desires. This is a spurious argument. Only wicked people or fools would argue in such a way. Man is a free agent and can control his desires. He can discipline himself not to desire what is forbidden. G–d is well aware of our innermost thoughts and will punish people for sinful thoughts, whereas He will reward people who have pure thoughts for up to two thousand generations. It is best if a person can train himself to have only pure thoughts, for they lead to laudable deeds.
  The מכילתא on Exodus 20,14 comments in a vein similar to what Maimonides has written. The commandment of לא תתאוה is seen as a preliminary stage to לא תחמוד. As long as the desire is not yet accompanied by plans to acquire the desired object, regardless of the owner's attitude, one is guilty only of לא תתאוה. As soon as one plans to obtain possession of the object of one's desire one becomes guilty of violating the commandment of לא תחמוד. How do I know that the plan to acquire someone else's property against his will eventually will lead to robbery? We know this from Michah 2,2: וחמדו שדות וגזלו , "They covet fields and seize them."
  Commandment 417 demands that we avow that though G–d may appear in different guises, i.e as a Judge or as a merciful Father, He is One (6,4).
  Commandment 418 legislates that we love the Lord our G–d, as per 6,5. I have explained the meaning of our love for G–d at length in my treatise בעשרה מאמרות. This commandment is in effect literally at all times. Whenever a person is preoccupied with advancing his ego in this world in any shape or form, he does so at the expense of neglecting his love for G–d and becomes guilty of neglecting to fulfil this commandment. His punishment will be severe. Only by constantly promoting the well-being of people and institutions dedicated to G–d and to Judaism does one consistently demonstrate one's love for G–d.
  Commandment 419 requires us to diligently teach the Torah to our children (6,7).
  Commandment 420 requires us to recite the קריאת שמע twice daily.
  Commandment 421 instructs us to put phylacteries on our arm.
  Commandment 422 instructs us to put phylacteries on our head.
  Commandment 423 instructs us to put a מזוזה on our door.
  Commandment 424 forbids us to put G–d to the test; the Torah (6,16) writes: לא תנסו את ה' אלוקיכם. What is meant is that one must not make exorbitant demands on G–d to prove Himself, such as demanding miracles from prophets who have rebuked us for our sins and who have previously legitimised themselves as prophets. The Torah quotes an example from the incident at מסה, where the people had demanded proof from Moses that G–d was in their midst (Exodus 17,7). We must not put the onus of proof on a prophet to show that G–d punishes the sinners and rewards the righteous.
  Commandment 425 forbids us to make covenants with any of the seven Canaanite nations; the Torah (7,2) writes: לא תכרות להם ברית.
  Commandment 426 forbids any display of kindness or mercy towards any idol worshippers. The Torah (7,2) writes: לא תחנם.
  Commandment 427 forbids intermarriage with any of these nations (7,23).
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The commandments mentioned in this פרשה all revolve around the main subject-matter of the portion, the three marvelous gifts G–d has given to the Jewish people. They are: The Torah, the Holy Land, and the Hereafter. The commandment to study and teach Torah refers to the gift of Torah. I have explained the mystical dimension of Torah study in my treatise on Tractate שבועות.
  The commandment to exterminate the seven Canaanite nations is directly connected with the sanctity of the Holy Land which is part of G–d Himself. G–d chose Israel as His nation because חלק ה' עמו, Israel is part of G–d's "share." You must appreciate something about the significance of these seven nations. Every single nation has its representative in the Celestial Regions. These representatives, usually known as שר, are also known as אלוהים אחרים "other deities." Due to its status as "G–d's share" Israel cleaves directly to Him, to part of what the Kabbalists call אצילות הבנין, the world of the "throne." It is from this domain that the 7 emanations of בנין evolve "downward" till they result in a physical world, מלכות. Each of the emanations comprises sub-categories of all ten emanations, representing all the concepts which the ten emanations symbolize. Thus we have a total of seventy for the seven emanations comprising בנין. Jacob came to Egypt with 70 people who formed the nucleus of the Jewish nation. These seventy are referred to in the Torah as a single נפש because they were the mystical dimension of this number seventy. The seven Canaanite nations between them also symbolize ten Gentile nations each, making a total of seventy, i.e. the well-known concept of the "seventy nations of the world." These seventy nations, however, do not represent the holiness which has its root in the world of אצילות, rather they represent the קליפות, the spiritual domain in which Satan is rooted. No wonder then that intermarriage with nations whose spiritual roots represent the חצוניות is forbidden. One must not even marry a convert from these nations. Intermarriage with other nations is prohibited only if the second party did not convert to Judaism first.
  The Arizal explains the reason that the Torah (Deut. 20,16) has demanded that the Jewish people kill every member of these seven Canaanite nations: לא תחיה כל נשמה. When the Torah instructs us how to relate to other nations (such as שעיר, i.e. אדום, עמון, and מואב however), it only commanded (Deut. 2,9 et al) the Jewish people under Moses not to make war against those nations. The seven Canaanite nations represent seven קליפות, i.e. שבעה כלים שנשברו, negative aspects of the seven emanations which comprise what we called בנין, the constructive forces enabling the creation of a perfect physical universe. Although, as we explained in connection with the name "Samael," even Satan had his root in something holy, i.e. א-ל, the spiritual decline of these descendants of the original Canaan, the cursed, was such that no vestige of sanctity was left in them. This meant automatically that no נשמה, spiritually elevated soul of theirs, would survive. The other three nations whose land G–d had promised as part of ארץ ישראל still retained vestiges of holiness. These were the קיני, קניזי and קדמוני, whose lands G–d had also promised Abraham (Genesis 15,19) when He promised us the Holy Land. These nations had their origin in the "upper" three emanations. The promise that we will inherit their lands in the future can be fulfilled when the last vestiges of sanctity will have vanished from these three nations. At such a time the commandment not to let a soul survive will also be applicable to those three nations. The Arizal wants to equate the three nations Edom, Ammon and Moab with the Keynee, Kenizi and Kadmoni respectively. The very names of these three nations allude to their having had a superior origin, שעיר alludes to Deut. 33,2, where G–d is portrayed as coming from Se-ir to give Israel the Torah. The name Moab means "from the אב, "the father," another allusion to the higher emanation חכמה, seat of undiluted holiness. The name Ammon is close to the word נועם, an allusion to the emanation בינה. שעיר is none other than אדום. The seven kings whom the Torah describes in the Torah (Genesis 36,31-39) as having ruled in the land of Edom before Israel had a king were not part of that nation. Apparently they had subjugated the country. This is why the Torah, when telling us that a particular king ruled over Edom, informs us of his country of origin. We are told in 2,20: והעמונים קראו להם זמזומים, that the Ammonites called the Refa-im Zamzumim. The word זמזום is derived from זמם, planned, thought out. In other words these רפאים had the "superior" emanation חכמה somewhere in their background. Their descendants were the mixed multitude who joined the Jewish people at the Exodus and converted to Judaism. This explains why they still had enough of a spark of sanctity in them to recognize the spiritual rejuvenation that was taking place at the time of the Exodus. On the other hand, anyone who plans something evil and uses his superior intelligence negatively, is similarly descended from them. The name סיחון, one of the kings of the Canaanite nations, suggests the word סייח, a young ass. The Hebrew word for donkey is חמור, the same letters as חומר, matter. The Canaanites were concerned with matter to the exclusion of the spirit. The name Og, king of Bashan, evokes similar considerations. The Arizal concludes that because the lands of these kingdoms were situated East of the river Jordan which symbolized the foundation of the feminine aspect in the emanations, these kingdoms could not have been subdued by anyone but Moses. Spiritually speaking, Moses represented the "middle" line between the left (feminine) side of the diagram of the emanations and the right (masculine) side. Moses was the carrier of the symbol of the Holy Covenant. He broke the tablets and salvaged the sanctity contained in them. When the Torah describes the defeat of the שני מלכי האמורי, "the two kings of the Emorite" (3,8), the first letters of these three words form the name משה. G–d said to Moses (2,31): ראה החילותי תת לפניך את סיחון, "See, I have begun to hand over to you Sichon, etc." This means that the patron of this kingdom, the שר, had been subjugated by Moses. The land of Israel is perceived as the "feminine" part of the union between the people of Israel and its land. Taking possession of the land of Israel, ביאת הארץ, is a euphemism for the union between Israel and its land as husband and wife. [I have rephrased some of this. Ed.]
  The seven Canaanite nations whose שרים are their gods, אלוהי העמים, are all אלילים, forms of idols. The same applies in different degrees to all the seventy nations of the world. Intermarriage with them is prohibited since all of them are liberally tainted by the pollutant introduced into Eve when she mated with the original serpent. This is why the Torah (29,17) describes the gods of these seven Caananite nations as שורש פורה ראש ולענה "a root sprouting poison weed and wormwood." Whereas intermarriage with these nations is prohibited even if they have converted to Judaism, the commandment לא תחנם, not to have pity on them or favor them in any other way, applies to all idol worshipers equally. The souls of such people are not rooted in the domain of חמלה or חנינה, pity or compassion; hence they do not qualify for pity and compassion on the part of the Jewish people. Their origin is in a domain of a very thick קליפה, peel, skin, i.e. something which effectively isolates them from the effect of radiation from holy sources. Thus far the Arizal.
  מצות אחדות השם . I have explained both this commandment as well as the commandment to love G–d, to put on phylacteries both on one's arm and one's head, as well the need to affix a parchment containing the references to these commandments on our respective doorposts. Though each of these commandments has its own mystique, all of them are expressions of our close attachment to G–d. This דביקות ה' may be understood as the path that leads to the third great gift G–d has bestowed upon us, the Hereafter. The true closeness to G–d is achieved only in the Celestial Regions after we have attained everlasting life. This is both the "place" and the "time" by which we shall acquire a much deeper understanding of G–d. As a symbolism of the knowledge to be acquired we put one תפילה on the arm opposite the heart, the seat of most of our wisdom. We put the other תפילה on the head, the seat of the brain, our intelligence. Both our thoughts and our heart must be pure, devoted to the service of our Creator.
  Performance of different מצות represents allusions to varying levels of our attachment to the Hereafter. In this regard the act of affixing a מזוזה ranks higher than the putting on of the תפילין. The act of expressing our belief in the unity of G–d as expressed by reciting the קריאת שמע including the paragraph about our love for G–d represents a still higher expression of our feelings in this regard. After all, the Hereafter is an abstract world, and belief is something spiritual, abstract. We find that the Hereafter itself comprises three different levels, just as the commandments alluding to it which we fulfill contain hints of the Hereafter on three different levels. We are basing ourselves on the three different expressions used by our sages when they speak about עולם הבא, the World to Come. Sometimes our sages use the expression יש לו חלק לעולם הבא, "he has a share in the World to Come." Other times the sages speak about someone being מזומן לעולם הבא, "invited to the World to Come." On still other occasions the sages use the expression מובטח לו שהוא בן העולם הבא, "he is assured of being a member in the World to Come."
  I have found among the various booklets of the Arizal that he defines the differences in these levels of the Hereafter as follows: "Know that the righteous enters into a marriage (union) both in this world and after his death. Every צדיק does so in accordance with his individual spiritual powers. There are also צדיקים who enter into a union (embracing the Hereafter) in this world such as בניהו בן יהוידע. (the exploits of this warrior who was among David's body-guards are listed in Samuel II chapter 23). Some enter into an union with the Celestial partner, i.e. אבא ואמא, already while in this world, since in those regions unions can be consecrated only through what we know as קדוש השם, martyrdom by glorifying the name of G–d. An example of this kind of זווג, union with one's partner in the Hereafter, were the Ten Martyrs tortured to death by the Romans including Rabbi Akiva. The same rule applies during any period Jews suffer religious persecution and defiantly go to their death as Jews." When we recite the קריאת שמע we experience a faint echo of such an affinity to the Hereafter. The name of בניהו בן יהוידע also alludes to the emanation בינה יה-ו י-ה למעלה. This is the deeper meaning of בניהו being described in Samuel II 23,20 as בן איש חי, someone who had established his claim to life in the Hereafter. When said בניהו is reported as having killed a lion, הארי, the numerical value of the word הארי=216 is equal to three times the fully spelled Ineffable Name 72. The prophet describes this encounter with the lion as having occurred on יום השלג, which has its own mystical dimension. When our sages say in Sanhedrin 90a: כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא, they mean that the soul of every Jew has access to the Hereafter. When the sages use the expression that someone is מזומן, "invited," they refer to the future when the light of the moon has become as brilliant as the light of the sun. This is the future we have in mind when we add to the words of the שמע ישראל the 24 letters of the formula ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד, "May the Majesty of His glorious kingdom be blessed forever." Nowadays when we are in exile the twenty-four letters in that formula are reversed i.e. have become ד"ך. This is the mystical dimension of Psalms 74,21: אל ישוב דך נכלם, "Let not the downtrodden turn away disappointed." When the Holy Temple was standing, G–d's Majesty consisted of 24 letters; when it will be rebuilt it will again consist of 24 letters. This is meant in Isaiah 54,12: ושמתי כד-כד שמשותך, "I shall make your suns twice 24." [The standard rendition of this verse is: "I shall make your battlements of rubies." Ed.] During Solomon's reign the moon was considered as having reached its zenith, i.e. in the history of the Jewish people whose fate is compared to the fate of the moon. This is what is alluded to by the 24 letters in the formula we recite when saying the קריאת שמע, when we express our absolute faith in this future display of G–d's Majesty. This number 24 equals one third of the possible amount of light. In the messianic future the full extent of the light, i.e. the other two thirds i.e. the ones alluded to in Isaiah 54,12 as כדכד,=48 will be revealed. When combining the three times 24 we have the number 72, i.e. the Ineffable Name spelled fully as words. In other words, G–d's name will be whole when this light will be displayed in all its power. The mystical dimension of the destruction of the Temple is alluded to in its name. It is called בית, house. The numerical value of בית is 412. By adding the number 2 for the two kinds of light it represents we get 414. This is the numerical value of אור, light, multiplied by two, i.e. 207 x2. The removal (destruction) of the בית, robbed us of two thirds of the light in store for us. The root of this light remains in the domain of אצילות. In those regions the only ones who can derive pleasure from it are those who unite in a זיווג, marital "union," the creatures we know as אבא ואמא. Anyone who will be privileged to do so in the seventh millennium (the millennium during which according to Talmudic sources this world will undergo destruction prior to its re-emergence, totally renewed) are the people our sages have referred to as having been invited to the World to Come. This is the secret meaning of the voice from the Celestial Regions which called out to Rabbi Akiva: "hail to you for you have been invited to life in the World to Come" (Berachot 61b). When the sages speak of someone being assured of the World to Come, i.e. מובטח לו שהוא בן עולם הבא, this is the highest level of life in the World to Come. People of the caliber of בניהו בן יהוידע are slated for such a level of experience in the עולם הבא. People of this caliber experienced death on earth only because mankind as such was sentenced to such a fate, not because they individually became guilty of death. On the contrary, these people used their stay on earth in order to totally perfect their personalities.
  ואתחנן אל ה' בעת ההיא . Our פרשה begins by extolling the virtues of the Holy Land, i.e. the second of G–d's gifts to the Jewish people. The atmosphere of ארץ ישראל which our sages (Baba Batra 158) have described as contributing to one's knowledge and intelligence is a necessary step for someone who wishes to acquire the "crown" of Torah, i.e. become a true Torah scholar. We have it on the authority of Isaiah 2,3 that: כי מציון תצא תורה, ודבר ה' מירושלים, "Torah comes forth from Zion and the word of G–d from Jerusalem." Thence it proceeds to the Celestial counterpart of ארץ ישראל, also known as עולם הבא. We know that this is so from Isaiah 60,21: ועמך כולם צדיקים לעולם יירשו ארץ, "As to your people, they are all righteous and will inherit ארץ forever." This is the context in which the land of Israel is mentioned at the beginning of our portion. The middle and last sections of the portion deal with the subject of how the Torah was given to the Jewish people.
  Let me now arrange the three "gifts" in their proper sequence. In 3,25: "Let me please cross and see this good land," Moses describes the nature of the land as being "good." Afterwards, he begins to extol the gift of Torah and the fact that studying it will lead to observing its commandments. 4,1 begins: "And now, O Israel, give heed to the laws and rules that I am instructing you to observe see, I have taught you social laws and statutes….for what great nation is there that has G–d close at hand as is the Lord our G–d whenever we call upon Him? Or what great nation has laws and rules as perfect as all this Teaching that I set before you this day?" Following this description of the gift of Torah, Moses continues by recalling the overwhelming experience of G–d's revelation at Mount Sinai when He gave Israel the Torah. This is followed by 4,25 when Moses looks into the future, warning the nation not to abandon the Torah which was a gift from Heaven. 
  This is followed by a paragraph outlining the laws of the city of refuge. In chapter five Moses addresses the whole people, recalling in detail the giving of the Torah and the Ten Commandments. In other words, most of this portion is concerned with the gift of the Torah. We find allusions to the World to Come in this last chapter recalling the giving of the Ten Commandments. Moses reminds the people (5,22) that they had said to him: "And now, why should we die and have the great fire consume us, for if we continue to listen to the sound of the voice of the Lord our G–d we will surely die?" Rabbi Moses Almosnino explains that the Israelites said: "G–d has shown us His Majesty, etc., that terrestrial man can survive hearing G–d speak to him. Since this is so, why does He not do away with the experience of death altogether? Had we not undergone the experience at Mount Sinai we would have thought that death is a necessary prelude to our experiencing a revelation by G–d. Now that we have experienced such a revelation without death, what further use is death? Now death can only become an anti-climax, a negative experience! Granted that G–d will not let us experience death as a negative experience we must conclude that after physical death further, more profound revelations are in store for us! If that is so, we will accept death very willingly" The people understood therefore that there must be a World to Come, a world which man participates in after his body has died. This World to Come contains several layers. Every person who merits to become part of it does so according to his respective spiritual level attained on earth. The paragraph commencing with שמע ישראל ה' אלוקינו ה' אחד, alludes to this עולם הבא, when G–d and we will be truly united. That which in this world is only an object of our faith, our belief, will then have become reality. We will see it with our eyes and will rejoice.
  This is followed by the paragraph starting with: והיה כי יביאך ה' אלוקיך אל הארץ. Even though on the פשט level this paragraph speaks about terrestrial ארץ ישראל, the paragraph contains allusions to the ארץ ישראל למעלה, the corresponding land of Israel in the Celestial Regions, the land of everlasting life. When the Torah continues in 6,12: "Be careful not to forget, etc.," this must be understood along the lines Rashi explained Leviticus 26,12: "I shall walk amongst you and I will be your G–d, whereas you will be My people." Rashi says that it means G–d will go for a stroll with us in גן עדן as if He were one of us and we would have no cause to be afraid of Him. To emphasize this point, Leviticus 26,13 continues: "I am the Lord your G–d, etc." We are left to explain why the Torah interrupted the various paragraphs dealing with our having received the Torah with the report that Moses proceeded to set aside three of the cities of refuge which would serve would-be murderers as an escape from revenge-seeking relatives of the victim.
  I have found a beautiful commentary concerning this amongst the writings of the Arizal. We must understand why Moses bothered to set aside these three cities, seeing they could not perform their function until the other three cities of refuge on the West Bank of the Jordan had been set aside also (Numbers 35,13; compare Makkot 9). When we understand the Arizal's commentary on the problem of the cities of refuge, we will also understand why the Torah interrupted the report about the gift of the Torah to the Jewish people by mentioning already at this point that Moses set aside the three cities of refuge which were to be on the East Bank of the Jordan. The Ari zal sees in Moses' action an attempt at rehabilitation for when he had committed manslaughter and had taken it upon himself to slay the Egyptian who had tortured a Jew (Exodus 2,12). He had considered this killing in the category of a murder inadvertently committed because he had felt at the time that he was performing a מצוה by doing so. The first letters of the words הירדן מזרחה שמה, which describe what Moses did, form the acronym משה. The following words, אשר ירצח את רעהו are also an allusion to Moses. We have already described that Moses was the re-incarnation of Abel. The Torah here alludes to the first murder i.e. fratricide, when Cain slew his brother Abel. This is also alluded to in Exodus 2,11, when the Torah describes Moses as observing an Egyptian man: מכה איש עברי מאחיו, "torturing a Jewish man, one of his brothers." The Torah hints that the Egyptian was a former brother of Moses, i.e. a re-incarnation of Cain. In this instance the evil which had been part of Cain's character had re-surfaced in the character of this Egyptian. We have explained on another occasion that the נפש of Cain, i.e. his lowest spiritual part, was re-incarnated in the body of this Egyptian, whereas Cain's רוח, the superior part of his soul, was re-incarnated in the body of Yitro. The highest part of Cain's soul, i.e. the נשמה, was re-incarnated in the body of Korach. Korach made the mistake of quarrelling with Moses; this resulted in his גלגול failing to achieve its ultimate purpose. Yitro was of mixed feelings. When he became aware that he was wrong, had sinned, he converted to Judaism. At the end of the paragraph dealing with the cities of refuge the Torah writes: וזאת התורה אשר שם משה. This means that Moses determined the need to set aside these three cities of refuge at this time for his own sake.
  Perhaps I may be so bold as to say that Moses personally observed what Avtalyon in Avot 1,11 warned against when he said: הזהרו בדבריכם שמא תחובו חובת גלות, "Be very careful with your words lest you become guilty of having to exile yourselves." We have another Mishnah, Avot 4,14, in which Rabbi Nehorai warns that it is better to exile oneself to a place where Torah is studied. When Moses saw that he was guilty of exile, he decided to become a constant source of Torah so that any place that he found himself at would fit the description of מקום תורה. By positioning the paragraph about the cities of refuge, i.e. exile, between two paragraphs extolling the gift of Torah he vicariously complied with the advice of Rabbi Nehorai.
  We have spoken about the three gifts G–d bestowed upon the Jewish people, i.e. the land of Israel, the Torah, and the Hereafter. Moses received the best possible portions of all of these gifts. I will explain how these respective gifts can be assimilated on different levels. The allusion to the World to Come is mentioned in the Torah chronologically, i.e. after the mention of ארץ ישראל and תורה when the Israelites asked: "why should we die, etc". The Israelites said to Moses: קרב אתה ושמע, "you approach and listen!" G–d also had said to Moses (5,27): ואתה פה עמוד עמדי, "you stand here next to Me!" The letters in the word אתה form the acronym ארץ-תורה-הבא. Even though Moses never entered terrestrial ארץ ישראל he did enter the equivalent of the terrestrial ארץ ישראל in the Celestial Regions even while his soul still lived inside his body. The Zohar in its commentary on פרשת ויחי explains that something similar happened to Jacob. I have copied the comments of the Zohar in my commentary on פרשת ויחי. The reason Jacob succeeded to be buried in terrestrial ארץ ישראל, was due to his close affinity to Celestial ארץ ישראל which represents the attribute of מלכות. What Jacob achieved only after his death, Moses already achieved during his lifetime because he was איש אלהים as he had demonstrated when he ascended to the region of Matronita, described in Pardes Rimonim as the guardian of Gan Eden. After Moses died he ascended to a still higher region called יובל עליון, part of the emanation of בינה. This is what we had in mind when we said that Moses succeeded in penetrating or assimilating the innermost secrets of the three concepts ארץ ישראל, תורה, עולם הבא.
  In light of the aforesaid we can understand a puzzling question posed by Rabbi Chanina son of Rabbi Agil who asked Rabbi Chiya son of Rabbi Abba in Baba Kama 54b why the word טוב, "good," never appeared in the text of the first set of tablets (Ten Commandments), whereas it does appear in the text of the second set of tablets. Rabbi Chiya answered that before raising the question why the word טוב appears, Rabbi Chanina should have asked if the word טוב appears in the second version of the Ten Commandments. Rabbi Chiya added that he was not at all sure that the word טוב does in fact appear in the text of the second tablets. He therefore referred the questioner to Rabbi Tanchum son of Chanilai who was a regular companion of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, an expert in aggadic matters. Rabbi Chanina went to ask Rabbi Tanchum who told him that he had not personally heard anything on this from Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, but that he had heard from Rabbi Shemuel the son of Rabbi Tanchum the maternal uncle of Rabbi Acha bar Chanina that the reason the word טוב did not appear was that these tablets were ultimately going to be smashed. To the rejoinder: "so what?" Rabbi Ashi explained that the Rabbi meant that the symbolism in the destruction of the word טוב would have left a residue of permanent hopelessness among the Jewish people. The obvious question that arises is: how could a learned Rabbi not know whether the word טוב appeared in the text of the second set of tablets. This is something that any student in an elementary school can check! Besides, why did the questioner not quote the verse he had in mind to demonstrate that it did in fact exist? Also, what is the relevance of the question: "Before you ask me about one thing ask me about another?" Furthermore, why is the statement that the Rabbi "did not know" repeated twice?
  The subject of the three gifts the Jewish people received must be understood on two levels. One level is the manifest one, i.e. נגלה, a gift which everyone can see as having been received. The other level is what we call the נסתר the hidden aspect of these gifts. We find that the word Tov is spelled with different vowels on different occasions. Most of the time it is spelled with the vowel חולם i.e. Tov, whereas sometimes it is spelled with the vowel שורוק i.e. Tuv. 
  Whenever it is spelled as Tov the reference is to the manifest good. When it is spelled Tuv the reference is to the hidden good. [The author discussed this in Parshat Ba'halotecha, in connection with Moses' offer to Yitro to join the Jewish people. Ed.] In connection with Torah we find the word spelled טוב with both the vowels חולם such as in Proverbs 4,2: כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם, as well as in Psalms 119,72: טוב לי תורת פיך. It is also spelled with a שורוק as in Psalms 119,66: טוב טעם ודעת למדני. In connection with ארץ ישראל we find ארץ טובה in Deut. 8,7 spelled with the vowel חולם, whereas in Isaiah 1,19 we are promised by the prophet "טוב הארץ תאכלו," spelled with the vowel שורוק. With respect to עולם הבא, we find in Deut. 5,16: למען ייטב לך, which our sages (Kidushin 39b) explain as a reference to a world which is totally good. 
  We also find in Psalms 31,20: מה רב טובך אשר צפנת ליריאך, "How abundant is the good that You have in store for those who fear You," where the word טוב is spelled with the vowel שורוק. The relationship between the words Tov and Tuv may be understood as similar to the difference between "good" and "best." What is manifest is termed "good" what is hidden is termed "best." That which is "hidden" from our eyes is what is visible in a domain where the original light which G–d withdrew from earth to the Celestial Regions after Adam's sin is active. Man can experience both levels of "good" also in this world. In the future, however, there will no longer be two kinds of "good," because the "hidden" light will have become manifest. All "good" will then be spelled with the vowel חולם. There will be no reason to hide the תוכיות, "the content of the innermost regions." It is this future our sages had in mind when they referred to part of the World to Come as עולם הנעלם or עולם שכולו טוב. They found the verse in Deut. 5,16 difficult because the word ייטב in that verse is derived from the word tov spelled with the vowel חולם. In view of this they could not understand why the Torah should refer to the World to Come by spelling the word tov with this vowel. They ultimately came to the conclusion that the reference must be to a world which had become "כולו טוב," had achieved its ultimate objective, a world which is totally good. Whereas the verse in Psalm 31,20 speaks of a time prior to this ultimately good world here on earth and therefore uses the word טוב spelled with the vowel שורוק referring to the hidden good, the word ייטב foresees an even higher level of עולם הבא.
  To get back to the puzzling discussion in Baba Kama 54. Rabbi Chiya bar Abba understood the question of Rabbi Chanina ben Agil as a twofold one. If he would give one kind of answer this would raise a new problem. If he gave the other answer it would also result in a further question. If the mention of "good" in 5,16, i.e. in the second set of the tablets, referred to "good" in the World to Come, this kind of "good" should have been mentioned in the first set of the tablets. If, on the other hand, the word ייטב in 5,16 refers to the good to be experienced in this world and it is therefore logical that it was omitted in the first set of tablets since these tablets represented the entire Torah [and we do not expect reward for Torah observance in this world Ed.], it should also have been omitted from the text of the second set of tablets. Rabbi Chiya replied that before assuming glibly that what was written in the second set of tablets referred to a "true good," one must first establish if that indeed is what the word ייטב in 5,16 is all about. He added that he himself had another query to which he did not have the answer, namely the exact meaning of "true good," הטוב האמיתי. He meant that he did not know whether to understand the word ייטב in 5,16 as being spelled with the vowel שורוק and thereby referring to the "hidden" good, or whether it was spelled with the vowel חולם and referred to manifest "good." In the latter case the question why it was not written in the first set of tablets is much stronger. If the only reason it was left out from the text of the first set of tablets was because it was in a domain which no human eye has ever beheld, then the very need to give the Jewish people a second set of tablets had itself removed such "good" even further from any human eye due to the sin of the golden calf. It should therefore certainly not have been written on the second set of tablets at all. This is why Rabbi Chiya sent the questioner to Rabbi Tanchum. Eventually the response was received that it had been foreseen that the first set of tablets would be smashed. What this meant was that there was both a נגלה, revealed, and a נסתר, hidden element in the tablets. The tablets i.e. the material, represented the נגלה aspect, whereas the letters i.e. the spiritual part, represented the נסתר aspect of the Ten Commandments. Our sages (Pesachim 87) are on record that when Moses smashed the tablets the letters "flew away." These letters were then stored in the Celestial Regions together with other things which are all "good." At the beginning of Creation, when G–d had created light and had surveyed His activity (Genesis 1,4), He described the light as "good." At that point there was only a single טוב, i.e. it was כולו טוב. G–d then took a look at what the wicked would do in the future and He decided to hide this "good" for a future when the wicked would no longer be active. This original light had returned to earth at the time of מתן תורה, but when the Jewish people committed the sin of the golden calf Moses broke the tablets as a sign that the recently restored original light was once more being withdrawn. There will come a future, however, when this light will be restored and the world will then qualify for the description כולו טוב, totally, absolutely good. The word "good" appears as part of the text of the second tablets then to serve as a beacon of hope for us of this future we can still look forward to. Had the word appeared first on the first set of tablets and been smashed, the impression might have been created that there would never again be a return to the idyllic state of affairs at the time G–d had created the absolute good, i.e. the original light. The absolute "good" is an allusion to the Unity of the Creator; were one to believe that there would not be a future of "absolute good," this would be tantamount to giving up on G–d's great Name ever becoming manifest again. This concludes our "overview" of the three great gifts we have received from G–d. Now let us turn to the details of these gifts.
  The beginning of the פרשה speaks about the gift of the land of Israel which is a patently "good" gift both in its manifest and in its hidden aspects. The land is situated "opposite" a corresponding ארץ ישראל in the Celestial Regions. Both the terrestrial land of Israel and the Celestial land of Israel has areas of varying degrees of sanctity. We have learned (Keilim 1,6) about the ten respective layers of sanctity of terrestrial ארץ ישראל culminating in the Holy of Holies. Moses thought that the lands of the kings Sichon and Og, i.e. the East Bank of the Jordan, already contained some level of the sanctity common to the whole of ארץ ישראל. We will explain why he thought so later on. A leader who leads the people to take possession of the Holy Land acquires great spiritual advantages. The authority of Jewish leaders is not of the same caliber as that of the Gentile kings or rulers. While the Gentiles derive their authority from physical power and material attributes, this is not so in the case of leaders of the Jewish people. Their authority is rather of the caliber of Heavenly authority. To be more specific: Leaders are appointed according to superior intellectual qualities, according to the ability of the individual in question to lead the people in Torah observance. As soon as the first Jewish king, Saul, was anointed king by the prophet Samuel he was granted Holy Spirit, as we know from Samuel I 10,11-12: הגם שאול בנביאים, "Saul too has joined the ranks of the prophets." One of the reasons the kingdom was transferred to David was that there was no one as qualified as David as far as Torah scholarship was concerned. G–d was with him to such an extent that any religious rulings pronounced by David were always accepted by his colleagues as binding. In addition, no one excelled like David in singing the praises of the Lord. These are the considerations that made Moses so desirous of remaining the leader who would bring the Jewish people into the Holy Land. He knew that if he were to be granted this request he would further perfect his personality, would be granted even greater insights by G–d. He wanted to fulfill those commandments which can only be fulfilled on the soil of the land of Israel, and he was certain that by doing so he would ascend still higher spiritually (Sotah 14a). 
  In the words of our sages there: "Surely Moses did not plead with G–d to let him enter the Holy Land merely to taste its fruit!" While on this subject let me explain Rashi's comment on 3,24. He divides his comment into פשט and דרוש. As far as the דרוש is concerned I find it difficult to follow him because, if he is correct, the Torah should have written אתה החילות והראית, "You have begun and shown me." I therefore prefer to deal with the פשט part of his commentary: that Moses felt that because he had been allowed to defeat the kings Sichon and Og on the East bank of the Jordan, this was a sign that G–d had rescinded His decree (Numbers 20,12) that he, Moses would not be allowed to lead Israel to the Holy Land. He considered the lands ruled by these kings as part of the land of Israel. Rashi quotes 2,31 where G–d had said: ראה החילותי תת לפניך את סיחון as proof that Moses thought that the decree had been rescinded. If Rashi's reasoning is correct, why did the Torah add the words בעת ההיא "at that time," in 3,23?
   Rashi as well as other commentators also explain the words רב לך אל תוסף דבר אלי עוד בדבר הזה "Enough for you; do not continue to speak to me about this subject" in a variety of ways. Seeing that so many commentators have had their say on this subject, I will add something of my own. This was part of the wars of conquest. The fact that Moses distributed these lands to some of the tribes who made their homes there proved that it was part of the land of Israel. If G–d did not allow all the land to be conquered by Joshua surely this was because He had relented from the decree in Numbers 20,12! Moses had good reason to believe this. When Moses quoted G–d (3,27) as having said to him: "You will not cross this Jordan," he was guilty of an inaccuracy. The Torah had not mentioned this. When he quoted G–d as saying: "instruct Joshua, imbue him with strength and courage, for he shall go across at the head of the people, and he shall allot to them the land that you only see," this too is something that seems quite irrelevant at this juncture. Moses said: "You have begun," i.e. the beginning of conquest and distribution of the land of Israel has been carried out by me. Why did You not let Joshua do the whole thing seeing that he is prepared for this task? Moses' reasoning here is similar to what he had said to G–d (Exodus 4,13) at the burning bush: שלח נא ביד תשלח, which the Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel understands as a reference to Pinchas, i.e. the prophet Elijah who will proclaim the advent of the final Redemption in the future. Moses had felt then that Pinchas was the suitable candidate to lead the Jewish people into the Holy Land also on the first occasion. When considering the fact that he had been allowed to commence the conquest and the distribution of the land we understand why Moses thought that the decree to deny him this task had been lifted. Although Moses had been told the exact boundaries of ארץ ישראל in Numbers 34,3-12, and these boundaries did not include the lands formerly occupied by Sichon and Og, Moses thought that there had been no need for the Torah to list those boundaries as the lands had already been distributed Moses was convinced that these lands were part of the Holy Land, and he was proven right when the Jews returning from the Babylonian exile sanctified them. Moses surmised that the reason that G–d had rescinded His decree against his leading the Jewish people in the conquest could only have been to enable him to acquire still greater insights into the phenomenon of a G–d who rules in Heaven and on Earth as described in 3,24. As a result of such considerations he prayed: "Please let me cross and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan, the good Mountain and the Lebanon" (3,25). He prayed to remain the leader. The expression אעברה is basically the same as when Moses said in Numbers 27,17 that the leader of the Jewish people should be at their head when going to war and should be the last one to return from war. Moses' major concern was not that he wanted to continue to exercise authority, but that this authority would be the means whereby he would gain greater insights. As a result of Moses, Israel's leader, gaining greater spiritual insights, the spiritual level of the whole people would also be raised. When we look at Moses' request in this light we appreciate that he asked not only for himself but also for his people.
  He continued by emphasizing ואראה את הארץ הטובה, "So that I may see the good land." I have already mentioned that there are many different levels of sanctity. Even though Moses thought that the lands of Sichon and Og were already part of the Holy Land, he was well aware that the West bank was of a higher level of sanctity than the East bank of the Jordan. Terrestrial ארץ ישראל is situated "opposite" ארץ ישראל של מעלה, Celestial Eretz Yisrael. The most holy part of terrestrial ארץ ישראל may be presumed to be "opposite" the holiest part of Celestial ארץ ישראל. Moses longed for the holiest part of ארץ ישראל למטה in order to be closest to the holiest part of ארץ ישראל למעלה. This is why he spoke of "the good Mountain, Lebanon," meaning the Temple Mount and site of the Holy of Holies on that Mount. He wished to be able to fulfill the commandments calling for one's presence in the Holy Land and, more specifically, in the Temple. When Moses continued (3,26) ויתעבר ה' בי למענכם, this means that G–d denied Moses' request precisely because granting it would result in the whole people being spiritually raised to a level even with Moses who had despised the angel. Israel was simply not worthy of such a level on its own merits. Only under Joshua, who enjoyed the assistance of the angel (Joshua 5,14) who introduced himself with the words "now I have come," could the conquest of the remainder of the land proceed. Moses had rejected that very angel in Exodus 33,15 as an inadequate level of Divine guidance. Moses therefore had to tell the people that his departure was due to their not meriting direct Divine guidance such they had enjoyed during his leadership. The scholars who specialize in רשומות, see in the respective first letters of the words גם בי התאנף ה' בגללכם an allusion to גרשוני מסתפח בנחלת ה' "G–d has expelled me from participating in His heritage."
  When G–d told Moses not to belabor the point any further, we must understand this reply on two levels, as G–d addressing Himself to two arguments. First G–d addressed Moses' desire to enter terrestrial ארץ ישראל in order to fulfill מצות התלויות בארץ. Concerning this request he told Moses "רב לך." Rashi explains this as G–d telling Moses that there is a great deal more in store for him where he was going (עולם הבא) than he could hope to achieve by performing commandments in the land of Israel on earth. These words of Rashi need further elucidation. 
  My late father of blessed memory has provided me with a brilliant insight into the words of Rashi (author talking). Briefly, he said that man has to perfect himself, i.e. his 248 organs and 365 tendons by performing 248 positive and 365 negative commandments. This is obviously impossible for any individual.  [The author elaborated on this in his introduction.] Even a Moses could not fulfill all these commandments personally. As an example, he could not perform the priestly duties because he was not a priest. Numerous other commandments, such as a levirate marriage, simply did not present themselves for him to fulfil. We have therefore explained that the only way a person can gain credit for fulfilling these commandments is when he studies their details with a view to fulfilling them if given the opportunity. This Moses had already done to the best of his ability. Not being allowed to enter terrestrial ארץ ישראל would therefore not deprive him of these merits and the resultant new spiritual insights. G–d assured Moses then that he had already been credited with the merits of having fulfilled all of the commandments he had been unable to fulfill in person. Concerning Moses' second consideration, that of gaining a deeper understanding of the manner in which G–d guides the universe, etc., something which he thought the atmosphere of the land of Israel would provide, G–d said: אל תוסף. Whereas it is true that living in terrestrial ארץ ישראל adds to one's understanding of Celestial ארץ ישראל as far as Moses was concerned he had already reached the limits of what man on earth could achieve, even in the Holy Land. He had qualified as the "husband" of Matronita, a symbol of the attribute of מלכות ארץ ישראל של מעלה, as we have explained previously as the meaning of בכל ביתי נאמן הוא, "He is fully trusted in all parts of My house" (Numbers 12,7).
  עלה ראש הפסגה ושא עיניך ימה וצפונה ותימנה ומזרחה. In this verse (4,27) G–d begins to explain to Moses that he had erred when he thought that his being allowed to defeat Sichon and Og was proof that He had rescinded His decree against his leading the Jewish people in their conquest of the West bank of the Jordan. G–d wanted to show Moses with his own eyes that the lands of Sichon and Og were not part of the Holy land, i.e. the area of 400 by 400 Parsot that are traditionally considered the area of ארץ ישראל (Rashi Numbers 17,8). Moses could encompass a tremendous area with his eyes. This is why the Torah uses the extra word בעיניך. When someone is told to raise his eyes and see, it is clear that he is meant to use his eyes to see with. The Torah wanted us to know that Moses' eyes were special. Only he was able to see the whole extent of the land of Israel with his physical eyes, unassisted by something supernatural. He could convince himself that the 400 square Parsot made up the land west of the Jordan, without including any part of the lands formerly owned by Sichon and Og. The מלחמת מצוה, the "holy war" to conquer those 400 square Parsot across the river Jordan, was a task wholly reserved for Joshua. G–d's decree had not been rescinded. G–d added that He would actually have allowed Joshua also to lead in the conquest of the lands of Sichon and Og although they did not belong to ארץ ישראל proper, had it not been for the need to strengthen Joshua by visual example, as described in 4,28. Once Joshua had witnessed how Moses had successfully defeated the mighty kings Sichon and Og and conquered their lands he would be able to summon the courage to lead the people of Israel in their battles with the 31 kings on the West bank of the Jordan. This is why the Torah had mentioned at the end of the last פרשה, (3,21) that Moses had commanded Joshua not to be afraid since he had seen with his own eyes what the Lord had done to those two kings.
  The words: ויתעבר ה' בי למענכם in 3,26 also contain a mystical dimension. This also touches upon the subject of the great gift of Torah G–d has bestowed on the Jewish people. I have found the following comment among the writings of a great Kabbalistic scholar Rabbi Chayim, the leading disciple of the Arizal. [I will paraphrase his comments Ed.] "As a consequence of Moses' accepting the mixed multitude as converts, he became involved in the סוד העיבור, the calculations pertaining to leap months, leap years, etc., as well as their halachic implications of the time conceptions can take place. One of these calculations involves determining when a Jubilee year occurs (the fiftieth year after the conclusion of seven periods of seven years). G–d had not wanted to accept this mixed multitude as converts. Had they not been accepted, Israel would neither have experienced death nor exile, since the acceptance of the Tablets would have signified everlasting life, as our sages (Eruvin 54 on Exodus 32,16) have taught us when they said: אל תקרא חרות אלא חירות, "do not read 'engraved' i.e. Charut but 'Free' (from death) i.e. Cheyrut." Moses had not consulted G–d before accepting this mixed multitude, thinking that he was performing a good deed by bringing them closer to G–d (which had been Abraham's lifework). In addition he had developed a personal interest in the conduct of these people as he had hinted when he referred to them (Numbers 11,21) as העם אשר אנכי בקרבו, "the people amongst whom I find myself." He had also foretold that these people would convert when he told Pharaoh in Exodus 11,8 that כל העם אשר ברגליך ישתחוו לי, "all these people who now sit at your feet will bow down to me." This meant that Moses was anxious to convert these people. Alas, not only did Moses fail to truly convert them, but they also infected the Israelites proper with their lack of faith during the episode of the golden calf, so that G–d told Moses: לך רד כי שחת עמך, "Go and descend, for your people have become corrupt" (Exodus 32,7). These people and their offspring by now made up the majority of the Jews in the desert. This is why Moses was forced to insert an extra year after every 49 years. This extra year serves as a warning that Israel must not again err by accepting converts wholesale and be misled by them. [I suspect that the association between "freedom" which is emphasized in the יובל- year legislation of the Torah -although the Torah calls it דרור- (Leviticus 25,10), forms the background to the סוד העיבור which Rabbi Chayim calls "this involvement of Moses in each generation in the determination of the Jubilee year." He must mean that the need to proclaim freedom would not have arisen but for Moses' accepting the mixed multitude when he did Ed.]
  Moses himself had attained the fiftieth level of moral and intellectual perfection, i.e. the fiftieth of the fifty שערי בינה before the sin of the golden calf. As soon as Israel committed that sin Moses was no longer able to access the fiftieth level of בינה. This is alluded to in G–d's words in Exodus 32,7, לך רד, i.e. descend from the לך=50. This is also what the sages had in mind when they said that the world was provided with fifty "gates" of insights, all of which were granted to Moses until he lacked one of them" (Rosh Hashanah 21). Moses had originally been granted all fifty שערי בינה. Moses suffered this spiritual setback due to his indirect involvement in the sin of the golden calf. This would also be the meaning of Psalms 8,6: ותחסרהו מעט מאל-הים, "You have made him a little less than divine." This is an allusion to the letter א being the only part of א-לוהים that Moses lacked. Normally we understand this verse in Psalms to mean that no one ever quite penetrated the "highest" gate of בינה. However, we may also understand the verse to mean that Moses was deprived of a great deal and retained only 49, as the Yalkut Shimoni suggests when he interprets that the word מעט in this verse in Psalms should now be read as מט,=49. This would mean that though Moses had attained 49 gates of insights, the one gate which had escaped him was of paramount importance.
  In view of the fact that Moses had acted with good intentions, and G–d does not withhold His goodness from people who act with pure motives, He does not deny such צדיקים the spiritual achievements they are entitled to at the time they die. This is what the Torah (Deuteronomy 34,1) alludes to when it reports Moses' death in these words: ויעל משה מערבות מואב אל הר נבו, "Moses went up from the steppes of Moav to Mount Nebo." We may divide the name of the Mountain into נ-בו, suggesting that at this point in his life Moses regained the fiftieth level of בינה. We may also understand this as if the letter נ from the word נבו detached itself and joined the letters in the name of משה, making his name equivalent to נשמה, soul. The word נשמה is usually understood as being equivalent to בינה. [Compare Pardes Rimonim in his chapter 14 under the heading of שערי ערכי הכנוים. Ed] Moses prayed many times not to be involved in this עיבור in every generation, all to no avail. He referred to this when he said: ויתעבר ה' בי למענכם, "G-d made me become involved in this סוד העיבור for your sake." He blamed the Jewish people for his predicament of becoming involved in this mystical aspect of becoming part of every generation. The word למענכם, means "for your sake," i.e. in order to help you attain your תקון, your rehabilitation. The word בי which has a numerical value of 12, refers to the need to consider leap months or leap years every 12 months. [In that connection the word עיבור may also refer to pregnancy, as per Yevamot 80 where Rabba Tosaphoa is reported to have declared a baby born 12 months after the husband's departure as being legitimate, not a bastard, i.e. the result of an infidelity by the mother. Ed.]
  When G–d said to Moses: רב לך אל תוסף דבר, this amounted to the rejection of Moses' prayers not to be saddled with such problems as the סוד העיבור. Originally Moses had been the "father of all the prophets." When G–d said: רב לך, He indicated that in subsequent generations [if Moses were to go on living Ed.] he would need to consult other Torah scholars, i.e. רב לך since his own intellectual powers would decline. We have a hint of this in Isaiah 40,14. Even in Moses' own lifetime the Torah has him say לא אוכל עוד לצאת ולבא (Deut. 31,2) "I no longer can master the intricacies of Torah studies" (Sotah 13b). He did not refer to his physical prowess, since the Torah itself (Deut. 34,7) testifies that לא נס לחה that Moses had not lost any of his physical vitality. On occasion he had to draw on the memory or resourcefulness of Joshua. This is another meaning of the words רב לך, i.e. "you already have another teacher." There is also a hint of the entire development of Moses' prophecy, his rise and decline, in Deut. 18,18: נביא אקים להם מקרב אחיהם כמוך, "I will raise up a prophet for them from their own people like yourself." The respective first letters in the opening three words of this verse form the acronym אלם, silent, dumb, suggesting that at the beginning of his prophetic career Moses was silent and the entire input was G–d's. Later on, prophetic utterances would flow from him directly, i.e. מקרב. Still later he would rise to an even higher level when G–d would command him and speak with him publicly. 
  All this is alluded to in Psalms 39,3: נאלמתי דומיה, החשתי מטוב וכאבי נעכר. "I was dumb, silent; I was very still while my pain was intense." The word דום-י-ה must be broken up so that we see that G–d decreed dumbness on the speaker in the verse. Being "silent from טוב," is an allusion to not having Torah inspiration; the only true טוב is Torah. The end of the verse describes Moses' reaction to this diminution of his intellectual/spiritual powers. According to סדר הדורות, at the beginning of his career Moses' name was שממה; it subsequently became משה. This is what is meant by Isaiah 52,13: "Indeed My servant shall prosper," meaning that Moses will be the משיח, the numerical value of the letters משה=345 being equal to the numerical value of the letters in the name שילה (a reference to Genesis 49, 10 where the word is understood to refer to the Messiah). Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 11,3 comment on the above that the first Redeemer will have the same name as the Ultimate Redeemer. The Ultimate Redeemer will be revealed to them only to be subsequently hidden from them, just as was the case with the first Redeemer. This is supposedly also alluded to in Kohelet 1,4: "A generation goes and a generation comes." 
  It is the mystical dimension of Michah 7,15: כימי צאתך מארץ מצרים אראנו נפלאות "I shall then show him miracles as I did when you came out of Egypt." The wording should have been: "I shall then show you miracles, etc." However, the prophet wanted to emphasize that the generation which will experience those miracles would be the same as the one that experienced the Exodus. [I presume that the generation of the Exodus which perished in the desert will experience a transmigration of souls prior to the final redemption which will then enable them and Moses to share the experiences they should have shared the first time around. Ed.] We have to understand Isaiah 52,13 as describing a gradual development, i.e. first הנה ישכיל עבדי, "Here My servant will prosper;" ירום, "he will be exalted;" next: ונשא, "he will be elevated," and afterwards וגבה, "to a height," and finally מאד, "very much." This last word is the transposition of the word אדם. The prophet describes the process of Man's rehabilitation. Man had originally been perfect only to decline spiritually and physically due to the sin. Isaiah then describes the climb back to his erstwhile spiritual height culminating in his achieving his original status אדם i.e. מאד. The final מעשה i.e. rehabilitation will be the completion of what had been G–d's plan for Man at the very outset of Creation. The verse in Isaiah describes the vicissitudes of Moses throughout these many generations as compensation for which he will emerge as the ultimate Redeemer. 
  This is described in verse 14 where the prophet says: כאשר שממו עליך רבים כן משחת מאיש מראהו ותוארו מבני אדם. "Just as the many were appalled at him, so marred was his appearance, unlike that of man, his form beyond human semblance." The מראהו מאיש the appearance unlike man that the prophet speaks of refers to Moses. The תוארו, "semblance" refers to Moses after his forehead radiated light. Alas, during the many generations which form the subject of the verse described by the prophet he was אחד מן העם, just like one of the common people. The whole of chapter 53 in Isaiah commencing with מי האמין refers to Moses and graphically describes his experiences; he even shared a grave outside the Holy Land as did the wicked people of the generation of the Exodus. When verse 12 speaks of: לכן אחלק לו ברבים this is an allusion to Moses' being involved in the סוד העיבור "the secret of possible existence" [my translation. Ed.] of all these generations who were "wicked people" compared to him. Moses will receive some reward in respect of each of these generations because of his share in whatever merits any generation accumulated. This is how we must understand the Mechilta Beshalach 15,1: that Moses was "equal" to all of the people of Israel. He provided spiritual input into every generation following him because G–d involved him in the סוד העיבור. When Isaiah 53,12 speaks about: ואת עצומים יחלק שלל, "He shall receive the powerful ones as his spoils," the meaning is none other than that G–d directly will give Moses his reward, whereas the other righteous people will receive it by way of Moses. The prophet goes on to say: תחת אשר הערה למות נפשו, "because he exposed himself to death," i.e. in each and every one of the generations since he died until the advent of the Messiah. Perhaps the fact that G–d repeated his name during their first encounter at the burning bush (Exodus 3,4) [unlike when the angel called to Abraham in Genesis 22,11, where the Torah has a line separating the two names i.e. אברהם৷ אברהם. Ed.] maybe an indication that there will be a "Moses" in every generation. When Isaiah continues: ואת פשעים נמנה, והוא חטא רבים נשא ולפשעים יפגיע, "and he was numbered among the sinners, whereas he bore the guilt of many and made intercession for sinners," this means that the final forgiveness of these sinners will be achieved through Moses' intercession. Thus far the comments in the writings of Rabbi Chayim.
  The events referred to by Moses when he said ויתעבר ה' בי למענכם, occurred after Israel had sinned by worshipping the golden calf. Moses had ascended to G–d (Exodus 19,3), i.e. before the sin of the golden calf. Concerning that time Moses himself reported that he ascended אל הא-לוהים, in other words that he had achieved the fiftieth gate which is the emanation of בינה. Even though the people of Israel were on a very high level at that time, Moses towered above them.
  This is the secret dimension of Deut. 5,5: ואנכי עומד בין ה' וביניכם "I stand between G–d and you." It is well known to students of the Kabbalah that the root of אנכי stems from the emanation בינה. We have explained that בינה=יובל=דרור=50, freedom, i.e. גאולה = redemption. When Moses was in Heaven, i.e. had attained the 50th level of בינה, he had a "clear vision." This means that he viewed things through the original light which G–d had withdrawn from earth after Adam's sin. This is another way of explaining that G–d spoke to both Moses and the people of Israel פנים בפנים דבר ה' עמכם, "G–d spoke to you face to face" (Deut 5,4). If the Jewish people were on such a level it suggests that there were no מחיצות, no barriers between them and G–d. How do we explain that Moses is supposed to have provided a barrier between them, i.e. "I was standing between G–d and you?" We must conclude that there was indeed no barrier, that once Moses utilized the original light this removed his presence as a barrier. By receiving the Torah and attaining the above described level of בינה, Moses had fulfilled his mission as the re-incarnation of הבל. He added the letter ה from הבל to his name. He ascended the Mountain which was burning with fire until the very heart of Heaven, i.e. עד ל"ב השמים (Deut 4,11). The word לב is a reference to the total of 32 paths that lead to these insights, the basis of the whole Sefer Yetzirah (chapter 1, section 1) The letter ה which was added to Moses' name further symbolized that he had received and assimilated all the five books of the Torah. I have found the following in the writings of the Arizal: When the Torah quotes Moses saying: בבעלותי ההרה לקחת לוחות האבנים "When I ascended Mountain in order to receive the stone tablets, etc." (Deut 9,9), you can take the first letters of the first three words and construct the acronym הבל. This supports our contention that Moses completed the task of הבל by attaining the fiftieth level of בינה.
  Hillel was known for his humility and modesty, a character-trait he shared with Moses who was known as the most humble man on earth. Hillel was able to prove this modesty because he held high office, was the elected prince of Israel during his time, just as Moses had been in earlier times. When you examine Exodus 14, 19-21 [the three verses containing 72 letters each which traditionally form the "great" name of G–d, Ed.], you will find that the letters of the name משה and הלל appear next to one another. [In his commentary the Tzror Hamor explains this in detail, as well as the three times 72=216 equals אריה, the force G–d used. The three verses 19,20,21 are placed one under the other so that they are divided into 72 three lettered units. Take the ו from ויסע; next take the first letter of the last word in the next verse, i.e. ה, and the first letter of the last verse in the regular sequence, i.e. the letter ו. Your first threesome then is והו. When you repeat this with the respective second letters following the same system you will get ילי. By proceeding along these lines you will find that the letters of the name משה i.e. מהש will appear next to the letters of the name הלל, i.e. ללה]. This is an allusion to the fact that Hillel in his age represented what Moses had represented in his time. This is also why Hillel lived to be 120 years old. The respective first letters in the words לקחת לוחות האבנים also spell הלל.
  This is the allusion contained in the words: על הארץ הראך אשו הגדולה, "On the earth He showed you His great fire" (4,36). The Torah (which was given surrounded by a great fire) is best fulfilled by those who humble themselves to be like the earth. "The Mountain was burning right up to the heart, לב, of the heavens." Moses ascended and merited receiving the לב, i.e. the 32 paths of wisdom, the entire Torah. In this way he perfected the erstwhile personality of הבל i.e. ה+לב.
  The Torah writes: (4,33-5,20) הקול מתוך החשך וההר בוער באש." Seeing that fire and darkness are almost exact opposites, how do we explain that the Israelites heard the voice of G–d both from out of darkness and from out of fire? Clearly there is a mystical dimension to this. Another word for fire is שלהבת. This word divides into הבל and שת, the names of the two people reincarnated in Moses. The word חשך, darkness, on the other hand, refers to Cain who ended up in darkness. The Arizal explains the relationship between אדם, חוה, קין, והבל still better. אדם is perceived as having emerged from the second highest emanation חכמה which in turn is equivalent to כח מ"ה. This means the combination of the soul, נשמה plus the "junior" power symbolized by the number 45, the numerical value of אדם, the concept of Man. חוה emerged from the next lower emanation בינה. She was אם כל חי, "the mother" of all subsequent human beings. קין והבל originated in the domain of דעת, [an emanation in the center line of the diagram, below כתר but above תפארת. Ed.] הבל had received input from the emanation חסד, as suggested by his name (as we demonstrated before) whereas קין had received 5 units of input from the emanation גבורה, which is fed by the emanation בינה. This גבורה is sort of a קן, i.e. nest, receptacle for the חכמה. The combined units of input from the emanations בינה and חכמה are 10; they account for the letter י in the middle of his name. This is the deeper meaning of Psalms 84,4: ודרור קל לה, where the letter ק is written larger and which separates between דרוד and the letter ן. This is to alert us to the fact that דרור, freedom is equated with בינה, i.e. יובל =50. קין was predominantly part of חוה, who represented בינה; this is why she said קניתי איש את ה' when she bore him. By this she meant to say: "I have acquired a man with G–d, i.e. as distinct from "with Adam." Having said that קין was the "receptacle" of input from both חכמה and בינה, and in view of the letter ן at the end of his name alluding to the fifty gates of בינה, we can understand what G–d meant when He asked Cain אי הבל אחיך, "Where is your brother Abel?" G–d criticized Cain who should have remembered that he was the שומר, the receptacle for his brother. Cain represented the female, Abel the male. The female is the receptacle for the male. The word אי may be understood as an acronym of אינך יודע "Don't you know?" Furthermore, the letter א alludes to בינה, whereas the letter י alludes to חכמה. When G–d's name is spelled א-ה-י-ה, this symbolizes His manifestation in the emanation בינה, whereas when it is spelled י-ה-ו-ה it symbolizes His being manifest in the emanation חכמה. Seeing that the reference to אחיך most definitely refers to someone male, G–d made it clear that Cain represented the female in that pair, i.e. the sister, אחות. When G–d had told Cain previously -when the latter was upset that his offering had been rejected- (Genesis 4,5-7), הלא אם תיטיב שאת, "Surely if you do right there is uplift (forgiveness)!" the word שאת could be read as אשת, "wife of." In the future the אשת חיל, woman of valor, will be described as the crown of her husband, and at that time G–d will govern the world using the emanation גבורה i.e. דין, seeing that mankind will be on such a high level that G–d does not have to make allowances for man's weakness and employ the attribute of רחמים as He does in this present world.
  This is the mystical element of our sages (Rashi on Genesis 21,12) describing Abraham as טפל, subsidiary to his wife Sarah (in prophetic insights). We learn from all this that once the emanation גבורה is "sweetened," it will surpass the spiritual plateau represented by the emanation חסד. Alas, we have not yet reached that stage in mankind's development, or better, in his process of rehabilitation. G–d therefore conducts the world using the emanation of חסד, the emanation associated with הבל.
  This is the mystical dimension of the first words of Kohelet where Solomon cries out: הבל הבלים הכל הבל, that in this world everything is no better than הבל! He bemoans the fact that in this world Divine guidance must be based on the attribute of חסד! a testimony to man's inadequacy. Solomon clearly implies that the way G–d deals with the present world is הבל, totally inferior to the way G–d will be dealing with the world of the future when He will be able to employ the yardstick of גבורה. This is what our sages meant when they said in in Midrash Kohelet 11,12 "the Torah (insights) which man studies in this world is הבל when compared to the Torah of the Messiah." What our sages had in mind is that the Torah which we learn in this world is based on the intelligence of the emanation associated with הבל, whereas the Torah of the Messiah will be based on the wisdom garnered from the emanation of גבורה, i.e. the domain from which Cain originated. Our own eyes behold regularly that a person whose origin is in the domain of גבורה is apt to be strong and valorous whereas people whose origin is in the domain of חסד are apt to be sensitive and weak. The relationship between חסד and גבורה is not unlike the relationship between silver and gold. Even among the קליפות, the spiritually negative forces, we find that the force גבורה equals אריה=216, whereas the force חסד is equivalent to חמור (donkey, symbolic of all that is earthly). This is the mystical dimension of Genesis 22,3: ויחבוש את חמרו, where Abraham is described as saddling his donkey on the way to the binding of Isaac. The word חמרו is spelled defective (without the letter ו) to indicate that by the act of saddling the donkey, symbol of everything material, Abraham assumed dominance over it. The numerical value of the letters in the name of אברהם is the same as the numerical value in the letters of the word חמר, =248. Abraham had to establish his authority over this קליפה so that it should not hinder him in executing G–d's command to offer Isaac as a sacrifice. He arose early in the morning (Genesis 22,3) in order to "awaken" i.e. to anticipate the emanation חסד and to subdue the קליפה aspect associated with it. Rabbi Akiva represented the type of personality based on גבורה, the domain Cain came from after the emanation גבורה i.e. had already been "sweetened." This is why Moses had suggested to G–d that, since He already knew there was going to be a man of such caliber, it would be appropriate to give the Torah to the Jewish people by means of a man such as Rabbi Akiva. Thus far the Arizal. Since Cain represented darkness it is no more than appropriate that light when it comes should originate in darkness. 
  We can find a very interesting allusion to this principle in Deut. 4,6: כי היא חכמתכם ובינתכם לעיני העמים אשר ישמעון את כל החוקים האלה ואמרו רק עם חכם ונבון הגוי הגדול הזה, "For that will be proof of your wisdom and discernment to other peoples, who on hearing of all these laws will say: 'Surely that great nation is a wise and discerning people.'" We have a principle that the words אך and רק are invariably used when the Torah wants to exclude something from consideration which was previously assumed to fall under a general category. We therefore have to try and understand what precisely the word רק in this verse is to exclude. Our sages commented on the word רק in this verse and others that even the least learned of the Jewish people are far superior to the Gentiles because they have the Torah and the wisdom contained in it. Our sages describe this graphically when they say "even the 'empty' ones (least observant) amongst you are as full of commandments as a pomegranate is full of pips" (Berachot 57a). So it will be in the future after all of Israel will be rehabilitated, a future described as a result of the rehabilitation of Cain. This will be in the nature of a חק, i.e. the kind of legislation which appears contrary to all logical considerations. Only G–d Himself knows the logic of the emergence of light from darkness just as only He understands the logic of the purity that emerges from the ashes of the red heifer while all those handling these ashes become impure by contact with it. In a similar way the same Cain who is known to us as the prototype of sin and impurity will eventually be the source of purification from sin and rehabilitation. The word חק may also be read as an acronym of the first letters in the words חוה קין, alluding to Eve who had said that she acquired Cain with G–d, as we mentioned earlier.
  Now to the subject of the Hereafter. Israel had been afraid that if they were to continue to acquire greater insights, i.e. over and beyond what they were spiritually and intellectually equipped to digest, they would surely die. They therefore had asked Moses that he should approach G–d and serve as their intermediary. They did this because, since Moses had already experienced the insights other people achieve only in the Hereafter, he had no reason to fear premature death. They realized that Moses had attained the fiftieth of the שערי בינה. When you take the letter ה which symbolizes the 5 Books of Moses and the letter י which symbolizes the Ten Commandments and you multiply them which each other the result is 50, an allusion to the fact that between the Ten Commandments and the five Books of the Torah you have the wisdom contained in the fifty שערי בינה. When Israel sinned at the golden calf, G–d told Moses: לך רד, "go and descend from the lofty platform of לך=50," as we have outlined earlier. Now G–d said: אל תוסף (3,26). The message was that during one's lifetime on earth the fiftieth level of בינה would not again be attained. This had to await a person's death. Only when separated from his body would one's soul-personality be able to attain that level of insights. To demonstrate that Moses did attain this level again when he died, the Torah describes his death as an ascent, i.e. ויעל משה … אל הר נבו (34,1). I have already mentioned that the name of the Mountain can be read as נ-בו, "50 is attainable through this Mountain." The choice of the word ויעל here is, of course, the reverse of the word רד G–d used when He told Moses about the sin of the golden calf. Moses attained during his lifetime what other צדיקים achieve only after their death. Once their bodies are left behind on earth their souls may behold what the Psalmist describes in Psalms 17,15: אשבעה בהקיץ תמונתך, "When I awake I will behold a vision of You." Concerning Moses, the Torah has testified that already during his lifetime: ותמונת ה' יביט, Moses was able to behold visions of G–d at will (Numbers 12,8). No one has an idea of the quality of עולם הבא in store for Moses; it is beyond anything we can imagine seeing that only G–d knows where even his body is buried.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  There is little point in looking for moral ethical messages in this portion when the entire portion is literally filled with such messages. In fact the same can be said of most of the Book of Deuteronomy. Moses' principal purpose in writing this book called משנה תורה, review of the Torah, was to ensure that the new generation would relive in their minds what the previous generation had actually experienced, and that they would draw the appropriate moral conclusions from all this and engrave it on their collective memories. 
  
  We learn among other lessons that not only do we have to study the Torah so as to understand the reasons underlying its commandments, but that when there is any doubt one must consult G–d Himself, as did Moses when he was in doubt. This is the way I understand a Midrash on the word לאמור in 3,23. This word normally means that someone is to be told the message that follows. In the case before us this seems hardly appropriate. Who was G–d supposed to tell about Moses' plea?
  Yalkut Shimoni item 177 on Exodus 6,12, where we have another instance in which Moses uses the word לאמור when speaking to G–d, says that there are altogether four such instances. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryah claims that Moses demanded that G–d reply to him, i.e. “לאמור, whether He would redeem the Children of Israel or not. G–d responded in Exodus 6,1: "Now you will see what I shall do to Pharaoh, etc." A similar incident occurred when the Torah reported Moses as using this expression in Numbers 12,13 when he wanted an immediate answer whether G–d was going to heal Miriam or not. There, too, G–d is reported as responding to this outcry in verse 14, indicating that Miriam would be healed after a week. We also have such an instance in Numbers 27,15 where Moses wanted a reply from G–d to his request that He appoint a suitable leader in his stead. G–d responded in verse 18 that Joshua would be the new leader of the people. Lastly, the Yakut quotes the verse in our portion where Moses supposedly demanded an immediate response to his request to enter ארץ ישראל.
  Concerning this Midrash one may ask: Where did Moses take the nerve to speak to G–d in such a fashion? One may, of course, simply point out that the very fact that Moses did not achieve what he asked for because G–d told him עתה תראה, meaning that he would experience only the part of the redemption from Egypt which would occur now, but not the conquest of the Holy Land, proves that his request was not couched in acceptable language. [This editor has another question, i.e. how could the request in Exodus 6,12 be answered in Exodus 6,1?] Similarly, had Moses phrased his question in more acceptable language, Miriam might have been healed immediately instead of after seven days. Again, if Moses had phrased his question concerning a leader for the Jewish people in more acceptable language would he maybe have seen one of his own sons appointed as his successor? 
  However, it would be doing Moses a grave injustice to believe that he erred in the language he used vis-a-vis G–d, especially to have made the same mistake on four separate occasions! I therefore believe that what Moses wanted to know on those four occasions did not concern something in the future, but he wanted to make sure that G–d would explain something to him which He had told him previously but which Moses was not sure he had properly understood. When Pharaoh had decreed that the workload of the Jewish people be increased (Exodus 5,9) Moses suddenly entertained doubts whether he had properly understood G–d previously when He had told him to take the people out of Egypt. He thought that possibly G–d had not referred to a process that would take place immediately but only after some considerable time. He therefore wanted to know from G–d when this redemption would occur. G–d reassured him that he had understood quite correctly, i.e. that the redemption would occur עתה, now. When G–d suddenly afflicted Miriam without even telling Moses anything about the cause of it all, i.e. "G–d suddenly told Moses Aaron and Miriam: go to the Tent of Meeting," Moses was not sure why he had become involved in all this. There could have been two reasons for this: 1) They (Aaron and Miriam) were not considered fit to receive prophetic communications due to their ritual impurity, as suggested by Rashi on Numbers 12,4, and that on account of this they could hear a communication from G–d only through the mouth of Moses. 2) G–d meant to put down Aaron and Miriam, and by having Moses present at that time their embarassment would be commensurably greater. If that had been G–d's purpose their very embarassment would constitute part of their atonement. We have an example of such a consideration in Exodus 32,14 when the very fact that G–d had said that He would wipe out the Jewish people and replace them with a new nation based on Moses was part of the Israelites' atonement. The shame of having been found so unworthy compared to Moses was part of their punishment. As soon as Moses saw that Miriam had become afflicted with לפניהם he asked G–d to explain why he had been called out also, seeing that G–d was not satisfied with merely shaming Miriam in his presence. Once G–d told Moses that Miriam had to remain quarantined for seven days Moses realized that he had erred in his earlier assumption that maybe his presence was Miriam's atonement, but that the first possibility, Miriam's ritual impurity at the time, was the reason Moses had to be called out to be the intermediary for a communication from G–d to her and Aaron. Something of a similar nature took place when Moses appealed to G–d regarding his successor. In Exodus 21,1 G–d had told Moses to place the various laws before the Jewish people. The word לפניהם used by the Torah there is understood to refer to legal experts, Torah scholars, as opposed to laymen. If the process was initiated by G–d giving Moses סמיכה, ordination, then it could be presumed that from that time on this ordination would be conferred by one scholar on his disciple, etc. On the other hand it was possible that just as G–d had chosen Moses to be ordained for this task in his generation, so G–d would ordain other leaders each in their respective generations. Now that the time had come for Moses to pass from the scene he wanted to know from G–d how this process of ordination of a future leader would be handled. G–d therefore told him in Numbers 27,18 that he, Moses, was to confer this ordination on Joshua by placing his hand on him. In our פרשה, too, Moses had thought that there were indications that G–d had rescinded His decree that Moses would not lead the Jewish people into the Holy Land. Moses therefore asked G–d for clear guidance as to the true state of affairs. We note that in all the instances when Moses used the word לאמור when addressing G–d there was a perfectly legitimate reason.
  If an outstanding Torah giant such as Moses saw fit to seek elucidation from G–d concerning any doubts he entertained, how much more must we learn how important it is for us – who do not compare to Moses in the slightest degree – to constantly review the text we study in order to be certain that we have not misunderstood any of it. Moses, of course, exhorted the people to be sure to have the right intentions when studying Torah, as we know from 4,39: "Know therefore this day and keep in mind that the Lord alone is G–d in heaven above and on earth below; there is no other."
  In his concluding comments on this פרשה the author stresses that a verse such as ואתם הדבקים בה' חיים כולכם היום is a slogan that must be remembered not only when we study Torah, pray or are engaged in spiritual pursuits, but that these very considerations must be ever present in our minds, even when we perform the most mundane of activities. 
  
  Eikev
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named עקב ענוה.
  Commandment 428 prohibits the use of any object which has served as part of a pagan cult in any form. The Torah (7,25) states: "You must not covet any of the silver or gold attached to the pagan symbols (which you have been enjoined to burn) to acquire them for yourselves."
  Commandment 429 forbids the use or enjoyment of any offering which had been dedicated to a pagan deity, nor must one make any use of trinkets which had once been used in the service of such a deity. The Torah (7,26) writes: "Do not bring an abomination into your house, etc."
  Commandment 430 legislates that one must say grace after meals. The Torah (8,10) says: "When you have eaten your fill you shall bless the Lord your G–d for the good land He has given to you."
  Commandment 431 is a directive to love the stranger (convert to Judaism). The Torah (10,19) writes: "Love the convert for you have been strangers in the land of Egypt."
  Commandment 432 requires us to relate to G–d with reverence. The Torah (10,20) writes: "You must revere the Lord your G–d."
  Commandment 433 requires us to cleave to G–d, i.e. to establish close relations with Torah scholars, His representatives. The Torah (ibid.) writes: "and cleave to Him."
  Commandment 434 directs that if someone has to swear an oath it must only be sworn in the name of the Lord. The Torah (ibid.) writes: "and by His name you shall swear."
  Commandment 435 enjoins us to engage in prayer to G–d. The Torah (11,13) writes: "and to serve Him with all your heart." Prayer is called "Service with the heart."
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  Kohelet 12,13 states: "The sum of the matter, when all has been considered: 'Fear the Lord and keep His commandments, for that is man's whole duty.'" This is a reference to the commandment stated in our portion to revere G–d, to serve Him, to cleave to Him and to swear in His name. It is a commandment of a general all-embracing nature. Because the commandment covers so much ground, the Torah introduces it (10,12) with the words: "And now, what does the Lord ask of you, etc.?" I have explained the meaning of יראת שמים reverence for G–d, at length in my treatise עשרה מאמרים. It includes awareness of the unity of G–d as well as serving the Lord, especially the commandments listed in this פרשה. This commandment includes that we must be aware of G–d's unity and the need to serve Him. Why would the Torah have to tell us separately to swear by the name of G–d only? The reason must be that the very mention of G–d's name one reminds one of the duty to serve Him and to revere Him. Once one does so one would certainly not perjure oneself.
  The warning to remove all vestiges of idol-worship is part of the overall directive of סור מרע, "stay away from evil." The wording of the prohibition not to covet appurtenances of former idolatry is a reminder that once one covets something one is liable to take steps to acquire it. When the Torah says: לא תביא תועבה אל ביתך, this is not the same as saying: לא תביא תועבה לביתך. The wording of the Torah teaches that the transport of the item is culpable, even before its arrival in your house. Following examples of distancing oneself from evil, the Torah continues to urge us ועשה טוב, to actively engage in doing good. An example of the latter is the commandment to love the stranger, i.e. the one who has forsaken the path of idol-worship. These converts are so beloved by G–d that He associates one's loving them with loving G–d Himself. This is why the Torah uses the word אהבה both for the feelings we are to harbor towards G–d as well as for the feelings we are to harbor and display towards the stranger who has embraced Judaism.
  We are also to "unite" i.e. cleave to Torah scholars upon whom there rests a spirit of purity in contradistinction to association with pagans who are surrounded by a spirit of impurity. Since words of Torah are halachically incapable of becoming impure, association with Torah scholars from whom these words issue is part of displaying reverence for G–d. When the Psalmist 19,10 speaks about יראת ה' טהורה עומדת לעד, that reverence for G–d is pure and endures forever, he alludes to the fact that the words of the Torah retain their purity forever.
  Prayer, i.e. our thanks to G–d, our praising Him, as well as our petitioning Him, is part of what is called עבודת ה', as is our eating and drinking when it is designed to help us serve the Lord better. Nowadays, our "table" fulfills the mystical dimension of what used to be the Temple Service. Instead of the sacrificial offerings being consumed by the altar, we consume our meals after and before a benediction expressing our awareness of Who it is that supplies our needs. You will find more about this in my comments under the heading "ק" in my treatise on sanctity in conjunction with eating. We become like angels when the food we consume is of the right kind and we consume it in a state of sanctity. Just as physical food is the basis of our continued existence on earth, so the souls are the "food" of the angels and assure their continued existence. We know that they need to feed on something from Nechemiah 9,6: ואתה מחיה את כולם, "You provide sustenance for them all." [The subjects of this verse include the various beings that populate the different layers of the Celestial Regions. Ed.] As regards human beings, their consumption of food can become similar to the spiritual forces released by the offering of sacrifices.
   This is the reason why the Torah links saying grace to the gift of the land of Israel and its goodness in 8,10. The reference is not to terrestrial ארץ ישראל, but to its "opposite" number, to Celestial ארץ ישראל. [If this were not so, why should we have to say grace for meals consumed in the diaspora? Ed.] The mystical element involved is that the Celestial ארץ ישראל is perceived as at the top of the domains of the emanations, the 10th emanation, the עולם האצילות. The Zohar on our פרשה, (Sullam edition page 18), describes the relationship between the ten rules governing the way in which we must consume our meals as an allusion to this tenth emanation. The ten rules [based on the Sabbath Eve meal. Ed.] comprise: 1) washing our hands; 2) preparing two whole loaves of bread; 3) consuming three meals. 4) lighting a candle on the table to symbolize the candlestick in the Temple which stood next to the table with the showbreads. 5) the benediction of ויכלו over a cup of wine. 6) speaking words of Torah during the meal. 7) To ensure that poor people are invited to the meal. 8) washing one's hands prior to reciting grace. 9) Reciting of grace. 10) Drinking the wine of the cup over which grace has been recited. [The author may have referred to a subsequent part of the Zohar in which 10 rules are listed governing eating on weekdays, including such details as to which hand to wash first, which hand to raise, not to eat hastily, etc. Ed.] Just as there are ten rules, הלכות, pertaining to eating, there are also ten הלכות governing the way the cup of wine over which grace is said is to be held, to be drunk, etc. I have written at length about the mystical significance of all these rules in my above-mentioned treatise under the heading of "ק". The important thing to remember is that our "eating" is the substitute for the sacrifice, and our "table" is the substitute for the altar. The overriding consideration to remember is that sacrificial service was one expression of our reverence for G–d.
  The Zohar explains the nature of יראת ה' in his commentary on פרשת בראשית (Sullam edition page 185, volume 1). He says that the main element of יראה is that man should fear the Creator of the whole universe who is his Master and the original cause of the whole world, compared to whom everyone and everything is totally insignificant. Man should concentrate his desire in a place called יראה. These words which are very few but contain deep meaning need analysis and clarification. The author of ראשית חכמה deals at length with this quotation of the Zohar. I myself have also dealt at length with the subject of the relationship between fearing G–d and loving G–d in my treatise עשרה מאמרות.
  Acquiring true reverence for G–d is in direct ratio to one's immersion in Torah and one's appreciation of G–d's greatness as a result of this immersion in Torah on all levels. There is no target, no ultimate goal for this reverence. When a person believes that relative to others he has attained great insights both as regards the understanding of the physical as well as that of the Celestial part of the universe, these insights are as nothing compared to the grandeur of G–d Himself. The ultimate source of all wisdom is G–d Himself. This is the reason Solomon taught us in Proverbs 22,4: עקב ענוה יראת ה', "The result of humility is fear of the Lord." What Solomon means is that the more fear of the Lord one acquires the more humble one becomes. Expressed differently: The more understanding one gains of the greatness of G–d the more one becomes aware of one's own insignificance. What does man have to offer that he should consider himself significant, important? The cause of humility then is reverence for G–d. The more learned the scholar the more humble he is apt to become. Greatness equates with humility because the truly great keep finding out how much is beyond their ability to ever comprehend. The ultimate wisdom we can acquire is the knowledge that we know very little. We will explain this later in connection with the attributes of G–d who is described in 10,17 as הא-ל הגדול, הגבור, והנורא, attributes which can be appreciated only by observing manifestations of these attributes, G–d in His פעולותיו. In view of what we have just said it is natural that Moses is described as the most humble man who ever lived, for he had acquired more insights into the workings of G–d and of the universe on all levels than anyone before or after him. A truly humble and modest person is a sign of one's deep insights into the greatness of the Creator. Anyone displaying arrogance, pretending to be superior, reveals that he is both shallow and hollow inside. Having explained the nature of the virtue of humility we can understand why G–d allows His Presence to rest on the humble, the modest, and the most unassuming people. It rests on them because they have acquired the greatest insights, have the deepest appreciation of HIM. Even people who are not intellectually equipped to become humble through their studies, i.e. through recognizing the wide gap between what they know and what there is to know, may experience G–d's Presence if they are poor, suffer afflictions; these people make a point of putting their trust in G–d. They are far more likely to do so than a rich man who believes that he does not need G–d's help.
  When Rabbi Yochanan said in Megillah 31a: "Any place where you find evidence of the greatness of G–d you also find evidence of His humility," he quotes scriptural proof from the Torah (10,17) as well as from verses in the Books of the Prophets and the Hagiographa. The essence of reverence for G–d then is an awareness of His greatness. 
  We find allusions to this יראה both at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of our פרשה. At the beginning, it is the very word עקב which alludes to fear of the Lord. In the middle of the פרשה, (8,12) the Torah warns that our material success in the Holy Land must not cause us to forget the Lord our G–d who is the source of our good fortune. At the end of our פרשה, the Torah speaks about the subject we have commenced this paragraph with (10,12).
  I shall copy a sermon I have written in my youth about the subject of humility and modesty:
  והיה עקב תשמעון . In the previous paragraph (7,7) the Torah explained that G–d's love for the Jewish people is not based on our superior numbers, seeing that we are "small," numerically speaking. The Talmud Chulin 89a states in the name of Rabbi Eliezer that the meaning of this verse is that G–d likes the Jewish people because even when they are riding high (economically) they still humble themselves, i.e. they behave as if they were מעט מכל העמים, the least significant of all nations. Abraham, for instance, described himself as: אנכי עפר ואפר, "I am but dust and ashes" (Genesis 18,27). Moses and Aaron (Exodus 16,7) said of themselves: ונחנו מה, "What do we amount to?" David described himself as: ואנכי תולעת ולא איש "I am only a worm, not a man" (Psalms 22,7). On the other hand, the "great" men among the Gentile nations did not react in this fashion to the greatness I (G–d) have bestowed upon them. I have given greatness to Nimrod; he responded by building a Tower in order to assert himself against Me. I gave greatness to Pharaoh; he responded by claiming "Who is the Lord that I should listen to Him?" (Exodus 5,2). I made Sancheriv a mighty ruler and he reacted by saying: "Who among the gods of all these lands has saved them from me that you should imagine that the Lord will save you from me?" (Kings II 18,35). Similar expressions of arrogance are recorded as having been used by Chirom the king of Tzor, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and others. Rava or Rabbi Yochanan are reported to have said that the continued existence of the universe would not have been permitted had it not been for Moses and Aaron and people of their caliber, all of whom said of themselves: "what do we amount to?" It is interesting that G–d is described in Job 26,7 as תולה ארץ על בלימה, "suspending earth over merely מה" (hardly something), a reference to Moses and Aaron who had described themselves as נחנו מה. Rabbi lla'i, also on folio 89 Chulin, suggests the meaning of the verse in Job to be that the earth will be allowed to survive for the sake of people who בולם את עצמם, "put the brakes on their ego" at times of strife. Rabbi Abahu, on the other hand, says that he who considers himself as if he did not exist is the "salt of the earth." He uses Deut. 3,27: ומתחת זרועות עולם, in the sense of "he who is trampled by the world is the real 'arms' supporting the universe." Rabbi Yitzchak derives this same message from Psalms 58,2: האמנם אלם צדק תדברון מישרים תשפטו בני אדם. He understands this verse to mean that maintaining a silent (אלם) profile and speaking out only in matters of צדק, i.e. Torah, is what keeps the world going.
  The greatest virtue of all the virtues that exist is the virtue of humility. This is why the greatest of all prophets is credited in the Torah with only this virtue. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair lists a number of virtues, possession of each one is a stepping-stone to still higher virtues, the highest one being ענוה, humility. If the first human being who was the direct creation of G–d Himself (and could have displayed pride therefore) is described as having been formed of earth, this is a subtle hint that we must practice humility. Man was also called אדם because this word is an acronym for the words אפר, דם, מרה, as mentioned in tractate Sotah. The title אדם was bestowed only on the Jewish people, to the exclusion of the Gentile nations. We became heir to this title because of the humility of our great leaders.
  Vayikra Rabbah 20,2 speaks about תפוח עקיבו של אדם הראשון מכהה גלגל חמה, "the protruding part of Adam's heel was capable of inflicting harm on the sun's orbit." Rabbi Shimon ben Menassyah concludes that if this was the effect of Adam's heel, what must have been the effect of his face! [The passage following is based on a discussion of the monthly, daily, or hourly "mazal" and its decisive influence on the fate of a person. It is presumed here that only the hour of birth is of importance but not the zodiac sign of the month, etc. Ed.] The Talmud Shabbat 156a states that if someone is born when the "mazal" of the sun serves, he is apt to be handsome, will be financially independent; on the other hand, whatever secrets he wants to keep will be revealed, i.e. if he steals he will not get away with it. If the sun has so much influence indirectly, how much more influence must it have directly! The expression חמה, sun, is equated with חכמה, wisdom. Our sages interpret the opening verse of our פרשה also to mean that he who makes יראת שמים his objective in life will wear חכמה as a crown on his head. This is what David meant in Psalm 111,10: "The beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord; all who practice it gain sound understanding." By making humility one's slipper, wisdom will become one's crown.
  [The author continues in this vein for several pages. I have decided to quote only very selected allusions, especially those which relate to the Hereafter. Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  We find a dispute concerning the meaning of Isaiah 57,15: ואת דכא ושפל רוח, usually translated as "with the contrite and the lowly in spirit." In Sotah 5a Rav Huna understands the verse to mean that the דכא is in the company of G–d, i.e. G–d elevates him to His level, whereas Rav Chisda understands it to mean that G–d lowers Himself to the level of the contrite and lowly spirit. The Talmud feels that the interpretation of Rav Chisda has more to commend it, seeing that G–d lowered Himself to the low mountain of Sinai when He gave the Torah to the Jewish people. He spurned the option of raising Mount Sinai to greater heights. I believe that we can understand the two opinions expressed here as being complementary; there is no dispute at all. In our present world G–d lowers Himself to the lowly in spirit. In the World to Come, G–d elevates the people who practiced humility in this world to His lofty level. When the Talmud described the opinion of Rav Chisda as more logical, the meaning is that on the basis of past experience this has been G–d's practice. 
  This does not preclude a change in the future. Jacob was אוחז בעקב "holding on to the "heel" (Genesis 25,26) i.e. to humility already from the moment he was born. This is also the mystical dimension of ויבא יעקב שלם, that "Jacob attained perfection" (Genesis 33,18). When Jacob was called ישראל because he prevailed in a struggle with the Divine, this is an allusion to the World to Come, a domain even closer to G–d than the domain of the angels. This is alluded to in Numbers 23,23 by Bileam who said: כעת יאמר ליעקב ולישראל מה פעל א-ל. "Jacob is told at once, Yea, Israel, what G–d has planned." [The author tries to demonstrate that when manipulating the spelling of the name יעקב the name ישרון which is the name used to describe the Jewish people on their highest spiritual level, can be obtained. When one omits the first letter of a "word" representing the "full" spelling of a letter such as the letter י being spelled יוד, this is called a concealed way of spelling the word, נעלם. In our example, if you spell the word יעקב "full" i.e י"וד-ע"ין-ק"וף ב"ית, and you then omit the letters I have highlighted i.e. י-ע-ק-ב, you will be left with ו"ד-י"ן-ו",-י"ת. The numerical value of the last 8 letters is 566, the same as the numerical value of ישרון. Ed.]. This is the mystical aspect of Isaiah 40,4: והיה העקוב למישור, "and the crooked will become straight," an allusion to the perception of Jacob as devious and engaging in deception as claimed by Esau. The "concealed" spelling of these names is a hint of the great good in store for the Jewish people. The three names יעקב-ישראל-ישרון correspond to the שלמות of Jacob in three areas: his body, גוף, his relationship with the material goods of this world, ממון, and his spiritual life, נפש (cf. Rashi on Genesis 33,18). These three areas are the subject of the manner in which we are to relate to G–d with love, i.e. "בכל לבבך, ובכל נפשך, ובכל מאדך. The body will be as much part of an everlasting life in the future we speak of as is the soul in our times. All the Kabbalists are agreed that this is so because the body has been created בצלם אלוקים, in the image of G–d. The names ישראל and ישרון allude to this dual "perfection" of body and soul, i.e. that both will gain everlasting life. The name ישרון symbolizes ישר, that G–d has created man ישר, upright, honest. He could not have done otherwise for ישרים דרכי ה', "the ways of the Lord are upright" (Hosea 14,10). It is relatively easy for a soul, רוח, to return to the Celestial Regions it has come from. When we speak about שלימות ממונו, the Torah means אלוהי כסף ואלוהי זהב לא תעשו (Exodus 20,23), that one must not elevate the value one places on silver and gold as something akin to a deity. 
  We have an allusion to this in Psalms 131. David testifies that though he had certainly attained a measure of understanding about the ways of G–d, this had not been a cause for him to become proud or haughty. In this Psalm the words לא גבה לבי allude to the שלימות הגוף, whereas the following words ולא רמו עיני allude to the שלימות הממון, seeing that it is the eye which is usually the cause of greed for money. The last words ולא הלכתי בגדולות refer to the שלימות הנפש. It means that David did not seek out merits which were beyond his ability to achieve, and when he was granted them he did not boast about such achievements. When our sages report that any halachic ruling made by David was always accepted as final this may have been the reward for his humility.
  Another way of explaining our Psalm may be that David felt the need to apologize for taking credit for his humility, i.e. he apologized שלא גבה לבו, for having his humility become common knowledge. This in itself would rate as a form of boastfulness. He apologized, for not having remained silent, i.e. אם לא שויתי ודממתי נפשי. Whichever may be the case, the subject of this Psalm is the extreme importance of practicing humility.
  
  We ask G–d daily at the end of the עמידה prayer ולמקללי נפשי תדום, "enable my soul to be silent to those who curse me." The wording seems peculiar. It would have sufficed to say: "Let me be silent to those who curse me." Why did the sages who composed this prayer add the words "my soul?" The answer is simply that unless one's humility is "soul-deep" as compared to merely "lip-deep," one has not truly attained the desired level of humility. Merely failing to respond to curses heaped upon one will not eliminate resentment and hatred carried in one's heart, and is hardly proof of humility. We may learn a lesson from nature itself. As long as the soil is hard and has not been subjected to plowing, (something which looks like abuse), it is not capable of producing crops. The same applies to our נפש. Only after experiencing some humiliating experiences is our soul capable of rising to the greatest heights it is capable of. It is clear from Proverbs 16,5: תועבת ה' כל גבה לב, "Every haughty person is an abomination to the Lord," that even if one only harbors such sentiments in one's heart, לב, G–d detests such sentiments.
  There is a very puzzling passage in Sotah 49b (Mishnah) which states that with Rabbi Yehudah the Prince's death the last person who could truly be called an עניו, a humble person, had died. Concerning this statement Rabbi Yossi is reported to have remarked to a colleague that this statement in the Mishnah should be erased seeing that he himself was alive [and presumably personified humility. Ed.] Rabbi Nachman took exception to another part of the comment of the Mishnah, that there were no more G–d-fearing people, seeing that he himself was alive. How could these Rabbis make statements praising their virtues when this is the height of haughtiness? We may understand this along the lines of a conversation quoted in Chovot HaL'vavot. One pious individual asked another whether the latter had already achieved equanimity. The other replied: "in which respect?" To this the first one replied to שבח וגנות, "praise and blame." He was told that the pious gentleman in question had not yet come to terms with these problems. Thereupon the first questioner assured his colleague that he had not yet approached a level of humility. If he would keep trying, however, there was a chance he could succeed in achieving such a virtue. The "equanimity" that the author of Chovot Halvavot in chapter Yichud HaMaaseh speaks of is the ability to not even respond in one's heart to praise, i.e. not to let it go to one's head, nor to feel offended in one's heart when one hears oneself disparaged. Both Rabbi Yossi and Rabbi Nachman – in claiming to be humble or G–d-fearing respectively – indicated that they had come to terms with what the pious person in our story had not yet come to terms with. They most certainly did not mean to lay claim to possessing virtues. The only reason they spoke up was that, if the people would be left with the impression that it was impossible to achieve a modicum of humility or reverence for G–d, an impression that the wording of the Mishnah could certainly create, then everybody would stop even trying to master these virtues.
  In Numbers 11 we have clear proof that G–d rewards those who lower their own profile. It speaks of the selection of 70 elders out of a total of 72 candidates. The ones who lost, Eldad and Meydad, were rewarded for their humility: they were the only two of these 72 men who were granted the gift of prophecy on a permanent basis.
  Humility can also be viewed as something that applies to one's body, to one's financial dealings and to one's mind or soul respectively. The highest level of humility is that of the mind, i.e. when a person such as Moses, the wisest of men and greatest prophet remains unassuming both in speech, manner and his heart. This is what may be termed as the "Torah" level of humilityץ The next level of humility comprises humility of the body. This may be compared to the "Prophets" level of humility. The aptness of this comparison is based on the fact that all the prophecies recorded in the Books of Prophets concern only a physical future of man, an era up to and including what our sages call the ימות המשיח, the Messianic age on earth. At that time the body will regain the perfection possessed by Adam's body before the sin. Our sages (Yuma 9) have said that since the deaths of Chagai, Zecharyah and Malachi (the last three prophets) the "white glass" has disappeared. Rabbi Alkabetz explained that the expression "white glass" is a metaphor for refinement of matter. The prophecies comprise the mystical dimension of the Holy Spirit. In order to qualify for the recording of such writings in the Hagiographa one must first have achieved this refinement of matter (the material which makes up one's body). The way to achieve this is through שלימות הממון, one's absolute integrity in matter of money. Our sages (Avodah Zarah 51) illustrated this when they said that Rabbi Menachem bar Sima'i was called "the son of holy people" because he had never even looked at a coin. People who display this kind of disregard for money merit a measure of "Holy Spirit." We find a similar definition for such people in Psalms 15: "Who may sojourn in Your holy mountain? He who lives without blame, who does what is right, and in his heart acknowledges the truth….who considers the virtue of humility as minor,…who honors those who fear the Lord; who has not ever lent money at interest nor accepted a bribe." We see that the way one handles money is an indispensable part of the definition of a person who wishes to be at home on the Mountain of G–d" One may summarize: The lower one's profile on earth the higher one's profile in a world of purely spiritual values.
  The three kinds of perfections (Jeremiah 9,22) we have spoken of, i.e. חכם-גבור-עשיר, correspond to נשמה, גו, and לבוש. לבוש represents all the things that surround the body and are needed by it to preserve and strengthen it. Torah is at one and the same time both נשמה, גוף, and מלבוש, as explained in the Zohar. The mystical elements of the Torah which appear to us as a string of letters whose meaning we have not yet unraveled will only be revealed in the future. When that time comes there will be a "new" Torah in the sense that hitherto undreamt-of insights will be revealed to us. Nachmanides has written about this in the introduction of his commentary on the Torah. This is also alluded to (Psalms 29,11) in the words: ה' עוז לעמו יתן, "G–d will give strength to His people." The Psalmist refrained from using the past tense. This means that so far G–d has given us only the גוף of the Torah, i.e. the הלכות, the commandments which have to be translated into action in this world. There is a third dimension to Torah called לבוש, the virtues, etc., we are to learn from the various stories the Torah relates. These stories and their moral lessons strengthen and preserve the "body" i.e. גוף of the Torah. This is alluded to in the second half of Psalms 29,11: ה' יברך את עמו בשלום. The word בשלום comprises the same letters as the word מלבוש. Just as the Torah itself consists of a progression of three distinct levels of sanctity, so the three parts of the Holy Bible consist of three gradated parts in descending order of holiness: Torah, Prophets and Hagiographa. We may view the Hagiographa as the מלבוש. This is one meaning of the Book of Esther 5,1 describing Esther as ותלבש אסתר מלכות, which our sages (Megillah 14) interpreted to mean that she wore the Holy Spirit, since the word בגדי is missing if the meaning were "Royal robes." Jeremiah 9,23 concludes by saying that if one has to boast the only thing one should boast about should be the insights one has acquired about the nature of G–d, he means that man's שלימות "perfection" should use G–d's Perfection as his model. Since G–d has not revealed Himself except through His Torah, the reference is to the three parts of the Torah which we have cited i.e. the נשמה-גוף-לבוש. 
  The Bible describes the שלימות הנפש in the Torah, the שלימות הגוף in the Books of the Prophets, and the שלימות הממון in the Hagiographa.
  When Moses, the man described as the most humble man who ever lived, permitted himself to say: "Any matter which is too difficult for you bring to me," G–d reacted by proving that he could not even deal with a problem that women knew the answer to, i.e. the problem presented by the daughters of Tzlofchod (Deut. 1,17, concerning Numbers 27,4-5).
  We have a principle (Pesachim 50b) that studying Torah for personal rather than pure motives will eventually lead a person to study Torah for the proper motives. We also have a statement (Deut. 10,17) that G–d does not respond to attempts at bribery. If both statements are taken at face value one could gain the impression that the person studying Torah for ulterior motives will be rewarded by G–d by eventually studying Torah for pure motives. This would be similar to G–d having been bribed by the person studying for personal motives. The author therefore understands the statement מתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה to mean that during the course of Torah study one becomes aware that G–d detests people who use Torah study for their own personal advantage. Once a student realizes this he will only study Torah for pure motives in the future. Torah study for ulterior motives per se is a sin, however. These and other quotations from the Torah indicate how much perfection of one's נפש is expected of us.
  
  The relationship between G–d and people who have achieved שלימות הגוף is indicated in Isaiah 57,15 which places G–d, whose name is holy, who towers in the lofty Celestial Regions, as side by side with the ones of contrite spirit. Our sages comment that the picture of man, אדם, is engraved on G–d's throne.
  
  
  When the Torah writes in 10,12: ועתה ישראל מה ה' אלוקיך שואל ממך, the word מה is an allusion to Moses and Aaron who had said disparagingly of themselves, ונחנו מה. It is expected of us that we follow in the steps of Moses and Aaron, both of whom set such an outstanding example of humility. Only if we try and emulate Moses and Aaron will we attain the level of spirituality which is implied in this verse by the title ישראל. The word מה may be read as מאה, i.e. 100, seeing it can be understood as diminutive such as in the example from Moses and Aaron. On the other hand, it can also stand for unlimited expansion such as מה רב טובך, "How abundant is Your good," in Psalms 31,20. It is our task to use the word in the latter connotation when we speak about G–d and in the former connotation when we refer to ourselves. The Rabbis who suggested reading מה as מאה referred to our hymns of praise, our prayers when we aggrandize G–d's attributes. All that G–d asks of us is the minimal interpretation of מה, i.e. to revere Him. This is the only area in which humility is not a virtue. We must project a high profile in our display of reverence for G–d. The letters in the word אם in that verse (Deut. 10,12), are the first letters of the names of אהרון משה. Limits on one's own modesty are imposed when one's modesty is maintained at the expense of a public desecration of the name of G–d. The Talmud Berachot 19b rules that if one discovers a mixture of wool and flax in the garment one wears one has to remove such a garment at once and not wait until one comes home (even if one causes oneself considerable embarrassment thereby). The reason is that no personal considerations are valid when G–d's name is at stake. The sages who have composed our Prayer Book have inserted eight expressions such as מה אנו, מה חיינו, in our morning prayers to counteract the eight areas where signs of arrogance manifest themselves. All these are rooted in one's head. It begins with מחשבה, one's thoughts, whence it proceeds to the heart. A contrite heart is the counter-measure to such feelings of superiority. A second manifestation of haughtiness is the forehead, symbol of obstinacy the result of arrogance. One needs to cultivate the opposite, something the author calls מצח רצון. The third manifestation of arrogance is עינים רמות, pride. One needs to cultivate עין טובה, a generous eye instead. The fourth way of displaying arrogance is described as אזנים רחבות שמע שוא, ears open to all kinds of disinformation. Its antidote is the ability to hear oneself denigrated without feeling the need to respond; one must develop the ability to listen to people in trouble. The fifth manifestation of haughtiness is flaring up in anger. Anger is most frequently the result of injured pride. One's behaviour ought to be modelled on that of G–d described in Isaiah 48,9: ותהלתי אחטם לך לבלתי הכרתיך, "To My own glory, I control My wrath not to destroy you." The sixth manifestation of pride and arrogance is the tongue which speaks boastfully. The only remedy is to curb one's tongue. The "tongue" of scholars is considered therapeutic (spiritually). The seventh way in which arrogance is displayed is with the palate. Arrogance is often shown in what one eats and how one eats, and what one disdains to eat. The obvious remedy is to live frugally. The eighth and final manifestation of haughtiness is expressed by one's facial muscles, i.e. a superior mien. The only way to overcome such signs of pride is to train oneself to present a face radiating sympathy at all times. All of these manifestations of arrogance emanate in the head. It is appropriate therefore not to walk around with one's head held high. Our sages are on record that ההולך בקומה זקופה דוחה רגלי השכינה, "He who walks with his head held high pushes away the feet of the שכינה." This simile is used as an example of מדה כנגד מדה, punishment fitting the crime. The punishment for such a person who did not practice the virtue of seeing himself like an עקב, heel, symbolising humility, is that he has forced G–d to be humble in the presence of his own display of arrogance.
  
  We find that people who practice humility deserve to become the founders of great dynasties. Ruth, the maternal great-grandmother of David, who was herself the daughter of a king, could have demanded to be treated as a princess. Instead she went to glean among the ears of grain with the poor of Bet Lechem. David, mighty king of Israel and prototype of the Messiah said of himself "I am a worm." 
  That most humble of men, Moses, was rewarded by receiving the Torah at Sinai. The letters in the word סין allude to the 120 days that Moses spent in the domain of Heaven. He restored harmony between G–d and Israel. Harmony, שלום, is the opposite of סין, strife.
  Having praised the virtue of modesty and humility, we must try to understand the statement of Rabbi Chiyah son of Ashi in Sotah 5a that a "Torah scholar must possess one eighth of an eighth" (of pride). This statement is followed by one of Rabbi Hunna son of Rabbi Joshua who says: "This amount of pride crowns him just like the beard is a crown of the ear of corn." The deeper meaning of this statement is related to the eight manifestations of pride we have listed and corresponding to which we recite eight (respectively 7) times מה in the רבון prayer every morning. Our sages have said on numerous occasions that the number "one" is not really part of any count. It follows that if a Torah scholar possesses only "one" of eight parts of pride this is hardly something to be concerned about. The problem is that the eight manifestations of pride are all rooted in the same source, i.e. the head, as we have pointed out. In such a situation, even a small amount such as one eighth becomes significant because it contains some of all the eight aspects. This is why Rabbi Chiyah does not want the תלמיד חכם to cultivate more than 1 /8th of 1 /8th i.e. 1/64th of pride. The only reason even this small amount of pride or self-confident bearing is permitted to the scholar is so that the people for whom he is to represent authority should not misconstrue his humble bearing as indicating an inability to lead.
  Let us analyse the eight possible sources of pride which we refer to in the prayer cited above. The words מה אנחנו refer to the ability to hear, or the loss of one's hearing. When someone has caused someone else an injury resulting in his becoming deaf, he has to compensate him with all five categories of compensation the Talmud provides for (Baba Kama 85b). The words מה חיינו refer to food and drink without which life cannot be sustained. The words מה חסדנו are a reference to the eyes, and the words מה צדקותינו refer to the forehead. We are told by Rabbi Ami in Taanit 8a that rain is granted to earth only on account of בעלי אמנה, people who keep promises made in business life. He supports this with the quotation from Psalms 85,12: "Justice looks down from Heaven." The supply of rain is considered an act of צדקה. On the previous folio Rav Shilo, quoting Rav Hamnuna said that rain is withheld only on account of עזי פנים, insolent people, people with a brazen forehead. The connection between the forehead and insolence is supported by several verses from the Bible. The words מה ישועתינו refer to one's face, as we know from Psalms 80,20: האר פניך ונושעה, "Show us Your countenance that we may be delivered." G–d's "face" is indispensable to our survival. The words מה כחינו, are, of course, a reference to strength and power, and we know that the true hero is the one who can control his rages, his temper. The words מה גבורתינו are a reference to courage, something centered in the heart. It also describes an arrogant attitude. The words מה נאמר לפניך is clearly a reference to the tongue which can and will boast. The word מה in מה ה' אלוקיך שואל מעמך וגו' is an allusion to the suppression of the eight areas in which the ego asserts itself and which we vow not to assert in our morning prayer. We go so far as to state that we consider our advantage over the animals in this respect to be nil. The word ועתה in the same verse may be divided into ועת ה', that there will be a time – namely in the World to Come – when we will no longer comport ourselves as humbly as we do in this world. At that time, G–d will שואל מעמך, will be in the position of a "borrower," (שואל). A borrower is legally liable for any damage sustained by the animal or tool he has borrowed. Allegorically speaking, G–d will have to pay us the reward for all the suffering we experience in this world. This is why our Rabbis (Berachot 6a) said that if a person intends to perform a commandment and is prevented from doing so by forces beyond his control, he is nevertheless entitled to the reward for the commandment in question. ולאהבה אותו בכל לבבך, בכל נפשך – Continuing G–d's expectations from the Jewish people in 10,12 the Torah describes love of G–d to be expressed both by the heart and by the soul. These correspond to the two kinds of perfections to be attained by Israel as ישראל and as ישרון. Such love for G–d refers to the Celestial Spheres i.e. when we are in the World to Come. There is also an allusion to perfection of the way we relate to money, i.e. to life on this earth, when verse 13 continues לשמור את מצות ה' ואת חקותיו, "To observe G–d's commandments and statutes," something that cannot be done in the Hereafter. The words לטוב לך indicate the purpose of these commandments, i.e. for our own good.
  Verse 14, הן לה' אלקיך, which commences with the word הן, alerts us to the fact that the letters in this word have no partners. All other letters in the alphabet can be combined with another letter to form the number ten or one hundred except these two. The letter ה is an allusion to this present world, whereas the latter י alludes to the World to Come. Five times ten is fifty, a reminder of the 50 gates of בינה. The word הן is a reminder that all our activities in this world must be oriented towards the World to Come. The fact that these letters have no "mate" means that G–d is One and has no partner. The expression שמי השמים in the same verse alludes to the eternal existence of Israel on the ישראל and ישרון level. The words הארץ וכל אשר בה at this point tell us that the universe, i.e. הן, is made up of both Heaven and Earth. רק באבותיך חשק י-ה-ו-ה. The letters in the word חשק form an acronym of the first letters in the description of the vowel pattern חולם שוא קמץ of the four-lettered name of G–d. Maimonides, who usually advises the golden mean, states that when it comes to humility a person should practice extremism, i.e. become as humble as is possible. This is also why the advice to practice humility given in tractate Avot 4,4 is prefaced with the unusual "מאד מאד." [The author sees allusions in the vowel patterns, especially the difference between Cholam-Kometz on the one hand and Sheva and Chirik on the other. The former alludes to the World to Come, the latter to the Here and Now. Ed.] The author illustrates his point and applies it to the virtue of humility versus pride and arrogance. 
  The Mishnah quoted from Avot 4,4 concludes by reminding us that all we have to look forward to in the grave is רימה, i.e. worms. The editor of that Mishnah implies that this is so only when the person in question has not adopted the lifestyle suggested by the author of the Mishnah, and has instead adopted a high profile, i.e. רמה קרנו. In other words: Employing the wrong vowel in this world results in the wrong vowel becoming your destiny after death.
  We have explained the reason that the רבון prayer we recite in the morning contains eight successive expressions all starting with the word מה. Since I am already on the subject I may as well explain the entire prayer.
   The paragraph starts by exhorting us לעולם יהא אדם ירא שמים בסתר, to be G–d-fearing in secret. This does not mean that one should hide one's fear of Heaven. It means one should revere G–d even when there are no witnesses around to be impressed. Another interpretation might be that a person should "hide" all his good deeds and perform them only for the sake of the "One who resides in the Hidden Regions" and not in order to impress others, etc. This subject-mattter is discussed in Chovot Halevavot in the chapter called יחוד המעשה. The author describes the way in which the Evil Urge attempts to seduce us. In the first instance he suggests that we do not perform any of the commandments. When he fails in this, he suggests that we perform the commandments vis-a-vis our fellow-man in such a way that we will gain recognition by our fellow-man. When he fails in this too, i.e. when he observes that man does good and causes others to be inspired to do good also, he reverses himself and suggests that we hide our good deeds so as not to be accused that we perform these good deeds only for the sake of the admiration we receive from others. The author of our prayer counters this by saying: "Remain G–d- fearing in your deeds. Do not abandon the performance of good deeds because you do not want to be regarded as a paragon of virtue." He continues ומודה על האמת, one should make it clear that the real reason one performs these good deeds is not for the recognition one hopes to receive by one's fellow-man. The fear of having one's good deeds misinterpreted should not deter one from performing them.
  The words רבון העולמים are a euphemism for the grandeur of G–d, His role as Ruler over the whole universe which is His. Although the world consists of layer above layer, G–d is the Supreme Cause of them all; we are but dust and ashes by comparison. The author of our prayer alludes to this in the words ואנשי השם כלא היו וחכמים כבלי דעת. How could we possibly base our claim to importance on our righteousness! What chance do we have to cleave to Him then? Our sages have said that a person is not entitled to prostrate himself in prayer unless he is as certain as Joshua that his prayer and pleadings will be answered. If so – asks the author of our prayer – what chance do we have to come close to G–d? 
  He refers to this lack of confidence that G–d will have to listen to our prayers by stating that – as distinct from Joshua – who relied on his worthiness, we do not rely on our worthiness, לא על צדקותינו אנחנו מפילים תחנוניו לפניך, "we do not submit our pleas before You because we rely on our righteousness." Instead we rely only on G–d's grace since the Torah mentions (Exodus 33,19) that G–d reserves the right to show grace and mercy to those whom He chooses (even if they do not deserve it). I have already explained the string of expressions commencing with the repeated use of the word מה. 
  [The author introduces a different approach to these eight references which I have decided to omit as too peripheral to our פרשה. Ed.]
  
  
  In connection with the debate in the Talmud (Shabbat 55a) whether זכות אבות, reliance on the merits of our patriarchs is still effective today, and if not, when it ceased to be so, the author makes the following observations: Tosafot quote a verse proving that even nowadays, i.e. after the destruction of the second Temple, this merit has not expired, and that we mention it in our prayers in order to remind G–d of it. I believe (author) that there is a difference between someone saying: "Please remember so and so," and someone saying: "Please do not forget so and so." The opinions in the Talmud which try and determine the merit of the forefathers ceased to be effective refer to G–d no longer actively remembering the merit of the patriarchs but simply not having forgotten them. The author of our prayer therefore refers to the merits of our forefathers כלא היו, "as if they had never existed," as distinct from "never having existed, having been used up." This is the difference between אין, and כאין. The חכמים mentioned in our prayer are the twelve sons of Jacob, all of whom accumulated powerful merits, so much so that Solomon describes them as a source of joy to their father (Proverbs 10,1). We also have a verse in Proverbs 24,3: בחכמה יבנה בית, "a house is built by wisdom," which is a reference to the house of Jacob. There used to be a period when the merits of the forefathers were constantly on G–d's mind. This was when the High Priest wore the breastplate. During those years the knowledge of what G–d desired flowed to us through the אורים ותומים, the oracle contained in that breastplate. Nowadays, alas, we are as if bereft of knowledge, i.e. כבלי מדע.
  When the author of this prayer speaks about the נבונים, this is a reference to the matriarchs; a mother is compared to someone with בינה. We are told in Berachot 57a that if someone dreams that he has slept with his mother he may look forward to insights and understanding. Our Kabbalists refer to בינה, insight, as אימא עילאה, "Mother Superior." 
  In this world the merit of the patriarchs is helpful to the sons; the reverse is true when one's parents have passed on into the world to Come, where the sons still on this earth are able to stand them in good stead by such merits as they accumulate. The reason that the father's merit can exert a favorable influence on the fate of the son is that the cause always influences the effect. In other words, the effect is mystically connected with its source even after it has parted company with it. There is an original common cause to both similar to the common raw material of the physical universe, the raw-material commonly known as <i>hiyuli</i>. This material is referred to in the Torah as תוהו. Nachmanides explains this at the beginning of his commentary on the Book of Genesis. The <i>hiyuli</i> in our world corresponds to a נקודה in the Celestial Regions which is called אין, nought. This is what Job (Job 28,12) referred to when he asked (rhetorically) והחכמה מאין נמצא? This verse is to be understood as a statement rather than as a question. In other words: The source of חכמה is אין. Bereshit Rabbah states that the universe was created for the sake of the אבות, i.e. for he sake of fathers. Now we can understand the sequence in the prayer under discussion. מה נאמר לפניך, "What can we say before You in view of the cessation of the merit of our patriarchs? Even assuming that the merits of our patriarchs had not expired, what did their accomplishments ever do for us except help us in this present world? Their influence was only centred in the Hiyuli. What are we going to do in the World to Come? 
  After all וימי חייהם הבל לפניך, "the days they sojourned on earth are as nothing before You!" Our sages have stated that "anyone who leaves behind him on this earth a son who is a Torah scholar may consider himself as though he were still alive." Even taking this fact into consideration, what good is it, since when we arrive in the World to Come and have to account for our conduct before You ימי חייהם הבל לפניך "the days of their lives are accounted as nothing?" In Psalms 36,7 man and beast are equated, i.e. אדם ובהמה; on the other hand Isaiah 63,16 states: כי אתה אבינו כי אברהם לא ידענו וישראל לא יכירנו, "You are our father for Abraham did not know us and Israel did not recognise us." The Talmud Shabbat 89b discusses this. It is well known that the word אדם is used when describing the spiritual aspect of man, whereas the exterior part of man is described as בשר אדם. Man is also called בהמה in the context of his body not being basically different from that of the other creatures in the animal world.
  ומותר האדם מן הבהמה – When the author of our prayer refers to the advantage man enjoys over the beasts as אין, the equivalent of Hiyuli in the Celestial Regions, he is telling us that in those Regions there is no-one who can help us (except G–d, as indicated by Isaiah 63,16). Hence all the salvations that we experience in this world are ultimately futile. This is what Solomon, in Kohelet 1,2, referred to when he exclaimed: הבל הבלים, הכל הבל, "vanity of vanities, all is vanity." A different approach to this line in the prayer understands it as a reference to Adam's two sons Cain and Abel. Cain has long ago ceased to exist and only Abel, or his גלגול, is still around, only because G–d accepted Abel's sacrifice. We have stated that Moses (after שת) was the re-incarnation of Abel. Since no one ever arose who could compare to Moses, the author of our prayer refers to this as the מותר האדם, the surviving remnant of original אדם.
  אבל אנחנו עמך – It is a fact that the merit of our patriarchs will assist us, provided we conduct ourselves as their true descendants and follow in their footsteps. We are urged to do so in Songs of Songs 1,8: צאי לך בעקבי הצאן, "Contemplate the actions of your ancestors" (cf. Rashi). When we do this their merits will be merged with all those described by the author of our prayers as בני בריתך, because we are בני אברהם אהבך. The prayer continues to cite the promises G–d made to Abraham in return for his offering Isaac on the altar. The mystical dimension of humility is deeply intertwined with the mystical dimension of love. The three patriarchs symbolize the three kinds of perfection we have discussed, that of the soul, that of the body and that of the way we handle money. Abraham demonstrated the perfection of the soul when he offered Isaac, his only beloved son, as a total offering, something which entailed a total abrogation of self. 
  Isaac achieved perfection of his body when he made his whole body into a total offering for G–d.
  Jacob achieved perfection in matters concerning money when he did not purchase the birthright for the material advantages this might confer upon him but for the added religious duties it imposed upon him.
  
  The Baal HaTurim draws our attention to the opening verse of our פרשה, and compares it with the last verse in the previous פרשה which speaks about performance of the commandments. He arrives at the conclusion that whereas the commandment has to be performed in this life, the reward for its performance, עקב, will have to await the Hereafter. Whereas the Baal HaTurim arrives at the same conclusion as the Talmud in Eruvin 22a where the word היום is stressed as opposed to the מחר, i.e. the Hereafter, when the reward is to be collected, he derives it from a different nuance in the text of the Torah. The reason may be that the Baal HaTurim found some problems with the exegesis of the Talmud. Had the interpretation of the Talmud been correct then all the Torah had to write in 7,11 is the whole verse without the word לעשותם at the end Furthermore, the Torah could simply have written לעשות instead of לעשותם. It seems therefore that the suffix ם is to contrast the difference between לעשותם and לעשותך. The difference between these two wordings is an allusion to the motivation which governs performance of the commandments. The Torah does not want us to perform the commandments for the sake of the eventual reward but לעשותם, for their own sake, i.e. לשמה. The fact that a new פרשה begins with the reference to the reward emphasizes that the reward is a corollary, a consequence of performance, but is not in a relationship of על מנת, "on condition that," to our performance of the מצוה. The humility implied in performance of the commandments on the basis of לעשותם (as we have explained the word) is further underlined by the Torah in 7,7: לא מרובכם מכל העמים .. כי אתם המעט מכל העמים, "It is not because you are the most numerous of all the nations that G–d took a liking to you….indeed you are the smallest of all the nations, etc." There was no need for the Torah to write that we are not the most numerous nation and to follow it up with the statement that we are the smallest nation. The last statement would have sufficed. The Talmud Chulin 89a concludes from this that the Torah's choice of language means that G–d likes us because, even when we are granted importance by G–d, we do not make this a pretext to become haughty, but we deprecate ourselves, behave humbly and modestly, ממעטים את עצמכם. This is reinforced in the lesson that Rabbi Levitas in Avot 4,4 urges us to heed: מאד מאד הוה שפל רוח, "Be exceedingly humble in spirit."
  
  
  The opening verse in our parsha may describe that the very משפטים which we observe will be our "reward," i.e. will be the cause that develops our humility within us. The word עקב, humility, is the result of our observing G–d's commandments. The next achievement will be יראת שמים, reverence for G–d, עקב, as a result of our having achieved a degree of humility. This could also be another meaning of the well known saying מצות אדם דש בעקביו, "the commandments a person 'threshes' with his heels." We normally understand this as a reference to those commandments which most people "trample," i.e. do not bother to observe. However, it could mean also that when one observes the commandments out of a sense of humility, בעקביו, the beneficial results could be far-reaching.
  ואהבת וברכך והרבך, "and He will love you, and bless you and multiply you" (7,13). The Torah mentions the three areas in which blessings are essential, i.e. life, sustenance, and children. The first expression והרבך, refers to life, i.e. למען ירבון ימיך, an increase in the number of our days. The second expression, וברך פרי בטנך, refers to children. The third expression, ופרי אדמתך, refers to our sustenance. The three areas in which the Torah promises us blessings are analogous to the three areas in which we strive to attain שלימות, perfection. The perfection of the נפש is achieved by the righteous who live on forever. The perfection of the body is assured when we experience the blessing of children who assure our continuity on earth. The perfection in money matters is attained when we experience the blessing of ample sustenance. Relating to this blessing in the proper manner, will bring about the first part of the verse: "And He will love you and bless you," and we will be blessed more than any other nation (7,14).
  ברוך תהיה מכל העמים . The words מכל העמים, may mean that because we keep ourselves apart, i.e. מ from all other nations we will experience greater blessings than any other nation. This is similar to כי לא מרובכם מכל העמים. The Torah describes examples of how the special blessings we will enjoy will become manifest. One example is verse 16: ואכלת את כל העמים, "You will consume all the other nations which G–d will deliver into your hands." This verse has to be understood according to the interpretation of Rabbi Bachyah ben Joseph ibn Pakuda, author of Chovot Halevavot. We find the following comment in the chapter שער הכניעה paragraph 7: "One of the pious people said that when the time comes for people to be shown their account (after death) they will be shown that many merits have been credited to their account of which they had been totally unaware. In fact, they will exclaim that they had never performed the good deeds credited to them in the ledger. It will be explained to them that every time someone abused them verbally in their hearing and they did not display anger or displeasure, such failure to respond was credited to them. Along this line we have an allusion in Reshit Chochmah in the fifth chapter of the שער הענוה, regarding David's reaction (Samuel II 16,10) to Shimi's curse. David speculated that perhaps G–d would turn his curse into a blessing when He saw how he, David, suffered from it emotionally, and furthermore how he had refrained from responding. David meant that G–d would credit Shimi's good deeds to his credit account.
  לא יהיה בך עקר ועקרה . We have a statement by Rav Yudah in the name of Rav in Rosh Hashanah 17a that any community leader who imposes more than the necessary fear upon the people under his charge (when he is not motivated by Heaven-oriented considerations) will fail have to a Torah scholar as a son. Rav supports this statement with a quotation from Job 37,24: "Therefore men are in awe of Him Whom none of the wise can perceive." Thus far the Talmud. This is what refers to the blessing in our verse. The main reason that a person wants to have children is that these should excel in performing good deeds. Our "fruit" are our good deeds. It follows that our children should excel in good deeds.
  והסיר ה' ממך כל חולי . The author of Reshit Chochmah writes in the third chapter of שער הענוה, quoting Rabbi Moshe Cordovero (author of Pardes Rimonim as well as Tomer Devorah) that people who wish to acquire the virtue of humility should use the stratagem of training themselves not to respond to slights directed at them. They should keep in mind that every slight suffered is part of the atonement for any sins they may have committed which would otherwise have to be expiated by physically harmful afflictions. By failing to respond to slights they might endure emotional pain which will not harm their bodies. This is the kind of sickness the Torah speaks of in our verse (7,15). The reason the Torah emphasizes that G–d Himself will remove the sickness may be that He Himself sent it in the first place in order to embarrass the person afflicted so that he would achieve atonement for any sins committed. This is what David (Samuel II 16,10) said about Shimi when he reacted to the curse by saying: ה' אמר לו לקלל את דוד "G–d may have told him to curse David."
  והסיר ה' ממך כל חולי וכל מדוי מצרים הרעים . The greatest sickness of the Egyptians was of a mental nature, i.e. they denied the existence and authority of G–d when they said: "Who is G–d, etc.?" They were so steeped in sexual immorality that the prophet Ezekiel 23,20 compares them to emitting semen like horses. Their indulgence in these activities was a display of their arrogance.
  Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai in Sotah 4b compares an arrogant person to an idol worshiper. This exegesis is based on the Torah applying the word "abomination" to both of these types of individual. Rabbi Yehudah castigates haughtiness as being the equivalent of heresy of the first order. He quotes a verse from our portion. It is written: ורם לבבך ושכחת את ה' אלוקיך "When you become haughty you forget the Lord your G–d." Different sages in the Talmud heap more scorn on arrogant people, each one supplying scriptural proof. The common denominator for this universal condemnation of the haughty person is that, inasmuch as G–d is our Master and we are His servants, how could a servant arrogate to himself importance in the presence of his master?
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  לא תירא מהם…כי תאמר בלבבך רבים הגוים האלה . I have written a commentary on this verse (7,17) elsewhere in which the word כי is treated as פשט, and divergent from the forced explanation of Rashi who comes to the conclusion that the word must be translated as "perhaps, maybe." I believe the meaning is: "If you say in your heart that you could never conquer these nations in the normal way without the active assistance by G–d because they are too numerous, I, G–d, tell you not to fear them because I will certainly assist you." If, on the other hand, you imagine that you are capable of accomplishing this task with your own strength, then you have reason to be afraid." The Torah spells this out later on in 8,12-18, etc., where Israel is warned not to ascribe its success to its own might.
  כל המצוה אשר אנכי מצוך היום . Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 60,2 advise that having commenced to perform a מצוה one should try to complete it. This is the message contained in our verse (11,8). It is only called a מצוה when performed in full.
  ארץ אשר לא במסכנות תאכל בה לחם . We have an allusion here to the advice of our sages not to eat like a glutton, but to eat in order to stay alive. We learned this first when the Torah describes the amount that Joseph sold to the brothers. The amount is described as שבר רעבון, i.e. enough grain to still the hunger (Genesis 42,19). This is the meaning of the words לא במסכנות. On the one hand one must be careful not to suffer from under-nourishment; on the other hand one must not eat as a matter of indulgence. This is why the Torah demands that we bless the Lord as soon as we have eaten enough to feel sated, (8,10). We should train ourselves to be satisfied with what G–d has granted us.
  ואת חטאתכם אשר עשיתם את העגל לקחתי ואשרוף אותו . "I took your sin, the calf you had made, and burned it." At first glance we must ask how it is possible to "burn a sin" as Moses says in (9,21)? I have explained on repeated occasions that every עברה performed by a person creates a "good angel, a constructive force," whereas every map, transgression, creates a "bad angel, a destructive force." Hence each respective "deed" assumes its independent existence. The repentant sinner must see to it that the destructive forces he has created will be neutralized. When Moses refers to "your sins," he refers to the destructive force created by the making of the golden calf. Moses says that he burned the destructive force thus created. 
  The Zohar, quoting Rabbi Chiyah on 9,27: "do not pay heed to the obstinacy of this people," asks how could Moses ask the King of Kings not to look in a certain direction when G–d looks into our hearts without even having the need to turn in any direction? G–d says of Himself (Jeremiah 23,24) that no matter how much a person tries to hide from Him he will not succeed because He has His eye trained on everything! However, the answer is as follows: Every good deed performed by a person appears before the Lord claiming it has been performed by its patron. G–d places it in a position where He constantly reminds Himself of the person who produced this positive force. The same is equally true of the transgressions performed by man. Each one assumes a posture before G–d accusing its patron of wrong-doing. This is the meaning of Deut. 32,19: וירא ה' וינאץ מכעס בניו ובנותיו "G–d saw and was vexed, and spurned His sons and daughters." What is the meaning of "He saw?" He saw what was standing before Him. As regards a penitent, on the other hand, we read in Samuel II 12,13: גם ה' העביר חטאתך לא תמות, "The Lord has remitted your sin; you shall not die." The expression העביר does not mean that the sin has been wiped out, but that G–d no longer focuses His attention on it so as to be able to treat the respective person well. When Moses asked G–d not to turn His attention to the obstinacy of the Jewish people this is what he had in mind. 
  
  Re'eh
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named שכיר יום.
  Commandment 436 enjoins that we must destroy idols and the utensils used in worshipping them. The Torah (12,2) writes: "You must destroy all the sites, etc."
  Commandment 437 forbids the destroying of the Holy Name of G–d or any of the sacred writings. The same applies to Synagogues, etc. The Torah (12,4) writes: "You must not do so to the Lord your G–d."
  Commandment 438 stipulates that one must offer the mandatory as well as any freewill offerings at the first festival which occurs after one has become obligated to present the offering in question. The Torah (12,5) writes: "You are to go there."
  Commandment 439 directs that all our sacrifices have to be offered up in the Temple. The Torah (12,14) writes: "There you shall sacrifice your burnt offerings."
  Commandment 440 forbids the offering of sacrifices outside the Temple. The Torah (12,13) writes: "Take care not to sacrifice your burnt offerings in any place you desire."
  Commandment 441 directs that any animal designated as a sacrifice which has developed a blemish must be redeemed before such an animal may be consumed by the owner (after usual slaughter, etc.) The Torah (12,15) writes: "But whenever you desire you may slaughter and eat meat …in any of your settlements." Our sages agree that this verse deals with animals which have become disqualified as sacrifices and have been redeemed.
  Commandment 442 forbids the eating of the second tithe of the grain harvest outside Jerusalem.
  Commandment 443 similarly forbids consumption of the second tithe of the grape harvest outside Jersualem.
  Commandment 444 forbids the eating of the second tithe of the olive harvest outside Jerualem. The Torah (12,17) writes: "You may not partake in your settlements of the tithes of your new grain or wine or oil."
  Commandment 445 forbids the eating of an unblemished firstling outside of Jerusalem, for the Torah (12,17) writes: "You may not eat of the firstlings of your herds or flocks, etc." This prohibition also includes a prohibition for a non-priest to eat such firstlings in any location.
  Commandment 446 forbids -even to priests-the consumption of the meat of sin offerings outside the precincts of the Temple. Our sages explained that this injunction is included in the wording of 12,17: "You may not eat within your gates, etc."
  Commandment 447 prohibits consumption of any part of the עולה, total offering. The Torah (12,17) speaks about your not being able to eat certain categories of offerings outside the Temple. We interpret this as if the Torah had said: "You may not eat certain categories of your vows which you will vow."
  Commandment 448 prohibits the eating of קדשים קלים, i.e. offerings some parts of which may be consumed by the owner, before completion of the sprinkling of the blood on the altar. This is also derived from 12,17. The word ונדבותיך is understood as basically superfluous and therefore used to refer to premature consumption of freewill offerings such as תודה and שלמים.
  Commandment 449 prohibits the eating of the בכורים, (first ripe produce of various crops) before they have been deposited in the Temple Courtyard. The Torah in 12,17 refers to them as תרומת ידך.
  Commandment 450 forbids us to abandon the Levite and enjoins us not to be lax in paying them the various gifts the Torah has assigned to them. This means that we must not delay payment of the tithes especially before the festivals on which all male Jews make their pilgrimage to Jerusalem; the Torah has especially enjoined us to see to it that the Levites should be able to rejoice on those festivals. This is the reason for 12,19: "Be sure not to neglect the Levite as long as you live in the land."
  Commandment 451 legislates the slaughtering of animals as a prior condition to their being fit to eat. The Torah (12,21) writes: "You must slaughter your cattle or sheep… and then you may eat."
  Commandment 452 forbids the consumption of tissue from a living animal. The Torah (12,23) writes: "You must not eat the life with the flesh."
  Commandment 453 provides a way to offer sacrifices that originate outside the Holy Land in the Holy Temple. The Torah (12,26) writes: "But such sacred or freewill donations as you may have you shall pick up and bring to the place that the Lord will select."
  Commandments 454 and 455 warn us neither to add nor to subtract from the commandments. The Torah (13,1) writes: "Neither add to it nor take away from it."
  Commandment 456 forbids paying heed to a prophet who prophesies in the name of a foreign deity. The Torah (13,4) states: “Do not heed the words of that prophet”.
  Commandment 457 prohibits the seducing of any Jew to serve idols. The Torah (13,12) writes: "They must not continue to do such evil in your midst."
  Commandment 458 forbids us to extend our love to a מסית, seducer, (in the sense of missionary for another religion). The Torah (13,9) writes: "and do not listen to him and show him no pity, etc.."
  Commandment 459 directs that we not abandon our hatred against such a seducer. The Torah (13,9) states: "Do not display any goodwill towards him."
  Commandment 460 forbids us to take any measures to protect such a seducer. The Torah (13,9) writes: "Do not protect him."
  Commandment 461 prohibits us from offering excuses such as mitigating circumstances for the seducer or citing other merits he may have to his credit. The Torah (13,9) insists: "Do not have any pity on him."
  Commandment 462 urges us not to fail to offer any possible evidence against such a seducer. The Torah (13,9) writes: "Do not cover up for him."
  Commandment 463 stipulates that witnesses must be thoroughly examined. The Torah (13,15) writes: "You shall investigate and inquire and interrogate thoroughly."
  Commandment 464 directs that the inhabitants of an עיר הנדחת, (a city, the majority of whose inhabitants have become idol worshippers), must be executed and the city itself must be burned. The Torah (13,16) writes: "Put the inhabitants of that town to the sword…doom all that is in it …burn it to the ground."
  Commandment 465 prohibits the rebuilding of such a town. The Torah (13,17) states: "it must never be rebuilt."
  Commandment 466 prohibits us from deriving any benefit from the property or belongings of any of the citizens of such a city. The Torah (13,18) writes: "Let nothing that has been doomed stick to your hand."
  Commandment 467 prohibits the making of incisions on one's flesh in the manner of the pagans. The Torah (14,1) states: "Do not make gashes on yourselves."
  Commandment 468 prohibits the shaving of one's head on account of a deceased person. The Torah (14,1) states: "Do not make a bald spot between your eyes on account of a dead person."
  Commandment 469 prohibits the eating of sacred sacrificial meat which has become disqualified. The Sifri derives this commandment from 14,3: "Do not eat any abomination."
  Commandment 470 directs that birds have to be checked for qualifying marks that make them fit for consumption. The Torah (14,11) states: "You may eat any clean bird."
  Commandment 471 prohibits us from eating winged swarming things. The Torah (14,19) writes: "Do not eat any winged swarming things, they are unclean for you."
  Commandment 472 prohibits the eating of animals which have died of natural causes (or by a death other than ritual slaughter). The Torah (14,21) says: "You shall not eat any נבלה."
  Commandment 473 directs the giving of tithes from our major crops. The Torah (14,22) states: "You shall set aside every year a tenth part of the yield," etc. In this instance the Torah speaks of the "second" tithe, מעשר שני.
  Commandment 474 directs the setting aside of a tithe for the poor in the third and sixth year of the Shemittah cycle. The Torah (14,28-29) writes: "At the end of three years you shall bring out the full tithe of your harvest….and the Levite and the poor shall eat it."
  Commandments 475 and 476 provide for שמטת כספים, the relinquishing of outstanding loans that have not been repaid at the end of the Shemittah year. The Torah (15,2) writes: "Every creditor shall remit the due that he daims…he shall not dun his fellow or kinsman," etc.
  Commandment 477 instructs us to dun the pagan (during that year if he has not repaid his debts to us). The Torah (15,3) writes: "You shall dun the stranger."
  Commandment 478 enjoins us to give charity to the poor. The Torah (15,8) writes: "You must open your hand and lend him," etc.
  Commandment 479 forbids the denying of charity to those in need. The Torah (15,7) writes: "Do not harden your heart," etc.
  Commandment 480 forbids us to deny a loan because of fear that due to the proximity of the Shemittah year the borrower might stall the repayment and thereby force us to cancel the debt. The Torah (15,9-10) states: "Beware lest you harbour base thoughts, etc…..Give to him, readily," etc.
  Commandment 481 instructs us not to release a Jewish servant from service empty-handed. The Torah (15,13) states: "Do not let him go empty-handed."
  Commandment 482 instructs us to provide such a servant with a financial stake. The Torah (15,14) writes: "Furnish him from your flock," etc.
  Commandment 483 forbids us to use the firstling of the male pure animals (or any other consecrated animals) for any kind of work. The Torah (15,19) writes: "You must not work your firstling ox," etc.
  Commandment 484 forbids shearing the wool of the firstling male animal. The Torah (15,19) states: "Do not shear the firstling," etc.
  Commandment 485 forbids consumption of leavened products as of noon on the fourteenth of Nissan. The Torah (16,3) writes: "You shall not eat the Passover while anything leavened may be eaten." This refers to the time when the Passover lamb may already be slaughtered.
  Commandment 486 forbids the leaving over any part of the חגיגה offering till the third morning of the Holiday. The Torah (16,4) writes: "And none of the flesh of what you slaughter on the evening of the first day shall be left until morning."
  Commandment 487 forbids us to offer the Passover sacrifice on a private altar. The Torah (16,5) states: "You must not slaughter…in any of the settlements," etc.
  Commandment 488 enjoins us to rejoice on the various festivals. The Torah (16,11) writes: "You shall rejoice before the Lord your G–d."
  Commandment 489 instructs Jewish males to appear before the Lord three times a year. The Torah (16,16) writes: "Three times a year…all your males shall appear," etc.
  Commandment 490 enjoins us not to appear before the Lord empty-handed on these occasions. The Torah (16,16) states: "They shall not appear before the Lord empty-handed."
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The commandments mentioned in this portion may be divided into three categories. They correspond to the three "pillars" that support the universe, i.e. תורה-עבודה-גמילות חסדים, Torah, service of the Lord and the dispensation of kind deeds. Torah is represented by commandments such as not to add or to deduct from them. In other words, we are ordered to preserve the שלימות, perfection, wholeness of the Torah. Philosophers have already said that it is part of the definition of perfection that one cannot add to it or detract from it. Perfection is indivisible. Torah is totally bound up with the great and Holy Name of G–d i.e. תורת ה' תמימה. I have elaborated on this in my treatise מסכת שבועות, section תורה אור. The Zohar, commenting on Exodus 3,15: זה שמי … זה זכרי, points out that the numerical value of י-ה+שמי=365, whereas the numerical value of ו-י+זכרי=248, together 613, i.e. the number of commandments in the Torah. G–d also describes Himself as אני ראשון ואני אחרון, "I am first and I am last," indicating total perfection. 
  This is why the Torah warns in 12,4 not to erase the Holy Name of G–d nor to destroy any of the stones of the Holy Temple. The letters of the name of G–d between them make up the house G–d resides in, i.e. the Holy Temple. We perceive of these letters as if they made up the body of the "house," and of the Name as the "soul" of these letters. Anyone destroying the "House" is as though he were destroying G–d Himself, so to speak. This is the mystical dimension of לא תעשון כן לה' אלוקיכם.
  Most of the commandments listed in this portion are of the עבודה, service, kind. The Torah therefore legislates that the place for such service must be fixed, i.e. the site G–d has chosen and called בית הבחירה. The Torah (12,5) therefore instructs us לשכנו תדרשו ובאת שמה, "seek out His Presence and come there." The word לשכנו alludes to the שכינה which resides in the Sanctuary as we know from וה' בהיכל קדשו, הס וגו' "And the Lord is in the Sanctuary of His holiness, be silent, etc.!" (Chababuk 2,20). The name of G–d is the reference to the שכינה, Presence; for it is where His glory and the strength of His תפארת, magnificence, unite. This is what the Torah (12,5) means with the words לשום שמו שם, "to place His name there." the Targum renders it as לאשראה שכנתה תמן. The wicked walk outside the holy place because they are the קליפה, the husk. This being so you must be careful not to offer your sacrifices outside the Holy Temple (12,13), lest it be perceived as if you offered them to these forces of impurity.
  On occasion, "sparks of holiness" burst out beyond the confines of the Temple precincts. When that happens it is a duty to return them to their proper place. This is the mystical dimension of the legislation that permits animals that have been consecrated as offerings outside ארץ ישראל to be brought to the Temple and to be offered on the altar there. When that (12,26) occurs, the "branch" is considered as having been restored to its trunk. The Torah describes the process as שם תעלה, "There you will elevate it." This means that such animals can be raised to a sacred level only in the Temple. 
  Since holiness exists only in the Holy Land, we are commanded to "depart from evil," i.e. to destroy all the sites where the Gentiles have worshiped This commandment applies only inside the boundaries of ארץ ישראל. Our sages (Chulin 13b) have alluded to this mystery when they said that Gentiles in the rest of the world are not considered as idol worshipers. This means that idol worshipers who live in the land of Israel which is under the direct rule of G–d serve Him in an inadequate manner, are heretics. This is what is called idol-true worship. The Gentiles who live in the rest of the world – which is under the authority of negative forces, חיצוניות, however – do not reject the authority under which they live. Just as it is a serious sin to destroy even a single stone of the Holy Temple, so it is a great מצוה to destroy – and never to rebuild – an עיר הנדחת, a city within the boundaries of ארץ ישראל the majority of whose inhabitants have turned to idol worship. Its very site has become defiled. Whatever applies to such a city applies to the מסית ומדיח, those that have seduced their fellow-Jews to turn to idol worship. Uprooting such cities or people is equivalent to uprooting the residual pollutant of the original serpent. Just as G–d cursed the serpent immediately (Genesis 3,14) without making any allowances or even asking why the serpent had seduced Eve, so we too have to deal with such phenomena without our customary recourse to finding every possible merit to save the transgressor from judicial execution. The commandment not to love the seducer enjoins us to emulate G–d's conduct in this respect. Since Genesis 3,15, G–d has made the animosity between human beings and serpents a natural phenomenon, something that we need not, or better should not strive to overcome. The false prophet similarly is part of the phenomenon of the pollutant of the serpent rearing its ugly head.
  Let us get back to the main subject. The Holy Temple and Jerusalem are the root of sanctity on earth. This is the real reason that the priests are not allowed to consume the בכורים before they have been deposited in the precincts of the Holy Temple. Inasmuch as the בכורים, the first ripe fruit of the year's various crops, are called ראשית, this teaches that great sanctity attaches to them, as we have explained on another occasion. This is why they have to be transported to a sacred place, and why people who are sanctified for their G–d, i.e. the priests, have to consume them inside Jerusalem. The mystical dimension of why similar rules apply to the consumption of קדשים קלים, sacrificial meat of a subordinate degree of sanctity, as well as to the consumption of the second tithes of the grain, oil, and grape harvests is that these represent the basic elements of our food supply. The remains of the sacrificial meat may not be eaten until their blood has been sprinkled on the altar because the blood represents the life of these respective animals. After this "life" has been dedicated to the altar, the body of the animal may be enjoyed. Remember that, just as the service, i.e. the sacrificial animal belongs to G–d as a gift, so does the person performing the service since the main purpose of sacrificial service is to bring oneself close to G–d, i.e. to make a present of oneself to G–d. We have explained the concept of אדם כי יקריב מכם, that man sacrifices himself, many times. The total offering, עולה, is in a class by itself; all of the animal (except the skin) is burned on the altar; this is because it is meant to atone for sinful thoughts as opposed to sinful deeds. When the Torah (Leviticus 6,2) describes it as מוקדה על המזבח כל הלילה, "remaining on the site where it is burned all night long," this is an allusion to sinful thoughts which occupy a person while he lies in bed. The קדשים קלים, on the other hand, allude to the שלימות הגוף, the perfection of one's body.
  The mystical dimension of the firstling of the pure male animals is an allusion to the people of Israel who have been described by G–d (Exodus 4,22) as His בכור, His first-born. They are without blemish, a perfect congregation whom G–d (Ezekiel 34,31) has also called צאן מרעיתי "sheep of My pasture." This is why they may only be eaten by the priests. The deeper reason why when such firstlings have become blemished and been redeemed, they may be eaten by ordinary Israelites is, that the Israelites themselves also possess some degree of sanctity, have been called אדם. Adam used to be holy. He would have remained holy had he not sinned. This firstling animal was also holy until it contracted a blemish, the equivalent of sin. Just as sinful man can redeem himself, as we know from Isaiah 43,4: "ואתן אדם תחתיך," | give men in exchange for you," so also can this animal be redeemed. This is the mystical dimension of the Azazel which carries our sins. The Torah (Leviticus 16,22) speaks of ונשא השעיר עליו את כל עונותם, which our Rabbis read as on עונות תם, that the he-goat of the Azazel carries on its head the sins of a firstling animal contracting a blemish. On the other hand, we are forbidden to inflict a blemish on it in order to be able to consume it (after redemption). It is quite obvious that such one must not benefit from such an action. It is also forbidden to use animals consecrated as an offering for any mundane task and to use their hair after it has been shorn. The reason for this is easy to understand when one considers that the tablets which Moses had shattered also retained their sanctity.
  The general rule we can derive from all that we have said so far is that the "inner" i.e. most sublime, sacrifice is אדם. This explains our tradition (Chagigah 12) that after death the archangel (High Priest) Michael offers up our souls on the Celestial Altar. This is all part of the great mystery of man having been created in the image of G–d. In view of all these considerations we can understand the Torah warning us repeatedly how careful we must be not to take human life before the most exhaustive interrogations of the witnesses and before a thorough examination of all the circumstances surrounding the accusation leveled against someone accused of a capital crime. When an execution is ordered after all these precautions not to commit judicial murder had been taken, such a death of the accused may be viewed as death at the hands of Heaven. Just as G–d is a true witness and a true judge, so the members of the Supreme Court, Sanhedrin, must be as clear about the guilt of the accused before they convict him as G–d is clear in His mind about the guilt of people He decides to kill. Once these procedures have been followed, the verse in Psalms 116,15: "Death is precious to G–d," has been fulfilled.
  In view of the fact that "death is precious to G–d," seeing that Israelites are holy (due to their divine soul which is fit to be a sacrifice to G–d after the death of their bodies), the Torah commands us not to inflict cuts and incisions on our bodies as a sign of mourning for someone who has died. After all, we are "children of the Lord our G–d," and not like the Caananites. Those nations are quite right in performing such incisions as signs of mourning; when they lose a near and dear one, he is lost forever for he, like them, has no share in the World to Come. On the other hand, when an Israelite dies he joins his Father in Heaven, surely not something to be marked by disfiguring our bodies. Death, in our case, simply means trading a temporary home for a permanent one.
  To return to our main subject, that the person presenting the offering is in fact the real sacrifice, something we derived from the wording of Leviticus 1,2: אדם כי יקריב מכם. This has an additional mystical dimension. It can happen that man is "sacrificed" even in our world [not only when the soul is sacrificed by the archangel Michael on the Celestial Altar. Ed.]. This happens as a result of the transmigration of souls as we have explained earlier (Torah Ohr on Eikev). It is the reason why we are commanded to slaughter animals even when we consume them as חולין, non-consecrated meat. Extreme care has to be taken in the performance of ritual slaughter so that we do not wind up eating נבלה. When this happens the verse from Genesis 34,7: נבלה עשה בישראל, "he committed an outrage in Israel," would apply. No one knows whose soul the animal in question harbored. By not having been slaughtered in the most meticulous way a great injustice may have been done. According to the directive ואהבת לרעך כמוך, "Love your neighbor like yourself," the obligation to kill the animal in such a way that its death elevates it spiritually is included. Should the animal die of natural causes (any cause other than approved ritual slaughter) the spirit of impurity which was contained in that animal will not have been released but will suffuse it. On the other hand, if it is healthy and contains some spark of sanctity, and is killed by means of ritual slaughter the soul will exit in purity.
  You will now understand that if someone eats tissue from a living animal (one that is not completely dead) he may possibly be practicing a form of cannibalism, i.e. eating tissue of a fellow human being whose soul was re-incarnated in that animal. This is the mystical dimension of the Torah telling us : "Do not eat the soul with the flesh" (12,23). The entire legislation about domestic animals, free roaming beasts, or even birds which are "impure," is connected to the possibility that such animals harbor a spark of holiness by being host to a soul which had once inhabited a human body, a soul which had originated in the Celestial Spheres. It is irrelevant in this respect whether the soul in question originated in the "left" or the "right" side of the emanations. I have written more about the latter aspect in my commentary on פרשת שמיני. It is when the Israelites conduct themselves in a spirit of sanctity that the promise of Exodus 25,8: "They shall make a Sanctuary for Me and I will dwell among them," will be fulfilled. The people themselves are the Sanctuary within whom G–d promises to reside provided that they lead consecrated lives. Man's three major parts, i.e. the head, the heart and the bowels, correspond to the קדשי קדשים, Holy of Holies, the היכל, Sanctuary, and the חצר הקודש the Holy Courtyard surrounding the Temple, respectively. We have discussed this at length in פרשת תרומה. When a Jew consumes consecrated food he is considered as if he were the sacrifice offered on the Altar. Concerning this aspect of our lives, the Rabbis have said that nowadays our table serves as the altar.
  The commandment to rejoice on the festivals and to make the pilgrimages to Jerusalem on the respective festivals of פסח, שבועות, סוכות, applies to every male Israelite. Our sages (Chagigah 2a) have said: כדרך שבא לראות כך בא ליראות, "Just as a person comes to ‘see,’ so he is seen." If he wants to be seen in the Holy Temple, in the residence of G–d's glory, then he first must fulfill סור מרע ועשה טוב, "Abandon evil and do good" (Psalms 34,15). How could one failing to comply have the effrontery to show himself to G–d and offer total offerings and festival offerings? As a sinner he is even forbidden to show himself i.e. to look upon the faces of רשעים! Having mended his ways, however, he himself becomes the sacrifice by means of the offering he has brought in the Temple.
  When the Torah (16,16) commands that these pilgrimages have to be made on three occasions annually, this is an allusion to Isaac, an unblemished total offering. In connection with the עקדת יצחק the Torah mentions the word Yireh or Yera'eh three times (Genesis 22, 8-14-14). "Three times a year every male of yours shall be seen by the Lord your G–d in the place G–d will select," corresponds to Genesis 22,8: "G–d will select for Himself the lamb as the total offering my son." This is because the words in Exodus 34,23 "את פני האדון ה' אלוקי ישראל" are an expression of a decree by G–d the "Master" Who decreees that He wants to see them together in one spot. "Three times as year every one of your males shall be seen by the Lord your G–d" (Exodus 23,17), corresponds to the second time the word is used in connection with the עקדה. The third directive to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem is in our verse here and corresponds to the third time the Torah used the expression יראה in connection with the binding of Isaac. It is a reference to the Mountain of G–d, Moriah. The warning השמר לך (12,13) in this portion not to offer sacrifices anywhere else, corresponds to similar words used by Abraham in his instructions to Eliezer (Genesis 24,6) not to bring Isaac back to Ur Kasdim whence Abraham had emigrated to the land of Canaan. The common denominator to all this is that Isaac, as an unblemished total offering, was not allowed to leave ארץ ישראל.
  The instruction in 12,19: השמר לך פן תעזוב את הלוי כל ימיך על אדמתיך, "Be careful not to neglect the Levite as long as you live on your land," is similarly based on the perception of the Levite as the sacrifice. We know that Isaac represents the מדת הדין, the attribute of Justice, i.e. a person whom G–d could deal with on the basis of his near-perfection. We know that the Levite was not allowed to offer the sacrifices on the altar; yet he is repeatedly referred to as performing עבודה. In connection with the sacrifices the Torah always uses the Ineffable four-lettered Name, an allusion to the attribute of Mercy. There is the further fact that the Torah describes the Levites as put at the disposal of Aaron the Priest and his sons (Numbers 8,19); the latter represented the מדת החסד, the attribute of Mercy. However, this is an indication that in this instance the attribute of Justice is used to "sweeten" the attribute of Mercy by uniting with it. עבודה and תורה go hand in hand; we know this from Deut. 33,10 where the task of the Levites to teach Israel the Torah is outlined. In practical terms, the sacrificial service, עבודה, was always accompanied by readings from the מעשה בראשית (Taanit 27). The members of the tribe of Levi were the principal teachers of Torah amongst the people. The gifts the Torah sets aside for the Levites are designed to free the Levites from the burden of having to earn a living. They then can devote themselves to their principal task of disseminating Torah knowledge. We have explained two of the three "pillars" on which the continued existence of the universe depends, i.e. תורה ועבודה.
  The third such "pillar," namely גמילות חסדים, which includes the dispensing of charity, is also dealt with in our portion at length. The Torah especially emphasizes that such charitable deeds are not to be one-time donations, but that: "you must repeatedly open your hand" when the need arises (15,5). This is accompanied by the prohibition to "close your fist" (15,7).
  The following is a quote from the commentary of the Rekanati on the subject of צדקה: "It is well known that a great many commandments are bound up with the commandment to give charity. The matter is similar to the number of organs in man's body which all depend on the soul for his survival. Some of man's organs more than others depend on the health of the central life-sustaining force. Were it not for the dispensation of charity, the poor would be forced to engage in thieving, robbery and a host of other transgressions. We have pointed out on numerous occasions that when good deeds are performed "down here" in our world, positive forces are created in the Celestial Regions. Even a small coin donated to charitable causes in our world is called צדקה. This enables the צדיק to unite with the emanation צדק [otherwise known as מלכות. Ed.] and to establish harmony with it. This is the meaning of Isaiah 32,18: והיה מעשה הצדקה שלום, ועבודת הצדקה השקט ובטח עד עולם, "For the work of righteousness shall be peace, and the effect of righteousness calm and confidence forever." The prophet Hosea 10,12 also states: זרעו לכם לצדקה, קצרו לפי חסד, "Sow righteousness for yourselves; reap the fruits according to goodness." We have other verses such as וצדקה תציל ממות, "And (the performance of) righteousness saves from death" (Proverbs 10,2). When people sin and the earth dies out (as a result), then the "feet" of the emanation מלכות descend towards "death" and anyone who causes any damage [in the sense of spiritually undermining the basis. Ed.] to the feet of this "מלכות" will die without mercy and pity. Woe to such a time! When someone, however, causes the צדיק to be united with צדק, beneficial rainfall for the earth will result bringing life in its wake. From this we learn that he who donates to charity in our world causes acts of righteousness to be performed in the Celestial Regions. This is the mystical dimension of the statement in Proverbs 10,2 that "righteousness saves from death." Were it not for the union established with the emanation מלכות, anyone who would do something prejudicial to it would die. This is the meaning of Proverbs 16,12: כי בצדקה יכון כסא, "For a throne is firm if based on righteousness;" we have other verses in the same sense such as Isaiah 1,27: ושביה בצדקה, that the repentant sinners will be redeemed through righteousness. A similar thought is expressed in Isaiah 54,14: בצדקה תכוננו, "You shall be established through righteousness." The secret of domestic peace and harmony is also anchored in the practice of צדקה. 
  This is the meaning of Psalms 106,3: "Happy, i.e. אשרי are those who act justly, who do right, עשה צדקה at all times." The word אשרי is used only in connection with people who through their actions manage to bring about a unification of several ספירות, emanations. This is the reason that the word only occurs in the genitive, i.e. as attached to someone or something else. When the Psalmist in 106,3 mentions שומרי משפט, he refers to the preservation of the "center line," קו האמצעי, which is called משפט. One must try to prevent this "line" from coming within the domain of טומאה, impurity. The words עושה צדקה בכל עת refer to the idea –which I have already mentioned – that the union of the צדיק with צדק is called צדקה. When צדקה is missing one is עני, "poor," so to speak. We have an example in Psalms 102,1: תפלה לעני כי יעטוף, "A prayer of the lowly man when he is faint." This is the mystical dimension of צדקה wherever it appears." Thus far the Rekanati on the subject.
  The commandment to provide a Jewish servant [generally someone who has worked for the master for six years. Ed.] who leaves one's employment with a stake, as per 15,14 falls under the heading of both צדקה and גמילות חסדים. The remission of outstanding debts at the end of the Shemittah year as well as the generosity displayed towards a servant leaving one's employment allude to the reward G–d will pay to those who serve Him faithfully. The whole subject of the שמטה, seventh year, legislation alludes to a world which is totally based on the concept of the Sabbath, the period when the reward for מצות performed in this world will be collected. G–d will יגוש, "dun" us for what we owe Him. He will instead pay us a generous reward because we have fulfilled our duties towards others as outlined in the legislation in this chapter.
  The overwhelming number of מצות recorded in this portion of the Torah do not apply in our times and can be fulfilled only during periods when the Temple is functioning. Even such commandments as פתוח תפתח, "keep opening your hand, to the poor," can only be fulfilled by people who are economically capable. A person who hardly has enough to get by cannot even fulfill this commandment. Even when the Temple was standing one could not fulfill the directive to give tithes and consume the second tithe in Jerusalem unless one owned a farm and grew crops. How then can a person attain his perfection when we have said that fulfillment of the 613 commandments of the Torah is the key to such perfection? When the Torah begins this portion by saying in 11,32: "Observe all these statutes and social laws which I place before you this day," and goes on to say in the same breath: "These are the statutes, etc., which you are to observe to do in the land," the Torah clues us in to the answer. In 11,32 the Torah mentions first שמירה and עשיה of the respective statutes and social laws, whereas in 12,1 the Torah mentions the statutes and social laws before the directive to observe and perform them. This is similar to the way the Torah (Genesis 26,5) describes Abraham as having observed G–d's various types of commandments. Clearly, Abraham could not have done this (in the form of fulfilling an obligation) as the commandments had not yet been revealed.
  The word שמירה has two meanings. One is that one "keeps" i.e. observes commandments which have been given. The second meaning is "waiting." One is constantly looking forward to a certain event occurring. Abraham waited for an opportunity to observe these various מצות, The expression ושמרתם לעשות means that a person should be in a frame of mind where he looks forward to fulfilling the various commandments which he has not yet had an opportunity to fulfill. In the meantime, he observes those commandments which he has found an opportunity to observe. When he relates to all of G–d's commandments in this way, the Torah promises him an equal reward for the commandments which he has not had an opportunity to fulfill. Chapter 11,32 refers to the commandments which can be fulfilled, whereas 13,1 refers to all those that cannot yet be fulfilled for one reason or another.
  Man's position in this world is no more than that of a laborer who collects his wages on a daily basis as long as he lives. His is not the responsibility to complete a certain task; all he has to do is to work faithfully at the task he has hired himself out for. If he dies before he has completed the whole task, the master rewards him as if he had; that part of the task he had failed to complete was due to the "Master's" decision to remove the worker from this earth. 
  I have written an article on this subject of our duties on earth being similar to that of the day-laborer when I was still quite young. I have decided to copy it here:
  את הברכה אשר תשמעו . We may ask why the Torah (11,27) uses the preposition אשר when describing the blessing, whereas in connection with the curse the Torah (28,15) uses the preposition אם. Some commentators explain that we can understand this when we understand the saying of our sages in Avot 4,2 that שכר מצוה מצוה, "the reward of performing one מצוה is another מצוה" The meaning would be that "once you start listening to G–d's commandments your reward will be that you will feel the urge to observe still more of the commandments." This would be analogous to והיה אם שמוע-תשמעו, (11,13 et al). The difficulty with this explanation is that we find a similar construction used in the Torah when the opposite attitude is described, i.e. והיה אם שכח תשכח (8,19).
  There are, however, some differences in the nuances of the expressions used by our sages when describing the Heavenly assist that is held out for people who try to do the right thing. The Talmud says: הבא לטהר מסייעין לו, "He who undertakes to purify receives direct help." When describing the opposite, the sages phrased it: הבא לטמא מוצא לו פותחין, "When someone sets out to defile., one gives him the opportunity" (Shabbat 104a). In other words: no direct assistance is provided to the sinner. This is in accordance with the principle מדה טובה מרובה ממדת פורענות, that when both positive and negative attributes are present, the positive attribute is always in the ascendancy, (cf. Rashi on Exodus 34,7 that the reward outranks the punishment by a ratio of 500 to 1, et al). [There is another wording of the quote הבא לטמא which describes apparent direct help, namely פותחין לו, "one opens the 'door' for him." Ed.] Whereas there is no problem with the first version, the second version appears to conflict with the rule that the מדה טובה is preponderant. Another difficulty in our text is that the Torah commences using the singular, i.e. ראה, whereas it continues with the plural לפניכם.
  Basically, the Torah speaks about blessings and curses. In the Celestial Regions both blessings and curses originate in the same domain. There is total unity, i.e. there really is no curse. Whatever originates in the most remote recesses of the Celestial Regions is only blessing. Curses occur only when the recipient or intended recipient of the blessings has forfeited them through his behavior. A blessing is a sign of a normal development, i.e. blessing is channeled from Heaven earthwards. The evil some people experience, and which they ascribe to an outpouring of curses from Heaven, is merely a blessing which these people are not able to cope with due to their faulty disposition. This approach helps us to understand Lamentations 3,38: מפי עליון לא תצא הרעות והטוב, that this is not the order in which blessings and curse emanate from above. On the contrary, the order is הטובות והרע, first the good and then the evil. Everything emanating from G–d is originally good. Not everything which is evil originates from G–d. עוז וחדוה במקומו, (Chronicles I 16,27) "Strength and joy are in His place." This tells us that what is good remains inviolate. Only evil is subject to evolution. One of the reasons that we the Jewish people are called ישראל, is because due to our origin in Heaven we are part of the Divine, though on earth we have become separated from the Divine because of the fact that we now possess bodies. The opening words of the פרשה, i.e. ראה אנכי, are in the singular because they point to our Divine origin. When the Torah switches to the use of the plural, i.e. לפניכם, this is in recognition of the fact that we have become composed of a great variety of differently oriented beings. The same applies to the way the Torah prefaces the blessings in the singular before switching to the plural. The curse will happen only אם לא תשמעו, "If you (pl) will not listen," an allusion to the lack of unity.
  Another difficulty in the text is the Torah's use of the expression נתינה, "giving," when speaking about the blessing and the curse. Blessing is something intangible; how can one apply the expression נתן to it?
  There is an interesting comment by Yalkut Shimoni on 11,13 item 863. We note that the word כל is missing when the Torah speaks about our collective observance of its commandments. The Torah writes: והיה אם שמוע תשמעו אל מצותי אשר אנכי מצוה אתכם היום, "It will come to pass when you will surely listen to My commandments which I command to you this day." The Yalkut explains that the wording is designed to forestall our argument that we cannot fulfill all the commandments, that "its measure is longer than the earth" (Job 11,9). We may compare the situation to a king who possesses a deep pit, so deep that no one has probed its exact depth. He tells a member of his staff to hire workers to fill up the pit; he does so. One of the more foolish of the workers takes a look into the pit and asks: "Will I ever finish filling up this hole?" The intelligent worker relates quite differently to the task at hand He is not concerned with the time it may take to complete the task but reasons that, since he is a day laborer and gets paid for the amount of time he puts in, he is happy to have found work which may assure him of a continued livelihood for an indeterminate period. This is what G–d says here to the Jewish people. He tells us not to worry about the immensity of the task but to view ourselves as day laborers and to be happy that we will receive a reward for every day that we keep observing His commandments. Thus far the Yalkut. This Yalkut presents a difficulty. We can understand the comparison offered when we adopt the viewpoint expressed by Rabbi Yochanan in Sanhedrin 111 in connection with Isaiah 5,14: "Sheol has opened wide its gullet and parted its jaw in a measureless gap." Rabbi Yochanan differed from Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish; the latter applied this verse to the consignment to purgatory of people who have omitted only a single statute in their observance. Rabbi Yochanan did not agree that G–d is so demanding and therefore preferred the opposite interpretation, i.e. that observance of a single statute is enough to save a person from being consigned to purgatory. How can we reconcile the view of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish with that of the Yalkut? 
  Another difficulty is that the Yalkut's interpretation contradicts such verses as 28,1 which seems to emphasize observance of את כל מצותיו אשר אנכי מצוך היום, "all His commandments which I command to you this day?" A further difficulty in the parable mentioned in the Yalkut is the worker claiming "I am happy that I have found work for myself." How can the filling up of the pit be compared with the performance of all of the Torah laws? It is possible to fill the pit completely, though it may take time. No Israelite, however, can observe all the 613 commandments by himself! However, the comment by the intelligent worker answered the worry of the foolish worker that he would not receive any pay until he had completed the entire task of filling in the pit.
  We find a basic discussion about the relative merit of Torah study and performance of the commandments in Kiddushin 40b. Rabbi Tarfon said that performance, i.e. practice, outranks study, i.e. theory in its ethical/moral value. Rabbi Akivah thought that study is of greater moral/ethical value. Thereupon the other sages present said that study is greater because it leads to performance of the commandments. Most commentators are puzzled by this. The very reason cited in the last statement implies that since the objective of study is performance, performance must be more important! Rabbi Yitzchak Arama in his Akeidat Yitzchak (chapter 47 on פרשת משפטים) deals with this problem at length. The subject is also discussed by Joseph Albo in his Ikkarim third treatise, introduction to פרקי משה to Song of Songs. I, too, feel entitled to offer my own contribution on this subject.
  It is quite true that one can answer that when the sages said that study leads to performance they did not mean to imply that study is part of the objective and what precedes it, but they meant to say that the relationship of study and performance is similar to the relationship of cause and effect. Study is viewed as the cause, performance as the effect. It is generally accepted that the cause is superior to the effect. Our sages (Sukkah 52) illustrated this when they advised that if one encountered Satan i.e. the evil urge, one should drag him to the house of study. This is because the Torah is called תושיה, i.e. something that weakens the flesh. This in turn will enable him to better follow the dictates of his brain and to serve his Creator and perform the commandments. This is the meaning of: "study leads to performance."
  I believe that I have found a better meaning of the statement in Kidushin (that study leads to action). It is something I have discussed in connection with the tradition that our 248 limbs correspond to the 248 positive commandments of the Torah and that the 365 sinews correspond to our 365 negative commandments. One can achieve perfection of one's body by performing all the 613 commandments. In that connection we raised the question that such perfection is impossible to achieve in view of the many commandments which simply cannot be fulfilled by any individual, however pious he may be. Some can be fulfilled only by priests, others can only be fulfilled in consequence of the committing of certain sins, something which is certainly not desirable. We wrote that Rabbi Meir solved this apparent difficulty by saying that people who study Torah לשמה, for pure motives, without ulterior design, will merit many things (Avot 6,1). He did not specify what precisely these "many things" were. It seems clear that he who preoccupies himself with Torah for Torah's sake, i.e. learns in order to observe and carry out the Torah's precepts to the extent he is able to, will merit many things; this although he might not actually have had the chance to practice what he had studied. We have further proof from the Talmud (Berachot 6a) that the intention to perform a מצוה is rated as equivalent to the deed. 
  We are told in Berachot 58a that Ben Zoma once saw a large gathering of Jews on the approaches of the Temple Mount and recited the benediction ברוך חכם הרזים, "Blessed be the One who understands the secrets; and blessed be He Who created them all to serve me." How could Ben Zoma make such a presumptuous sounding statement? The fact is that the world was created for the sake of man so that he could study and perform the laws of the Torah. In view of the fact that the vast majority of people do not live up to what is expected of them it is easy to query why G–d bothers to have such a large human population. Ben Zoma answered this question by pronouncing a blessing that G–d had created all the other human beings to serve those who – like himself – devoted themselves to Torah. Unless there were armies of people whose occupation it is to maintain civilization, how would the few who dedicate themselves to Torah study and מצוה performance even come close to what they were able to achieve by having been relieved of more mundane tasks? The chance for perfect man to achieve his goal of perfection is made a great deal easier by this army of people labouring in other fields. The subject is also discussed by Maimonides in his introduction to סדר זרעים, in connection with the well-known statement that nowadays all that G–d has in this universe are the four cubits of Halachah.
  We now understand why the Talmud, after quoting Ben Zoma's benediction, continues to quote Ben Zoma describe the tremendous physical difficulties encountered by Adam before he was able to eat the first loaf of bread. The Talmud details 10 stages, commencing with plowing, seeding, harvesting, etc. etc. Ben Zoma contrasts this with his own lifestyle. He gets up early in the morning and finds all his physical needs provided for. The Talmud continues in the same vein by describing the many steps needed before clothing is made, whereas Ben Zoma finds garments practically ready to wear. The gist of all this is to illustrate that Torah (Proverbs 3,18) is indeed עץ חיים היא למחזיקים בה, "the tree of life for all those who strengthen it and hold on to it." Midrash Tanchuma points out that Solomon did not say that Torah is a tree of life for those who toil with it, but only "for those who cleave to it." When Moses blessed the tribes prior to his death, he said to Zevulun and Issachar (33,18): "Rejoice Zevulun when you go out, and Issachar in your tent." Issachar can remain in his tent, isolated from the problems of earning a livelihood far from home because his brother Zevulun shoulders that particular burden on his behalf. When Ben Zoma recited the benediction in which he acknowledged G–d's being privy to all our secrets, i.e. being חכם הרזים, he alluded to the fact that only He knows which of the commandments we have not fulfilled because we were unable to for one reason or another. Only G–d knows which ones we compensated for through exhaustive study of their meaning instead.
  My father of blessed memory (author's), explained a Rashi on Deut. 3,26, in which the word רב is understood as "G–d has a great deal more in store for you, more than merely crossing the Jordan." At first glance Rashi's comment seems quite unrelated to the text. My father explained Rashi's description of the conversation between G–d and Moses as follows: G–d to Moses: "You surely did not think that by not crossing the river Jordan you will merely be denied to taste the fruit of the Holy Land, but what you aimed for was fulfilling the commandments which can only be fulfilled in that land. If this is your concern, רב לך, there are many more commandments which you would not be able to fulfill even if I allowed you to cross the river Jordan. You cannot fulfill the string of commandments applicable only to priests, etc. You cannot fulfill the commandment of the levirate marriage, neither many other commandments." Rashi therefore means that G–d reassured Moses: "just as you will receive credit for fulfilling the commandments relating to residence in the Holy Land, so you will also receive credit for all the other commandments you have not fulfilled in practice but have studied." This whole subject matter has been discussed at length in קול בוכים on Lamentations 4,16: פני ה' חלקם, "The Lord's countenance has turned away from them." The author claims that just as terrestrial man's body has 248 limbs so his soul – which represents Torah study – has 248 parts. This is the meaning of רב טוב אור הגנוז, "there is a wealth of good light stored up in the heavens for Moses", and this is why the sages described the face of Moses as comparable to the "face" of the sun, whereas the face of Joshua was as the "face" of the moon. The difference was due to the fact that Moses received the Torah directly from its Source. It was a relatively easy matter for Moses to understand all parts of the Torah and therefore to fulfill the requirements of residence in the land of Israel on a spiritual plane employing all 248 parts of his soul. Joshua, on the other hand, observed those commandments in practice. The fulfillment of the commandments on a spiritual plane seems of still greater value. In Proverbs 6,23 Solomon speaks of נר מצוה ותורה אור, that the relationship between individual commandments and the totality of Torah is like the relationship between a single candle and a luminary.
  [At this point the author – basing himself on Pardes Rimonim in his chapter שער הנשמה where he describes how things were before man sinned – describes that originally the body was equipped with intelligence and that this is why Adam was called אדם instead of איש or גבר. Then performance of G–d's commandments was basically a totally spiritual activity. It will be so again in the World to Come. Meanwhile, most commandments can be fulfilled primarily by our bodies, which by now are to the soul as the moon is to the sun. The moon is basically dark, does not have any light of its own. Only when the sun shines on it does it reflect light. The same applies nowadays to the performance of a מצוה. The "dark" body receives its instructions, i.e. illumination from the soul, and only in this way can the body perform G–d's commandments. The body only reacts. This explains why physical performance of G–d's commandments can be viewed as inferior to study of these commandments (in certain circumstances). All of this will be changed in an ideal world. The body is like a נר, a lamp which is the receptacle for the light, whereas the soul is the light itself. All the aggadic tales about the moon and the sun can be understood in this vein. We have stated elsewhere that the study of "a great matter" refers to the study of מעשה מרכבה, whereas "a small matter" refers to the discussions in the Talmud between Abbaye and Rava; the relative importance of these matters is seen from the vantage point of Adam prior to his sin. Originally then, there was a time when study (by itself) was great. The importance of study nowadays lies only in the fact that it leads to animation of the body, i.e. performance of the commandments by the inferior body. Ed.]
  
  Since we are already on the subject of the relative importance of the sun and the moon, I will now proceed to explain the discussion in Chulin 60b described as having taken place between the moon and G–d. So many commentators, and especially Kabbalists, have written on this subject that all I want to do is deal with it on the most fundamental basis, i.e. the פשט. I believe that the sun and moon in the story are to be accepted at face value; they may, however, be symbols of the relationship between study and performance at the same time. Just as the moon depends on the sun, so performance depends on the knowledge of what is to be performed, when it is to be performed, and where it is to be performed. The wording of the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Pezzi in the Talmud illustrates this point. The Rabbi questioned the verse in Genesis 1,16 according to which G–d made "two large luminaries, the great luminary to dominate by day and the small luminary to dominate by night." In order to deal with the apparent contradiction of there being two great luminaries, the Rabbi tells us a parable in which the moon complained to G–d about two kings not being able to wear one single crown (to rule simultaneously). G–d thereupon invited the moon to reduce itself in size. The moon replied that it could not see why it should be punished for having made a valid observation. Thereupon G–d told the moon to dominate (shine) by day as well as by night. To this the moon replied that there was no point in shining by day since its light would not be noticed (after the sun already shone by day). G–d then consoled the moon by telling it that in the future Israel would base its calendar on the lunar cycles. The moon responded that Israel would not count its days according to the lunar cycles because the Torah already stated in Genesis 1,14 that the luminaries would determine the seasons, i.e. solstices. G–d then told the moon that the righteous, i.e. Jacob would share its adjective "small" also with Samuel and David, all of whom would be called "small" in the Bible, (cf. Amos 7,5, and Samuel I 17). When G–d realized that the moon was still not satisfied He told the Jewish people to offer a sin-offering on His behalf on every New Moon in order to expiate for His having reduced the moon in size.
  The whole story is extremely puzzling. There are other difficulties in the story. The moon's retort that it could not see why it should suffer for having made a valid observation is strange. Did the moon want the sun to diminish its size for similarly invalid reasons? After all, one of the two had to diminish its size! Why would the moon consider its blood as redder than that of the sun? 
  We may simply answer this by saying that all the moon asked for was to retain its size, implying that the size of the sun could be increased. I have explained Deut. 28,43: הגר אשר בקרבך יעלה עליך מעלה מעלה ואתה תרד מטה מטה, "The stranger in your midst will keep rising higher and higher above you, whereas you will sink lower and lower" in a similar vein. 
  Another difficulty is that at the end of the discussion the impression is left with us that the moon remained victorious in a debate with G–d, and that G–d having been defeated in a verbal encounter, decided to pacify the moon for His not reversing His decision. This is surely an intolerable outcome!
  Another puzzling statement is the reference to "Jacob the small one," "Samuel the small one", "David the small one," in that order. We are forced to assume that the prophet Samuel is meant here so as to justify the order in which the names are listed. Some people say that the reason Samuel is referred to as the "small" one is, because his mother made a "small" robe for him when he was a little boy (Samuel I 2,19). This surely is a very forced explanation.
  The fact is that the luminaries were of the same size, but that G–d foresaw the "fall" of man. One of the luminaries had to be reduced in size to symbolize this "fall" of man. This is the reason that in the story in the Talmud the moon (לבנה) is called ירח, something unusual. Whenever the Bible refers to the moon before its diminution or after its rehabilitation in the Messianic age, it always refers to the light of the לבנה, not to the light of the ירח. The basic difference between the two names for the moon is that the name לבנה cannot be pluralized, just as the name אדם, or שמש cannot be pluralized. We do find plural endings for the name ירח however, i.e. ירחים. The important thing to remember is that the moon only asked a question, it did not express an objection to having to reduce itself. The moon only hinted that instead of one of the parties having to reduce itself there might be a different solution. The moon may have hinted that, in view of G–d's decision, it was up to itself (inasmuch as it symbolizes Israel) to engage in good deeds which ultimately would refine its body to enable it to regain its lost size. The argument was that used in Avot 3,22: כל שמעשיו מרובים מחכמתו למה הוא דומה לאילן ששרשיו מרובים וגו' "'that anyone whose good deeds exceed his wisdom…. such deeds are firmly planted like a tree with many roots," proving that performance outranks study in importance.
  G–d's reply hinted that the reverse was true, giving the reason we gave earlier, that under the given circumstances there was no room for comprehensive performance. Performance needs a certain set of conditions. Study can occur at all times, under any set of conditions. G–d invited the moon to become a practical example of this by physically reducing the range of its מעשה. If, in spite of a much smaller size, i.e. physical ability to perform deeds, the moon would ultimately regain it size, this would surely show that study is all-important because only through study would the moon have achieved this goal.
  The moon did not understand the hint. It countered: "because I made a valid point before You I should reduce myself in size?" It added the word לפניך to allude to the present state of affairs. This shows that the opening remarks of the moon need not be understood at face value but as an allusion, as we explained. Had this conversation taken place between the moon and any of G–d's creatures, the moon would have been quite specific. However, since the conversation took place with G–d Who knows all that each one of His creatures feels and thinks, the moon is portrayed as having merely hinted. 
  When G–d said: "Go and rule by day and by night," this is equivalent to G–d saying: "I have told you already that from the standpoint of study you can perform all the commandments even as of now." This means that you can confer merits on others by means of study which otherwise you could confer on them only through action. There is an allusion here to the fact that מצוה performance sometimes is possible both by day and by night, whereas some commandments can be performed only either by day or by night. In other words, performance is tied to the domain of time, subject to the sovereignty of "time." The concept is similar to מצות עשה שהזמן גרמה, "positive commandments triggered by a certain time." The very term "time" is an allusion to transience, implies both something "before" and "after." Not so with eternity. Torah and the soul are eternal, i.e. beyond the restrictive limitations imposed by the reference to "time." This is what G–d had in mind when He counseled the moon to shine by day as well as by night (shining as a reference to study). 
  Although it was aware that G–d was clarifying what He had said at the beginning, the moon did not understand what G–d had in mind. The moon understood G–d as having said that by reducing its size, i.e. diminishing the material part of itself it would be able to concentrate on the spiritual part, i.e. study. Having done so, the result would be intelligent and spiritually uplifting performance of the Torah's commandments. The moon failed to understand G–d's meaning that it could have regained its original size by the performance of a מצוה of this kind. This is why it responded that there was no need for such illumination at a time when the sun shone anyways, i.e. when it was possible to perform the commandments by deed, and not only by learning about them.
  The moon believed that G–d wanted it forever more to be just like them in Proverbs 6,23, to the נר. It believed that the שרגא at best is the receptacle which – after suitable preparation – serves as the dispenser of טיהרא, original, as opposed to reflected, light. It did not think it would ever regain its original size. This is why the moon – metaphor for the experience of Israel in our world – seemed discontented.
  The reference to Israel counting its days according to the solar calendar, etc., is simply a hint to the moon that it had misunderstood G–d and that a whole lifetime of seventy years may on occasion be telescoped into merely days, all depending on the opportunities that presented themselves to G–d's creature, (in this case the Israelite) to perform the commandments. In other words, under certain circumstances G–d will consider the intention as equivalent to the actual performance. In terms of the debate about the relative value of study versus peformance, this means that study is superior. Study is almost always לשמה, whereas performance may often be merely by rote, without even the intention to perform G–d's will.
  When the moon mentioned that Israel counts its days according to the solar cycle, it implied that performance of the commandments under suitable conditions does not automatically bring about penetration to their deeper meaning. The Rosh in a responsa (quoted in Tur Orach Chayim 58), dealing with the benedictions we recite, states that one discharges one's duty even if the words are spoken without the requisite thoughts. If the same person relies on the Reader, שליח צבור, to discharge his duty in this regard for him and he only answers "Amen," he will only be relieved of his duty if he had listened carefully to every word. We may similarly understand the moon's question as referring to the supposed superiority of study over performance, if study itself is not always something that has been done with the proper thoughts.
  G–d therefore told the moon that the adjective "small" that would be used for the righteous, such as in the case of Jacob, Samuel and David, would serve as assurance that the moon was not considered inferior. By the same token, there is no point in calling someone "small" unless this is in contrast to something else that is called "big. Here, the Jewish people as a whole may be considered "big," for G–d had referred to it as בני בכורי ישראל, "My firstborn son Israel." The three examples of "small" people selected were Jacob, Samuel and David because these three people are also described on occasion as the equivalent of "big". The prophet Samuel is described as שמואל הרמתי, "at home in an elevated place," (similar to Samuel I 8,4). The Talmud describes that Samuel "the small one" [a scholar in the third century] was of such a caliber that, had his personal merits only been the determining factor, the spirit of G–d would have come to rest on him. The prophet Samuel i.e. the "big" Samuel, was ranked equal to Moses in many respects. Taanit 25 relates that the "small" Samuel only had to decree a fast in order to pray for rain when rain would already materialize without the people having commenced their fast even. The fact that David was described on occasion as the "small one," suggests that there must also have been a "big" David. The "big" David will be David when he re-emerges as the Messiah. It is said of him (Psalms 72,8) : וירד מים עד הים ודוד שמו, "Let him rule from sea to sea, etc." The Psalmist means that whereas initially the domain of David would be small, eventually it would encompass the whole globe. The message is that "small" and "big" will combine, i.e. study and performance of Torah commandments together will bring about the ideal state, will make a "big one" out of a formerly "small one." This is different from דבור, words of Torah, which will be graciously received by G–d even if they do not reflect penetration to the deeper meaning of the Torah. In other words, words of Torah do not require to be supported by full understanding, whereas mere study, i.e. listening to someone else's discourse on Torah does. When we view the conversation in this light, we find that G–d certainly had the "last word," i.e. was not "defeated" in this verbal encounter. Nevertheless, when G–d saw that the moon was unhappy although it had been shown that it was wrong, He decided to assuage its feelings since He wants His creatures to be happy and content with the fate assigned to them. 
  This is why he instructed Israel to offer a male goat as a sin offering each New Moon in compensation for having reduced the moon's size (i.e. Israel's size in this world). The Rekanati, in his commentary on Exodus 12,2, explains at length that the function of this sin-offering on the New Moon is very similar to the function of the scapegoat which is tendered to Azzazel on the Day of Atonement. Allegorically speaking, the reduction in size symbolizes the diminution of the forces of holiness due to Adam's sin. This results in the powers we call חיצוניות experiencing an uplift, increased strength. By sacrificing the male goat on the New Moon as a sin-offering to G–d we are symbolically sacrificing the קליפה, the symbol of negative influences which in turn undermines the influence of this קליפה. By doing this we re-convert some of the forces that though they originated in a holy domain had become active as negative forces. Such a positive act results in atonement. Rashi describing Genesis 32,2,1 explains Jacob's motive in sending gifts to Esau with the words: אכפרה פניו, to mean קנוח, "wiping clean." Atonement then is a way of "wiping the slate clean." Sin is considered to be a stain on our soul or character. Atonement is the removal of the stain in question. We follow this procedure every month whenever the moon renews itself. This process will continue until the קליפה has been reduced so much that the moon can regain its former size and its light equals that of the sun. At such a time, when the world will be filled with knowledge of G–d, the physical part of our bodies as well as matter in the universe will be imbued with sanctity similar to that intangible part of man, his soul.
  If anybody mistakenly thought that the scapegoat is an offering to the Azzazel, the parallel with the goat-offering on New Moon should make it abundantly clear that this is not the case. In both instances the animal is offered as a sacrifice to G–d, though in the case of the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement the form of the offering is unusual. When in the Mussaf service of the New Moon we recite the specific function of ראש חודש as a time for atonement, and we add the words ותשועת נפשם מיד שונא, "and as a salvation of their soul from the one who personifies hatred," we continue by referring to a "new altar." The "altar" referred to in this prayer is the one in the Celestial Regions, the one on which the archangel Michael offers the souls of the righteous.
  [I am condensing the continuation of this particular discourse from this point on. Ed.]
  
  
  
  Let us go back to the parable from the Yalkut which we quoted on pages earlier. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish who demanded fulfillment of every single commandment in the Torah can hardly reconcile this with the parable of the pit in the Yalkut. We have divided the commandments into 248 positive ones and 365 negative ones. The sages use the number 365 as signifying the concept "day" as in the solar year which comprises 365 days. The pit may be compared to man. When the pit is not filled with “commandments performed,” it is empty, but just as in the case of the pit the brothers threw Joseph into, this does not mean that it did not contain potentially lethal creatures such as dragons and scorpions (cf. Rashi on Genesis 37,24). The "scorpions" mentioned are a metaphor for the forces of the קליפה, forces created by our sins. Only when the pit has become filled and does not leak a drop (of the commandments performed which have filled the pit) have these forces of the קליפה become totally neutralized. When the foolish laborer described in the parable expressed his chagrin that he would never be able to fill the pit, he referred to the negative commandments. He knew that performance is of paramount significance. He also knew that 365 of the 613 commandments are incapable of being "performed," since observing them consists of lack of activity, i.e. שב ואל תעשה, refraining from violating the commandment. He therefore could not understand how one could receive rewards for what one did not do! This foolish worker did not understand that the 365 negative commandments are performed by consciously abstaining from committing acts which would be transgressions. In other words, our thoughts play a key role in מצוה observance. This is the "joy" that the other labourer referred to when he said "I am happy that I have found work for myself." The "happiness" is an allusion to the "performance" of negative commandments by deliberately refraining from eating pig because G–d had forbidden it, not because there was none to be had. This kind of attitude is regarded just as the deed of handing out charity, for instance. We see that there are many commandments which are "performed" by thought rather than deed, something that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish was aware of and agreed with. We have proof of this in Psalms 119,3: אף לא פעלו עולה בדרכיו הלכו, "They have done no wrong, but have followed His ways." This means that when one foregoes the opportunity to violate a negative commandment this is considered as if one had performed a commandment. The same principle applies when one cannot perform a positive commandment for one reason or another. When the Torah states in the opening line of our portion: את הברכה אשר תשמעו, "The blessing when you listen, etc.," the message is that from the moment we undertake to study the commandments with a view to fulfilling them, the blessing, i.e. the reward is already due us. Should we be prevented from performance by some accident, this does not diminish the merit we have already acquired.
   The author views our rehabilitation process as linked to our souls having stood at Mount Sinai and having witnessed the revelation. The major organs involved were the ears which had heard the commandments. When later generations tune in their ears to what is written in the Torah, it is as if they were trying to make up for generations or individuals who had closed their ears to Torah instructions. The very word נעשה "we shall do," which the Jewish people said prior to the revelation was an allusion to the beginning of creation when G–d had said נעשה אדם בצלמנו. Once our ears are involved in this process of rehabilitation the other organs will become involved also and general מצוה performance will result. 
  Rabbi Yochanan looks at the chain reaction which follows performance of the first מצוה and deems it as sufficient to attract blessings from G–d. He presumably took his cue from Job 33,23: אם יש עליו מלאך מליץ אחד מני אלף להגיד לאקדם ישרו, "If he has a representative (angel), one advocate against a thousand, to declare the man's uprightness." In line with the tradition that every מצוה performed results in the creation of a "good" angel, Rabbi Yochanan feels that such an advocate is already something substantive. When the Torah speaks about the curse in 11,28, it makes certain that the words לא תשמעון are followed immediately by the words וסרתם מן הדרך, "you depart from the path," a reference to action. While G–d grants blessing for a good intention even when it could not be translated into action, He does not curse for the mere failure to listen to the commandments, to Torah lectures. Only once such non-study and non-preparedness to listen results in violation of the commandments will the punishment take into account the attitude displayed which led to the violation. Midrash Shmuel on Avot 3,1 "then you will not commit a sin," points out that Akavyah does not speak about the sin coming to you but about you coming to the sin. With the right attitude you can stop yourself even when the sin has come quite close to you. The Torah uses the word ראה in the singular, instead of ראו, plural which would have matched the rest of the verse, in order to underline the importance of the performance of even a single commandment.
  We must not question this exegesis by saying that the "path" the Torah speaks about some people forsaking is the adoption of idolatry instead of Judaism, because of a rule that the only time G–d considers the mere contemplation of a sin as already culpable is when the sin in question is idol worship. This is based on the expression (11,28) ללכת אחרי אלהים אחרים, "To prepare to go after other deities." Clearly, the Torah, by not writing "when you have followed other deities," warns you that we are culpable for the mere intention. In all other instances the Torah does not threaten punishment for the mere contemplation of a sin.
  והיה כי יביאך ה' אלוקיך אל הארץ אשר אתה בא שמה לרשתה . "When the Lord your G–d will bring you to the land to which you will come in order to inherit it." The Torah speaks of terrestrial ארץ ישראל which is similar to its celestial counterpart. The word הארץ refers to the "earth" after one's death in which one "sleeps," i.e. refines the body through metamorphosis in order to be able to take one's place in one's original inheritance, the one intended for Adam before the sin. Just as on our earth there are two mountains, Mount Gerizim and Mount Eival, which symbolize blessing and curse respectively, so there are two parallel mountains in the Celestial Regions. One is generally known in our scriptures as ההר הטוב, or הר ה', "the Mountain of ‘good,’ or the Mountain of G–d," the one which can be climbed only by people who have complied with the criteria set down in Psalms 24,4. The other Mountain is known as הר שעיר, the Mountain of Se'ir, symbolizing darkness exuded by the evil urge. Our rabbis describe it as a "Mountain" because they view the overcoming of the evil urge as similar to the scaling of a mountain. The wicked, on the other hand, consider the evil urge as something they can easily control and therefore the evil urge appears to them merely as high as an hair, hence the name הר שעיר, "the mountain no higher than an hair." Were it not for the "good angels" created by our various מצות, our access to the Mountain of G–d would be severed completely. G–d in His great mercy decided to pay more attention to the "voice" of what these good angels relate about us than to the foul deeds we commit with our hands, i.e. הקול קול יעקב והידים ידי עשו, "though the hands are the hands of an Esau, the voice is that of Jacob." [A homiletical explanation by Midrash Shmuel of Genesis 27,22 applied to Akavyah's statement in Avot 3,1. Ed.] The words ואין אתה בא לידי עברה mean that if you have קול יעקב going for you you are in no danger at the hands of Esau, the hands of Satan. The meaning of the name הר גריזים is similar to the meaning of Psalms 31,23: ואני אמרתי בחפזי נגרזתי לפניך, "I said in my haste I am thrust out of Your sight." The Psalmist goes on to say that David learned that he had not been cast out by G–d after all. The function of Mount Gerizim then is to reassure us that Paradise lost is recoverable. Our deeds create the "good angels" whose pleas reach the throne of G–d. there are also barriers in the heavens between the different categories of צדיקים. Every righteous person occupies a station appropriate to his conduct while he lived on earth. Our Rabbis (Tanchuma Beshalach 10) explained that G–d made separate lanes when the tribes of Israel crossed the Sea of Reeds. They base this on Psalms 136,13: "Who divided the Sea of Reeds into גזרים, sections." The same happened when the Jewish people crossed the river Jordan into the Holy Land. This was one of the reasons twelve stones were erected in the river-bed; they marked where each tribe crossed. 
  [The author digresses here to explain the symbolism of different kinds of water, and how the "wrong" kind of "water," or water which has not been put in the service of the right side of the emanations, will prove destructive, fatal. He also refers to the river Dinor a river of fire mentioned in the Book of Daniel which, according to Kabbalistic teachings, serves as a ritual bath for the souls once they emerge from judgment in purgatory. I am skipping most of this excursion into deep mysticism. Ed.]
  
  The author does not see a duplication in verses 29 and 31 respectively, but views the first verse as addressing itself to removal of impediments to Torah observance, such as the sites of pagan worship still extant in the land of Canaan when the Israelites would invade the land. The words אשר אתה בא שמה לרשתה in verse 29 describe a different reality from the reality referred to by the words לבא לרשת את הארץ in verse 31. The first verse is an introduction to the sources of curse still in that land, whereas the second verse addresses itself to a time when blessings will prevail. At that time there will be all kinds of Heavenly assists, which is not the case when one is guided or driven by the evil urge. 
  The מקומות in 12,2 which have to be destroyed are a reminder that there is only one מקום, "one place" i.e. G–d who is not confined by space but has created it." The entire passage is understood as a reference to what went wrong in גן עדן and how to go about repairing the damage that had occurred at that time.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  אלהיהם על ההרים . The expression אלוהיהם על ההרים in 12,2 presents a difficulty. Why did the Torah see fit to add the words על ההרים, "on the mountains?" You will understand when you read this verse in conjunction with with the verse about Mount Gerizim. It reminds us of a statement by our sages in Chulin 6a that the Samaritans, כותים, (a people introduced into Samaria by the Assyrians after the ten tribes had been exiled), eventually became total Gentiles and fashioned themselves the image of a pigeon to which they prayed. When this happened it became clear that all the Torah commandments which these people had previously undertaken to perform had been motivated only by their desire to insure themselves against attacks by ferocious beasts which roamed the area. When מצוה performance is based on such considerations it will not lead to the desired objective of sanctification of body and spirit. The kind of "fear" G–d asks of us is something internal, not external i.e. connected to external considerations.
  ואכלתם שם לפני ה' אלוקיכם, … ושמחתם לפני ה' אלוקיכם . According to the Zohar, these verses (12,7 and 12,12) describe different epochs. As long as the Temple was standing one could be in the Presence of G–d, consume the sacrifices in Jerusalem, and rejoice while doing so. How can a person sit down and eat and enjoy same in the knowledge that there is no Temple and that no sacrifices can be offered and that we are not allowed into G–d's Presence? The second verse comes to console us that G–d will join us when we sit down for our meals and recite the appropriate benedictions. He will encourage us to speak words of Torah during the meal. 
  By doing so one fulfills the directive of verse 7: "to eat in the Presence of G–d." In view of the fact that one eats in the Presence of the שכינה, one has to share one's meal with the poor, and not give them anything inferior to what the host eats himself. One must observe table manners, not gulp down one's food as did Esau when he sold Jacob his birthright (Genesis 25,30). We have a tradition that a wicked person will always feel that his belly lacks something, is hungry (Proverbs 13,25). When the Torah writes לפני ה' אלוקיך, this is always to emphasize that we must feel in the presence of positive rather than negative forces, חצוניות. While consuming one's meal one must not engage in futile pursuits but concentrate on the immediate requirements of the meal and on words of Torah. 
  In this way joy will become part of our meal which we must signify by drinking wine and reciting the appropriate benediction to display our joyous frame of mind. We must not project sadness. If we follow these guidelines we may be sure that the שכינה is above our heads. The Rabbis enumerate ten rules to observe in connection with the cup of wine we fill before saying grace (Berachot 51a). According to Rabbi Yochanan only four of these rules are actually practiced nowadays. The four are: הדחה, שטיפה, חי, מלא. The cup has to be washed on the inside, on the outside, the wine has to be potent prior to being diluted with water, and the cup has to be full. The first letters of the four requirements form the acronym שמחה, joy.
  איש כמתנת ידו כברכת ה' אלוקיך אשר נתן לך . The two letters כ in front of the words כמתנת, כברכת, are a reminder that when we give a gift we should never feel that what we are giving away was ours in the first place, and that we therefore are truly generous. Whatever is at our disposal was given to us by G–d. David expressed this idea already very forcefully when he said (Chronicles I 29,14): כי ממך הכל ומידך נתנו לך, “For everything is from You, and it is Your gift that we have given to You.” The Torah alludes to this by not writing מתנת ידך, but כמתנת ידך instead. 
  When the Torah goes on כברכת ה' אלוקיך this is a warning that we should not think that G–d's "blessing" is something He grants without any input from us. G–d does not "give" a blessing. When man on earth performs "blessed" deeds, he activates the blessing which lies in wait in Heaven. The blessing that man appears to have received from G–d is actually something that is the direct result of his own activities. When the Torah directs (15,8): פתח תפתח את ידך, "Keep opening your hand, etc.," the message is that G–d will open His heavenly treasure chamber in direct relation to the number of times we have opened our hands to the poor down here on earth. Keeping such considerations in mind we will surely fulfil the commandment to be charitable in the proper spirit.
  
  Shoftim
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named שש מעלות לכסא.
  Commandment 491 provides for judges to be appointed in every community, for the Torah writes (16,18): "You shall appoint magistrates and law enforcement officers for your tribes in all the settlements, etc."
  Commandment 492 prohibits the planting of a tree in any part of the Temple precincts. The Torah states (16,21): "You shall not plant for yourself an Ashera or any tree near the altar of the Lord your G–d."
  Commandment 493 prohibits the erecting of a stone pillar anywhere. The Torah writes (16,22): "Do not erect for yourself a stone pillar."
  Commandment 494 prohibits the offering as a sacrifice of an animal which suffers from a temporary blemish. The Torah (17,1) writes: "You shall not sacrifice to the Lord your G–d an ox or sheep that has any defect."
  Commandment 495 directs that one must obey the ruling of any properly appointed Sanhedrin (Supreme Court). The Torah (17,11) writes: "You shall act in accordance with the instructions they will give you based on the Torah."
  Commandment 496 enjoins us (especially a dissenting judge) not to defy the judgment pronounced by the Sanhedrin. The Torah (17,11) writes: "You must not deviate from the judgment which they tell you either to the right or to the left."
  Commandment 497 provides for the appointment of a king. The Torah (17,15) states: "You shall surely set a king over yourself, a Jewish one."
  Commandment 498 prohibits the appointment of a non-Jewish king. The Torah (17,15) writes: "You must not set a foreigner over you."
  Commandment 499 enjoins the king not to amass too many horses.
  Commandment 500 prohibits the king from marrying more than eighteen wives. The Torah (17,17) states: "He must not have too many wives."
  Commandment 501 enjoins the king not to amass too much material wealth. The Torah (17,17) writes: "He shall not amass silver and gold to excess."
  Commandment 502 forbids the king to return to Egypt to live there. The Torah (17,16) states: "He must not lead the people back to Egypt."
  Commandment 503 directs the king to write a Torah scroll for himself even if he already owns one.
  Commandment 504 legislates that the entire tribe of Levi shall not participate in the distribution of the land of Israel to the various tribes at the time the land will be conquered. The Torah (18,1) writes: "The levitical priests, the whole tribe, shall not have a share in the territorial portions with Israel."
  Commandment 505 provides that the Levites will not receive part of the land like the other tribes, but be allocated certain cities instead. The Torah (18,2) states: "The Levite shall not inherit amidst his brethren."
  Commandment 506 directs that the priests be given the shoulder, the cheeks and the stomach (of any animal slaughtered for private consumption). The Torah so directs in 18,3.
  Commandment 507 directs the farmers to set aside a Terumah Gedolah for the priests because the Torah (18,4) writes: "You shall also give him the first fruits of your new grain."
  Commandment 508 directs that the first shearing of the farmer's flock be given to the priests. The Torah (18,4) writes: "The first shearing of your flocks."
  Commandment 509 instructs that on festivals all priests performing service in the Temple shall share on an equal footing. The Torah (18,8) writes: "They shall receive equal shares of the dues."
  Commandment 510 forbids the practice of consulting augurs. The Torah (18,10) states: "There shall not be found amongst you an augur."
  Commandment 511 forbids the consulting or whispering to snakes, etc. The Torah (18,10) forbids this specifically.
  Commandment 512 forbids consulting sorcerers.
  Commandment 513 forbids consulting the dead.
  Commandment 514 forbids consulting oracles called Ov.
  Commandment 515 forbids consulting oracles known as Yidoni.
  Commandment 516 directs that we must listen to the voice of a true prophet. The Torah (18,18) writes: "I will raise up a prophet amongst them."
  Commandment 517 forbids a false prophet from voicing his supposed message. The Torah (18,20) writes: "He who will predict something in My Name which I have not instructed him"--that prophet shall die." 
  Commandment 518 forbids prophesying in the name of other gods. The Torah (18,20) writes: "Whoever speaks in the name of other gods--that prophet shall die."
  Commandment 519 warns not to be afraid to execute a false prophet. The Torah (18,22) states: "Do not be afraid of him."
  Commandment 520 provides for the establishment of cities of refuge and the way to them. The Torah (19,3) writes: "You shall survey the distances, etc."
  Commandment 521 warns against extending pity to convicted murderers and other criminals. The Torah (19,13) states: "Do not show him pity; thus you will purge Israel of the blood of the innocent, and it will go well with you."
  Commandment 522 prohibits the moving of your neighbour's landmarks, meaning that one must not steal land. The Torah (19,14) writes: "You shall not move your countryman's landmarks."
  Commandment 523 forbids convicting an accused on the basis of the testimony of a single witness. The Torah (19,15) writes: "A single witness must not validate against a person."
  Commandment 524 directs that witnesses who framed someone be punished with the punishment that would have been meted out to their prospective victim had they not been found out in time.
  Commandment 525 provides for the anointment of a priest to address the troops prior to their going into battle.
  Commandment 526 legislates against displaying fear of an enemy in battle.
  Commandment 527 directs that we must offer a peaceful alternative to our enemies in the event of a "permissible war," i.e. a war not involving defence of the borders of the Holy Land. The Torah (20,12) describes both alternatives.
  Commandment 528 enjoins us not to allow any of the seven Canaanite nations which do not emigrate to survive, The Torah (20,16) directs: "Do not allow any soul to survive."
  Commandment 529 forbids the cutting down of fruit-bearing trees of the enemy during a siege, or even when there is no siege. Destruction of food is generally prohibited.
  Commandment 530 directs that the heifer which has to be killed in atonement for murder committed by persons unknown be dealt with in the prescribed manner in the wadi.
  Commandment 531 prohibits cultivating this wadi ever again.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The commandments mentioned in this פרשה are based on the "six pillars of silver," i.e. the six pillars upon which the universe is built. These six pillars are: תורה, עבודה, גמילות חסדים, דין, אמת, שלום.
  The pillar of דין is mentioned in the first part of this פרשה, where the appointment of judges and a Supreme Court is legislated. The rules about an individual Torah scholar who refuses to submit to the majority decision of his colleagues and the law to appoint a king whose function it is to lead the people in the path of Torah, all belong to the pillar דין. A king is permitted to deviate in some ways from Torah norms concerning the movement of boundaries, whereas other people are not. The rules not to judge on the basis of a single witness, how to deal with untruthful witnesses, etc., are all part of the pillar דין.
  The pillar of אמת is represented by legislation dealing with sorcerers, a false prophet, etc., all of whom originate in the left side of the emanations, the domain from where שקר, lies, emanate. The legislation not to pay heed to a false prophet, not to be afraid of violating the demands he makes upon you, as well as the promise that G–d will provide true prophets, all are part of the pillar אמת.
  The pillar of שלום, peace, is presented as part of the legislation dealing with warfare – provided the war is not against the seven nations who occupied Canaan at the time the Jewish people entered it – in order to show how the Torah stresses peace. The Torah nonetheless decrees the utter annihilation of all the inhabitants of the land of Caanan because true peace can only come about when the wicked have been removed or have become penitents. We are even commanded to preserve ecological "peace" when the plants in question are of immediate and universal use to man, i.e. fruit- bearing. Such plants must not be destroyed even if by doing so the war would be shortened. The anointing of the priest who addresses the soldiers on their way to battle is designed to assure the soldiers that G–d loves them and has their welfare in mind. When we love G–d there will be peace between G–d and us and war against our (His) enemies. This is why the Torah orders us not to fear our enemies.
  The pillar of תורה is dealt with in the legislation denying the tribe of Levi a share in the land to be distributed amongst the other tribes. It is their task to study Torah and to teach it, as we know from Deut. 33,10:יורו משפטיך ליעקב ותורתך לישראל, “They shall teach Your laws to Jacob and Your instructions to Israel.” If the Torah had allocated them farmland and orchards they would be so busy tending their land that they would not be able to fulfil their spiritual tasks. This is why the Torah instructs the Israelite to give certain gifts to the Levites so that they should be free of the burden of earning a livelihood and shoulder the burden of Torah study, etc., instead. Once the priests had increased in number their service in the Temple was restricted to a few days a year for each shift. On the festivals however, when they were in Jerusalem anyways, they could then receive a share of the meat of the many offerings presented on the altar. They made their regular living from the portions of meat set aside for them from animals slaughtered for private consumption as well as from the firstborn male animals, the first shearings, the Terumah (approx. 2% of the farmer's grain, oil and grape harvest). The Levite also contributed to the priest 10% of the tithes received.
  The pillar called עבודה is represented in our פרשה by the prohibition to plant a tree in the Temple precincts, and the prohibition to erect stone-monuments. The law forbidding the sacrifice of a blemished animal also falls under that heading.
  The pillar of גמילות חסדים concerns the true kindness shown to people after their death. In our פרשה this pillar is represented by the law concerning the cities of refuge which are a partial restitution for the victims of unintentional murder. The requirement to kill the עגלה ערופה as a declaration that one has not been remiss in fulfilling this commandment also comes under this heading. I shall now deal with these "pillars" one at a time.
  
  The עמוד הדין, is שופטים ושוטרים תתן לך. I will first explain the plain meaning of this legislation. Later on I will deal with the mystical aspects of these laws. The first difficulty is why the Torah chooses to use the term תתן לך "give for yourself," when the subject is the appointment of judges and law-enforcers, whereas when the Torah speaks about the appointment of a king, the king is described as תשים עליך, "you will appoint him over you." One cannot argue that the term עליך is inappropriate except when the subject is the appointment of a king, since our sages (Yevamot 45b) have used the term עליך in another context such as: כל משימות שאתה משים עליך אל יהו אלא מקרב אחיך, "anyone to whom you grant any authority over yourself must be a member of your people."
  We can answer this after first examining some details of the legislation dealing with the appointment of a king. All our commentators have spent long hours trying to comprehend why Samuel was so angry at the people of Israel when they asked him to appoint a king, seeing that the Torah provides for the appointment of a king. In Sanhedrin 20b, Rav Yehudah says in the name of Shmuel that all the prerogatives a king claims for himself as per Samuel I 8, 11-17 are legally his. Rav, however, said that the entire passage was only meant to frighten the people out of their demand for a king. He based his opinion on the word עליך in our verse any שום תשים עליך מלך. Rabbi Yehudah said that the Torah legislated three commandments which would become operative upon the Jewish people entering the land of Israel. They are: The appointment of a king, the destruction of the people of Amalek, and the building of the Holy Temple. Rabbi Nehorai said that verses 15-20 in our chapter in Deuteronomy are only written in anticipation of the possibility foreseen in 17,14 that the Jewish people would actually demand to be ruled by a king. Rabbi Eliezer said that the elders who lived during the reign of Samuel did no wrong by phrasing their request for a king in the words: תנה לנו מלך לשפטנו. The only people who committed a sin were the עמי הארץ, the ignorant masses, who added in Samuel I 8,19 that they wanted a king עלינו, "over us," and who wanted the king in order to be like the other nations (ibid.). Rabbi Yitzchak Abravanel quotes all the various opinions in his commentary on our פרשה. He challenges the opinion expressed by Rabbi Eliezer by pointing out that in our פרשה, too, the people are presumed to have prefaced their desire for a king by saying ככל הגוים אשר סביבותי, "just as all the other nations around me." It is worthwhile to read up what Rabbi Abravanel has to say about this. Anyone who is intelligent will realize that one has to explain the opinion of Rabbi Nehorai in accordance with the interpretation offered by Rabbi Abravanel.
  The Sifri quotes Rabbi Nehorai as saying that the people's request for a king was only a pretext to enable them to worship idols. The author based his theory on the words (Samuel I 8,20): "and we shall then become like all the nations." Rabbi Abravanel challenges this statement saying that if this were true how could G–d possibly have concurred in providing a king for the people when He said to Samuel: (Samuel I 8,22) "Accede to their request and crown a king for them?" Why did G–d not at least warn the people not to make the incidence of monarchy a pretext for idol-worship? I believe that such a warning is alluded to in Samuel I 8,7, where G–d told Samuel: "It is not you they have rejected; it is Me they have rejected as their king." Nachmanides, referring to Genesis 49,10, where Jacob assures Yehudah that the sceptre signifying royalty will not depart from his tribe, explains that the sin of the Jewish people at the time was that they rejected Samuel who was such an excellent judge. If that were so, why did Nachmanides single out Samuel? Did our sages not say that the authority of every judge in his period equalled that of Samuel? They even considered an ignoramus such as Yiftach as being Samuel's equal in authority (Rosh Hashanah 25b)! The clearest of all our early commentators is the Ran who appears to adopt the approach of Rabbi Eliezer when he distinguishes between two kinds of leadership. 1) Authority which is based on Biblical law. The Sanhedrin was appointed to ensure the proper administration of that law. 2) The second kind of authority, which usually expresses itself in rulings which contradict Biblical law, is called הוראת שעה, decrees promulgated in order to meet certain emergencies. Our sages have said that the reason Jerusalem was destroyed was because the judges insisted on applying Biblical law (Baba Metzia 30b) when they should have taken into consideration the circumstances prevailing at the time and have made allowances before convicting certain people. There is an allusion to this in 21,9: ואתה תבער דם הנקי, "You will remove from your midst guilt for the blood of the innocent." This verse could also be translated as "you are destroying the blood of the innocent," i.e. that on occasion innocent blood is spilled by inflicting punishment on the innocent due to prevailing pressures, such as in emergencies and in times of war. Appointment of a king enables the nation to be administered expeditiously during emergencies; the king has the right to ignore certain Biblical laws. This subject is meant in Psalms 122,5: "There the thrones (literally chairs) of judgment stood, thrones of the house of David." The "thrones of judgment" are the Sanhedrin, whereas the "thrones of the house of David" refers to the thrones of the dynasty of the house of David.
  It is a general rule that a Sanhedrin hands down what is called משפט צדק, based on direct Torah law, whereas whenever there is a need to bypass Torah law for reasons of emergency the king would sit in judgment and on occasion rule against Torah law. This is also alluded to in the Torah's demand 16,20: צדק צדק תרדוף, "Justice, Justice, you shall pursue." The first time the Torah uses the word צדק it refers to Torah law as administered by the Sanhedrin, the second time it refers to the administration of law by a king on the basis of הוראת שעה. Concerning the latter situation the Torah continues: "in order that you may live and inherit the land that the Lord your G–d is about to give you," for Jerusalem was destroyed only because the authorities insisted on basing all their judicial verdicts on Torah law.
  In the days of Samuel, Israel sinned because they asked that the king be a judge, i.e. replace the Sanhedrin, and to base his administration of justice on Torah law. This was contrary to G–d's will. He had arranged for judges to be appointed to perform this task. The king was to usurp the powers of the Sanhedrin only when there was a הוראת שעה. The term שימה עליך is particularly appropriate for describing the הוראת שעה- nature of the king's function.
  Prior to the appointment of the first king, the Sanhedrin performed both functions, i.e. משפט התורה as well as הוראת שעה. This is one of the reasons Moses is referred to in our traditonal sources as מלך, king. This is also why, after the destruction of the Temple when Israel no longer had a king, Rabbi Eliezer is on record as saying: "I have heard that (nowadays) a Jewish Court of Law may administer corporal punishment even when Torah law does not call for this."
  Keeping all this in mind we can understand the meaning of Rashi's comment on 17,11: "Do not depart to the right or to the left," i.e. even if the judge tells you that (what you know to be) right is "left" or what (you know to be) left is "right." This interpretation was valid only when there was no king in Israel. Once a king was appointed, however, each level of administration had its functions clearly defined. In the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer Israel's sin consisted of their wanting to do away with this divison of responsibility between two different bodies. Israel committed a major error as soon as they asked for the king to act as שופט. Rabbi Eliezer divides the verse in Samuel I 8,5 שימה לנו מלך לשפטנו ככל הגוים into two distinct requests. One request was made by the elders, the second one by the people at large. The elders, who spoke about לנו, meant that the king would join them, as they were the judges already. This is why they did not say עלינו, "over us." The people at large, who entertained a different perception of the tasks to be performed by a king, said: שימה עלינו "place him above us" (Samuel I 8,5). They wanted the king to perform both the functions the Sanhedrin was designed for, i.e. משפט התורה, as well as those of a king, i.e. הוראת שעה.
  To get back to our subject, i.e. the words ושפטו את העם משפט צדק, "They will judge the people according to the meaning of the word צדק" the first time they appear in 16,20. Another reason why the word צדק is repeated in that verse could be that it alludes to the statement in Tanchuma Shoftim 8 that כל הדן דין אמת לאמיתו זוכה לעולם הבא, that anyone who judges truthfully merits a place in the World to Come. Tosaphot comment on this in the first chapter of Baba Batra that the wording is meant to preclude a verdict which is based on trickery. Tur Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat section 15,3 explains what exactly such a דין מרומה is, namely that the testimony of witnesses is accepted only if the judge does not feel that they are trying to trick him into a false verdict. In other words: Judges must not only observe the formal provisions of the law but must endeavour to look beyond the correct formalities in order to arrive at a true verdict.
  A third interpretation of the repetition of the word צדק would be that there are two ways of arriving at a fair judgment. The first צדק refers to the need to arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution of disagreements without recourse to the letter of the law. The second time the word צדק is used is for the eventuality that an agreed solution to the disagreement cannot be found. According to the Sifri it also means that the trial may not be re-opened once a person has been found innocent, even if new evidence against him is suppposed to have been found. Still another meaning of the second צדק could be that a judge, is supposed to be מתון, i.e. judge each case on its individual merits, without reference to precedent. It is not enough to refer to a previous judgment in what is perceived as an identical dispute. No two cases are identical. Moses already explained this point to his father-in-law Yitro in Exodus 18,16 when he told ושפטתי בין איש ובין רעהו, "When I pronounce judgment I have to consider each litigant on his own merits."
  לא תטה משפט . This must be explained similarly to the words ימין ושמאל in 17,11: even if the Sanhedrin were to declare that "right is left" and "left is right," their verdict must be accepted. As we have explained earlier, verdicts which sound patently wrong must have been the result of the application by the court of the principle of הוראת שעה, i.e. that the overriding considerations of the authorities in charge were the demands of the hour. This was not the plain meaning of this verse, the פשט.
  We also have to address the problem of why the Torah (17,9) speaks about an individual judge or a lower court turning for guidance to the Supreme Court "in those days." How can one appeal for guidance to a judge or court whose members are no longer alive? The Torah therefore only tells you that even though the judges in your generation are clearly inferior to the judges of a former generation they still are the authority of their day. If that were the true explanation why did the Torah have to allude to the subject altogether? I certainly would have known this by myself! Unless such an attitude was universally accepted, no one would have ever turned to Joshua to settle a dispute since everyone was aware that Joshua was inferior to Moses! One can understand why the Torah tells us not to bypass a certain priest (cf. 26,3) in favour of another priest, seeing that they both live in the same generation but are on duty on different days or weeks, but such an argument cannot be used with judges whose function is not restricted to a certain משמר, duty roster.
   The true explanation is that offered in Tur Choshen Mishpat 25. It is stated there in the name of Rabbi Avraham ben David, better known as ראב"ד that "nowadays" [already 700 years ago, Ed.] a Rabbi does not have the right to challenge the decision of a Rabbi who occupied the position of "Gaon" unless the decision by such a Gaon is clearly at odds with all our traditions. Since this does not occur in practice, anyone challenging the decision of a Gaon is presumed to have committed the cardinal error of הטועה בדבר משנה, having erred in a fundamental point of law; he may be presumed simply to have been unaware of the decisions of the Geonim, or else he would not have challenged their validity. Had he been aware of such decisions he would have withdrawn his own ruling. The רא"ש writes in a similar vein that these statements are not only applicable to decisions made by the Geonim but also apply to those made by prominent Rabbis in subsequent generations. If someone nowadays, continues the רא"ש, rules contrary to earlier Rabbis, being unaware of their decisions, he is considered as טועה בבר משנה. When he later hears the decision of those Rabbis of earlier generations he may reverse his own decision if he agrees with the decision of those Rabbis. If, however, he does not agree and is able to substantiate his disagreement, he is at liberty to do so; the Torah has given the judges of their respective generations the right to make authoritative rulings, based on the statement that the authority of a Yiftach was in no way inferior to that of an outstanding prophet such as Samuel. This holds true as long as the decision is not clearly in conflict with all the views expressed in the Talmud. A Rabbi who lived after the period of the Geonim may therefore challenge their rulings. Thus far the רא"ש. It is clear from the רא"ש that when a Rabbinic authority in our generation rules against a ruling of one of the Geonim we must respect the ruling given in our generation. This is the plain meaning of the words: "You will come to the judge who lives in those days and enquire and they will tell you what is the law." When Rashi said that this applies even when the judges tell you that "left is right" and that "right is left," the meaning is that if, for instance, a Rabbi in the last generation ruled permissively in a certain matter, i.e. declared it "left," the Rabbi in the present generation who rules that the matter is prohibited, i.e. declares it as "right," must be obeyed. The same applies in reverse. This subject is also alluded to in the words: לא תטה משפט; on the one hand it warns against arbitrary decisions, on the other hand it allows the ignoring of earlier decisions on the basis of לא תכיר פנים, "Do not respect faces" i.e. do not blindly accept rulings of earlier authorities merely on the basis of precedent."
  The mystical aspect of all this focuses on the line: ושפטו את העם משפט צדק … צדק צדק תרדוף. The active pursuit of צדק will be a direct result of the Courts handing down fair judgments. The reason the word צדק is repeated is because there is a צדק in our world and there is another צדק in the Celestial Regions. The first kind is generally known as דינא דמלכותא דינא, i.e. that the judgments pronounced in this world, though binding, represent the Divine name א-ד-נ-י, i.e. the letters in the word דינא rearranged. The צדק in the Celestial Regions is anchored in the emanation בינה from which דין/גבורה emanate. The צדק in our world is the mystical dimension of the earth. The צדק in the Celestial Regions is the mystical dimension of the World to Come. Both ארץ ישראל and עולם הבא are gifts G–d gave Israel on pain of sufferings, יסורים. All such יסורים originate in the emanation דין/גבורה. Whenever the Sanhedrin bases its judgments דין תורה, these result in יסורים, because Torah too is one of the three gifts we received from G–d which we acquire only by suffering some יסורים. When we now look at the words למען תחיה וירשת את הארץ in 16,20 we note that the promise of inheriting terrestrial ארץ ישראל is tied to the pursuit of צדק in this world, whereas acquisition of our share of the World to Come i.e. תחיה, is tied to the pursuit of צדק in the Celestial Spheres. By administering דין תורה we become able to obtain all these three great gifts G–d has bestowed on the Jewish people. The Sanhedrin is instructed by the Torah to hand down verdicts which are called משפט צדק. We are aware that משפט originates in the emanation תפארת, and that the combination of משפט and צדק is equivalent to a merging of the emanations תפארת and מלכות. What all this means in layman's language is that the Sanhedrin is to temper justice with mercy, דין with רחמים. This is accomplished when the judges try to arrive at some kind of compromise between the litigants. If they succeed in doing this they perform משפט and do not need to be תטה משפט, i.e. lean towards strict justice (rather than merely משפט). When they have done this they lean towards the attribute of חסד, and we have a tradition that G–d Himself is מטה כלפי חסד, inclines towards the attribute of Kindness. This means that two different attributes or emanations respectively are involved in arriving at the preferable resolution of disagreements. When the Torah legislates that the testimony of no fewer than two witnesses is required, this may symbolise that two different concepts are at work when deciding the outcome of litigation. Some of our Kabbalists said that the reason G–d is called א-ל דעות ה' (Samuel I 2,3), is that the word דעות is an allusion to עדות, testimony, the letters in both words being identical. It is a hint that two considerations are active when legal decisions are made. This matter is explained in detail in Pardes Rimonim in the chapter called אם אין סוף הוא הכתר. ולא יקום עד אחד באיש . "One witness shall not arise and testify against a man" (19,15). The Sifri interprets the word באיש to mean that if a single witness testifies that the husband of a woman has died and there is no corroborating evidence, it is sufficient to enable the widow to remarry.
  We have a perfect example of the principle of מדה כנגד מדה, that retribution fits the crime, in the legislation about עדים זוממים, false witnesses trying to frame someone. These "witnesses" who testify to something they have not seen must suffer the fate their intended victims would have suffered had it not been that the truth was revealed in time (19,19). People must be judged by applying the same yardstick by which they judge others. The hidden message in this legislation is that when G–d created the universe, He created opposites. Just as He created domains of sanctity, He also created the alternative, i.e. a domain of impurity, קליפה. He who performs good deeds establishes his affinity to the domain of sanctity, whereas he who engages in sinful conduct establishes ties with the domain of impurity. All this is part of the concept: שכר מצוה מצוה, ושכר עברה עברה, that the "reward" of a good deed is another good deed and vice versa (Avot 4,2). The reward is the spiritual impact of the performance of the good deed. When the Torah ties the punishment of such a "witness" to כאשר זמם לעשות, "what he intended to accomplish" instead of to "what he did accomplish," it is to teach us the rule that we are measured by the same yardstick we apply to others. The Rekanati endeavors to explain how our sages dared arrive at the conclusion that if the intention of the עדים זוממים had in fact been accomplished, (i.e. that their victim had already been executed before discovery of the fact that they had not been at the scene of the crime to which they testified), that they then go out scot-free from a human tribunal (Chulin 11). This is what he writes: "I have to explain to you why the sages in Chulin arrived at such a ruling from something the Torah did not actually state. Did they presume to know everything that was in G–d's mind? First of all, let us be clear that the statement in Chulin כאשר זמם ולא כאשר עשה applies only in cases where a death penalty had been administered. If the subject of the testimony was something not involving a possible death penalty the witnesses in question will have to make restitution even if their victim has already been convicted. This is why our sages used as their example the words: הרגו אין נהרגים, "if they have killed they will not be executed." Having said this, know that G–d does not allow miscarriages of justice, i.e. that an innocent person be put to death by a Court. Anyone who has not committed a sin carrying the death penalty will not be convicted by the testimony of false witnesses. If such an accused is executed this merely proves that he was guilty of another sin for which he deserved to die, but that the other sin he was guilty of had not been witnessed, and that therefore no judicial proceedings could have been instituted. In view of this the false witnesses had actually accomplished G–d's purpose when they testified against the accused in question. They had actually merely caused the death of a person who -legally speaking- was already considered "dead" in G–d's books. How could we execute a witness for having caused the execution of someone already legally dead? All of the foregoing is based on our conviction that the Sanhedrin only confirm judgments already made in Heaven, that they are the representatives of the שכינה. If the witnesses were found out before their victim was executed, it is clear in retrospect that they were about to shed innocent blood. Clearly, for such a crime they must face retribution in kind. When judges perceive themselves as agents of G–d, it can be said of them that אלוקים נצב בעדת א-ל, 'G–d stands in the divine assembly'" (Psalms 82,1). Thus far the Rekanati.
  The Sanhedrin consisted of seventy judges (elders) plus the president, i.e. the most outstanding scholar. The number seventy corresponds to the seventy "princes" who represent the seventy Gentile nations at the Celestial Court. These seventy "princes" are preceived of as surrounding the Celestial Court where G–d presides, thirty-five on His right and thirty-five on His left. The Ineffable Name which represents תפארת is above them. The Jewish nation which is also known as תפארת performs this function amongst the nations of the world.
  The very concept of a king, מלך, is rooted in the emanation מלכות. We have already shown that the Talmudic dictum of דינא דמלכותא דינא, is based on the word דינא being the name of G–d א-ד-נ-י, the same letters as the words דינא. The mystical dimension of the directive that the king has to write a ספר תורה for himself is that the emanation מלכות "receives" the written Torah, whereas the emanation itself is perceived of as being the "oral Torah." The Torah alludes to this attribute when writing והיתה עמו, "it shall be constantly with him" (17,19). The word והיתה is feminine, whereas the instruction immediately following is masculine, i.e. וקרא בו, "he shall read in it." This results in a union between the concepts represented by the respective emanations תפארת ומלכות. When David (Psalms 119,56) said: זאת היתה לי, this was because he knew that the attribute מלכות is called זאת. It was because David was aware of this that he could say (Psalms 27,3): אם תחנה עלי מחנה לא יירא לבי, אם תקום עלי מלחמה בזאת אני בוטח, "Should an army besiege me, my heart would have no fear; should war beset me, I would still be confident in זאת." In view of such considerations we can understand why the king was commanded not to amass too many horses; after all, we have a principle (Psalm 33,17) that שקר הסוס לתשועה, that "horses are a false hope for deliverance." The king must demonstrate that he relies on זאת, the merit acquired through his Torah writing and Torah study instead. The prohibition to amass too much silver and gold is due to similar considerations. A very wealthy king would tend to hire mercenary soldiers to fight his battles instead of relying on G–d's help. G–d's ability to help in war does not depend on the number of the king's soldiers but on their spiritual preparation. We know this from Judges 7,6 where Gideon sent home all but three hundred of his volunteers. He had first tested their degree of religious observance by the way they scooped drinking water from a pool without going down on their knees (a sign of having once worshipped idols). In 17,16 the Torah links a return to Egypt to the king's possession of an inordinately great number of horses. Amassing horses is an outward sign of lack of reliance on the merit of זאת. Such lack of confidence in G–d will ultimately result in a moral backsliding of the people, an immersion in the moral morass of the Egyptians which originates in the impurity of the menstruant woman. The mystical dimension of the Egyptian philosophy is called מצולת ים, [a term used in the Zohar for Samael and the forces associated with him. The idea is that Samael's domain is beneath the מים העליונים. Ed.] The morally best of Egypt i.e. the attribute of שפחה, is but a maid-servant of ארץ ישראל. The relationship of Hagar (the best of Egypt, spiritually speaking), to Sarah is seen as symbolising this relationship.
  The following is the commentary of the Rekanati on the limitation of the number of wives a king may marry: "In view of the fact that the attribute זאת must dominate in the conduct of the king, G–d has warned him not to be attached exclusively to the philosophy of מלכות represented by that attribute. Were he to do so, he would remove himself further and further from the attribute of חסד. (Cf. Solomon in Proverbs 30,20 who describes the adulterous woman as: "she eats, wipes her mouth and claims not to have committed any wrong.") In order to prevent the king from falling victim to such influences, the Torah warns the king only (because he is more at risk than the ordinary citizen) not to marry too many wives, not to amass too many horses, etc.
  I must confess that I have been troubled for many years by what happened to king Solomon. How is it possible that a man who is described as having been wiser than anyone (Kings I 5,11) and beloved of his G–d, could become so bereft of wisdom when he became old that he is described in the Book of Kings I 11,4 as having been misled by his wives to follow idols, in particular the cult of "Ashtoret the idol of the Tzidonites and Milkom the abomination of the Ammonites?" Such conduct would be totally incomprehensible if an ordinary Israelite had engaged in it, how much less could one credit such behaviour to the wise king Solomon? Besides, most of the Book of Proverbs authored by Solomon in his prime is devoted to warnings of the wiles of women! Once I reminded myself that the one thousand wives and concubines Solomon is reported as having wed or consorted with were predominantly of non-Jewish descent, the veil was lifted from my eyes. The genuine Kabbalists have said that the total number of levels of impurity leading to the highest level of impurity is one thousand. These levels of impurity are referred to collectively as נכריות, "foreign-born wives." [I believe that Rekanati here deliberately leaves open the question of whether the number one thousand mentioned as the number of Solomon's wives is to be understood allegorically. Ed.] Solomon's very wisdom was the cause that he investigated the significance and influence of all these various levels of the original serpent's pollution. When the Book of Kings describes Solomon of having "walked after Ashtoret the idol of the Tzidonim," it does not say that Solomon served or worshipped such idols. The meaning is that 'he went to investigate the philosophical basis of that cult.' In the process, he became more involved than necessary for the purpose of his investigation. This was accounted a sin on his part. Whereas it was incumbent upon Solomon to understand the nature of that cult, it was wrong of him to develop any kind of attachment to it." Thus far the Rekanati.
  We have stated that the authority of the king includes that he has the right to be פורץ גדר, override certain rules which apply to the ordinary citzen. This is part of the attribute of being אדון הארץ, "master of the land." The king's authority on earth is rooted in the fact that his appointment was first approved in the Celestial Regions. The ordinary citizen who does not enjoy the privilege of being פורץ גדר, [nor has to meet the challenges faced by a king. Ed.] is bound by לא תסיג גבול רעך אשר גבלו ראשונים (19,14).
  עמוד האמת . The legislation in 18,10-12 which prohibits resorting to sundry ways to influence one's fate by consulting the occult or sacrificing one's children to the Moloch, is part of what we described as the "pillar of truth" in our opening comment on this פרשה. The Torah describes such activities as abominations and insists on תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך (18,13) "You shall be whole-hearted with the Lord your G–d." The next instalment of legislation which comes under the heading of עמוד האמת, "the pillar of truth," tells us how to deal with false prophets. I have already explained how G–d created a domain whence the false prophets and their ilk derive whatever knowledge they possess. This was part of G–d's system of providing balances in this world. It is necessary in order to give meaning to the freedom of choice we have been granted. The Torah is at pains to point out that whereas we do not dismiss all these phenomena as total deception, yet the wisdom possessed by these media is not true wisdom. This is why the Torah emphasizes in 18,14 that "these nations whose land you are about to dispossess are in the habit of turning to soothsayers, etc." The Torah goes on to say that we, the Jewish nation, do not need to do so. We already have Bileam's assurance (Numbers 23,23) that "Israel does not need to employ snake-charmers, etc." Israel is fortunate that תתן אמת ליעקב, that G–d has given us access to truth, to genuine wisdom (Michah 7,20). We must make a point of always adhering to the attributes on the "right" side of the emanations.
  עמוד השלום . The outstanding lesson about the importance of the pillar "Peace" which the Torah teaches us is that, even while discussing the preparations under way to invade the land of the enemy, the Torah speaks about Israel offering a peaceful solution to the problems it encounters with its neighbors. We must keep in mind that in the last analysis רע, evil, did not originate in Heaven. The only reason there is such a thing as רע at all is so that the טוב may be be appreciated. I have discoursed on this subject at length. Once "evil" will be overcome, "good" will assert itself permanently. Anything which contains "good" must be seen to do so. 
  This is a reason why fruit-bearing trees must not be cut down. The commandment not to destroy foods, etc., is a comprehensive commandment. Everything has a root in the Celestial Regions, be it inert matter, vegetable matter or living creatures including human beings. It is basically forbidden to uproot plants unless such uprooting serves a useful purpose, such as feeding it to one's domestic animals. The very act of uprooting the plant in question raises it to a higher level in nature's scheme of things. The vegetable matter is thereby raised to the level of the animals.Slaughtering an animal for human consumption similarly raises its spiritual level to that of the human beings for whom it provides nourishment. Our sages call such a process: לחוב על מנת לזכות, "to create a liability for the sake of bestowing an asset." Rabbi Eliezer the Great said (Yoma 20) that "whenever one cuts down a fruit-bearing tree in the land of Israel its voice can be heard protesting from one end of the earth to the other."
  The appointment of the כהן המשוח who addresses the soldiers prior to their going into battle (20,2) symbolizes the attribute of חסד. It is especially important for soldiers who are about to risk their lives in an encounter with our enemies to be aware that the attribute of חסד is active on their behalf. They will make a point of cleaving to the attributes of חסד ושלום.
  The reason that men of military age who are engaged in building a house for themselves, or in the planting of a vineyard which has not yet borne fruit, or who have betrothed a bride without as yet having consummated the marriage are free to return to their homes to complete these endeavours is explained by the Rekanati. We are quoting verbatim: "Know that the three categories of people listed by the Torah in 20,5-8 are people who are especially prone to meet with disaster. The attribute of Justice is more likely to seek them out than others. We have proof for this from what happened during the episode of the golden calf. If you will examine the various occasions when the Torah reports the Jewish people as sinning while they were in the desert, you will find that it was almost invariably after they had experienced a spiritual "high." The first set of tablets were smashed because of the golden calf. Our sages explain that the עין הרע the evil eye, had focused on these tablets.  After the Israelites had travelled only three days' journey from Mount Sinai, the very next verse (Numbers 10,36) ויהי העם כמתאוננים, רע באזני השם "The people were complaining before the Lord; they spoke evil within the hearing of G–d." All this in spite of the Torah having told us that the Presence of G–d rested over their encampment. The sin of the spies occurred at a time when the people were ready to conquer ארץ ישראל, i.e. they were at a spiritual "high." The sin of בעל פעור occurred immediately after G–d had made Bileam bless the people instead of cursing them as he had been hired to do (Cf. Numbers chapters 24 and 25). After all, Michah 6,5 reminds the Jewish people to remember the advice given to Bileam by Balak how to curse the Jewish people and how Bileam had responded to him. In that admonition of the prophet the Jewish people are addressed by G–d as "My people," i.e. they were on a morally high level at that time. This is the meaning of the statement of our sages in Shabbat 130 that ליכא כתובה דלא רמו בה תיגרא, "There is no marriage contract which does not give rise to some dispute." Thus far the Rekanati.
  To summarize: The more a person or a people ascends spiritually the greater the challenge to Satan. Satan will "work overtime" to try and entrap people who are on a spiritual high and to drag them down. People who are about to see their life's wish fulfilled by entering marriage, consecrating a house, or by harvesting the first harvest of their vineyards, are therefore at risk because they have reached a situation close to fulfilment of a major aspiration-similar to that of the Jewish people prior to their entry into the Holy Land. The Rekanati also explains the custom of breaking a glass during the wedding ceremony as a "bribe" to the מדת הדין, much as the proverb about "giving the devil his due." As a result of receiving this recognition, ועולתה קפצה פיה, "the mouth of wrongdoing is stopped" (Job 5,16). When Israel stood at Mount Sinai and received the Torah they were in a state similar to a bride prior to her wedding. Satan exploited this opportunity by making extra efforts to subvert the Jewish people, being afraid that once the tablets became the property of the Jewish people they would forever be immune against his efforts to corrupt them i.e. he would lose his power to hold the threat of mortality over them. By employing the "evil eye," Satan, in the form of the golden calf, succeeded in seducing the nation even though it was on such a high spiritual level.
  עמוד התורה . I have already explained that all the levies which the Torah legislates for the benefit of the priests and the Levites are designed to enable their recipients to devote themselves to a life of study and dissemination of Torah. They have been charged by the Torah with teaching Israel the Torah (33,10). The entire universe was created for the sake of Torah. It is significant that the gifts the Torah allocates to the priests and Levites comprise parts of the inert, the vegetable world, the animal kingdom, as well as the firstborn male human beings. They receive certain cities to dwell in, i.e. part of the inert portion of the universe. The tithes represent the vegetable matter, whereas the cheeks, stomachs and thighs of the animals slaughtered for consumption represent their share of the animal kingdom. This is in addition to their receiving the ראשית הגז, the tithes of the firstlings of the shearings. Rabbi Menachem Habavli writes that just as the hairs of the goats are for the goats and the goats dance there (cf. Isaiah 13,21 describing satyrs dancing), so the ראשית הגז is for the priests seeing G–d has chosen them to perform the sacrificial service and to serve as atonement for the sins of the Jewish people referred to by Jeremiah 50,17 as שז פזורה ישראל. The priests even receive a share of the part of the universe called המדבר, i.e. human beings, when they are offered the first-born sons of the other tribes for redemption. The priests are commanded to perform their service in shifts, משמרות, just as the angels in the Celestial Sanctuary perform those duties in rotation.
  עמוד העבודה . The first time the Torah mentions the pillar עבודה is in our portion in 16,21 where the planting of an אשרה in the Temple precincts is prohibited. Erecting a מצבה, stone monument for the purpose of offering a sacrifice, even to G–d, is prohibited anywhere (16,22). The offering of an animal or anything else which is imperfect as a sacrifice is also prohibited (17,1). Over and beyond all this the Torah refers to perfect service by the words: תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך, "be perfect with the Lord your G–d," i.e. the person who offers the sacrifices must be perfect. Neither the person offering the sacrifice nor the animal he offers – which represents him – may be be imperfect. A blemish on an animal serving as an offering reflects on the owner of the sacrifice. We can draw a logical inference from all this. If perfection of the object to be sacrificed is demanded, then the souls of the departed which are to be presented on the Celestial Altar by the archangel Michael, the High Priest in those regions, must surely also be perfect, unblemished. How indeed must we endeavour to perfect our personalities while we are in this world that our souls when they ascend to those regions will not be rejected as unfit for sacrifice by the archangel Michael; should a certain aspect of our personality be blemished we must make every effort to overcome this. In this respect character traits are viewed as comparable to the limbs or organs in sacrificial animals in which a defect has been discovered.
  The examples of אשרה and מצבה are selected as representing something totally blemished. The Canaanites used to engrave likenesses of their deities on stones or trees. These images would grow with the tree. The Canaanites would worship those trees and prostrate themselves before them. Our sages made a very apt comparison between the unfit judge with ever-increasing authority and the אשרה which does not produce fruit. Rabbi Menachem Habavli calculated that the numerical value of the word אשרה and the word דיין is an identical 11, provided we use the system known as מספר קטן which ignores all the zeros (wherever they may be). The numerical value of the word מצבה, adding the digit 1 for the word itself and also using the מספר קטן method, is the same as that of the word פרנס=21. It follows then that an אשרה is equivalent to a dried out tree unable even to provide shade. Leaders unfit for their position are compared to the מצבה, a stone, totally devoid of all feelings.
  עמוד גמילות חסדים . The last of the six pillars which is part of the legislation in our פרשה concerns first and foremost something one does for the dead. The latter cannot repay us as our performance of any service for them is the true rendering of kind deeds. The first such example the Torah deals with in our פרשה concerns the person who has killed inadvertently and is protected against the vengeance of the victim's blood relations by taking refuge in one of the cities set aside for such a purpose (19,2-10). He must remain there until the death of the High Priest during whose tenure the killing occurred, and who represents the attribute of חסד. We have alluded to these details in our commentary on Numbers 35,9-36 where we pointed out the element of חסד inherent in this legislation.
  The legislation of the עגלה ערופה, the apparently senseless killing of an innocent heifer which has not had a chance to perform a useful function in life (21,1-9), is also an act of true kindness, חסד. It is both an act of kindness towards the victim of the murder as well as towards the inhabitants of the town near which the foul deed was perpetrated. By performing the rite of breaking the neck of the heifer in question the chances of finding the murderer are enhanced, which in turn would lead to justice for the murdered person when his murderer is punished. Rabbi Menachem Habavli comments on this paragraph as follows: "The reason for this legislation is that the publicity surrounding the breaking of the neck of the heifer in a valley of virgin soil will lead to the unmasking of the murderer. The procedure bestows honour both on the deceased and on the living. The murderer attacked from behind, i.e. the neck of the victim. This is why the neck of the heifer is broken. The murderer committed his act secretly. Therefore the act of atonement is also performed in a spot which is not used by the public. During periods when the general public observed the laws of the Torah and murder was almost unknown, the worms which infested the carcass of the heifer would gradually travel in the direction of the home of the murderer and lead to his discovery. Although it would, of course, be impossible to make such a murderer stand trial on the basis of such "evidence" seeing there had not been reliable witnesses to his act, the murderer would be ashamed once he realised that the people all were certain in their hearts that he was the guilty person." Thus far the commentary of Rabbi Menachem. The "honour" this procedure provided for the living was that the implied suspicion is removed that someone from the nearest town to where the victim had been found might have committed the murder is removed. The Zohar (Rosenberg Montreal edidtion page 133 on Parshat Shoftim) quoting Rabbi Shimon, explains that when someone is murdered the victim's soul is not perceived as having been snatched by the angel of death but by the murderer instead. This means that the murdered person was not allowed to live out the span allocated to him on earth. This single act of murder set back the time of the coming of the Messiah by denying the angel of death his task of helping to rehabilitate mankind from the pollutant of the serpent (and therefore mortality brought about by Adam's sin) and thereby bringing closer the time of the ultimate redemption (which frees mankind from mortality). This crime is especially serious when it happens in ארץ ישראל, where the earth itself needs atonement for having accepted the blood of the victim. G–d took pity on us and legislated the procedure of עגלה ערופה so that we may compensate for any setback in the time-table of redemption due to the murder that has been committed on holy soil by a person or persons unknown. Thus far the Zohar.
  I myself feel that the reason this procedure involved the priests (as we read in 21,5) is because the priest represents the attribute חסד. It is this attribute which is required to neutralise the forces of the accuser. 
  This also explains the prayer (verse 8) accompanying this procedure in which the elders of the city nearest the victim implore G–d: "Absolve, O Lord, Your people Israel whom You have redeemed, and do not let the guilt for the blood of the innocent remain among Your people Israel." This prayer implies that the city suffered from the guilt of innocent blood spilled in its vicinity. This seems outrageous! Who would accuse G–d the Merciful of burdening the whole city with such guilt in the absence of any evidence that these people had in any way be involved in murder? We must look at this by keeping in mind that there is no human being so righteous that he never sins (Kohelet 7,20). Sometimes the only reason a person is saved from punishment for a sin committed is the temporary absence of Satan who would have accused him of such before the Heavenly tribunal. Whenever there is a gathering of the wicked, everyone of whom is in line for punishment, there the accusers will most certainly be present to press their claims. On such occasions they will also indict the righteous for any sin they committed at a time when no accuser was at hand. This is what our sages meant when they said that the righteous becomes a victim for the sins committed by the people in whose generation he lives (Shabbat 33). We can now understand the need for the person who is innocent, i.e. who has led the life of a צדיק, to pray not to become a victim of the general retribution which may occur as a result of all the accusations levelled by Satan the perennial accuser now that a serious crime has been committed.
  I have found a similar interpretation by the Rekanati who writes as follows: "The plain meaning of the prayer in 21,8: 'do not burden the people of Israel with the guilt of shedding innocent blood' is undoubtedly the spilling of blood of the innocent. We must ask, however, why there is a need to pray to G–d not to burden us with a guilt we have not been guilty of? Who could imagine that G–d would punish without due process of law? Was this not precisely the response of Avimelech to G–d when he knew that he had not actually raped Sarah (Genesis 20,5)? He claimed that Sarah had misled him! King David in Psalms 7,5 said: "If I have dealt evil to my ally, etc." He defended himself against G–d not considering him worthy of intervention because of a sin he might have committed quite by accident. A similar passage is found in the Book of Jonah when the sailors about to go down with their ship reluctantly agreed to save themselves by throwing Jonah overboard (Jonah 1,14). 
  The answer to this is that, although G–d is well aware of what goes on within the heart of man, man is nonetheless required to declare his innocence through prayer. By doing so he evokes the goodwill of the attribute of Justice. Ever since earth had become tainted the attribute of Justice can be reconciled only through the prayers of the righteous. The goodwill of that attribute is secured in direct proportion to the efforts of the righteous to lead exemplary lives. The Zohar describes that the state of guilt in which the world finds itself because of the deeds of the wicked, can be set right only through the removal from earth of a number of righteous people who will atone for the state of the world in the Celestial Regions. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 44,5) comment on Genesis 15,1: אנכי מגן לך, where G–d promises to act as shield for Abraham [after he had defeated the four most powerful kings with the help of supernatural intervention on his behalf. Ed.] that G–d said to Abraham that ever since the generation of Noach He had not used the righteous as protectors for their respective generation, but that starting with Abraham's generation He would do so. Moreover, whenever Abraham's descendants would become deeply involved in wickedness, G–d would focus on a righteous person in that generation who would confront the attribute of Justice calling out "enough" and offer himself as atonement for the sins of his contemporaries, [a synopsis of the principle of זכות אבות. Ed.].This is the meaning of the statement: "give Satan a limb as a bargaining chip." This is the meaning of Job 16,11: יסגירני א-ל אל אויל ועל ידי רשעים ירטני, "G–d hands me over to an evil one, thrusts me into the clutches of the wicked." It is considered better that a righteous person confront Satan rather than that the wicked should be the ones who goad him. Thus far the comment on Genesis 15,1. [I believe the author portrays Job as complaining that he the innocent has been treated as the scapegoat for the wicked. Ed.] This is also the meaning of the statement by our sages in Baba Kama 60 that "once G–d has given free rein to Satan to punish the guilty, Satan no longer distinguishes between the guilty and the innocent. At such a time the righteous are invariably his first victims." [Cf. Rashi on Exodus 10,22. Ed.] On the same folio Rav Joseph quotes biblical proof for this thesis from Ezekiel 21,8: "I shall cut off from you the righteous and the wicked alike." Additional support comes from Exodus 22,5: "If a fire is started and the stacked corn is consumed and it spreads to thorns, etc." The Talmud says that the only time a fire "spreads" beyond the confines of one's own property is when the גדיש, "stacked corn" (simile for the righteous) has already been consumed i.e. נאכל instead of ואכל. Afterwards the "thorns," i.e. the wicked, are also consumed by such a fire [seeing that there are no more righteous people to step into the breach. Ed.]. This is yet another description of the principle of בקרובי אקדש, "I will be sanctified by those who are closest to Me," which we discussed in connection with the death of Aaron's two sons Nadav and Avihu. Another occasion when our sages focus on this phenomenon of G–d's justice is Ezekiel 9,6: וממקדשי תחלו, "And begin from My Sanctuary." Rav Joseph suggests that the reading should be ממקדושי, from those that are holy to Me. This means that destruction will commence with the righteous. [In that connection the righteous are seen as guilty for not having sufficiently protested the wickedness. Ed.]
  We have now concluded our explanation of the various categories of commandments legislated in this portion. Perhaps one can regard the six steps that led up to the throne of King Solomon (Chronicles II 9,18) as symbols of the six pillars (categories of commandments), which between them ensure the continued existence of this world. There is a Midrash which quotes Rabbi Acha as commenting on the comparison between these six steps and the six prohibitions in our פרשה. The six negative commandments in our portion (which deals with the subject of the king and his prerogatives) are: (16,19) לא תטה משפט, לא תכיר לא תטע ל אשרה, לא תקום לך (16,20), פנים, לא תקח שוחד לא תבח לה' אלוקיו שור ושה אשר יהיה בו (17,1) and מצבה מום.” These are the six negative commandments. There was a crier who was stationed at the bottom of King Solomon's throne. As soon as the king ascended the first of the six steps this crier would call out the first of these six negative commandments. When the king ascended the second step he would call out the second of these six commandments. He would continue thus until the king reached the last step. It is difficult to understand the connection between the commandment not to sacrifice blemished animals and Solomon's throne.
  Another major difficulty is presented by a statement both in Bamidbar Rabbah 12,3 and Esther Rabbah on the verse in Esther 1/2: כשבת המלך אחשורוש על כסא מלכותו. In both instances the Midrash describes the steps to Solomon's throne as symbolizing alternative commandments from our פרשה i.e. the respective prohibitions of marrying too many women, amassing too many horses and amassing too much silver and gold; also the three commandments already listed from 16,19. According to the description given in Esther Rabbah the lowest step would represent a reminder not to marry too many wives, the next step not to amass too many horses; the third step not to amass too much gold and silver. Step number four would remind the king not to plant an אשרה; step number five would remind him not to erect a private altar, מצבה; step number six would remind him not to offer a blemished animal as a sacrifice. The description in Esther Rabbah also lists three other symbolisms of six each, such as six of the (7) heavens, the six sections of the oral Torah, i.e. the Mishnah, as well as six different terms used by the Bible to describe the earth. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  According to Pardes Rimonim (beginning of section three of the chapter called אצילות, בריאה, יצירה, עשיה), G–d's throne is to be perceived as having six steps and being supported by four posts making a total of ten. The "throne" is equivalent to the emanation בריאה.
  [Our author goes to great lengths to explain how Solomon's throne was a terrestrial replica of the perception we have of the Celestial Throne. I have decided to omit this paragraph. Ed.]
  
  
  
  
  
  When Moses (in his parting address to the Jewish people in פרשת וזאת הברכה) wanted that his blessing should apply to the people of Israel, he "awoke," or activated the six "pillars." The word אשדת in 33,2 is to be read as two words אש דת. The letters in those two words represent the first letters each of the four pillars אמת-שלום-דין תורה. The other two "pillars" חסד-עבודה are mentioned by Moses a little while later in verse 8 where Moses speaks of תמיך ואוריך לאיש חסיד"ך, referring to the tribe of Levi. Moses goes on to say in verse 10: ישימו קטורה באפך. We know that the choicest of all sacrifices i.e. עבודה is the incense, קטורת. At the very end of his blessings (verse 26), Moses speaks of רכב שמים בעזרך, that with Israel's (i.e. Yeshurun, Israel in its most ideal state) help G–d "rides" the heavens. When Isaiah 66,1 has G–d describe the Heaven as His throne, this is a reference to "G–d riding." When Moses says in 33,25 at the end of the blessings: וכימיך דבאך, "Your strength corresponds to Your days," this is an allusion to the six days of Creation. The six pillars are also called days. Torah is called "day," as we know from Exodus 19,1 where Israel's arrival at Sinai- the source of Torah- is described as occurring ביום הזה, "On 'this' day they arrived in the desert of Sinai." Rashi comments that the reason the Torah employs the words ביום הזה, "on this day," instead of the more appropriate ביום ההוא, "on that day," is to urge us to love the words of Torah as dearly to-day as on the day they were first received thousands of years ago. We know that עבודה is called "day" because the Torah (Leviticus 7,38) writes in connection with the service in the Temple: ביום צוותו, from which we derive that the service has to be performed by day. The connection between the pillar גמילות חסדים and "day" is found in Psalms 42,9: יומם יצוה ה' חסדו, "May G–d command His kindness by day." Our sages (Chagigah 12b) say that anyone who is preoccupied with Torah study at night will have a thread of G–d's kindness extended across to him from the day. We know that the pillar דין is related to "day" from Deut. 21,16: והיה ביום הנחילו את בניו, "On the day he will transmit his estate to his sons as an inheritance, etc." Judgments are not handed down at night. The pillar אמת is the integration of two opposing forces. This corresponds to the concept "day" which is the harmonious blending of opposites i.e. evening and morning into a single unit (Genesis 1/5).
  The above mentioned six pillars are alluded to in the six letters of the word וכימיך in 33,25. The letter ו alludes to the pillar שלום, which symbolises making a whole out of parts. The number six is divisible into six parts, three parts or two parts. The resulting parts then are א,ב,ג [units of one, two, or three respectively. Ed.] When you combine the respective number of these units i.e. 1+2+3=6 you get the original total. I have demonstrated elsewhere that the regular letter כ symbolises עבודה, seeing that it is shaped in a form of כפיפה subordination. A true and loyal servant subordinates himself totally to his master. This idea is symbolised by the shape of the Shofar which we blow on New Year's Day. The Rabbis (Maimonides chapter 1, Laws of the Shofar) said that it is preferable to use a ram's horn because its shape suggests subordination. The letter י alludes to the Torah, the synopsis of which is represented by the Ten Commandments. The letter מ which is the middle letter in the word אמת alludes to the eternal nature of G–d who "was, is and forever will be." He is "first", He is "last" and as He is now He will always be. The pillar אמת, also testifies to this inasmuch as its letters are the first, the middle, and the last letter of the Aleph Bet. The second time the letter י appears in כימיך, it alludes to the pillar דין. It alludes to the ten judicial aspects in which the judging of capital crimes -דיני נפשות- differs from litigation involving merely monetary disputes, דיני ממונות. The "final" ך i.e. the open-ended letter כ at the end of the word וכימיך alludes to the pillar חסד, and reminds us to have an "open hand," to be generous to appeals by the poor and the destitute. The Torah (15,7) warns expressly: לא תקפוץ ידך, "Do not ball your hand into a fist." Moses concluded the verse (33,25) with the word דבאך. The four letters of this word are the respective first letters of four foundations of succesful life on earth i.e. of G–d's blessing. They are: דירה נאה, a beautiful home, בד קודש, a certain amount of solitude or seclusion, אשה נאה, happy married life, and כלים נאים, nice clothing. [Three of these four, the home, the wife and the clothing, are mentioned in Berachot 57 as "broadening" man's mind. Ed.]
  These six pillars and four supports are already alluded to in the words of 18,13: תמים תהיה עם השם אלוקיך. The word תמים alludes to the six pillars. The first is תורה, (for Psalms 19,8 speaks of תורת ה' תמימה. The next pillar, עבודה, is alluded to because the Torah (Leviticus 22,19) speaks about תמים זכר. The pillar גמילות חסדים -by definition- appears in conjunction with the pillar אמת becomes a true חסד של אמת, something which does not look forward to something in return. This is the true meaning of תמים. Both the pillars אמת, שלום, and דין are associated with the word תמים as we know from Deut. 32,4: הצור תמים פעלו כי כל דרכיו משפט א-ל אמונה ואין עול; we also know that שלום is equivalent to תמימות since the Torah tells us that when something is joined the result is תמים as in Exodus 26,24. The verse תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך continues with the words עם ה' אלוקיך which is an allusion to the four "supports" of the throne. We have mentioned that the uniqueness of G–d is to be emulated by us by התבודדות, seclusion. The אשה נאה, whom we have described as one of the fundamentals of successful existence on this earth, is a simile for the נשמה, soul, which is part of G–d, His "wife," so to speak. This is why the Torah writes: עם ה' אלוקיך. The דירה נאה, beautiful dwelling we mentioned as another ingredient of successful life on earth is a metaphor for a good and dedicated heart, (seeing that the "dwelling" is something interior just as the heart). Whenever the Torah speaks of a commandment the fulfilment of which primarily depends on one's heart, we find an exhortation ויראת מאלקיך, "You shall fear the Lord your G–d." Rashi comments that this is because G–d looks into our hearts. Finally, the כלים נאים, nice clothes which we described as another fundamental for a successful existence in this life, are a metaphor for the various parts of the body with which we perform most of G–d's commandments, and which have been granted us by G–d for this purpose. Proof that we are beloved by G–d is the fact that we have been created in His image.
  An important function of the six pillars which ensure this world's continued existence is that we, who perform the commandments which symbolise these six pillars, associate as closely as possible with the four supports. In metaphorical language: Since we have a tradition that G–d only has the four cubits of הלכה in this world, study and performance of the six pillars mentioned is equivalent to secluding oneself in the Tent of Torah. Our sages (Berachot 6b) have said that all our enemies will succumb if someone sets aside a special place for studying Torah. 
  [The author continues in this vein for several more pages. Inasmuch as I have not found anything there that has not been said in a similar vein on previous occasions, I have decided to omit it. Ed.]
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  שופטים ושוטרים תתן לך בכל שעריך . We find an allusion here to the moral imperative quoted in the ספר יצירה that there are seven gateways to the soul (נפש). They are: The two eyes, the two ears, the mouth, and the two nostrils. Thus far the ספר יצירה. Only the gateways that are in man's head have been mentioned here. There are, however, two more "gateways," namely the opening from which seminal fluid is emitted, and the opening from which we excrete. Man has to guard these openings with extreme care. This "care" extends to what he sees with his eyes, what he hears with his ears, what he says with his mouth, and the anger that he lets escape from his nostrils. He also must exercise careful control over the gateway from the site of the Holy Covenant with G–d, making sure that any seminal fluid which he emits serves a sacred purpose. He must also ensure that he does not unnecessarily fill up the opening from which he excretes, as only animals keep on eating for the sake of eating, heedless of the amount of filth and vomit they accumulate within their bodies. In short, these are the שערים, gates of his body, that man must watch over like a judge and law enforcement officer. This is the reason the Torah added the words תתן לך, "place for yourself" in the opening verse of our portion.
  לא תטה משפט לא תקח שוחד . Our sages have been very much concerned about anything even remotely resembling a bribe. Even the most insignificant service performed for a person to whom one is indebted is prohibited. Tur Choshen Mishpat lists a variety of apparently innocent sounding examples which are forbidden under this heading. It is dangerously easy to become guilty of transgressing this commandment. The דורשי רשומות, found an interesting allusion in the letters of the words שוחד and תטה משפט. When you תטה, "incline" the letters of the word שחד they turn into תטה, i.e. the letters in the alphabet following the three letters שחד spell תטה.
  מצות מינוי המלך . The straightforward meaning of the commandment to appoint a king is to imbue the people with the fear of the authority he wields. They will observe Torah laws better because there is a terrestrial king who will hold them responsible for non-observance. Because of this the king is commanded to be especially scrupulous in his own מצוה observance as it would not do for him to call to order or even convict others for sins which he himself is guilty of. This idea is symbolized by the Torah's command that the king must have two Torah scrolls, i.e. he must be twice as scrupulous as his subjects in observing what is written in the Torah. The reason he is warned not to amass too many wives, too many horses, or too much gold and silver is because each one of these is indicative of too much greed. The possession of too many horses also falls under this heading, since the king must rely on G–d and not on man made means of salvation. We remind ourselves of this in our daily prayers when we recite Psalms 20,8: "They (call) on chariots, they (call) on horses, but we call on the name of the Lord our G–d." Our sages rule that the king must be extra scrupulous in his personal conduct in order to inspire his subjects and not give them an excuse to sin by pointing to his own own lax observance of the commandments; we in our time can apply this ruling to our teachers and rabbis and anyone in a position of authority.
  For the above reason the paragraph following the one dealing with the king deals with the position of the priests and Levites, each of whom have been selected by G–d for high office, and who therefore have to apply to themselves more stringent yardsticks of Torah observance than apply to the ordinary Israelite.
  Keeping this in mind, we can understand a peculiarity in 18,6. There the Torah writes: "When the Levite who lives in one of your gates (towns) comes to the place G–d has chosen, he may do so whenever he pleases. He may serve in the name of his G–d like all his fellow-Levites who are in attendance there." The obvious question here is why, in describing the function of the priest, the Torah in this paragraph merely calls him: "the Levite," while in the preceding paragraph (18,3-5), it calls him by his rightful title? The appointment of the priest as a כהן, originated in the emanation חסד, as opposed to the appointment of the Levite as a tribe with special functions, which originated in the emanation גבורה. Because the priest is on a more elevated level than the mere Levite, his conduct is measured by a more exacting yardstick. The Torah alludes to this in verse 6 where the priest is reminded that he is basically judged as a Levite, i.e. by the standards of the emanation גבורה, otherwise known as מדת הדין, the attribute of Justice. The allegorical meaning of the words חלק כחלק יאכלון in 18,8 is that on the holidays, when all of the priests are allowed to eat a share of the sacrifices being offered, they all share the same standards. We know that the world is judged (Rosh Hashanah 16a) on the three festivals Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles in addition to New Year's when people's lives are in the balance. On Passover the size and quality of the forthcoming grain harvest is decided upon in Heaven; G–d decides on the size and quality of the yield of fruit-bearing trees on the Festival of Weeks, and on the water supply during the rainy season on the Festival of Tabernacles. These decisions are made by the attribute of Justice. The priests are to remind themselves of the activities of the attribute of Justice when they partake of the offerings on these festivals.
  תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך . This verse applies to one's attitude in all one's religious observances.
  There is an additional important allusion in this verse which is seized upon by the Zohar in a different context. Accordingly, the performance of a מצוה enhances the "image" of G–d, whereas when one sins one damages G–d's "image" both in the Celestial Regions and on earth. Man's sins leave noticeable imprints on his face; this is the reason that Isaiah 3,9 speaks of: הכרת פנים ענתה בם, "Their faces reflect their sins. Rabbi Moshe Alshich, commenting on Genesis 45,28: אלכה ואראנו בטרם אמות, "I will go and see him (Joseph) before I die," writes that Jacob wanted to determine if Joseph had remained loyal to the Abrahamitic tradition by looking at his face. As soon as Jacob looked at Joseph's face (Genesis 46,29) he expressed willingness to die. The Torah phrases this peculiarly when it writes: "After I have seen that you are alive." At first glance the words "that you are alive" seem superfluous. Jacob indicated by his words that being "alive" in itself was quite meaningless unless Joseph had remained loyal to his father's teachings. Joseph's face reflected G–d's approval, i.e. G–d made Joseph's face light up. One of the ways which result in man's face being illuminated is by means of repentance. When the Jewish people are reminded (Deut. 5,4) that G–d spoke to them פנים אל פנים, "face to face," this is a compliment telling us that their facial features had undergone a change for the better, and that the ugly lines on their faces reflecting their sinful behavior had been erased. Psalms 42,12 speaks of the hope of the sons of Korach. There is no point in being downcast when repentance can cause us to reflect G–d's salvation on our own face; not only this, but we will simultaneously remove the tarnish caused to G–d's "image" by our own sins. The commandment to appear in the Temple three times a year (16,16), caused our sages in Chagigah 2a to say that the word יראה can be read both passively or actively, i.e. "to be seen" or "to see." Their message is that if one comes to the Temple with a positive attitude, i.e. in order to "see" G–d, then one will also be positively "seen" by G–d. This also enables us to understand another verse which is generally held to be almost beyond comprehension.
  We read in Psalms 27,8: לך אמר לבי בקשו פני את פניך ה' אבקש, "In your behalf my heart says: 'Seek My face! O Lord, I seek Your face'." The subject matter in this verse is the previous verse (4) where David had expressed the wish: לחזות בנועם ה' ולבקר בהיכלו, "to gaze upon the beauty of the Lord, to frequent His Temple." David says to G–d: "My heart says to You that there is no need for You to look at the lines in my face because my heart sends the message: "I am with You." David means that since G–d looks into all our hearts, why would He need to gauge from David's face whether he was loyal to Him. David claims לבי ובשרי "my heart and my flesh are one." Both my heart and my flesh shout for joy to the living G–d" (Psalms 84,3). Human beings, however, who cannot see what goes on in my heart must look at my flesh, i.e. at the lines in my face to gauge whether I am loyal and true to You. In verse 8 the words בקשו פני are in the plural because they are addressed to human beings, as if David were saying: "You mortal people seek out my face to determine if I am true and loyal to G–d. When did I want you to test me, says David? At the time when I expressed the wish to gaze upon the beauty of G–d, etc."
  To sum up: Man's sins leave an imprint not only on his own face but also tarnish the "image" of G–d. This is why the Torah phrases its request that we be "perfect, whole" with Him by using the word תמים in the plural, [when it could just as well have described this attitude as תם (sing.) similarly to the Torah's description of Jacob's character in Genesis 25,27. Ed.]
  מי האיש אשר בנה בית חדש ולא חנכו ילך וישוב לביתו . The same rule applies to someone who has planted a vineyard and not consecrated it, or to someone who is betrothed to a girl and has not yet wed her. Remember that there are three periods each of which is described as עולם הבא, "the World to Come," as we know from the Sabbath morning prayer הכל יודוך. In our liturgy we describe these various periods of time as 1) חיי העולם הבא, 2) ימות המשיח, 3) תחיית המתים. The period described as חיי העולם הבא refers to a "home," i.e. a dwelling equipped with the type of furnishings that are in keeping with the relative merit each righteous person has achieved during his lifetime on earth. The period called ימות המשיח refers to the period when man and woman join in matrimony, i.e. when G–d and the mystical equivalent of the Jewish people called כנסת ישראל form a permanent bond. This period is referred to by the prophet Isaiah 62,5: "As a youth espouses a maiden, your sons shall espouse Me; and as a bridegroom rejoices over his bride, so will your G–d rejoice over you." After this period called תחיית המתים, "the resurrection of the dead," there comes the period of eternity, something which has not been described by any prophet since none have been shown it. Our sages have alluded to this period as the period of the יין המשומר בענביו מששת ימי בראשית והוא כרם השם צבאות, a period when wine will be served which has been preserved in its grapes ever since the six days of Creation. G–d regards this as His personal vineyard. A sinner has to return home instead of fighting in the war called מלחמת רשות. A sinner is a person who has not yet completed his preparations for entry into any of these phases of the World to Come. The Torah merely alludes to this by giving examples of people who have undertaken three different types of crucial enterprises without having completed their tasks. When the Torah stresses that anyone of these three categories of people is to ישוב לביתו "return" home, this is a not so subtle hint to the sinner to engage in repentance, תשובה.
  When the Torah speaks of wars conducted against a city (20,10), this is also an allusion to the war against the most powerful king, the evil urge, the war man is engaged in throughout his life. – כי תצור אל עיר, "When you lay siege to a city, etc." (20,19). This refers to a small city, i.e. the battle against the evil urge which has not yet become a major threat. The various details described in this passage may be viewed as metaphors for the measures to be taken to cleanse oneself spiritually. Rabbi Avraham Saba in his Tzror Hamor, as well as other commentators all underline the allegorical significance of this passage as describing the ongoing struggle with our evil urge. 
  
  Ki Teitzei
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named קדושת הגוף וקדושת דמים.
  Commandment 532 of the 613 commandments deals with the rules pertaining to an attractive female prisoner of war a soldier wishes to wed.
  Commandment 533 prohibits the sale of such a prisoner of war once she has become the soldier's wife. The Torah (21,14) writes: "She must not be sold."
  Commandment 534 forbids the soldier to rape or otherwise abuse such a prisoner of war after the initial intercourse. The Torah (21,14) warns: "You must not enslave her."
  Commandment 535 provides for the hanging of a corpse in cases where the Torah has provided for this procedure. The Torah (21,22) states: "You must hang him on a tree."
  Commandment 536 rules that people who have been executed by due process must be buried. The same applies to people who have died normally. The Torah (21,23) demands: "You must make sure that you bury him on the same day (the day of the execution)."
  Comandment 537 forbids leaving overnight a corpse which has been hanged without burying it. The Torah (21,23) says: "You must not allow his corpse to remain hanging on the tree."
  Commandment 538 stipulates that found objects must be returned to the person who has lost same. The Torah (22,1) states: "You must make repeated efforts to restore them" (the lost animal or object).
  Commandment 539 forbids one to ignore a stray animal (which obviously belongs to someone). The Torah (22,1) says: "Do not ignore them."
  Commandment 540 orders us to assist in loading a person or an animal when they need assistance. The Torah (22,4) says: "You must help him raise it."
  Commandment 541 forbids us to ignore the plight of an animal or human being which has broken down under an excess load. We must assist in helping remove the load ensuring that the person or animal can get up. The Torah (22,4) says: "You must not watch the ass of your brother break down, etc…..and ignore the situation."
  Commandment 542 prohibits a man from wearing women's jewelry.
  Commandment 543 forbids a women from wearing man's jewelry or clothing, such as a uniform, etc. The Torah (22,5) warns: "Men's clothing should not be worn by women nor women's clothing by men."
  Commandment 544 enjoins us to send away the mother bird before snatching the eggs or fledglings from her nest. The Torah (22,6) says: "Let the mother go and take only her young."
  Commandment 545 forbids taking the mother bird and leaving the fledglings. The Torah (22,6) writes: "Do not take the mother together with the young."
  Commandment 546 requires us to build a fence around the edges of our roofs to help prevent someone falling off. The Torah (22,8) directs: "Construct a railing."
  Commandment 547 forbids the placing of obstacles anywhere within our houses or our country. The Torah (22,8) says: "Do not bring bloodguilt on your house."
  Commandment 548 forbids the planting of grain in the midst of a vineyard. The Torah (22,9) writes: "You shall not sow your vineyard with a second variety."
  Commandment 549 prohibits eating the proceeds of such a mixture. The Torah (22,9) continues: "And the yield of the vineyard may not be used."
  Commandment 550 forbids the use of two differnt species of animals in pulling one plow. The Torah (22,10) writes: "You shall not plow with an ox and an ass together."
  Commandment 551 forbids the wearing of a mixture of wool and linen. The Torah (22,11) says: "Do not wear cloth combining wool and linen."
  Commandment 552 legislates that marrying a woman must involve certain means of קנין, acquisition. The Torah (22,13) says: "When a man acquires a woman, etc."
  Commandment 553 provides that a person who has defamed a woman's chastity unjustly must marry her provided she was betrothed to him. The Torah (22,14) says: "She will become his wife."
  Commandment 554 forbids the husband of such a woman to divorce her. The Torah (22,19) writes: "He cannot send her away as long as he lives."
  Commandment 555 stipulates that the penalty of stoning must be carried out on persons guilty of such punishment. The Torah (22,21) says: "The people of her town shall stone her to death."
  Commandment 556 states that someone who commits a sin under duress (such as rape) must not be punished. The Torah (22,26) writes: "Do not do anything to the girl."
  Commandment 557 provides that a rapist must marry his victim. The Torah (22,29) states: "She will be his wife."
  Commandment 558 forbids the husband of a woman he has raped ever to divorce her. The Torah (22,29) writes: "He cannot divorce her as long as he lives."
  Commandment 559 forbids a castrated man from marrying a Jewish girl. The Torah (23,2) says: "No one whose testes are crushed or whose member is cut off shall be admitted into the congregation of the Lord."
  Commandment 560 forbids a Mamzer (product of a forbidden sexual union) to marry an Israelite. The Torah (23,3) says: "A Mamzer must not become a member of the congregation of Israel."
  Commandment 561 stipulates that a Moabite or Ammonite must not marry an Israelite woman. The Torah (23,4) states so expressly.
  Commandment 562 prohibits denying members of descendants of Esau who wish to join the Jewish people from doing so. The Torah (23,8) writes: "Do not abhor the Edomite."
  Commandment 563 prohibits excluding the Egyptians from joining Judaism. The Torah (23„8) says: "Do not abhor the Egyptian."
  Commandment 564 enjoins us from actively promoting the welfare of the Ammonites or Moabites. The Torah (23,7) says: "Do not concern yourself with their welfare as long as you live."
  Commandment 565 stipulates that someone who is ritually impure must not enter the camp of the Levites. The Torah (23,11) says: "Anyone who is not pure must not enter the Levites' camp while in such a state."
  Commandment 566 directs that provision must be made outside the camp for sites where to relieve oneself. The Torah (23,13) says: "You shall have a place, etc."
  Commandment 567 directs that one must equip oneself with suitable tools to bury one's excrement. The Torah (23,14) says: "With your gear you shall have a spike, etc."
  Commandment 568 forbids a Jew to extradite a Gentile slave who escaped into Israel or who escaped from a Gentile master within Israel to a Jewish environment. The Torah (23,16) says: "Do not extradite a slave who escaped."
  Commandment 569 prohibits us from exploiting such a slave. The Torah (23,17) says: "You must not ill-treat him."
  Commandment 570 enjoins you from having sexual intercourse with a woman who did not receive a marriage contract from you. The Torah (23,18) states: "No Israelite woman shall be a prostitute."
  Commandment 571 prohibits that the payment for the services of a whore or the proceeds from the sale of a dog be offered as a sacrifice on the altar in the Holy Temple. The Torah (23,19) writes: "You shall not bring the fee of a whore or the pay of a dog to the house of the Lord."
  Commandments 572 and 573 forbid a Jew to either charge or accept interest payments in any transaction with a fellow-Jew. The Torah (23,20) warns: "Do not deduct interest from loans to your countrymen." On the other hand the Torah directs in verse 21 that we should charge interest to a Gentile. This is the interpretation of Maimonides. The author of the Semag disagrees and feels that charging or paying of interest in dealings with a Gentile is permitted but not obligatory.
  Commandment 574 directs that any vows must be paid up not later than the third of the three festivals which involve a pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Temple. The Torah (23,22) states: "Do not be tardy in fulfilling your vow."
  Commandment 575 warns us to fulfil verbal commitments. The Torah (23,24) states: "You must fulfil what crosses your lips."
  Commandment 576 directs that hired workers must be permitted to eat while harvesting crops of the fields or of the tree. The Torah (23,25) writes: "When you enter another man's vineyard and you eat grapes you may do so until you are full."
  Commandment 577 forbids said labourer to "fill a doggie bag," i.e. to take home from such harvested fruit instead of personally consuming it on the site. The Torah (23,25) adds: "You must not put any in your vessel."
  Commandment 578 prohibits a labourer who eats while working to eat from any produce that is still attached to a tree or to the ground. The Torah (23,26) says: "You must not put a sickle to your neighbour's grain."
  Commandment 579 stipulates that divorce proceedings must be confirmed by a valid document. The Torah (24,1) states: "He will have to write her a document of divorce."
  Commandment 580 forbids the former husband of a divorcee to remarry her if the divorcee has in the meantime been married to someone else. The Torah (24,4) states: "Her first husband must not take her back after she has become defiled, etc."
  Commandment 581 exempts a groom from military draft for the first full year of his marriage. The Torah (24,5) writes: "He shall not go to war or be drafted for any other communal service; he shall be free for his house for a full year."
  Commandment 582 is an order to the newly wed groom to make his wife happy for an entire year. This is the second half of 24,5, i.e. "He shall give happiness to his wife whom he has wed."
  Commandment 583 forbids the lender to take the cooking utensils of the borrower as collateral for a loan. The Torah (24,6) states: "A handmill, etc., shall not be taken in pawn."
  Commandment 584 forbids a person afflicted with a skin exzema, צרעת, to remove any symptoms of the disease. The Torah (24,8) says: "Be careful to do in accordance with the instructions of the priest, etc."
  Commandment 585 forbids taking collateral by force, without the presence of a representative of the court. The Torah (24,10) warns: "Do not enter his house to seize his pledge."
  Commandment 586 instructs the holder of the pawn to return it to the borrower at the time he is in need of it (if he needs it nightly). The Torah (24,12) says: "If he is a poor man do not sleep while in possession of his pledge."
  Commandment 587 addresses the holder of a pawn which may occasionally be needed by the poor man from whom it was taken as a pledge, to return it when it is required. The Torah (24,13) says: "You must surely restore the pledge to him."
  Commandment 588 instructs the employer of day-labourers to pay the labourer's wages on time, i.e. at the end of the working day. The Torah (24,14) writes: "On his day you must pay him his wages."
  Commandment 589 forbids relatives to testify on behalf of their kin. The Torah (24,16) says: "Fathers must not be executed on the strength of the testimony of their children."
  Commandment 590 warns us not to subvert the law of the stranger, orphan or widow.
  Commandment 591 forbids the taking of the garment of a widow as a pledge. The Torah (24,17) writes: "You shall not take a widow's garment as a pawn."
  Commandment 592 instructs the farmer to leave forgotten sheaves for the poor.
  Commandment 593 forbids the farmer to go back and collect such forgotten sheaves. The Torah (24,19) writes: "Do not go back to collect it."
  Commandment 594 instructs the court to administer the penalty of 39 lashes to the party that is guilty of such punishment.
  Commandment 595 warns the person administering this penalty not to administer any excess lashes, nor to administer more lashes than the amount the guilty party is considered able to absorb without endangering his health. The Torah (25,3) states: "He may administer up to 40 lashes, no more."
  Commandment 596 warns the farmer not to muzzle the ox at the time it threshes the grain. The Torah (25,4) writes: "Do not muzzle the ox while it is threshing."
  Commandment 597 legislates that the widow surviving a husband who died without children must not marry a stranger (other than her brother-in-law). The Torah (25,5) instructs: "The wife of the deceased shall not be married to a stranger."
  Commandment 598 instructs one of the surviving brothers to marry his widowed sister-in-law. The Torah (25,5) writes: "Her husband's brother shall unite with her."
  Commandment 599 provides for the ceremony of Chalitzah in the event none of the surviving brothers of the deceased is prepared to marry this widow. The Torah (25,9) writes: "She will pull off his sandal, etc."
  Commandment 600 instructs us to save a person who is in danger from pursuit by a murderer even if this must involve killing the potential murderer, i.e. the pursuer. The Torah (25,12) states: "You shall cut off her hand."
  Commandment 601 commands us not to show pity to the pursuer. The Torah (25,12) says: "Do not show pity."
  Commandment 602 forbids us to have different size stones purporting to be the same weight. The Torah (25,13) says: "You shall not have them in your pouch."
  Commandment 603 is an instruction to remember what Amalek did to the Jewish people when he attacked us in the desert in noman's land. The Torah (25,17) says: "Remember what Amalek did to you."
  Commandment 604 is an instruction to wipe out the descendants of Amalek. The Torah (25,19) states: "Blot out the memory of Amalek."
  Commandment 605 is an injunction never to forget what Amalek did to our ancestors when they came out of Egypt.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  I have written on a number of occasions that man is the purpose of Creation, that he was created in the image and likeness of G–d, and that just as Adam originally had two faces to indicate the equality of man and woman, so also man's body and soul respectively used to be perfect and both were sanctified to their G–d. Woman subsequently was separated from Adam in order to become his helpmate (partner), to enable them to unite truly and to become "one flesh" (Genesis 2,24). Adam (Man) by this separation assumed his perfect form, and had become complete. In the Midrash of Rabbi Nechuniah ben Hakanah we find the statement that G–d's holiness is made up of seven different aspects, everyone of which is represented in man. It is written of Man that "He created him in the image of G–d; He created them male and female" (Genesis 1,27). These are the seven aspects in which Man reflects sacred aspects of G–d; the right upper leg, the left upper leg, the right hand, the left hand, the torso (the male member) and the head. If you will add these up you will only arrive at a total of six. The seventh is the wife of man; the Torah describes her as an integral part of man when it writes: "they became one flesh." Thus far the Midrash of Rabbi Nechuniah ben Hakanah i.e. ספר הבהיר.
  The two arms of man correspond to the emanations חסד and גבורה. The two legs correspond to the emanations נצח and הוד. The male reproductive organ within which all the forces of the body coalesce and form his seed and by means of which he unites with his wife, corresponds to the emanation מלכות. After the Torah had described the union of man and wife [i.e. man in the plural i.e. אותם, Ed.], it mentions that G–d blessed them (Genesis 1,28). He called their combined name אדם. Man had not become whole until joined by his wife as a separate entity. When this occurred Man's soul wore garments of distinction [i.e. the body. Ed.] Man's essence is his "interior," his body is merely his "clothing." This "clothing" was snow white, as if he were wearing clothing made of "light," i.e. כתנות אור. Man's body then could be described as illuminating both his soul and itself. This provided man with three different kinds of wholeness or "perfections." They are alluded to in the acronym מגן (usually understood as shield, protection). The three letters forming that acronym are the first letters of each of the words ממון, money, גוף, body, and נשמה, soul. This is what is meant when the beauty of Jacob is described by our sages as comparable to the beauty of Adam. The Torah refers to it when it describes the mental and physical state of Jacob/Israel shortly after his encounter with Samael. We read in Genesis 33,18: ויבא יעקב שלם, "Jacob arrived whole." We are told in Shabbat 33b, that the word "whole" comprised the three aspects we have mentioned as the perfection of Adam. The Talmud described one of the aspects in which Jacob was "whole,” שלם, as תורתו; this refers, of course, to the state of his נשמה, his soul, since it is Torah which illuminates our soul. Adam the whole was not deficient in any area that is part of life. He did not have any needs since he already found himself at home in גן עדן, in an ideal environment. His food was derived from the trees of גן עדן. He did not have to work for a living and was therefore free to directly devote all his time to the service of G–d. The Torah describes that Adam was placed in גן עדן in order לעבדה ולשמרו, was placed in such an undemanding environment in order to enable him to serve G–d without hindrance and impediment. Our sages interpret the word לעבדה as referring to the performance of positive commandments, whereas the word לשמרה refers to the care taken not to transgress negative commandments. Adam performed all six hundred and thirteen commandments in a theoretical, spiritual fashion. All of this is explained in Pardes Rimonim chapter הנשמה, and I have elaborated on this elsewhere (מסכת חולין item 104, new edition of של"ה השלם by Rabbi Meir Katz). Man unfortunately did not even manage to spend a single night in גן עדן before he sinned. (cf. Psalms 49,13). His "jewelry" was removed as a result of his seduction by the serpent. This brought in its wake that instead of wearing "garments" which illuminated his soul as well as his body, he had to wear garments made of the hide of flesh, i.e. animals which did not represent anything spiritual. Ever since, new generations of man are the product of the smelly drop of semen, i.e. semen which is polluted by the residual pollutant of the original serpent. Once Eve had become defiled through sexual union with the serpent, the defiled party had to leave the holy site, i.e. גן עדן, just as in the desert anyone who was ritually impure could not remain within the holy precincts of the מחנה שכינה, the camp hosting the Presence of G–d. The immediate result of this was the toil involved in securing his sustenance, his clothing and his shelter. This is what the Torah meant when it describes that G–d told Adam: "You will eat bread in the sweat of your brow" (Genesis 3,19). Because man was constructed from parts of nature, מטבע, he has a tendency to pursue money, <i>matbei'a</i>, as symbolized by the word מטבע. He uses this money, מטבע, to secure his needs. 
  Man, who had possessed all kinds of "perfections," became far from being perfect. Even though the perfection of his נפש, his soul, remained holy, he had lost the perfection of his other two components, that of the body and that of anything connected with his economic activities.
  When G–d eventually chose us, the Jewish people, from among all the other nations, Israel is described as חלק ה' עמו יעקב חבל נחלתו, "G–d's portion is His people, Jacob is His own allotment" (Deut. 32,9). Only the Jewish people have qualified for the title תורה תמימה. G–d gave us the תורה תמימה, the perfect Torah, containing the 613 commandments which are performed in practice in this imperfect world we live in. By dint of observing these commandments to the best of our ability, we are pleading to attain in this life a degree of sanctity of the body and a sanctification of the way we relate to matters which determine our financial well-being. If and when we achieve this we will become pure once more and attain Adam's spiritual-physical level before his expulsion from גן עדן. At such a time performance of the commandments may assume a totally different form, similar to the form it took when Adam was still in Paradise. G–d took us out of bondage in Egypt to enable us to become His servants as He said in Leviticus 25,55: "for the children of Israel are My servants."  Thus by having become His servants we add more power to the spiritual essence of our souls. In the eventual future we will recapture the spiritual niveau possessed by Adam when he still wore the garments woven of light. When that point in our history will be reached, our life will become eternal, and both body and soul will have an enduring existence on earth. Our nourishment will then be provided directly by the שכינה as is the unanimous view of the Kabbalists and recorded by Nachmanides – in complete contrast to Maimonides who does not envision the period in question as pertaining to physical life on earth. The refinement we have discussed can only be achieved through the performance of the commandments involving one's body and one's money. Considering the fact that almost all the seventy odd commandments listed in this portion pertain either to our body or involve our financial resources, we may view the entire פרשה as primarily devoted to teach us how to achieve the sanctity of our body and our relationship to matters economic.
  We must remember that the major focus of attaining sanctity of the body revolves around the reproductive organ and whom and for what purpose we choose our life-partner. We must strive that the drop of semen which will fertilize the ovum in our wives be sacred and not tainted by the pollutant of the serpent. One important way of accomplishing this is to ensure that we never emit semen except for the purpose of begetting children from our lawful wife. Sacred intentions during mating will bring about a union between the emanation of תפארת and מלכות, which represents the dual faced Adam before Eve was separated from him. These two emanations symbolize the mystical dimension of the זווג, physical union of man and wife. 
  The holy thoughts one must have during sexual intercourse are spiritually useful only if one has chosen a suitable wife. The reason that Eve was separated from Adam at a time when there were no other human beings was to demonstrate that the union of Adam and Eve in matrimony was a union between two partners who were suited to each other. When one chooses a wife one has to maintain the צלם אלוקים aspect of one's personality. If one is motivated by other considerations in choosing one's wife, or if one engages in sexual intercourse – even with one's wife – for reasons other than the procreation of G–d-fearing children, one's משכב ומושב is considered as חוצה. We have mentioned on numerous occasions that G–d created "opposites", i.e. in order to provide man with merits for making the right choice, He had to give us a chance to make the wrong choice. Marriages which were not entered into under the aegis of such holy considerations originated in the domain of Samael and Lilith. Anything which originates in those domains – though not completely devoid of holiness, since even Samael originated in a holy sphere – is still tainted with at least some of the serpent's pollutant. During the 130 years [between the birth of Cain and Abel and that of Sheth. Ed.] that Adam did not entertain marital relations with his wife, the serpent contaminated any semen that Adam emitted during those years, with the result that the world became infested with many destructive agents of Lilith. If we nowadays become guilty of similar emissions of semen for other than holy purposes we are guilty of the same thing. This portion makes a point of illustrating what may occur when one does not marry the right partner and does not engage in sexual relations for an approved purpose.
  The list of commandments which deal with this subject includes the commandment that after having married a man must spend a year free from communal duties so that he may elevate the marriage to the proper level of sanctity. If, after working at such a task, it turns out that the partnership is not compatible from a spiritual point of view, he is to write a decree of divorce. He is not to remarry such a wife if in the interval she has been married to someone else. The laws pertaining to rape, seduction, and people who smear the reputation of their betrothed, are also listed in our פרשה; the above-mentioned can never divorce their victims. Ammonites, Moabites and Mamzerim are barred from marrying Jews for all future generations, whereas the third generation of Egyptian or Edomite converts may so marry. Physical blemishes precluding a Jewish male from siring children also constitute an impediment to marrying a Jewish girl. Jewish prostitutes must not be tolerated. The laws about the levirate marriage, the laws about how and under what circumstances one may marry a female prisoner-of-war, as well as the prohibition to sacrifice the proceeds of harlotry, are all examples of how we must strive to sanctify our bodies both on an individual and on a national basis.
  Other commandments dealing with the sanctification of one's body are the laws of chaste behavior when performing natural physical requirements, the provision to put excrement out of sight, etc. Among the other prominent aspects in our portion of the Torah's attempts to sanctify our lives we may even find the prohibition to enter the holy precincts if one suffers from involuntary ritual impurity only. Part of this overall scheme are the laws pertaining to physical punishment for transgressing many of the negative commandments. A further instance of the attention the Torah places on elevating our bodies spiritually is the law respecting the dignity of a legally executed person who must not be displayed overnight. Similar considerations are underscored by the laws protecting the body from accidental injury such as the requirement to erect a parapet around a flat roof. The same motivation is evident even in the physical protection offered to Gentile slaves who have escaped their masters and fled to the land of Israel. The law enjoining us to help animals avoid unnecessary suffering, namely to assist owners in relieving the excess burden of such animals is another example of the comprehensive concern of the Torah for the dignity of any living creatures.
  Next the Torah concentrates on the elevation of any financial transaction to a higher level of sanctity than that which prevails among the Gentiles. The Torah begins by forbidding the wearing of a mixture of wool and linen; the Torah forbids the possible mistaking of men for women and vice versa by forbidding each sex to wear the attire normally worn by the opposite sex. Taking a widow's clothing as a pawn is prohibited, as is the high-handed action of a lender when appropriating a pawn without supervision by the court authorizing same. There also is legislation requiring the return of a pledge under certain conditions even though the underlying loan it secures has not been repaid. Utensils needed in preparing the necessities for a civilized life-style must not be appropriated as pledges altogether. The prohibition of imposing or paying interest to Jews is a prominent part of the legislation aimed at elevating our attitude to money and what it should or should not represent. The legislation that one may (or should) charge interest to Gentiles puts the concern for higher standards to be observed among the Jewish people into sharper focus. The prohibition not to mix seeds, mismatch beasts of burden, etc. all point to a much higher ethical niveau on which our economic life is based. Social legislation providing that workers and even one's own beasts must be allowed to eat from the product of their work while they are harvesting, are all designed to teach us concern for all those who work for us not to exploit them. The laws not to be tardy in paying wages to people who depend on them for their daily bread are another example of the Torah's concern for putting our economic life on a socially elevated basis. The whole legislation pertaining to the treatment of the helpless in society, i.e. the widow, the orphan and the stranger (newcomer to the Jewish people) all aim to teach us that we are part of one unit and are responsible for one another's economic well-being. This string of legislations concludes with the demand to wipe out Amalek who represents impurity of the body incarnate and values diametrically opposed to those espoused in the Torah.
  I shall now endeavor to explain these commandments in detail to the best of my ability: כי יקח איש אשה . The true sanctity of marriage, i.e. the acquisition of a wife and thereby sanctifying the joined lives of the partners, can be achieved only if the husband sanctifies himself at the time he engages in sexual intercourse with his wife. When their union is on such a level then man and wife symbolize the union between the emanation of תפארת and מלכות to which we have referred on page 1183. That union in turn symbolizes the highest level of union between the concept of כנסת ישראל and G–d. It encourages the merging of the still higher emanations חכמה and בינה, the root of the division between the male and the female. One "perfects" or "completes" the name of G–d by fulfilling the commandment to be fruitful and to multiply. The concepts of אב and אם symbolize the letters י-ה of the Ineffable Name, whereas the concept of בן and בת symbolize the letters ו-ה in that name. The name בן symbolizes the emanation תפארת, an outgrowth of the emanation חכמה, whereas the name בת symbolizes the emanation מלכות, which is the outgrowth of the parallel emanation בינה. By fulfilling the commandment of being fruitful a properly motivated זוג of a Jewish husband and wife helps bring about this union in the higher spheres. We know that the four-lettered Ineffable Name can be spelled in twelve different ways. The average year consists of twelve months. The Torah makes an allusion to the objective of every Jewish marriage both by giving the groom one year, i.e. twelve months, to establish such a marriage and also by freeing him from his communal duties.
  Remember that union is not only physical, i.e. not only the flesh becomes one, but also the souls unite in the Higher Regions. When that occurs one's wife has truly become "בת זוגו." On the rare occasions when such union fails to be achieved the husband terminates the marriage through a decree of divorce, and the wife becomes someone else's marriage partner, for she was obviously not destined to complement her first husband's spiritual needs. It is customary to write the גט, divorce document, in 12 lines in order to make the dissolution of this marriage similar to the way it was contracted, i.e. that union was to be achieved within 12 months. Our sages, in lamenting the sadness of such an occasion, did not refer to the numerically "first" marriage when they said that when one divorces one's "first" wife the altar sheds tears. [This comment applies to someone who has found his בת זוג, something called זווג ראשון, the match approved by heaven, see chapter 45 in Rabbi Moshe Alshich's commentary on Psalms at length on this subject. This editor's translation page 323. Ed.] The marriage in question is not one in which people are involved whose souls are already experiencing the second or third re-incarnation. The terrestrial altar which corresponds to the Celestial Altar (known to Kabbalists as אשת חיל), is truly saddened. The Rekanati comments on the reason why the Torah describes the divorce document as ספר כריתות, literally a "book of separation." The union of the souls of the pair in question took place in Heaven long before their respective bodies joined on earth. Therefore, when separation between the pair occurs a "book of separation" is needed in order to effect this total separation. This so-called "book" is to be understood as an allusion to the emanations "ספירות." What had been joined in Heaven has been torn asunder by a husband who was too insensitive to his good fortune of having found his true בת זוג on earth. The Torah instructs the husband (24,1) that if he divorces his wife וכתב לה ספר כריתות, that the divorce decree in question must be especially written לשמה, "for her name," i.e. for this particular couple. It must contain both the husband's and the wife's name as well as the city in which they reside to show that the separation is only between them and does not affect the דו-פרציפות in the emanations of חכמה and בינה. Thus far the Rekanati. 
  To sum up, when a union of two people who are properly matched occurs it draws down the blessings from the Celestial Regions which symbolize ideal pairings of the male and female elements. ולא תהיה קדשה בבנות ישראל, "There shall not be a prostitute among the daughters of Israel" (23,18). Should such unholy unions occur in our domain they are liable to cause G–d's bounty to be directed to a concubine in the Celestial Regions. This "concubine" is known to Kabbalists as קדשה. It is she who brings the forces of impurity into our world.
  The reason the categories of Mamzer, the Moabite, and Ammonite may not intermarry with Jewish girls is that inasmuch as their place in the scheme of things prior to their becoming converted was in an unholy domain, they are considered to remain under the influence of the forces governing that domain. It is they who symbolize the unholy union between Samael and Lilith. They produce children who do not grow up to embrace G–d's teachings. Ruth Rabbah comments that anyone who marries people who belong to these "peripheral" domains is the subject of the verse in Hoseah 5,7: "They have begotten alien children because they have broken faith with the Lord." When Israel concludes sacred marriages, however, the souls of Israel are elevated from a holy source in accordance with Hosea 14,9: "I become like a verdant cypress. Your fruit is provided by Me." There is an allusion here to the nobility of the souls of Israel originating in the Celestial Regions. [Presumably the fact that in nature a cypress is not a fruit-bearing tree. Ed.] The expression רענן used by the prophet means that the cypress keeps on producing fruit, similar to the meaning of Isaiah 43,5: "I (G–d) will bring your descendants from the East."
  The mystical dimension of the pairing of human beings is the mystical dimension of the active and passive forces in the world. When a man is unable to produce viable sperm, he cannot fulfill his function as the משפיע, active partner of the team. This is why castrated males cannot be allowed to marry healthy Jewish girls. Such a union would undermine the purpose of a man's and a woman's union in this world, promoting greater unity in the Celestial Spheres. Anyone who contributes to undermining this unity is guilty of a great sin. Both Targum Yonathan and Targum Yerushalmi understand 24,6: לא יחבול רחים ורכב, also as a warning not to prevent groom and bride from carrying on marital relations and producing children. Any person who so prevents a couple is indirectly responsible for the emission of seminal fluid for purposes other than producing a child and deprives the semen of the potential soul it was to house if it had developed normally. The Torah alludes to this when writing: כי נפש הוא חובל, "for he injures a soul."
  We can better understand the reason that the Torah permits Edomites and Egyptians (of the third generation after conversion) to become fully fledged members of the Jewish people if we take a look at the historical development of Abraham, the first convert to Judaism. Both the second generation after Abraham, i.e. Isaac-Ishmael, and the third generation, i.e. Jacob-Esau, still contained a considerable amount of פסולת, spiritual refuse. Only the fourth generation of Abraham's descendants, Jacob's sons, were completely pure and had divested themselves of their spiritual waste. Esau actually became the means that Jacob received the blessing. As a recognition of this the third generation of converts descended from Esau/Edom are admitted as full fledged members. The Torah acknowledges this in 23,8: "Do not despise Edom for he is your brother;" this means that after living as a Jew for the third generation Esau once more qualifies as a brother of Jacob not only biologically but also spiritually. The same law applies to the absorption of Egyptians into the community of the Jewish nation. Our exile in Egypt actually commenced at the time G–d foretold Abraham about it at the covenant of the pieces in Genesis 15,13. Abraham was told that the fourth generation of his descendants would return to the land of Canaan. While in Egypt, the souls of the Jewish people were refined to the extent that they were able to become a nation comprising over 600,000 men of military age, a people that qualified for the title "Israel," the honorific title bestowed by G–d on Jacob. It is appropriate therefore that the third generation of an Egyptian convert to Judaism should enjoy full equality with other Jews just as Jacob who was the third generation counting from Abraham's conversion, was pure and had shed all the spiritual פסולת which had remained from the pollutant of the serpent. Israel, too, had remained גרים, strangers, in Egypt for three generations. The prohibition of bringing the wages of harlotry to the altar of G–d is explained simply by the fact that the harlot is beholden to Lilith, the antithesis of the שכינה. It is a domain where the dogs cry out because the angel of death is constantly around. This is why David prayed in his Psalm 22,21: "Save my life from the sword, my precious life from the clutches of a dog."
  There are two kinds of harlots: One is the above mentioned Lilith, who is always associated with wailings and is the power in charge of of melancholy. The other is Machalat who is in charge of the superficial kind of happiness, i.e. dancing, music and generally light-hearted irresponsible conduct inspired by the forces of impurity. Machalat is the mystical dimension of the יפת תואר, the good looking prisoner of war described at the beginning of our פרשה, whose exterior has so captivated a Jewish soldier that he is bent on spending a lifetime with her. The only reason that the Torah gives its reluctant consent to such a marriage is כנגד יצר הרע, as an antidote to the evil urge. The Torah fears that unless a way is found to permit the soldier to live with such a woman under strictly regulated conditions, he would live with her anyway without benefit of marriage. It is not surprising therefore that the children from such a union should fit the category of בנים זרים, alien children, which we have described earlier. This is clearly alluded to by the fact that the Torah's example of a בן סורר ומורה, a rebellious son, is written immediately before the passage dealing with the case of a sinner whose execution results in the posthumous hanging of his body (21,22).
  The laws pertaining to a husband who falsely accuses his wife of having lost her virginity prior to marriage, i.e. accusing this woman as belonging to the kind of women associated with Lilith or Machalat are reminiscent of what I have written about in my commentary on פרשת חיי שרה in connection with the gifts Abraham gave to the sons of his concubines (page 133) where I dealt with the statement of the sages (Sanhedrin 91) that Abraham gave the sons of his concubines gifts and encouraged them to leave the land of Canaan [voluntary transfer as promoted in our time by some Israeli politicians. Ed]. Our sages in the section of the Talmud mentioned state that Abraham gave these sons of the concubines the שם טומאה, "the name of the 'other' domain in the scheme of emanations." This enabled them to call on the spiritual powers of that domain, the domain of Lilith and Machalat and thereby broadened its influence in this world. What the sages have called שם טומאה there is parallel to what the Torah (22,19) here describes as שם רע. The punishment i.e. rehabilitation of the מוציא שם רע, i.e. rehabilitation is that he must remain married to such a woman (who is not associated with the domain of Lilith). The situation of the rapist and seducer described in 22,23-22,29 is somewhat similar. Whereas a sacred union must be entered into voluntarily by a free-willed decision by both groom and bride, in these cases the groom is penalized by denial of his right to exercise his freely made decision to enter into a sacred union with his wife. Whereas the man was supposed to be the משפיע, the active, initiating force, and his wife the מושפע, the passive recipient in the instances mentioned the man in the union has forfeited his role as a משפיע.
  The mystical dimension of the procedure of חליצה or the levirate marriage between a childless widow and her brother-in-law, is very profound. I will proceed to explain the rules of such a marriage because they are discussed in this portion. Our subject revolves around the concept of reincarnation and the transmigration of souls. The ultimate purpose of marriage is the union of kindred souls. One must avoid being married to someone whose soul is not a kindred spirit if one wants to ensure that one will have children who are truly children of G–d and of whom it can be said as in Hosea 14,9: "your fruit is provided by Me (G–d)." From all this it is clear that man's purpose is to emulate the ways of G–d; if someone has no children he does not only die in this world but also has no life in the Hereafter if he had failed to endeavor to have G–d-fearing children in this world.
  We will explain part of the mystical dimension of the concept of reincarnation, in order to clarify the concepts זווג ראשון and זווג שני which are mentioned in Sotah 2a. Once we understand these concepts we will also understand the deeper meaning of the יבום and חליצה legislation. The Zohar, commenting on the reason why the corpse of a person hung after execution (21,23) [and the same applies to anyone who dies from natural causes Ed.] must be buried within less than 24 hours, writes as follows: Rabbi Yehudah derives from this law that if a body were allowed to remain unburied for a period of 24 hours this would cause a deterioration in the שאברי המרכבה. [I believe the term refers to man's distinction as compared to the animal to serve as the carrier of the entourage of the Divine Presence, שכינה. Ed.] Non-burial would reduce man to the level of the animals as per Psalms 49,13 that "man must not be allowed to remain unburied overnight, lest he be like an animal." All of this is connected to the fact that man was created in G–d's image and form. Were this deterioration to occur it would on occasion prevent G–d from assigning the soul of that body to transmigrate to another body He had singled out for it. The soul of the departed must appear before the Heavenly Tribunal before it can be transferred to another body. Until the body that this soul inhabited has come to burial, the soul does not appear before the Heavenly Tribunal. The Rekanati connects the subject of transmigration to the mystical dimension of man's creation and hence his burial. He writes that one must not imagine that G–d sets out to create a human being and has great plans for such a human being only in order to forsake it. The very reason that G–d ordered the prompt burial of a human being is so that He need not delay carrying out His decrees. Transmigration of the soul of the departed to another body is impossible as long as burial has not taken place. The matter is similar to a husband whose wife has died and who would not remarry until his first wife had been interred. The urgency of the burial is determined by the possibility that G–d has another body on hand waiting to receive the soul of the person recently departed. Rekanati finds support for his theory in the fact that immediately after the passage requiring the burial of the corpse of a legally executed sinner the Torah legislates the concern that must be shown for an animal that has lost its way home (22,1). The passage has an allegorical meaning above and beyond the immediate legislation. If G–d is concerned with restoring lost animals or objects to their owner, it follows that G–d is at least as concerned in providing an opportunity for even a sinner who had to be executed to "find" his way back and cleave to G–d and His commandments. This can be accomplished by גלגול נשמות. The aforementioned helps us to understand the expression נדחים, "outcast," which the Torah uses in our verse, in contradistinction to the end of the passage (verse 3) where the Torah simply refers to אבדה, "a lost object." Rekanati concludes by referring to his own comment in this vein on the סוד העבור on Ruth 4,7.
  When the prophet Isaiah 27,13 speaks about "that day when a great ram's horn will be sounded to signal the ingathering of the strayed ones in the land of Assyria and the expelled ones in the land of Egypt who will come and worship the Lord on the Holy Mount in Jerusalem," he refers to this reunification of the souls that have been scattered. Our daily prayer: תקע בשופר גדול … וקבץ נדחינו, also has in mind those souls that have been dispersed. The same is true of the prayer on the festivals in which we mention that we have been scattered on account of our sins, etc. There too, we pray not just for the return to Jerusalem of Jewish bodies, but for the return to their origin of those souls that have been forced to endure a second or third round of life in this world. The major thrust of these prayers is for the welfare of our souls. There are many aspects to this transmigration of souls. 
  I want to add a few words in connection with 22,1 that we must not idly watch the ox or lamb of a fellow-Jew outcast. Let me preface my remarks with a comment by the Kabbalists on the transmigration of souls. The words of the saintly Rabbi Solomon Alkabez [who composed the famous Lecha Dodi which we sing every Friday night, Ed.] describe these concepts in the clearest terms. I have therefore chosen to quote from his works: "On the day the Lord created Adam (Man) on earth He equipped him with 248 luminaries [in the sense of inspirations. Ed.] which contained the details of the highest spiritual regions, אצילות, within which are found His statutes, social laws, and moral instructions. The function of the positive commandments is not only to enable man to live in this spiritual world, but also to enable him to live on this earth as a form of secondary existence, i.e. בצלם. G–d also created man with 365 sinews corresponding to the 365 negative commandments. When G–d "blew" the soul of life from the most refined spiritual regions into Adam's nose, Adam, so to speak, brought a soul equipped with all these מצות into this earthly existence. These מצות formed the attire of Adam's soul and not a single one was missing. Becoming guilty of "losing" even one of all these מצות is a mortal sin which results in one's soul's inability to attain the place assigned to it in the highest Spiritual Spheres. The distance one will be short of in attaining one's goal is in direct ratio to the number of מצות one has not fulfilled. If one has not only failed to fulfill all the positive commandments but has even become guilty of transgressing negative commandments, the result is an even greater distance between the place one occupies and the place one should have occupied in the Spiritual Regions. G–d, in His great pity for His creatures, has made thoughtful provisions so as not to totally cast out a sinner. This is why He established the principle of re-incarnation, i.e. transmigration of souls. By allowing a soul to return to earth once more, it is given a "second chance" to rehabilitate itself and recapture its original place in the world of the spirits. This principle of transmigration of souls is applied in three different ways, corresponding to the attributes in which our three patriarchs excelled respectively. Some souls do not return to earth because they have to rehabilitate themselves for positive commandments neglected or for negative commandments which they transgressed when they were on earth previously. The only reason they return to earth is in order to perform acts of kindness for the people of their respective generations. Details of this are explained in ספר הפליאה, ספר התמונה, and ספר לבנת ספיר. The Torah alludes to this in Deut. 3,26: ויתעבר ה' בי למענכם. The term עבור is compared to גלגול, both meaning a kind of "transfer." Moses is in effect telling the Jewish people that his being transferred from this world at that time and place was for their own good. This paralleled the attribute of חסד which Abraham excelled in.
  Some souls are forced to undergo a second round of life in this world as a punishment i.e. rehabilitation for sins committed in this life which cannot be atoned for in the purely spiritual regions. This is the way the King of Kings has arranged it. When one has broken a number of covenants one may have to return to earth for each and every covenant one has broken during a previous life on earth. This is the mystical dimension of infants or small children dying. They obviously did not commit a sin in their most recent incarnation, yet they may have had to experience death a second time to expiate for having broken G–d's covenant with Israel in a previous incarnation. All of this occurs when the sinner had failed to repent properly while he lived on this earth. This is why it is appropriate for a person who is not knowingly guilty of any major sins in his present life on earth to repent thoroughly any sins he may have been guilty of in a previous incarnation and for which he had not then obtained forgiveness. If such a person engages in thorough repentance in this round of his life on earth, the vicious circle of transmigration will be broken and his soul will find eternal rest in the Hereafter, not needing to return to life on this earth again. A different fate awaits those who have failed to take advantage of their third round of life on earth, as we know from the words of Elihu in Job 33,29. During the first two or three incarnations the souls were reincarnated in the bodies of human beings. If they have failed to rehabilitate themselves they will be reincarnated as "pure" animals, i.e. the kind of animals fit for consumption by Jews; their eventual fate may be reincarnation in the bodies of impure animals. Anyone who has failed to understand Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai [the author of this description in the Zohar ] properly, believes that he describes how G–d puts ever greater distance between Himself and the sinner. In fact the reverse is true; G–d tries to arrange for the "lost object" to be restored to its owner. This kind of reincarnation is based on the attribute of פחד, fear, [not relying on or appealing to G–d's attribute of Mercy. Ed.] the outstanding characteristic of Isaac. The third category of transmigration is due to providing an opportunity for the souls in question to perform those commandments which they had been unable to in a previous incarnation due to lack of opportunity. This kind of reincarnation could theoretically continue for one thousand generations under the aegis of the emanation תפארת, outstanding characteristic of Jacob." Thus far Rabbi Solomon Alkabez.
  The animal שור, ox, has its origin in the emanation גבורה, as we know from Ezekiel's vision of the מרכבה (Ezekiel 1,10): ופני שור מהשמאל, "And the face of the ox from the Left." The lamb mentioned in our verse (22,1), however, refers to Israel the lamb, in dispersion. Jacob's and hence Israel's attribute is תפארת, harmony, the Torah refers to this by hinting that transmigrations of souls due to either the attribute of שור or שה will not result in the souls ultimately becoming נדחים, outcast. The Torah did not need to tell us that transmigrations due to the attribute of חסד would not result in those souls becoming outcast. It is quite clear that such transmigrations were designed to add even greater luster to the personalities these souls represent.
  Although the regulations about men not wearing women's clothing and vice versa evidently are meant to underscore that we are not to upset the divisions made by G–d when He created the world and decided who should be the משפיע and who should be the מקבל, there is yet another mystical meaning at the root of these regulations. The basic function of garments [prior to Adam's sin and the need to use garments as protective covers. Ed.] is to portray the glory of the wearer. This is why Adam, while in גן עדן, wore garments constructed of light, i.e. he radiated light, showing all those whom he approached that he was a creature of substance. Once these garments were exchanged for כתנות עור, tunics made of skin, their function became reversed. Clothing now was designed to hide the shame of the wearer. The idea of clothing was corrupted, as I explained elsewhere. We must also consider that there is a difference between souls which originate in the left side (diagram) of the emanations, i.e. the female side, and souls which originate in the right side (diagram) of the emanations, the male side. This profound secret is alluded to when we are told about the prophet Elijah fleeing from the renewed pursuit of Izzebel after he had slain the four hundred priests of the Baal and the people had cheered G–d. His flight is described in Kings I 19,3 in the words: וילך אל נפשו, and subsequently as: וישאל את נפשו למות. In the first example the prophet's "male" soul is referred to, in the second example the "female" source of Elijah's soul is meant. [The customary translation simply sees in the first words an attempt by Elijah to run for his life, whereas in the second version it sees a recognition by Elijah that his efforts have failed and that there is no point in his saving his life. Ed.] The Zohar in פרשת ויגש deals with the problem of how to join the male soul with the female, (cf. page 18 Sullam edition.)
  The Rekanati sees in our verse an allusion to the סוד העבור, the secret dimension of the mysteries of who is born, when, and to whom. The morning benediction thanking the Lord that He has not created us as a woman contains the profound allusion to the importance of not exchanging a female soul for a male one or vice versa at the time when they are reincarnated. The same Rekanati in his commentary on פרשת בראשית, writes that the secret of barrenness and inability to sire children is also due to the interchanging of male and female souls, or rather, souls from the female domain with souls from the male domain. Procreation is possible only if each of the souls of the partners involved have emanated from their respective domains, i.e. bodies and souls must match. This is why the Torah says in Deut. 7,14: לא יהיה בך עקר ועקרה -- ובהמתך, "There will be neither a male nor a female sterile person amongst you—nor amongst your livestock."
  According to the Rekanati even the prohibition to take the garments of a widow as a pledge for a loan (24,17) contains an allusion to transmigration of souls. He sees in the prohibition a device by the Torah not to subject the widow to two painful experiences, the loss of her husband and the loss of her garments. In order to understand how this alludes to transmigration of souls we need to refer to a similarly worded verse in Exodus 22,25: אם חבול תחבול שלמת רעך עד בא השמש תשיבנו לו, "If you have occasion to take your fellow man's garment as a pledge, you must return it to him by sunset." This verse alludes to the mystical dimension called סוד העבור. Kabbalists see in it a reference to the soul which has to return to the Celestial Spheres every night, a concept we are familiar with from our nightly payer המפיל in which we consign our soul to G–d till the following morning. The widow consigning her garment (="soul") to a creditor therefore is punished every night on two counts, her soul suffers its second reincarnation. A widow is metaphor for a soul which has been consigned to a second round of life on earth already. The lender must not become the cause of her having to live a third round on earth. Transgressing the physical commandment described here results in psychic harm to the soul of the person against whom one has sinned.
  The author claims to find additional support for the Rekanati's approach from the first half of verse 17: לא תטה משפט: גר, יתום; the soul is only a גר, transient on earth; its true home is in the Celestial Regions in the domain of G–d her Father. The Torah therefore warns us not to commit acts which would subvert the true partnership זווג of father and mother, of G–d and soul. 
  According to the Arizal even the mixing together of certain prohibited species, both in the animal world and the domain of the צומח, plant-life, may be an interference with certain types of existence decreed by G–d on souls in a certain stage of transmigration.
  Let us now look at the legislation of the levirate marriage or its alternative חליצה, removal of the sandal from the foot of the potential second husband by the widow qualifying for such a levirate marriage. I have explained earlier that the Torah's statement that man was created in the image and form of G–d means that there is a comparison between man and G–d in seven separate areas. We explained that man, i.e. the male, possesses six of these aspects, the seventh being his wife. It is required of man that he "build" a replica or replacement of himself by employing his G–d-given assets and thus preserve the דמות of G–d granted him; should he fail to create all the conditions that facilitate procreation he would thereby become guilty of diminishing G–d's דמות. [the word must be understood as portraying that man's physical faculties represent all the physical forces G–d created in the macrocosm. (cf. Kuzari 4,25) Ed.] דמות is the "final" attribute (emanation). [In Pardes Rimonim described as דמות אדם=מלכות. Ed] It is known as תמונה, "picture," because its numerical value equals the numerical value פרצוף אדם, =501. [The word פרצוף in Kabbalistic terms generally refers to the manifestation of abstract concepts. Ed.] The "feet" of this attribute descend to the domain of death, i.e. anything which is lower than this attribute is part of the domain of death. Above that domain is Mattatron, another name for the emanation מלכות. This domain may be understood as having a lower and a higher section. The lower section is below one's loins, a part connected with death, whereas what is above the loins is connected, i.e. cleaves to the objective "good." Concerning the area above the loins we are told in Proverbs 18,22: מצא אשה מצא טוב, "he who found a (suitable) wife has found (objective) good." Anything below this dividing line of מתניו, his loins, is the domain of death.
  Let us return to my earlier statement that ההולך בלא בנים מת הוא בעולם הזה ולא יחיה בעולם הבא, "anyone who is childless is considered dead in this word and will not live in the World to Come."  There is a way to overcome this handicap posthumously by means of the levirate marriage. The first thing one has to bear in mind is that every husband deposits part of his רוח, spirit, during marital relations with his wife. This is so because he has only acquired the seventh part of his צורה or דמות by union with her. The spirit he has deposited within her remains within his wife even after he has died, especially during the first twelve months after his death. All this has been explained by the Zohar on פרשת משפטים where the subject is discussed. This residual spirit of her deceased husband is at war with the second husband whose spirit is also deposited within her by their union in marriage. During the struggle between these two spirits either one may emerge victorious on different occasions. 
  [The following is a lengthy quote from the Sullam edition pages 43-46 of the Zohar on פרשת משפטים. Ed.]
  <i>"Since you have begun to venture into the great ocean, you may as well examine all the sides of that ocean. I must now reveal that the brother-in-law who marries the widow of his brother has to contend with the fact that she still contains the spirit of her departed husband. Nothing gets lost in this world, not even the breath one exhales. If you are willing to examine all these secrets, go ahead and do so without fear. We know that when ordinary people die in this world they leave behind parts of their spirit within their widows. They deposited this spirit in their wives as the result of their original sexual intercourse with their wives. What happens to this spirit when this widow remarries and absorbs the spirit of her new husband? We can certainly not say that the spirit of the original husband is lost! The first husband left behind children, and therefore the new husband does not perform the function of a גואל. It is clear then that the two spirits within the body of this woman cannot live together harmoniously. Neither is it possible that the spirit of the first husband disappears. What happens to it? What happens to the spirit of the husband if his widow does not remarry? The cause of an unsatisfactory second marriage is the fact that the spirit of the deceased within her cannot make peace with that of the second husband that is now also present within her; she is constantly reminded of her first husband [whose spirit continues to disturb her equanimity because of its ongoing quarrel with that of the second husband]. Should the spirit of the second husband overcome the spirit of the first husband, the spirit of the first husband will leave the body of his widow. On the other hand the spirit of the first husband may overcome that of the second husband. This would result in the death of the second husband. It is concerning such a situation that our sages have advised that one should not marry a woman who has lost two husbands."</i> [The presence of the spirit of her first husband is still so strong that it represents a danger to any new husband. Ed.] The Zohar continues on the subject. The only reason I have quoted part of his commentary is to demonstrate how complicated the whole subject of זווגים happens to be. The following is an excerpt of שורש ישי, page 16. 
  I will explain his words in brief. He raises the following question: It is agreed that in a levirate marriage the spirit of the departed brother unites within the widow with he spirit of the surviving brother and no quarrel ensues between them; what happens when the departed left behind children, or the departed did not have a brother to whom his widow could get married? What happens to the spirit of the departed which remains within the womb of his wife? The author of Shoresh Yishai describes the same situations as have been described by the Zohar and concludes that anyone who marries a widow is endangering himself since he does not know if his spirit will be able to overcome the residual spirit of the widow's first husband. When a woman has lost two husbands the odds are that the spirit of the first husband within her is so strong that marrying her is tantamount to provoking the angel of death.
  The שורש ישי at the end of his deliberations, concludes that victory of the respective spirit over the competing spirit of another husband depends on which marriage represents the true match originally planned in Heaven. The spirit of the true בן זוג will always prevail over the spirit of a husband who is not her true בן זוג. Examples of such marriages are the marriage of Ruth the Moabite to Boaz and the marriage of Tamar to Yehudah. Tamar's marriage with Yehudah was successful in spite of the fact that she had buried two husbands.
  To get back to the subject of יבום and חליצה. The woman is called מנעל, [usually translated as shoe, but here derived from the word נעל, "locked." Ed.] She is called this because she had locked within her part of the spirit of her late husband. When she removes the shoe i.e. מנעל of her brother-in-law, (who is like her husband) she dissolves the spiritual bond which had existed between her and her departed husband. Her husband's spirit will have to find a resting-place for itself wherever it manages to find same.
  In commenting on Ruth 4,7: "Now this was formerly done in Israel in cases of redemption or exchange, to validate any transaction, one man would take off his sandal and hand it to the other," the Zohar on פרשת חוקת enlarges on the theme of נעל. I will content myself with copying a synopsis of his comments. [actually the author copied the entire passage of the Zohar. Ed.] <i>"In Exodus 3,5 at the Burning Bush, G–d tells Moses: אל תקרב הלום, של נעלך מעל רגליך, "Do not come close, remove your shoes from your feet." What was the point in involving Moses' shoes in this revelation? The shoes G–d referred to represent Moses' wife. G–d suggested to Moses that in order to qualify for what He had in mind for him, he should divorce his wife and marry another. This alternate "marriage" was to be to a source of greater light, i.e. the שכינה. The true "wife" for Moses would be found in a higher world. The נעל, shoe, Moses removed from his foot – and which is described in Ruth 4,7 as a time-honored medium (symbol) for effecting transfer of ownership of something between two people – is the medium of effecting transfer from one world to another, i.e. death in this world and transfer to the Hereafter. This is why the sages have a tradition that a dream that one is given something by a person who has died is a good sign, whereas a dream that a dead person takes something away from one such as a shoe, is a bad sign (Berachot 57). The taking of one's shoe symbolizes that one will shortly be transferred to another world, i.e. one will die. We have an allusion to this in Song of Songs 7,2: מה יפו פעמיך בנעלים בת נדיב, "How lovely are your feet in sandals, O daughter of nobles!" (The mystical dimension of this allusion is jealously guarded by the initiated). What we have stated above is true when it is the departed person who takes the shoe. This is a symbol of transferring something to the world of the dead. If a living person takes a shoe in order to confirm an acquisition he does so at the behest of Heaven, i.e. to carry out G–d's decree to transfer a certain possession to another. The shoe used in performing the rite of חליצה has a different significance; all has a common mystical denominator. Consider that the husband in question who has died without having children is not welcomed by the בת נדיב (the emanation מלכות) in her world. The spirit is therefore moving about aimlessly, with no place to rest. G–d has taken pity on this spirit and commanded the brother of the departed person to release him from his misery. He is to do this by enabling the spirit to enter another "dust" i.e. body in accordance with Job 34,15: "and mankind would return to dust." If this redeemer is not willing to "revive" his departed brother [through the vicarious means of the levirate marriage and the siring of a male heir. Ed.] the latter has to receive an alternate נעל. This is the נעל which the widow removes from the foot of her brother-in-law to receive it on behalf of her late husband; her receipt of the shoe indicates that her late husband has returned to the world of the living. What happens in this procedure is the exact opposite of what occurs when a person dreams that a departed person has taken his shoe away from him. In the case of חליצה the living is perceived as taking from the dead. This is why the dead is able to return to be among the living by means of this sandal. The widow is seen as the crown of her late husband. The "wife" is understood as a metaphor for the שכינה which now accepts the spirit of the departed in its domain. This sandal has to be thrown to the ground to demonstrate that the widow wishes this body to be revived. G–d will take pity on this spirit either immediately or after a suitable interval and accept it in His domain. Throwing the sandal down on the earth also symbolizes that this departed person will be reconstituted from another source of dust. In the meantime the departed first returns to the earth he originally came from, thus releasing his widow to remarry anyone else suitable for her.</i> Thus far the quote from the Zohar.
  The following is the comment of Rabbi Solomon Alkavez on page 77 of his שורש ישי unity where he refers to the comment of the Zohar we have just copied. The expression נעל refers to the wife and is a euphemism similar (according to Devarim Rabbah) to the euphemisms the Torah employs when describing the steps to be taken to remove our excrement from sight (23,14) in this world. 
  In Exodus 3,5 where G–d told Moses to remove his shoes, this was a euphemism for divorcing his wife. When the Torah cites as the reason that Moses had to remove his shoes the fact that he was standing on holy ground, this was a reference to the superior marriage partner G–d had assigned to him. 
  [Rabbi Alkavez illustrates his viewpoint with a number of scriptural examples explaining the whole sequence of expressions such as אדמה, מקום, etc. in homiletical terms. I have decided to skip this. His main point I believe is to show that G–d indicated to Moses that he was being chosen as His instrument. If lesser prophets received some kind of "ordination," the father figure of all prophets surely deserved no less. Ed.]
  
  
  
  The word כי in the verse כי המקום אשר אתה עומד עליו אדמת קודש הוא, must be understood as אלא, "but or only." The Talmud in Tractate Gittin 90a lists four possible meanings for the word כי when used in scripture. The message to Moses then was not that he should temporarily remove his sandals while experiencing this encounter with G–d, but that he should henceforth remain aware of his holy destiny and act accordingly. The "wife" Moses was to have dealings with in the future would be none other than אדמת קודש. Thus far the comment of Rabbi Solomon Alkavez in his שורש ישי. 
  We have now provided a glimpse of the mystical dimension of the system of יבום and חליצה, the objective of which is to facilitate the soul finding its true partner, be this in the physical or in the spiritual domain. Our purpose in this world is to perfect the דמות as much as we are able to, primarily by fulfilling the commandment to procreate, i.e. to increase or expand the concept of דמות אלוקים in this world and thereby filling the world with G–d's likeness. As stated previously, the best way to achieve this is by sanctifying our bodies.
  What I have written so far also explains the matter of sanctifying the body which the Torah is concerned with in this portion and which is alluded to in 23,14: "When you have squatted you shall dig a hole with it (the spade) and cover up your excrement." The Torah continues to demand: "Your camp shall be holy." The Zohar has already stated that the word "your camp" here also alludes to the body as a whole i.e. the 248 limbs and 365 sinews all of which have been created in the image of G–d. Whereas these shall be holy, excrement is not part of this "camp" and must be covered. We are also commanded (23,11) not to allow someone who is impure into our "camp," i.e. the camp of the Levites. We must remember that just as there is (or was) a גן עדן on earth there is a corresponding גן עדן in the Celestial Regions. That גן עדן is known as the מחנה שכינה, the camp of the Divine Presence. The terrestrial גן עדן is something similar to the camp of the Levites. When man sins and consequently is garbed in a spirit of impurity he is banned even from the equivalent of the terrestrial גן עדן. G–d gave us all of His commandments in order that we may merit inner garments, i.e. the garments woven of light Or, spelled with the letter א. There is another kind of garment worn above the inner garments. Whereas physical performance of the commandments entitles one to wear the garments of light referred to, another garment of still more refined material is the one woven by one's having understood the mystical elements of Torah and its commandments. Those are the garments worn when one enters and appears before G–d in the Celestial גן עדן. 
  When one sins, alas, one finds oneself garbed in dirty clothes and has to submit to the process of cleansing those clothes. The variety of penalties listed in the Torah for the various sins committed is the means of laundering these garments. These penalties are divided into several groups. First and foremost we have four different kinds of death penalties which correspond to the four letters in the Ineffable Name. They are designed to remove the four most "stubborn" kind of קליפות. The kinds of transgressions which are punishable by any of these death penalties are so serious that they "impair" at least one of the letters in the Ineffable Name. One must observe penance of the most rigorous kind in order to cleanse oneself of such sins. It is this kind of repentance the prophet has in mind when he calls upon the Jewish people (Hosea 14,2) שובה ישראל עד י-ה-ו-ה אלוקיך, "Return, O Israel, until the Lord your G–d." The prophet wants to illustrate how far reaching the effects of Israel's sins have been, that they even impaired or discredited the Ineffable four-lettered Name. The penalty of thirty-nine lashes corresponds to the thirty-nine curses which resulted from the sin committed by Adam through the seduction by the serpent. This is why it is strictly forbidden to add as little as a single stroke of the belt (25,3).
  The Tziyoni writes in a gloss on פרשת בראשית that the reason we are to be so careful with observing the details of the legislation of צרעת, blemishes of the skin, the clothes, or the house, is that we are dealing here with inner blemishes, i.e. sins, which have become visible externally. G–d has been very kind in externalizing the effect of these sins so as to give the afflicted person an opportunity to repent and rid himself of the pollutant of the serpent which his sins are due to. The priest is the only one who can effect a cure because the priesthood originated in the "right" side of the diagram of emanations in the emanation חסד, whereas the pollutant of the serpent has its origin in the "left" of the diagram of emanations, the side from which Samael originates. Nowadays, when we do not have priests who can perform the steps leading to the rehabilitation of an afflicted person (including the sacrifices he has to bring at the end of the period of his isolation as outlined in Leviticus 14,2-32), repentance is the only instrument by which we can cleanse ourselves. The right hand of G–d is always stretched out to welcome penitent sinners. 
  The body was created in order to be holy and dignified. This is why a dead body must not become an object of derision as it would if it were allowed to hang overnight without burial. The commandment to construct a railing on one's roof is also inspired by the need to preserve the integrity of the body. A similar consideration applies to the commandment to save a person pursued by either a criminal or someone who takes the law into his own hands. The law forbidding us to extradite a Gentile slave to his master is similarly motivated. Once the slave has had the good fortune to enter the boundaries of the Holy Land he is not again to be cast out. Even the commandment to help one's enemy with loading or unloading his beast is an expression of the Torah's concern for the body.
  Rabbi Menachem HaBavli writes as follows in connection with the commandment to construct a railing around one's roof: The reason for this commandment is to save you from being guilty of the blood of someone who might fall off your roof. Man constructs a house in order to protect himself against all kinds of dangers which lurk outside. He wants to direct G–d's blessings to his house. Failure to erect a railing would make him responsible for accidents resulting from this act of negligence. Such a house would be turned from a source of blessing into a source of death as a result. It would not be fit for the owners' children to inherit because people would constantly point to this house as the site from which someone had fallen to his death. Even though the person who fell off the roof was meant to die by Heavenly decree, and a railing would not have saved him if it was decreed that he should die by a fall from this roof, the fact remains that by erecting a railing one can feel totally exonerated from any part in such a person's death.
  The commandment requiring us to help the owner of an overloaded animal or human being (22,4) by unloading the excessive load is directed at the natural tendency to ignore the discomfort of our detractors. The Torah demands that we put aside such petty considerations and display empathy with the pain of such a human being. When the Torah phrases the action to be taken by using the words הקם תקים עמו, the emphasis is on the last word, i.e. what you do for the victim you are really doing for yourself. By having demonstrated this kind of empathy you may feel confident that, should the occasion arise, you too will become the beneficiary of someone else's empathy. The Talmud Baba Metzia 31 says that given a choice of helping one's friend unload an overburdened animal and helping an enemy load his beast, you must give preference to loading the enemy's beast; such an act helps restore harmonious relations between him and you (cf. Exodus 23,5).
  The law forbidding extradition of a Gentile slave who fled from his master to the land of Israel (23,16) is based on the fact that once one has attained a higher level of sanctity – in this case being present in the Holy land – one has begun to serve the Lord and must not revert to serving man. The slave in question has to be given his freedom; the freed slave will undertake to recompense his erstwhile master for his financial loss. The entire legislation demonstrates the advantages of ארץ ישראל and its elevated status. The expression לא תסגיר includes not forcing the freed slave to live in a walled city with a gate, or under some kind of house-arrest similar to that of the involuntary murderer in a city of refuge. He is to live wherever it suits him, where he finds work –except in Jerusalem – which is not a city belonging to any one of the tribes. The words באחד שעריך preclude this freed slave from taking up residence in Jerusalem.
  The Torah has to add a warning not to take advantage of such a freed slave (23,17) because by nature such a person feels even more insecure than a regular stranger. Our own national history is not unlike the personal history of this slave. We too were slaves in Egypt, unable to escape. Since this man came to place himself under the protection of the Lord G–d of Israel we must do all we can to bring him closer so that eventually he may convert to Judaism. Thus far the comments of Rabbi Menachem HaBavli.
  There follows a string of commandments all of which are designed to put our financial dealings on a sanctified level. Quite a number of these commandments contain allusions to the mystical significance of "garments” which we have already written about. Males must not wear the clothing designed for females; the garment of a widow must not be taken as a pledge; the lender must not personally and arbitrarily take a pledge from the house of the borrower. He may do so only under the authority of an official of the local Court of Law. Kitchen utensils must not ever be taken as a pledge. The manner and timing of returning a pledge also contains a number allusions to the mystique of the clothing worn by the soul. 
  There are many esoteric meanings hidden in the legislation about returning pledges. These are connected with the "garments" worn by the soul. I have touched on some aspects earlier. The matter of not wearing שעטנז, a mixture of wool and linen has symbolical significance since the letters in the word שעטנז when re-arranged spell שטן עז, i.e. that "Satan is tough." It is also interesting that the process of producing the forbidden fabric שעטנז is called שוע-טוה-נוז. The word the Torah chose to describe this mixture is therefore itself an acronym for the process used to produce such a fabric. Rabbi Menachem HaBavli describes the reason for this prohibition in the following words: "One must not mix the forces which recall the sin Cain had been guilty of. Cain brought flax seed as an offering, Abel had brought wool from some of his sheep. Cain strengthened the power of Satan by killing his brother Abel. Satan would henceforth stand on the right of a person wearing a mixture of wool and linen and tempt him into sin. If wool represented something positive reminding us of Abel, then mixing it with linen is as if we symbolically gave Satan 'equal time.' Anyone doing so will be judged as if he had accepted the position of priest for some idolatrous cult." Thus far Rabbi Menachem Habavli.
  This Rabbi goes on to explain (items 345,346,347 in his book) why the Torah prohibits seizing the pledge arbitrarily, against the protest of the borrower. Although we have a principle that the borrower becomes a slave to the lender (Proverbs 22,7), this does not mean that total anarchy prevails in the relationship. When the Torah (24,10) speaks of the right of the lender to receive a pledge as some sort of guarantee that the borrower will repay him, the wording is לעבוט עבוטו instead of ליקח עבוטו, i.e. "to take collateral for his loan." If the lender were to do this he would be punished accordingly (מדה כנגד מדה). We view all our souls as being pledged to G–d (nightly) for a specific period of time. Just as a lender may become guilty of calling in a loan prematurely, so G–d may decide to prematurely recall the soul which serves as our pledge to Him for the loan of life. If one fails to return the pledge to the owner who needs it, one is endangering one's life because G–d may decide not to return the soul to such a person in the morning, as He does every other day. In this connection the author refers the reader to a story in Chagigah 4b which discusses the question of whether anyone dies without sin or whether one dies before one's allotted time. The Talmud relates that such a thing is indeed possible. Rabbi Bibi was present when the angel of death instructed one of his messengers to bring him the soul of a certain Miriam who was a hairdresser. The messenger went and brought the soul of a different Miriam, a nursery teacher, instead. When told by the angel of death that he had brought the soul of the wrong Miriam the messenger volunteered to bring back the soul of this nursery teacher. The angel of death told his messenger that this was not possible. Seeing this woman had already died, she would now forever remain with the dead. The Talmud uses this incident to illustrate that undeserved death is indeed a possibility. The question was then asked how the messenger had had the audacity to take the life of a person whose time had not come? The messenger explained that when he met this woman she was about to clean the oven with a baker's shovel and burned herself accidentally. The angel of death had been able to lay claim to her soul because her mazal had changed for the worse. It was explained to Rabbi Bibi that in a case like this the unexpired life-expectancy of this nursery teacher would be allocated to a young Rabbi who had displayed an exceptionally moral attitude to material possessions.
  To return to our situation: It is possible that in ordinary circumstances the lender in question would have had more years to live. He failed to return the pledge when the borrower needed it. This failure may provoke the angel of death into making a "mistake" just as he did with the nursery teacher. His excuse would be that seeing that we all commend our souls to G–d whenever we are too tired to stay awake and active, the "wrong" soul may be forgotten to be returned on the next morning. He who failed to return a pledge he had taken may find that his own pledge is not returned to him either.
  The legislation not to accept the testimony of people related to each other is worded in the Torah as: "Fathers must not be executed for the (sins) children." This means that the testimony of the children must not be used to convict the parents. When people are related to each other there exists such a close affinity between them that just as one would not testify against oneself so relatives would not testify against each other. This is the underlying rationale of the legislation. On the contrary, a son can project (make available) his own merits for the benefit of his father whereas a father cannot do this for the benefit of his son. If the children are good they must not be executed by the testimony of their parents. Although the Torah speaks here only of testimony by relatives, the repetition of: “children must not be executed by (the testimony of) the parents,” draws attention to the reverse, i.e. that children will on occasion die as a punishment for sins the parents have committed. One only dies for one's own sins once one has attained maturity. One may have to die as a minor for the sins of one's parents.
  The Torah is insistent about our being punctilious in not shortchanging anyone in weights and measurements; G–d's entire system of reward and punishment is based on the principle of making the punishment fit the crime, i.e. מדה כנגד מדה. Woe to the person who is dishonest in this regard and literally invites G–d's retribution.
  The laws pertaining to paying the hired laborer on time, the rules about what the laborer may consume when engaged in harvesting the owner's field, etc., are all allusions to our relationship to G–d our "employer." It is incumbent upon us to be His loyal servants; if we are, the Torah promises us and we expect to receive recompense in the form of enjoyment of "dividends" such as eating while working in the fields of this world. The "principal," the main reward for the מצות, is in the Hereafter: this clearly implies that we must not expect to take home in this world any of the fruit we harvested [in the field]. Basically, reward for commandments performed is not collected in this world. This is alluded to by the prohibition to eat any of the fruit of the field or orchard still attached to the ground (23,26). 
  The Torah insists that the day laborer be paid his wages immediately, on the day he completes his assignment; this is an allusion to the need for each one of us to examine our actions at the end of each day and to repent for anything we may have done wrong during the day. We regard every single day in our lives as a self-contained unit.
  Rabbi Menachem HaBavli suggests the following rationale for the prohibition to the farmer to retrace his steps in order to gather in a sheaf he had overlooked previously (24,19): It is the nature of the evil urge to try and stop a person from performing deeds of loving kindness. It is accepted in kabbalistic circles that blessing reposes especially in what is a left-over. We know this from Ruth 2,14: "She ate, felt sated, and had some left over." We have a similar verse in Kings II 4,44: "When they had eaten they had some left over, as the Lord had said." The eyes of the poor are trained on G–d; He is their only hope. As soon as the owner of the field forgot this sheaf it became the property of the poor. Even if the owner of the field retraces his steps and collects this sheaf before one of the poor has seen it he still is considered as having robbed the poor. This is why the Torah asks you to consider such a sheaf as irretrievably lost to you the moment you become aware that you forgot it. If you fail to do so, you yourself will become impoverished having to beg for a hand-out on the threshing grounds. Thus far Rabbi Menachem Habavli.
  "Remember what Amalek did to you…Do not forget." Amalek is the personification of the impurity of the body. Its spiritual representative is Samael himself. The latter is the "husband" of Lilith. Their prime endeavor is to undo the sanctity established between Israel and G–d by means of the holy Covenant of circumcision.
  There is also evidence in the legislation involving animals of the concern for the sanctity of our bodies and of our financial dealings. Both the law bidding us to send away the mother-bird before taking its young, and the Torah's demand to assist in helping a fallen domestic animal to get up from under its load, are part of the process by which we are to perfect and sanctify our bodies. The law not to muzzle a beast while it is threshing is a way of sanctifying our financial dealings. Ever since Adam's sin man and beast are far more alike than they were originally. In the future we ourselves will qualify as sacrifices to be offered by the Celestial High Priest Michael on the Heavenly Altar.
  We must realize that the commandment to send away the mother-bird contains within it very great esoteric mysteries; the Zohar as well as other kabbalistic authors deal with it at length. Nachmanides spends a great deal of time on it. The Rekanati quotes all these commentaries and raises a number of questions concerning them. It is worthwhile to read these comments in the original.
  You may also want to review what I have written in פרשת חוקת on the meaning of G–d's comment on the law of the red heifer: גזרה היא מלפני. I mentioned there that this statement does not mean what people usually understand, namely that the decree in question defies reason and has to be accepted simply in order to demonstrate our obedience. On the contrary, the expression means that there is a very profound reason for this law. The origin of the law is in a domain beyond our ability to comprehend as long as our bodies are not totally pure. The procedure of sending away the mother-bird before taking her young (22,7) symbolizes that we dispatch it to "higher regions" as mentioned by Rabbi Nechunyiah Hakanah in his ספר הבהיר and as quoted by Nachmanides. [Nachmanides adds the fact that the Torah does not mind the presence of the father-bird. Ed.] The procedure is an allusion to the emanation בינה, the אם עליונה, "Mother Superior" in the Celestial Regions, that mystical dimension of the World to Come. The mother-bird, or rather what she represents, is indispensable to us in a world which is totally good and totally long and which is promised to us as a reward for observing this commandment at the end of verse 7.
  We  have explained this portion from the vantage point of sanctifying one's body and one's financial dealings. But the choicest  part of sanctifying one's body is sanctifying the mouth. For this is what distinguishes a person from other living creatures, such that he is called a speaking being: It is written (Genesis 2:7), "and man became a living being" - and Onkelos (the classic Aramaic translation of the Torah) renders this as, "man (Adam) became a talking spirit." From this stems the duty of a person to fulfill everything that comes out of his mouth, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 23:24) "You must keep what has come out of your lips." And even though this is mentioned in connection with vows, that is as an additional warning [not to default on vows]. Regardless, it is also stated about everything. For our external speech flows from our inner speech, and that is the speech that God and the angels use. And it is this speech that God uses when speaking with us, as it is stated [in many places], "And God spoke, etc." - and [there,] it is written, "saying," to be a warning to us that our inner speech come from our souls which is a portion of God above. Hence, all of a person's toil should be towards his mouth. Woe to him and to his soul of the one who defiles himself with foul language or lies or that which is similar to them. Rather, care must be taken in avoiding evil and guarding the mouth even in mundane conversation. Truly one should only open one's mouth in  praise and thanksgiving to God, with the voice of Torah [study] and of prayer. And then, 'the voice will be the voice of Jacob,' and the external speech will flow from the inner [speech]. But the generation of the flood, as well as the generation of the [Tower of Babel], did not stand by their inner speech. Hence anyone who does not stand by his word must accept upon himself [the curse of (Bava Metzia 44a),] "He Who exacted payment from the people of the generation of the flood, and from the generation of [the Tower of Babel], will exact payment [from whoever does not stand by his statement]."
  It is well known that in order to rehabilitate oneself spiritually one must exercise תשובה, תפלה וצדקה, repentance, prayer and the performance of charitable deeds. All of these three factors of man's rehabilitation depend on his mouth. Prayer and the reciting of G–d's praises are, of course, functions of the mouth. We know that repentance has to include verbalizing one's confession and one's resolution not to sin again. The Torah in 30,14 mentions that Torah is easy of access, i.e. בפיך ובלבבך לעשות. Rabbi Yitzchak says (Eruvin 54) that the Torah is easy to fulfill, לעשות, once one has repented both by mouth and in one's heart. Confession of one's sins with a broken heart is the principal ingredient of repentance. Charity, too, involves the mouth. Our sages (Baba Batra 9b) say that anyone who gives charity acquires six blessings; if someone also tries to make the recipient feel better by kind and encouraging words he will qualify for eleven blessings. Interestingly enough we have three words which symbolize three aspects of repentance, i.e. צום, קול, ממון, each one of which has a numerical value of 136. This suggests that all three aspects of תשובה are of equal importance. Stated differently, תשובה, צדקה, and תפלה equal קול. The very first part of our פרשה alludes to all the three ingredients of repentance. The Torah speaks about going to war, the plain meaning of which refers, of course, to actual warfare and battles with the enemy. Over and beyond this, however, the paragraph refers to the ongoing battle between man and his evil urge. Many of our commentators are at pains to point this out in their commentary on the relevant section in פרשת שופטים when they comment on the verse discussing the siege laid to a city (20,19). In actual fact, the war with his evil urge is the greatest battle man has to fight in this life. The matter is illustrated in the Talmud by the story of the elderly sage who met soldiers of the army of Alexander the Great at the time of his victorious return from a major battle. These soldiers were in a very exuberant frame of mind. The sage, while he congratulated them on their victory, pointed out that the victory they had won was minor, and that they had to get ready for the battle of their lives against the evil urge. This is what the sages meant when they described the whole paragraph of the יפת תואר as an illustration of man's ongoing battle against his baser instincts (Kidushin 21). By extending this allegory a little further we may come to understand the whole reason why a מלחמת רשות, a war which is expansionary, is allowed: We are always permitted to conduct aggressive action against our evil urges. We can be sure of G–d's ongoing support in that undertaking once we make the first move in the struggle against the evil urge. Our sages point out that we would be unable to subdue the יצר הרע without G–d's active assistance, but that we have G–d's promise: ונתנו בידו, "He will deliver him (the evil urge) into your hand" (21,10). It is significant that the Torah here employs the singular whereas in פרשת שופטים it speaks in the plural (20,2—20,3--20,4). This may be a reminder that the fight against the evil urge can only be fought on a person-to-person basis. We have a tradition that a nation neither succumbs to another nation nor to the Jewish people unless its protective spirit in the Celestial Regions had first suffered defeat. We have pointed out examples of this such as Israel observing "Egypt" instead of "Egyptians" "dead on the beaches of the sea" (Exodus 14,30). We learn from all this that our enemy (the evil urge), assumes many guises, i.e. attacks us in the plural, and this is why the Torah always describes our enemy in the plural (אויביכם, אל תערצו מפניהם). We have to battle all these manifold "enemies" because each transgression we commit creates a negative force in the world which comes back to haunt us. All of these negative forces created by our very selves are presided over and directed against us by Samael/Satan/Angel of Death, etc. The Torah describes victory over this multifaceted but essentially single force with the words: ונתנו ה' אלוקיך בידך ושבית שביו, "The Lord your G–d will deliver him into your hand and you will take him captive." Taking this enemy prisoner is possible only with the help of Torah study and מצוה observance. David describes this victory over the evil works in Psalms 68,19: He speaks about: עלית למרום שבית שבי, "You went up to the heights, having taken captives."
  We can now understand Rashi's comment on the first verse in our פרשה that the Torah evidently speaks of a מלחמת רשות, an expansionary war. The Torah had already stated that in the wars fought to conquer ארץ ישראל no prisoners must be taken. It says: לא תחיה כל נשמה, "You must not allow anyone to survive" (20,16). In Sotah 35b, however, Rashi derives the permission to take Canaanite prisoners from the fact that the Torah must speak about an expansionary war and the prisoner in question is a Canaanite who had been resident outside the boundaries of ארץ ישראל to whom the commandment: "Do not allow a soul to survive" does not apply. Rashi purports to quote the Sifri on our verse: Should it occur to you that this verse speaks about a campaign involving the capture of ארץ ישראל, this is impossible since we must not take any prisoners from the inhabitants of ארץ ישראל. Therefore the reason for this verse is only to permit you to keep a Canaanite prisoner of war captured in another country. [The wording of Sifri as printed in our editions (Malbim) is different from Rashi. Ed.] Let us now consider the implications of the above comments on the allegorical explanation of the passage. We would say that though the Torah wages war against the evil urge it does not envisage total annihilation of the evil urge, but rather the Torah suggests that it must be controlled, i.e. be taken captive. Utter destruction of the evil urge would result in utter destruction of mankind; there would no longer be an urge to indulge in union with one's wife and begetting children. The evil urge in all its facets including the sexual urge is to be indulged only minimally under controlled conditions. The Torah's description of the feeling of fondness entertained by the captor for his captive, i.e. וחשקת בה, is a metaphor for the positive feelings we often entertain for the evil urge. The message the Torah has for us is that as soon as we experience such feelings of attraction towards anything sinful we must suppress the evil urge by making it appear as despicable as per the examples in our passage which are designed to make the sexually attractive prisoner lose her allure.This is the advantage of the repentant sinners of whom our sages in Berachot 34b state that their moral/ethical plateau cannot be equaled even by the perfectly righteous who have nothing to repent of. The repentant sinner is at an advantage over the perfectly righteous because he has trained himself to resist temptation when it assails him. The totally righteous person, who has never been tempted has not yet learned that he has to "stand" aside lest temptation may overcome him. I have elaborated on this whole subject in the appropriate chapter of my treatise עשרה מאמרות.
  ושבית שביו . We have mentioned earlier that the Sifri interprets this to mean that even non-resident Canaanite prisoners are included in the permission granted to take them as prisoners. We must remember that our internal conflicts, our battle with the evil urge, is also due to the curse resting on Canaan whose strength is derived from Samael in the Celestial Regions. We find an allusion to this in Numbers 21,1 where the Torah reports that the Canaanite led by the king of Arad took prisoners, שבי, from among the Jewish nation. This king, or the nation he represents, is perceived as having used scales that were not true in his hands (Hosea 12,8). In Job 39,5 the word ערד is used to describe a wild ass. The verse in Job refers to the "releasing" of such an animal to wreak havoc. Know therefore that it is sin and not the wild ass which causes death. Israel learned this lesson in Numbers 21 where Moses was told to construct the copper snake and people who looked up to it, i.e. looked to G–d for help were saved (cured from the bites of the snakes mentioned in 21,6), whereas the others died from the bites sustained (Rosh Hashanah 29). In this connection the Talmud (Berachot 33a) recounts an occurrence where a wild ass terrorised a community and people told Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha about it. The Rabbi asked to be shown the lair of the animal in question. When he was shown the lair he placed his heel on the entrance to the lair. The wild ass emerged, bit Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha and died as a result. Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha hauled it on his shoulder and brought its carcass to the house of study. There he told his students that it was not the wild ass that had brought death to the community but the sins of the people who had been bitten by it. At that time the people said: "Woe to the people who have encountered the wild ass, and woe to the wild ass that has encountered Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha." Rashi comments: "I have found in Halachot Gedolot that they say in ארץ ישראל "When a wild ass bites a human being and the wild ass reaches water first the victim dies; if the victim reaches water first the wild ass will die. A miracle occurred in the case of Rabbi Chaninah and a well of water suddenly opened beneath his heel. This is no idle legend. When the Israelites conquered the land of Canaan the Canaanites died from such bites, but miracles occurred for the Israelites who crossed the Jordan. Afterwards the Canaanites started dying. These were what are referred to as מלחמות שוות, normal wars. 
  We similarly find that when Jacob was embattled against the Emorites that he referred to his conquest of the city of Shechem as something he had acquired by means of "my sword and my bow" (Genesis 48,22). There was another element to this battle: The prayer Jacob offered up helped him succeed. Onkelos translates the words בחרבי ובקשתי as בצלותי ובבעותי, "with my prayer and my entreaty." It was Jacob's custom that whenever he was involved in a confrontation he would employ three kinds of weapons which our Rabbis have referred to as מלחמה, דורון, תפלה. These may be considered as Jacob's "secret weapons." The weapon called דורון, was gifts to charity; the weapon called מלחמה was the struggle against his evil urge; the weapon called תפלה needs no homiletical interpretation. These three weapons together are what are popularly known as הקול קול יעקב. The weapon of charity is also alluded to in a Biblical passage describing soldiers going into battle. Psalms 85,14 speaks of: צדק לפניו יהלוך וישם לדרך פעמיו, "Charity goes before him as he sets out on his way." We also have a verse in Exodus 30,12 ונתנו איש כופר נפשו, suggesting that a man can use his charitable gifts to help him overcome his blood-guilt, i.e. to save him from danger in war. The fact that only men over the age of twenty had to make this contribution is a clear indication that once one is of military age it may become a life-saver.
  Prayer too may become a life-saver, i.e. may help a person to prevail in many crucial encounters with the קליפות and all the little demons in the air all around us. Prayer is unable to rise to Heaven until one has first successfully battled with these negative forces abounding in this world. Our standard weapon against such forces are the hymns of praise, פסוקי דזמרה, which we recite daily in advance of those prayers in which we beseech G–d to help us. This is all explained in detail at the beginning of a book called שערי אורה. [The author explains that the word זמרה in the expression פסוקי דזמרה is not from the root זמר, song or music, but is from the word Zamar as in תזמור, "you will prune." The forces of Satan will have to undergo "pruning" before our main prayers can find their way heavenwards. Ed.]
  Let me explain this subject at greater length: Our sages (Berachot 32b) have said that as of the day the Temple was destroyed the gates of prayer have been locked. We know this from Lamentations 3,8: Even though I cry and plead, He shuts out my prayer." Our portion revolves around this problem. Let me first quote something from the book קול בוכים on Lamentations 5,11: "They have ravished women in Zion." The author comments as follows: We find in the Zohar that the plural "women" which Jeremiah refers to in this verse refers to two specific women, paragons of seduction, i.e. Lilith and Machalat (daughter of Ishmael). Kabbalists write that Lilith is accompanied by 480 groups of destructive agents corresponding to the numerical value of her name לילית. They follow her and indulge in wailing, etc. Machalat is accompanied by 478 groups of destructive agents corresponding to the numerical value of her name מחלת. All these 478 groups follow their mistress dancing and generally making merry. These two women never collide with one another throughout the year; they do not inflict harm on each other though there is constant warfare between them. [their philosophical outlook. Ed.] The only day in the year when they are confrontational is the Day of Atonement. Due to the confrontation these two women and their followers are engaged in on the Day of Atonement they have no time to interfere with our prayers enabling our prayers to rise heavenwards. Usually, whenever a person sins these women are alerted and told "why are you at peace at a time when there sin is about? Arise and destroy the universe!" This is the meaning of Isaiah 3,12: נשים משלו בו, "Women ruled over him" (the people of Israel). I have heard from my teacher that the women referred to in the verse in Isaiah are the wives of the two spies. They are the two "spies" of the earth mentioned in the Zohar which are identical with the two male goats used in the service on the Day of Atonement. As soon as Joshua wanted to enter the land of Israel these two "spies" submitted to the authority of Joshua, prostrated themselves before him and offered to be his servants. Joshua expressed his dissatisfaction with this arrangement, insisting that he would only use the services of Pinchas and Caleb as spies to reconnoiter the land of Canaan. However, he asked these two "spies" to spread feelings of demoralization among the inhabitants of the land of Canaan in order to facilitate the conquest of the land by the Jewish people. The "spies" agreed and complied with Joshua's instructions. We can derive all this from the text in the relevant verses in the Book of Joshua. In Joshua 2,3 the spies Joshua sent out are described as having come לחפור את הארץ, "To spy out the land," whereas in actual fact we do not find any word in the whole story about their having performed the mission of spying out the country. The inhabitants simply seem to have melted away much as wax melts in the presence of fire. The spies are reported as having arrived in Jericho by climbing the outer wall of the house of Rachav. They immediately became aware that the whole country was demoralised at the prospect of being invaded by the Israelites. The inhabitants simply had no backbone left. The Talmud Zevachim 116b derives from the statement of Rahav – the city's most prominent harlot – that: ולא קמה עוד רוח באיש מפניכם, "that the men of the country had all become incapable of having an erection due to their fear of the Israelites." Clearly then the two "spies" had performed their task in advance of the arrival of Pinchas and Caleb.
  The two "wives" of these two "spies" did not submit to Joshua at the time, however. They represented the "hard" attribute of Justice and the attribute of impurity and had not submitted to Joshua. When king Solomon ascended the throne of Israel and the glory of Israel was at its height, kings from all over the world came to bring him presents, and he inherited the crown of every domain including the domains ruled over by the various demons. According to a version in the Targum Sheni on the Book of Esther, Solomon sent a threatening letter to the queen of Sheba warning her that if she would not come and submit to his rule, he would dispatch all kinds of demons who would kill her while she was asleep. There is also a story in the Zohar that Solomon dispatched one of the demons to king Chirom while the latter was in bed. This demon took king Chirom well into the depths of purgatory until he expressed his willingness to submit to the rule of king Solomon. This is what is meant in Kings I 5,26: "The Lord had given Solomon wisdom as He had promised him. There was peace between Chirom and Solomon and the two of them made a treaty." When the two women Lilith and Machalat heard this, they also submitted to Solomon and even prostrated themselves before him. This is the meaning of Kings I 3,16 that "then two prostitutes came and stood before the king". The verse emphasizes the arrival of these two women by stating אז תבאנה, "then they came," as if to state that until then they were not prepared to come and to submit to Solomon.
  There is also a comment in the Zohar on Lamentations 1,5: היו צריה לראש, אויביה שלו, "Her oppressors have become her masters, her enemies are at ease,” according to which Jeremiah used the word שלו to indicate that the two groups of enemies, Lilith and Machalat, had concluded a peace between themselves in order to denounce Israel jointly. I have written about this at length in my sermon on שבת חזון at the end of my treatise on מסכת תענית. It follows that the period of conquest of ארץ ישראל (which commenced under Joshua and proceeded under the heading of לא תחיה כל נשמה, "do not allow anyone to survive") really was not completed until these two exponents of what the Canaanites stood for humbled themselves and submitted to Solomon. When we have to conduct "wars" outside the boundaries of the Holy Land, we are unfortunately still encountering "attractive women," (the seducer in alluring garb) i.e. Machalat who dances and generally inspires one to emulate her lifestyle. How are we to subdue this manifestation of the evil urge? Granted that it is easier to cope with the other manifestation of the evil urge, Lilith, seeing that her melancholy attitude leads one to resort to the שערי דמעות, the gates of tears, something which has remained available to us as a last resort even after the Temple had been destroyed (Berachot 32). By wailing ourselves we can neutralize the waitings of Lilith; however, the problem of how to cope with Machalat remains. The only recourse we have is וחשקת בה, to pretend to develop a fondness for her ways but not for the objectives [such as the slogan "Enjoy yourself it's later than you think." Ed.] she espouses. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai counselled that the proper way of resisting the allure of pork is not to pretend that one does not like it and to develop a psychological distaste for it, but rather to admit that it smells good, looks good, etc., but because the Torah has forbidden it we must deny ourselves the taste of it (cf. Rashi Kidushin 20). I have dealt with this concept at length in my treatise עשרה מאמרות. The Torah speaks about "your enemies" (pl) in 21,10, and then proceeds to speak about a single enemy G–d will deliver into your hand; its message is that one of these two enemies will be much easier to vanquish than the other. The one that can be conquered easily is Lilith because the gates of tears are open for us during all historical epochs. 
  The mystical undercurrent of the whole legislation is continued by the Torah in the next paragraph which commences with: "If a man has two wives, etc.” The two "wives" in question are none other than Lilith and Machalat. The "wife" who is described as the אהובה, the beloved one, is none other than Machalat, who captures the imagination of many people who observe her because of her joyful attitude to the transient life on this planet. The other wife, the one the Torah describes as שנואה, the hated one, is Lilith. The firstborn son the Torah speaks of in 21,15, is an allusion to בני בכורי ישראל, Israel. Israel is to always prevail over the hated "wife," even during times when the war against half of the evil urge she represents is waged outside the Holy Land. If we do not properly observe the commandment לא תחיה כל נשמה "Do not allow any of your enemies to survive," then Israel the first born son may turn out to become a בן סורר ומורה, (21,18). Raising a son who turns out to be wayward and defiant is the result of our not having waged the war against the evil urge with all our might. The Zohar describes this passage in approximately the following way: Upon being given this passage of the Torah Moses asked G–d how a Jewish father and mother could be expected to take their own son to the Supreme Court in order to have him executed? This whole passage should be deleted from the Torah! G–d explained to him that it was included to enable us to receive a reward for studying it, though it would always remain in the realm of hypothesis only. At that time G–d called upon יופיאל, the "prince" of Torah, who asked Moses to allow him to explain the meaning of the passage. He explained that the word איש at the beginning of the verse כי יהיה לאיש refers to G–d Himself who is known to us as איש מלחמה from Exodus 15,3. The word בן in our verse refers to the people of Israel, G–d's firstborn son. The words סורר ומורה are an allusion to Hoseah 4,16: כי כפרה סוררה סרר ישראל, "Israel has balked like a stubborn cow." The words: איננו שומע בקול אביו ובקול אמו, refer to G–d the father and כנסת ישראל, the mother, respectively. Such concepts are alluded to by Solomon in Proverbs 1,8: אל תטוש תורת אמך, "Do not abandon the teachings of your mother." The words ויסרו אותו, "they disciplined him," are reminiscent of Kings II 17,13: "G–d warned Israel and Yehudah through all His prophets and seers: 'Turn back from your wicked ways, etc.'" The words: ולא ישמע אליהם are parallel to the words ולא שמעו אליהם in Kings II 17,13. The Torah continues in 21,19: ותפשו בו אביו ואמו והוציאו אותו אל זקני עירו ואל שער מקומו, "His father and mother will seize him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the public place of his community, etc." We must ask ourselves: Why did the Torah not write "their city" instead of "his city?" Why did the Torah not write מקומם, "their community" instead of מקומו? The subjects of עירו and מקומו are the city of G–d and the place of the כנסת ישראל respectively. The Torah alludes to the highest Tribunal in the Celestial Regions whence supervision of man's activities on earth is exercised. The Torah adds the apparently superfluous words בנינו זה "this son of ours" to emphasize that he is not a Canaanite. Suddenly the parents (i.e. the Torah) add a new accusation: זולל וסובא, "he is a glutton and a drunkard" to explain the background to the excesses of such a wayward son, i.e. the presence of Canaanites in Israel's midst from whom the Jewish lad picked up these bad habits and became a delinquent. Psalm 106,35 refers to the results of such social mingling between the Jews and the Canaanites: "They mingled with the nations (Canaanite) and learned their ways." The Torah itself testifies about the Israelites in Numbers 25,2: "The people ate and bowed down to their deities." The eating and drinking with the Canaanites eventually led to these people making obeisances to the deities of their Canaanite (actually Moabite) hosts. It is therefore fair to attribute the cause for turning into a בן סורר ומורה to someone associating socially with the Canaanites. The Torah continues in 21,21: "The men of his city shall thereupon stone him to death." The "men of his city" referred to are the forces G–d has appointed as agents to carry out sentence on people who have been found guilty. The reference to stones are the אבני קלעים with which we are familiar from Uzziah's army in Chronicles II 26,14.
  Immediately Moses had heard all this he understood that all the exiles the Jewish people would have to suffer in the course of their history can be traced back to the original sin committed by Adam. This has been explained in the opening passage of Midrash Eichah Rabbah on Hosea 6,7: והמה כאדם עברו ברית בגדו בי, "They transgressed the covenant just like Adam, they betrayed Me." This is the reason why G–d Himself grieved over Adam and is quoted as saying איכה about his downfall (Genesis 3,9). Jeremiah simply paraphrased G–d when he commenced his famous elegy with the words איכה ישבה בדד. We can extend this allegory even further: Consider that immediately after the passage dealing with the בן סורר ומורה the Torah continues (21,22) that the body of a person found guilty of a capital offence who has been executed is to be hung on a tree. The verse is an allusion to Adam who had eaten from the tree of knowledge and thereupon experienced the death penalty. However, the Torah goes on in 22,1 that in the future the "ox of your brother who has broken down" will not remain outcast forever, that it is Israel's task to assist in the rehabilitation of Adam by keeping the Torah's commandments. 
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  "The Torah permitted the marriage with the אשת יפת תואר only in order to help the soldier in question cope with his evil urge." There are many things which have been permitted: Not because they are objectively permissible, i.e. desirable for us to enjoy, but because, were the Torah to forbid these things altogether, we might well become guilty of far greater transgressions. For example: it is better to eat an animal which has first been slaughtered though the blade of the knife may have been nicked, than to eat an animal which has died without the benefit of ritual slaughter altogether. Anyone who has some common sense will appreciate that just because the Torah appears to have made a concession to the fact that we are not angels and suffer from an evil urge, this is no reason to avail ourselves of any or all of these "concessions" to our moral weakness. The latter principle is known as קדש עצמך במותר לך, "demonstrate your attempt to sanctify yourself by abstaining from matter which is technically permissible."
  Rabbi Menachem HaBavli phrases it thus: "One should not eat in the manner of a glutton because the Torah ordered that a בן סורר ומורה be stoned to death. Do not eat the kind of food which leads to an increase in the amount of blood. [I believe we have to understand this in terms of the ancient belief that bloodletting, i.e. removal of excess blood, was a remedy for a variety of bodily dysfunctions. Ed.] Permissible food and drink intake act like leaven acts in a dough, i.e. it adds bulk and power to the forces of the יצר הרע, the evil urge. Immersion in Torah study acts as leaven for the יצר הטוב, the urge to be good. The Torah penetrates to the depth of our subconscious mind, wanting us to die in a state of innocence, hence the apparently cruel penalty for the בן סורר ומורה. The legislation of the wayward son was never enacted in practice since the halachic details connected with it make it almost impossible to meet all the required conditions. The nearest actual example we have of a similar incidence is Absalom, the son of a marriage between David and a יפת תואר. He rebelled against his father as an adult and died guilty. [Had he been executed at the tender age of 13+, as provided for in the case of the בן סורר ומורה, he would have died innocent. Ed.]
  לא תוכל להתעלם . One is forbidden to ignore lost objects, but has to pick them up and make every effort to locate the owner for a simple reason. If the Torah already displays such concern about the restoring of mere property to its owner, how much more concern does it feel about saving the soul of a person from becoming "lost." In this respect everyone of us is a guarantor. G–d reserves the option to exact payment from anyone of us just as the lender has the option to be repaid by the guarantor of the loan or by the debtor himself. This is the reason why the Torah selected the term השבת אבדה rather than החזרת אבדה. The term is to remind us of our obligation to do everything in our power to see that a Jew who has strayed from the path of Torah should do תשובה. We cannot ignore this obligation. The commandment is considered so important that public announcementts about the lost object may even be made on the Sabbath. There is an additional aspect to the negative part of this commandment. Failure to return found objects to their owners impedes the arrival of the Redemption. Thus far the comment of Rabbi Menachem Habavli on this מצוה.
  לא יהיה כלי גבר על אשה ולא ילבש גבר שמלת אשה . Rabbi Menachem HaBavli claims that this prohibition is designed to prevent opportunities for marital infidelity. The wearing of clothes of the opposite sex leads to sexual arousal and makes it more difficult to resist such temptation. I have found it written somewhere that if a midwife wraps a newborn baby boy in clothes once worn by a girl, that boy will grow up and become a womanizer. If the reverse occurs the girl is likely to become a prostitute. It is essential therefore to wrap a baby in a new garment, one that does not yet exude the residue of either a male or female who has worn it. This teaches that garments have a "personality" of their own. Garments worn by women transfer some femininity to a male who wears them and vice versa. In addition to this it is unseemly for a man who has been created by G–d as a member of the "stronger" sex to don garments of the "weaker" sex and thus indicate dissatisfaction with G–d's decision to put his soul in the body of a male.
  ועשית מעקה לגגך . The allegorical meaning of making such a railing may be that one has to set limits to one's pride. The roof is the highest point of the house, and symbolizes pride; the railing represents a restriction on one's pride.
  
  מוצא שפתיך תשמור ועשית כאשר נדרת לה' אלוקיך . This verse contains an allusion to the oath of loyalty to the Torah each soul is made to swear by the angel who taught it that same Torah while still in the mother's womb (Niddah 30b). The phrasing "keep your promise," presupposes that everyone has taken such a vow.
  לא יוכל בעלה הראשון לשוב לקחתה . On the prohibition to take back a wife one has divorced if she had remarried in the interval: There may be an allusion here to the soul which has been reincarnated in an inferior body as a penalty for having committed serious sins in a previous incarnation. Such a soul has a chance to rehabilitate itself and its previous life only as long as it is within the body to which it has been re-assigned. If it fails to exploit this second chance, לא יוכל בעלה הראשון לשוב לקחתה, her first husband, i.e. the body it inhabited originally, cannot reunite with this soul [at he time of the resurrection. Ed.]
  זכור את אשר עשה ה' אלוקיך למרים . This is a dire warning not to make derogatory remarks about other people. The commandment to remember daily how even Miriam was punished surely underlines the importance the Torah places on this.
  זכור את אשר עשה לך עמלק … לא תשכח . I have found that the Torah divides this commandment into two halves. When the Jewish people are politically independent and strong, the part of the commandment we are obligated to fulfill is "to wipe out the memory of Amalek." When we are politically impotent we must still fulfill the part of the commandment which bids us "not to forget." One performs this part by cursing the name of Amalek and what that nation stands for.
  
  Ki Tavo
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named והלכת בדרכיו.
  Commandment 606 enjoins the owner to recite the paragraph dealing with the bringing of the first ripened fruit at the time he brings these as a gift to the Holy Temple.
  Commandment 607 is called Viduy Ma-asser and consists of the recital that one has discharged one's obligation regarding the various laws of tithing.
  Commandments 608, 609 and 610 forbid the eating of מעשר שני in a state of pre-mourning, אנינות, a state of impurity, or the spending of its equivalent purchase money on anything but food or drink, or on items directly connected with food or drink.
  Commandment 611 enjoins us to emulate the ways of the Lord to the best of our ability. The operative verse is 26,17: "You have affirmed this day that the Lord is your G–d, that you will walk in His ways, that you will observe His commandments, etc,., that He will be your G–d so that you may walk in His ways, etc."
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The one commandment in this portion which comprises all other commandments is the commandment to "walk in G–d's ways." Since man has been created in the image of G–d, it behooves him to emulate G–d to the extent he is able to. He has to see to it that every one of his limbs is in perfect condition, for each limb has been charged with the performance of some commandment. The same applies to our spiritual and emotional faculties. We know that G–d is gracious; hence we too must display this trait in our dealings with other people. Our sages quote G–d as saying: כל זמן שבני עוסקים כסדר הזה, "As long as My children conform to this order (of prayer) they will not leave empty-handed". [The reference is to the recital of the 13 attributes of G–d which He taught Moses in response to his request for knowledge how to assuage His anger. Ed.] We all know how many times we recite the thirteen attributes and nothing seems to happen and our sins do not seem to disappear. This is because we did not heed the wording of the promise. The sages spoke about G–d having demanded that we practice, עוסקים, the attributes of G–d, not merely recite them during a confessional [cf. Alshich and Tzror Hamor on Exodus 34,6. Ed.] והלכת בדרכיו, "and you will walk in His ways." Fulfilling this part of the Torah's blueprint for our relationship with G–d will qualify us to be the מרכבה, the carrier of G–d's Presence on earth. Man, in the way he was originally constructed, was after all the reflection of G–d on earth. Who could better qualify as the מרכבה? We have already described elsewhere how the 7 sections of our body represent the seven parts of the concept בנין. By sanctifying our body we will be able to recapture the lofty niveau Adam possessed and become like the דמות עליון, a replica of the form in the highest regions. 
  This is alluded to in 26,19: ולתתך עליון על כל הגוים אשר עשה לתהלה לשם ולתפארת, "and He will set you supreme over all the nations He has made, to be for fame renown and glory, etc." The word תפארת refers to the emanation of that name, the level at which original man of the dual face emanated. The word תהילה, on the other hand, refers to the still higher emanation בינה, as Pardes Rimonim explains under the heading תהלה in the section ערכי הכנויים. Though there seems to be some doubt whether this expression refers to the emanation כתר or בינה, we may consider that all three emanations i.e. כתר, חכמה, בינה are meant. They represent the origin of בנין. Keeping this in mind we understand why the term עליה, ascent, is used not only in connection with the blessing, such as in 26,19, but also in connection with the warning or curse in 28,43 where the stranger in the land of Israel is described as ascending, whereas we will descend. That verse even repeats the expression מעלה מעלה "higher and higher," describing the progress made by the alien. How are we to understand this? Do we not have a tradition that the מדה טובה, the positive, is always in 500 times greater supply than the negative? (Sotah 11; Sanhedrin 100, Yuma 76 et al.) We therefore must not understand the words מעלה מעלה to mean that the alien will climb much higher than Israel but rather that he will only ascend two steps. The repetition acts as a limitation, (מיעוט), a common occurrence in Bible exegesis. The reference to the ascent of the Jewish people in 26,19, ולתתך עליון, however, is a comprehensive term.
  Man's purpose is to perfect his resemblance to the Divine. It follows that even those aspects of his body which are more mundane by nature should be elevated to a level of חולין שנעשו על טהרת הקודש, "profane matters treated as if all the restrictions of sacred matters applied to them." This includes the act of sexual union with his wife. At first glance the very desire to engage in sexual intercourse is demeaning, reflects the dominance of our physiological impulses over our spiritual impulses. This can be overcome when man sanctifies himself prior to engaging in marital relations with his wife. When he does so he not only models himself on the Divine but the children who will be born as a result of such a physical/spiritual union will reflect the דמות ה' in an intensified measure. We have elaborated on this elsewhere as well as on the fact that there are three partners involved in the making of every human being, G–d having said "Let us make man in Our likeness" (Genesis 1,26). [This refers to G–d's participation in the creation of every human being subsequent to the first. I have found this confirmed in ראשית חכמה, שער קדושה, פרק טז, paragraph 56 in the new edition by Rabbi Joseph Chayim Waldman. Ed.] G–d's participation is conditional on the act of marital union being performed under the aegis of the סטרא דקדושה, the sacred side of the emanations.
  Similar sanctification can be achieved by man even in that most regular and therefore most profane performance of bodily functions, eating and drinking. I have described this at length in my essay on קדושת האכילה. The food is elevated to the spiritual level of sacrificial meat, the drink to that of the wine libations, both as offered on the altar when the Temple was standing. G–d will then relate to our food and drink intake as He is described in Song of Songs 5,1 as relating Israel's offering of incense, the preferred of all sacrificial offerings. The Zohar both on פרשת ויקרא and elsewhere explains that whole verse in Song of Songs in terms of the various sacrifices. The mystical element in all this: The consumption of the sacrificial meat on the altar, though it takes place in this world, represents a spiritual awakening in this world which translates into a ריח ניחוח, a pleasing fragrance which rises towards heaven. The same thing happens when the righteous in this world consume their daily meals. Their seemingly mundane activity is transformed into a spiritual experience by which they derive pleasure from the brilliance of the שכינה and their entire body derives nourishment from its splendor. Even the plates and other utensils used will become refined and will sparkle. These utensils will then qualify to serve as receptacles for spiritual food. Maimonides refused to believe that the eternal reward for the performance of the commandments included an eternal physical life of both body and soul after the resurrection; he preferred to believe in an eternal existence of the soul alone. Maimonides (because according to him there was neither eating nor drinking in the World to Come) would not have recognized the need for these utensils. I believe he forgot an important consideration. Food will always be needed to sustain life. The food and drink does not necessarily have to be of the physical variety which we are familiar with. Spiritual food may also be served in dishes, but sanctified dishes. Were this not so, how could G–d – or certain aspects of G–d – have been described as "receiving" the sweet smelling fragrance of the incense offering? It is said of this fragrance in Songs 5,1: אכלו רעים שתו ושכרו דודים, i.e. the fragrance which symbolizes something intangible, spiritual, [compare the commentary on that verse by Metzudat. Ed.] We can now understand that something like this is conceivable also in our times provided our food has been prepared with the necessary care. 
  In principle, this is what the legislation of בכורים, מעשר and מעשר שני is all about. We are to bring physical food to a holy place and consume it under conditions of holiness having declared that we have met all the necessary requirements to qualify for doing so. The Torah reports that even Adam was told that he could eat from every tree in the garden i.e. אכול תאכל, (eating of a dual nature); this was a hint that such eating was to be spiritually uplifting.
  ולקחת מראשית פרי האדמה . Rav Huna, commenting on the first verse in the Torah in Bereshit Rabbah 1,4, says that the universe was created in consideration of three merits acquired by Israel. They are: the merit of setting aside the חלה from their doughs, the merit of giving tithes, and the merit of bringing the first ripe fruit to the Temple. In fact, the reason that the word used by the Torah for describing the beginning of creation is בראשית, [and not e.g. בהתחלה] is that the legislation of חלה is described as setting aside מראשית עריסותיכם, "from the 'beginning' of your dough" (Numbers 15,20). The same word is also used in Deut. 18,4 in connection with the tithes. The expression is further used in connection with בכורים, as we know from our פרשה 26,2. The difficulty with this Midrash is why these three commandments should be so much more important than others to justify their being reported to be the reason that G–d created the universe. We have other easily understandable quotes about the word ראשית being equated with Israel and the world being created for the sake of Israel or for the sake of Torah. This special significance of the above-mentioned three commandments certainly needs elaboration! Another difficulty in the Midrash is the wording אין דבר נקרא ראשית אלא חלה, which implies that the appellation ראשית is not accorded to anything else but חלה. How can the Midrash reverse itself immediately afterwards and state אין דבר נקרא ראשית אלא מעשר? The Midrash compounds this by stating "אין דבר נקרא ראשית אלא בכורים." How many things are there which qualify for the exclusive appellation ראשית? Another difficulty is that the verse (18,4) quoted by the Midrash as proving that the term ראשית applies to מעשר actually speaks of תרומה and not of מעשרות? Why does the Midrash not use the customary form for quoting a verse i.e. שנאמר, but instead says: כמה דאת אמר?
  Actually, the purpose of the creation was the Torah which would provide the means by which mankind could successfully exist on earth and which in turn mankind or Israel respectively were meant to observe. Just as the Torah consists of "body and soul," or of visible and invisible aspects which nonetheless form a whole, so man is composed of 248 limbs and 365 sinews corresponding to the 613 commandments in the Torah. All these 613 parts of the human body can be viewed as holy, קודש, whereas there is also a קודש קדשים, an even holier part of man, i.e. the soul. We must understand how the body can qualify for the description holy, קודש, seeing it is mostly animal-like and depends on eating and drinking in order to stay alive. If the body is so dependent on physical, biological functions, how could it develop the affinity to Torah needed seeing that Torah is totally holy? What did G–d do in order to overcome this problem? He imbued our food with a degree of holiness. He sanctified the relevant first produce called חלה, מעשר and בכורים. He commanded us in the Torah to sanctify these particular parts of the food we eat and thereby created the "bridge" which enables the body which is animal-like to become holy, to relate to the Torah on a spiritual wavelength. The act of dedication to His name of these parts of our food supply elevates the whole concept of physical food to a higher spiritual plateau; its technical means is the giving of the parts dedicated to G–d's representative, the priest or the Levite respectively.
  The food which man consumes is first and foremost based on grain, דגן, the "king" of all plants. This is the reason that G–d commanded to set aside part of the grain harvest for special sanctification as a תרומה, gift, contribution. Since G–d did not consider this sanctification of food as adequate, He also imbued the tithes to be given to the Levites with a degree of special holiness. The Levite, in turn, gives some of what has been allocated to him to the priest, i.e. the תרומת מעשר; once the Levite has done so he has joined the ranks of the 1-10-100, or 2-20-200 described in שערי אורה in connection with the reason for the need to recite 100 benedictions daily. (Compare what we have written in connection with the blessing Isaac experienced, page 160) We have outlined there also how the relationship between the ordinary Israelite, the Levite and the priest parallel the relationship between 1, 10, 100 respectively. We explained the relationship as akin to the relationship between the three levels of man's soul, נפש-רוח-נשמה. The Israelite gives 10 out of 100 to the Levite; the Levite in turn gives to the priest 10 out of his share, i.e. 1/100th of the original quantity. Once the raw grain has been transformed into something of spiritual significance, the dough, it is elevated further by the setting aside of חלה. Next this dough is converted into bread which has by now been thoroughly sanctified. Bread is so important that our sages (and frequently the Torah itself) automatically referred to every meal as "bread". People are described as being invited to eat "bread," when in fact the invitation extends to a comprehensive meal. 
  Having dealt with these aspects of cereal-based food and the means to sanctify them we are left with the problem of the sanctification of the fruit of the trees. This is the reason for G–d's commandment to the farmer to take from the seven kinds of produce the land of Israel is famous for, (5 of which are tree grown fruit) and for every farmer to annually present the first ripe fruit of each category in the Temple. The seven categories are in their class what דגן is in the class of all that grows directly in the earth, i.e. the choicest. All the tree-grown fruit becomes sanctified when the farmer observes the legislation as it applies to these seven kinds of fruit/produce. The Midrash stated אין ראשית אלא חלה; this means that the mere sanctification of giving תרומה or מעשר from the grain in its original state was not enough to elevate it to the desired level of sanctity; the process had to be continued at the level where the grain is transformed into dough. Hence the Torah speaks of ראשית עריסותיכם. The same consideration applies to מעשרות; that sanctification too was not adequate yet, i.e. the מעשר ראשון given to the Levite had to be followed up by the תרומת מעשר given by the Levite to the כהן. Since תרומת מעשר is דגן in its original state, the Midrash did not want to use the customary expression שנאמר to preface the quotation from the Torah. This would have been interpreted as applying to תרומה גדולה instead of to תרומת מעשר, i.e. the lesson that even designating grain as תרומה גדולה was not yet an adequate level of sanctification. The Midrash teaches that the word ראשית is used to describe the first- but not necessarily final- step of sanctifying something.
  The overall lesson of this whole series of legislation is that the righteous individual consumes physical food (the part permitted to him) to remain alive so as to be able to serve his Lord and perform His commandments. G–d regards food consumed under such circumstances as being in the class of an offering that has been presented to him. I have explained this at greater length in my treatise קדושת המאכל, under the heading of the letter ק.
  I would like to reveal another aspect of the words: והלכת בדרכיו in 28,9. There is an allusion here to something more than mere hyperbole. It implies you will be blessed "coming" and "going." G–d makes this even plainer in 28,6: ברוך אתה בבואך וברוך אתה בצאתך. Verse 7 resumes the same theme when the manner in which our enemies will be put to flight, etc. is described. The command to strive to emulate the attributes of G–d to the limits of our ability includes both their hidden and their revealed aspects. G–d's revealed aspects are His deeds, the way He manifests Himself; His Essence remains forever "hidden." Man too must retain this "hidden" element, i.e. keep himself aloof from all the peripheral matters in his environment and strive for an intimate relationship only with G–d. He reveals himself by performing many commandments, such as attending Torah lectures or conducting them in public. He is seen regularly in the Synagogue and generally strives to sanctify the name of the Lord by his actions in public. As soon as he has completed performing whatever מצוה he has performed he returns home to isolation and does not waste his time in idle chatter in public places.
  In order to explain the nature of this התבודדות, isolation, let me first quote a passage from the Tikkunei Ha-Zohar concerning הבל which is rampant on earth: <i>"It happened on a Sabbath eve that someone who could only walk on crutches encountered two scholars whom he addressed as "masters of the generations" [foremost scholars of their time] and "masters of wisdom." He greeted them cordially, inquiring where they were headed. When told the place the scholars were travelling to (on horseback), the man on crutches mentioned that he was headed for the same place and could arrange board and lodging there for the scholars in the event the latter were in need of same. Upon hearing this, the scholars asked how it was possible that they would not arrive ahead of the man on crutches seeing that they were on horseback whereas he did not even have his own legs. While saying this they turned their heads and observed that the cripple suddenly ran like a rod of lightning. He arranged for the two scholars to experience a contraction of the distance to be covered so that they too arrived simultaneously with the cripple at the entrance of a cave. The cripple asked the scholars to enter the cave. The Rabbis followed him and climbed inside the cave until they arrived at an orchard where they found the cripple divesting himself of his former body and assuming an entirely new body. The former cripple's face shone like the sun and he was seated on a Royal throne surrounded by three hundred disciples at his feet. The disciples were engaged in reciting the first verse of Kohelet: "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." The disciples kept on repeating this verse innumerable times. The "leaders of the generation" turned to the disciples inquiring if there was no other verse in the Book of Kohelet that they kept repeating the same verse all the time. Upon hearing this, the man on the throne [who had first appeared to the scholars as a cripple] immediately arose and took hold of the hands of the two scholars and transported them to seven palaces. Each of these palaces was inscribed with the first verse of Kohelet, i.e.: "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." When they came to the seventh palace the entrance was decorated with the likeness of an eagle and a crown. On the crown there was the image of a dove. On the crown was inscribed the following: "Anyone who is not conversant with the meaning of the seven vanities in the first verse of Kohelet is the subject of the verse in Numbers 1,51: והזר הקרב יומת, 'And any stranger (non priest) who enters will be executed.'" Thereupon the two scholars turned to leave.</i>
  <i>The former cripple turned to them exclaiming: "You are supposed to be the leading scholars of your generation and this is why we have followed you thus far in order absorb some of your wisdom! You are no scholars at all! You do not even know that the whole universe was built by means of this verse in Kohelet. By invoking this [42 lettered name of G–d which we recite before the לכה דודי prayer on Sabbath eve, Ed.], He covers the entire universe sometimes in a single flight, sometimes in two flights, sometimes in three flights, etc., up to seven flights. We, on the other hand, who are in this world, are all cripples. I have inherited the interpretation of this verse in Kohelet from my father, who in turn had learned it from his father, who inherited this knowledge from the earliest generations." Thereupon he gave them enough money and they returned to their original location in the winking of an eye. [I believe the meaning of this to be a reference to the knowledge these two scholars had taken away from these treasure chambers as being described as "sufficient money." Ed.] These seven times six words, representing the 42-lettered name of G–d, express the thought that all on this world is but vanity. </i>
  <i>The colleagues (formerly described as leaders of their generation) had said to the former cripple: "Rabbi tell us at least a hint of the deeper meaning that lies in these words [the verse vanity of vanities, etc.] and do not keep this knowledge concealed from us.” Thereupon the [former] cripple said: "Rabbis there is undoubtedly a profound truth hidden in this verse. However, I will tell you a hint. The seven times the word "vanity" appears have to be read as follows: הבל =1 vanity; הבלים =two vanities; הבל הבלים =three vanities; הכל הבל =1 vanity making a total of seven "vanities." Between them they refer to the seven formulations of the Holy name which G–d uttered and as a result of which part of this physical universe came into being. This 42-lettered name of G–d is composed of the 7 groupings described in the passage we recite before לכה דודי. The word הבל when re-arranged is the same as להב, flame, and the word הבלים when re-arranged is equivalent to להבים, flames. David in Psalms 29,7 speaks of קול השם חוצב להבות אש, "the voice of G–d kindles flames of fire." He who understands the secret of the seven הבלים as they emerge from the mouth of G–d is able to understand how all existence (in this world) came into being with the use of this 42-lettered name by means of which heaven and earth were created.</i> Thus far the quote from the תקוני הזהר.
  This is an exceptionally mysterious parable. No doubt the people referred to were preoccupied with Kabbalah and endeavored to understand how the use of these names would translate into converting a spiritual world into a physical one just as the "man on crutches" had been doing in the parable. What was the nature of the "hint" which the "cripple" had revealed? Although, as we have already stated, this is a secret of a very exalted nature, everyone who reads this passage must endeavor to interpret it in the light of his knowledge and intelligence. We may also analyze why the "cripple" is described as having addressed the scholars as "leaders of the generation." He repeated this reference to them again later on in their conversation. Why? He could have simply addressed them as "Rabbis" or such.
  I believe the point is that the "cripple" is a simile for people who seek illumination in esoterics by isolating themselves from the community. They are described as cripples to indicate that they have no legs, i.e. that they stay in their surroundings and do not move about like ordinary mortals. Even though on rare occasions there is a need for them to leave their homes, they attend to these pressing needs with the utmost speed returning to their isolation "in the wink of an eye." This is in line with the Torah describing Aaron the High Priest as "not leaving the precincts of the Holy Tabernacle" (Leviticus 21,12). What this means is that the High Priest was to commune with G–d primarily in the Sanctuary. The scholars whom this Kabbalist encountered and whom he deliberately addressed as the "leaders of the generation," represented the leaders of the community at large whose task it is to immerse themselves in community affairs at all times. The "cripple" appeared to them in order to acquaint them with this dimension of affinity to G–d and His ways which can only be achieved through isolation. They were told that through achievement of this communion with G–d in this world all the pleasures of the World to Come would eventually become available, at which time one would be able to streak through the universe like a rod of lightning, (as the impression gained by the scholars when they saw the "cripple" "move.")
  When the events in the parable have been described as occurring on the Sabbath eve, this is to remind us of the statement of our sages (Avodah Zarah 3a) that "he who toils on the Sabbath-Eve will eat on the Sabbath." The holy name of G–d consisting of 42 letters is, after all, being completed on the Sabbath-Eve. 
  In order to explain the significance of the seven times הבל in the first verse in Kohelet cited in our parable, I have to preface with a quotation from the Zohar. We read there that there is a kind of הבל which occurs on earth and there is a kind of הבל which has its roots in the masters of the lie. In the latter case it refers to acts of deceit. In the former case the word may refer to the verse in Deut. 8,3: כי על כל מוצא פי השם יחיה האדם, "that man lives on all that issues forth from the mouth of G–d" i.e. from the Torah. This verse uses the term מוצא פי השם to describe the הבל פיו, the instructions issuing forth from the mouth of G–d. The word הבל must be understood as follows: the letter ה stands for the Five Books of Moses, the letter ב stands for the first letter in the Torah i.e. בראשית; the letter ל stands for the last letter in the Torah, ישראל.
  The creation of the physical world in the 7 days of Creation is described as הבל הבלים הכל הבל. This is why man is not to live in that world exclusively but should endeavor to cleave to a world based on a different kind of הבל i.e. the seven days of creation in the sin-free higher world. There man is to commune with G–d in solitude. These days are referred to as the seven days of בנין. They are to be viewed as seven times seven days, corresponding to the forty-nine שערי בינה. Each of these days comprises seven sections as explained at length in the Pardes Rimonim. When one adds what is known in the circles specializing in גימטריאות as the כולל, the word itself, in this case the emanation בינה, one arrives at the number fifty, the highest of the "gates of insight" attainable by man. Above the regions we have described as בנין, we come to a region inaccessible to man where G–d operates with the 42-lettered name, i.e. another domain in which seven units of six each are active. Our Kabbalists have found an allusion to this domain in the verse שלח תשלח את האם, (Deut. 22,7) a reference to the "Mother Superior” in the Celestial Regions. There is no way we humans can access this domain while bound by a body, and this is why the verse in Deuteronomy alludes to this by saying רק הבנים תקח לך, "you may only take the young ones for yourself," i.e. only lower emanations and domains represented by them are accessible to humans. These seven times seven periods alluded to the six times one thousand years this world is to exist and the one thousand years it is to be in a state of destruction before giving way to a more perfect universe. When a cycle of this kind has repeated itself seven times the ultimate perfect world will emerge. All of this is alluded to in the concept of these seven times six words representing the 42-lettered name of G–d. The six letters (words) in each section of these names correspond to the six days of active Creation. When the word itself is added it alludes to the Sabbath, the seventh day. [You will observe that the prayer אנא בכח which we mentioned as being recited before לכה דודי is also recited daily in the mornings during the recital of the order of daily sacrifices. At the end of each line the first letters of each of the six words in the stanza are printed as an acronym to reflect what the author has just tried to explain. Ed.] As a result you will arrive at the division of this name into seven times seven. The Torah alludes to all this when it instructs us in Leviticus 25,8: "Count for yourself seven times seven Sabbaths of years; these seven times seven Sabbaths of years shall total forty- nine years." These "years" are "days" in G–d's calendar [where a day equals one year. Ed.] This whole verse is an allusion to the name of G–d as described in the אנא בכח prayer. This is the deeper meaning of the "cripple" in our parable having seven palaces and why on each palace the verse of Kohelet referring to the seven הבלים was inscribed. They are to be understood as seven להבים, fiery emissions from the mouth of G–dץ Since we have a principle that G–d provided alternatives for everything He created, there must also be alternatives for the manner in which ascent to holiness is possible. 
  This alternative is alluded to when the Torah in Deut. 28,25 speaks of: בדרך אחד תצא אליו ובשבעה דרכים תנוס לפניו, "you will go out (to war) against your enemy on one path but flee from him in seven directions." The allegorical meaning of this verse is that there are many ways which may, G–d forbid, lead away from G–d's purpose for His universe. I have mentioned earlier that on the one hand G–d remains concealed, i.e His essence is concealed from us, whereas on the other hand He is manifest through His actions. His being concealed becomes especially noticeable when He manifests Himself and we do not "see Him." The closest we can come to appreciate Him is within the framework called בנין. It is appropriate for us therefore to partake as little as possible in the הבל הבלים of the physical world created during the seven days of Creation and instead seek communion with Him in the higher regions, the seven days of Creation of the higher world. This is the message of the man on crutches, the "cripple" in our parable. If, however, a person needs to venture into the physical world in order to fulfil any of the commandments of the Torah he should do so only for as long as required to perform the מצוה in question. He should return without delay to his communion with G–d in solitude. This is why the Torah (28,6) stresses: ברוך אתה בבואך וברוך אתה בצאתך. "You are blessed when you enter and you are blessed when you exit." This is why the parable described the attainment of solitude in terms of קפיצה, that the earth, so to speak, contracted under the runner to enable him to reach his destination more speedily. There is also an allusion in the parable that we find ourselves suddenly in front of a "cave;" the "cave" is hyperbole for our grave, our death. Since we do not know the day we die, we must hurry to achieve what is our task in life while we have a chance. When the parable describes the seven palaces as being as brightly lit as the sun this is a hint that those who prefer to suffer insults rather than to insult others are viewed as emitting light similarly to that of the sun.
  As to the eagle, the crown and the image of the dove in the parable related by the Tikkunei Ha-Zohar: This is an allusion to the close relationship between G–d and our people. He is fond of us, and we are fond of Him. This sentiment is clearly expressed in 26,17: את ה' האמרת היום להיות לך לאלוקים וללכת בדרכיו … וה' האמירך היום להיות לו לעם סגולה… "You have affirmed the Lord this day to be your G–d and to walk in His ways,….and the Lord has affirmed you this day to be His own treasured nation…" The eagle symbolizes His fondness of us, as we know from Exodus 19,4 where G–d recalled how He transported us (the whole Jewish nation) (as) on the wings of eagles." The dove symbolizes our own fondness for G–d and our cleaving to Him to the point of preparedness to die for the sake of His Holy Name. Israel is called יונה, dove, as per Psalms 68,14: יונה נחפה בכסף, "wings of the dove covered with silver." Our sages comment on this that it is characteristic of the dove that once it has mated it will not mate with any other female. Our sages also stated (Midrash Tehillim ibid.) that the dove does not go into convulsions when it is slaughtered, just as the people of Israel do not have spasms when dying a martyr's death but accept such a death gracefully.
  The "cripple" described as sitting on the throne with three hundred disciples at his feet is an allusion to the Heavenly Spheres. There are ten emanations in each of the four worlds known as עולם האצילות, עולם הבריאה, עולם היצירה, עולם העשיה. Each emanation comprises ten sections totaling one hundred. There is a difference, however, between the divisions of the emanations in the עולם האצילות and those in the other three "worlds." The former are of infinite dimension; the latter have strict limitations, as explained in the Pardes Rimonim. We can detect another allusion here. It is known and accepted that a "spiritual day" comes into existence every day a person makes a contribution to "repairing" the damage caused to G–d's earth by Adam's sin. The Arizal derives this concept from Psalms 139,16: ימים יוצרו, "days were formed," i.e. that the positive deeds of man translate into tangible shapes, the "day". Our parable describes these deeds as the disciples. Individuals of average piety perform such "repairs" on fifty-four days a year, the days on which they engage in fasting. These fifty-four days are comprised of 40 plus the 11 eves of the New Moon, the tenth of Tevet, the seventeenth of Tamuz, and the ninth of Av. The fast commemorating the murder of Gedalyah and New Year's eve are included in the forty days mentioned. We are therefore left with another three-hundred days (the average year comprises 354 days). The disciples mentioned in the parable number 300, to tell us that these students engaged in "repairs," תקונים on the other 300 days of the year as well.
  This is a further reason why we have a statement that every righteous person will inherit 310 worlds in the future (Proverbs 8,21 — להנחיל לאוהבי יש as interpreted in the introduction to Tractate Avot). The worlds referred to are the worlds of Atzilut, Briyah, Yetzirah and Assiyah. There is no need for an allusion to the עולם האצילות seeing it has infinite dimensions which are impossible to symbolize by numbers. In that world there is something much closer to absolute unity than in any of the "worlds" which form part of the process of development. Since, however, even that world of emanations divides into ten parts, it is alluded to by the number 10 rather than 100.
  This then is the mystical dimension of the 310 worlds portrayed by the "cripple" who sat on the throne with 300 disciples at his command. The three hundred are an allusion to the Celestial Throne. The moral lesson to be learned from all this is that we have to follow in G–d's footsteps and endeavor to make the creature resemble its Creator. This will result in our existence being justified and of value, the crown being eventually restored to its former glory, and the Jews thereupon enjoying the "light."
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  והיה כי תבא אל הארץ . This paragraph is interpreted in the Midrash Hane'elam (part of the Zohar) as referring to the World to Come. The Tzror Hamor copied extensively from that Midrash on 26,5.
  וענית ואמרת . Rashi points out that the passage contains our thanks to G–d who, in His kindness, has already saved us at the beginning of our national history when we were merely a single family. We must learn from it to give thanks to G–d for all our achievements whenever they occur.
  היום הזה ה' אלוקיך מצוך . Rashi explains that the commandments should appear to us as if they had only been made on that very day. Rashi adopts the same approach when explaining in 27,9: "Keep silence, and hear O Israel, this day you have become a people to the Lord your G–d." Rashi writes: "You should consider each day as the one on which you entered into the covenant with G–d." This is a very important rule, which, when practiced, helps us to perform G–d's commandments with eagerness, as one performs a task newly assigned. It helps not to treat Torah as something that we are so familiar with that we fall into the habit of neglecting its demands. The Arizal explains 28,47: "because you did not serve the Lord your G–d in joy and with a glad heart when you enjoyed everything in abundance," in a similar vein. G–d teaches us that performance of His commandments must be accompanied by a greater joy than the joy one feels for all the material blessings G–d has bestowed on one. It is not enough merely to serve the Lord and obey His commandments. We must do so joyfully.
  <i>"You have affirmed this day that the Lord is your G–d, that you will walk in His ways, that you will observe His laws and commandments and rules, and that you will obey Him. And the Lord has affirmed this day that you are, as He promised you, His treasured people who shall observe all His commandments, and that He will set you, in fame and renown and glory, high above all the nations that He has made; and that you shall be, as He promised, a holy people to the Lord your G–d."</i>
  Who among us can read the above three verses without being deeply moved and inspired to cleave to G–d who has chosen us the Jewish nation as His people. Clearly, the "threefold thread" will not easily be broken and will serve as an ongoing reminder for you. We are linked to G–d through the covenant; we have also received the Torah on pains of an oath. This is the background to all the verses (25,15-26) in which curses are called down on all those who fail to honor this commitment. It is why these verses were also recited in the guise of blessings such as: "Blessed the man who did not make an idol, etc." (cf. Rashi). At first glance we may be puzzled why the Torah chose to spell out the various curses whereas it only implied the blessings? Normal practice would have dictated the opposite! After all, the Torah usually prefers to stress the positive! The Torah here intended that it should be accepted on oath. Hence the people had to be sworn what not to do. The very fact that the chapter concludes (28,69) with: "These are the words of the covenant which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel, etc." shows that the list of "cursed be, etc." is an essential part of this presentation. The curses and blessings between them have combined to keep us and to assure us of a future when a surfeit of physical and spiritual light will be the beacon leading us out of our exile, when the guilt of Zion will have been expiated.
  In the final verse of our portion: "<i>Observe therefore the words of this covenant, and do them, that you may make all that you do prosper</i>," this message is stressed once more.
  
  Nitzavim, Veyeilech, Ha'Azinu
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named נו"ה צדק.
  Commandment 612 enjoins the entire Jewish people to assemble at the end of the Shemittah year on the second day of the festival of Tabernacles.
  Commandment 613 directs every male Israelite to write a copy of the written Torah for himself. The Torah writes: ועתה כתבו לכם את השירה הזאת ולמדה את בני ישראל. "Now write down for yourselves this 'song' and teach it to the Children of Israel."
  This concludes the list of the 613 commandments. According to Nachmanides the commandment to do תשובה is also alluded to in this portion in 30,11: "For this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you, etc." In the portion האזינו we find an allusion to the prohibition to drink wine intended as a libation for idolatrous cults. The Torah refers to this in 32,38: "who are the fat of their offerings and drank their libation wine." We have a similar allusion to this commandment in Exodus 34,15: "and he will invite you and you and will partake of his (idolatrous) offerings." The word "from" (his offerings) includes libations.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  ישראל גוי אחד בארץ, Israel is a nation unique in this world. It has been crowned (singled out) with a single crown consisting of two facets, i.e. both in a general and in a specific way.
  The entire nation is considered as if it were one person; this is why the Torah refers to the people as נפש, person (singular) already at the time Jacob descended into Egypt (Genesis 46,26, et al.). The significance of this lies in the fact that כי חלק ה' עמו, "that His people Israel are part of G–d Himself" (32,9). The remainder of mankind was divided into 70 nations, each one with a representative in the Celestial Regions, i.e. a horoscope presided over by a שר, "Minister," as we know from 4,19: "which the Lord your G–d assigned to all the nations; He took you and removed you from the iron crucible, from Egypt, to be for Him His very own nation, as is now the case" (4,20). The Jewish people's fortunes are not guided by intermediaries such as horoscopes. The 70 nations were divided from one another as we know from 32,8: "When the most High gave nations their homes and set the divisions of man, He fixed the boundaries of peoples in relation to Israel's numbers." The relationship (common denominator) between the "numbers" of Israel and that of the nations of the world is that Israel numbered 70 when they first went down to Egypt. The difference is only that the 70 Israelites that came to Egypt are all described as נפש, a single person. Any part of the Jewish nation is compared to the entire nation. Because Israel is part of G–d, it has an eternal future, as pointed out in Sanhedrin 90a: "Every Israelite has a share in the World to Come."
  In addition to this common factor which links every Israelite with one another to form part of the whole, each Israelite is a distinct individual as is evident from a statement by our sages (Bamidbar Rabbah 21,22, based on Isaiah 4,5): "any righteous person is burned or singed by the fire G–d has provided as part of the canopy He grants to every righteous person." This teaches that though every Israelite has his share in the World to Come, everyone is assigned a place of his own. Concerning this state of affairs, Moses said in 32,12: "The Lord guided him separately, unaccompanied by any alien power." The word ינחנו in this verse is a singular, (guided him, not guided us) to stress that every Israelite is an individual unit, personality. When Moses continued that: "He was not accompanied by another power," this refers to the שרים and מזלות assigned to guide the fates of the Gentiles. None of those forces exercise the slightest control over the Jewish people. The two commandments in these last three portions directly reflect these thoughts. The commandment of Hakhel, demanding that all of Israel – women and childen included – assemble in the courtyard of the Holy Temple to listen to a reading of the Torah, is rooted in the fact that all of Israel is perceived of as a single body. Subsequently the Torah once more instructs every individual Israelite separately to write a copy of the Torah for himself. As long as Israel perform G–d's commandments they experience a close affinity with G–d both on a national and on an individual level. If, G–d forbid, they were to fail to observe the Torah's commandments, they would find themselves under the influence of אל נכר, an alien deity, i.e. Satan, the evil urge (mentioned in ראשית חכמה, שער ענוה נ"ז). When this happens, the sinner will find himself in the domain of "the left side of the emanations," i.e. subject to influences similar to those which govern the lives of the Gentiles.
  G–d has, however, provided a remedy for those Israelites who have become subject to these influences. This remedy is known as תשובה, repentance. Repentance possesses the power to bring such sinners "back into the fold," into the right side of the emanations which represents holiness. This was pointed out by Nachmanides; the relevant verse is 30,11 which refers to repentance. The mystical dimension of repentance is part of the emanation בינה. Students of the Kabbalah are aware that this emanation cannot be accessed by the Gentiles. The latter can access only the emanations from חסד "downwards." Canaanites have access to these lower emanations. Ishmael was sired by Abraham who represented the emanation חסד. Hence Gentiles are able to relate to this emanation. Being offspring of Isaac, who represented the next "lower" emanation גבורה, the descendants of Esau also could access that emanation. Having delineated the above exceptions, the 70 nations can access only the שרים ומזלות which we have already described. The inability of these 70 nations to access the emanations of either חסד or גבורה explains why the touching by members of such nations disqualifies wine, an expression of G–d's bounty. All this because of the pollutant of the serpent which spread through mankind as a result of Eve having squeezed out the fruit of the tree of knowledge (reputedly the grape). It thus became what is termed in our portion (29,17) פורה ראש ולענה, "a fruit turning into poison weed and wormwood." Concerning this type of wine, Solomon (Proverbs 23,31) has said: "Do not look at wine when it is red." Since the emanation בינה is not exposed to the "touch" of the Gentiles, the wine we find in that domain is the kind of which our sages have said that it has been preserved in its original grapes ever since the six days of Creation, in order to be served up to the righteous in the Hereafter (Berachot 34b). This is an allusion to the six "revealed" days of Creation remaining as they are, i.e. accessible to contact by the Gentiles. The six days of Creation known as the days of בנין, the concealed aspect of the work of Creation, serve as an area in which this wine is stored for the eventual enjoyment by the righteous. The penitent must elevate himself to a level that qualifies him to partake of that wine in the future. He is able to burst the confining shackles of the קליפות, symbols of the constraints imposed upon him by the evil urge, so that he can rejoin the mainstream of the Jewish people. The בעל תשובה together with the other righteous will then experience the revelation of G–d's secrets as a result of having partaken of this wine. This is the meaning of Psalms 25,14: "G–d's secrets are reserved for those who fear Him." The numerical value of the word סוד, secret, is 70. It alludes to the 70 who formed the nucleus of the Jewish people who first went down to Egypt. Because they were all a single "person," נפש, they all have a share in the World to Come. It is known to Kabbalists that the emanation בינה is the mystical dimension of the World to Come, a domain where G–d and His Name are One and where a unified people of Israel cleave to Him. It is only the people of Israel who are referred to by the title אדם; by describing the creation of אדם as "in G–d's likeness" (Genesis 1,26), the Torah concurrently refers to the creation of the Jewish people. When we reflect on the respective meanings of אדם and אדמה, earth, we must conjure up in our minds that it is the function of this אדם to serve as the מרכבה, carrier, or better אדמה of G–d's Presence. G–d is perceived as sitting on a throne. The throne is standing on this אדמה, i.e. is supported by אדם, the Jewish people. It follows that any misconduct by Israel in our terrestrial spheres undermines the "floor" on which G–d's throne is based. 
  Verses 32:4-5 allude to the holy origin of Man/Israel and its eventual corruption by the dual spelling of the word לו both with the letter ו and with the letter א. The Zohar on 32,3 (Sullam edition Ha'azinu page 92) states: "<i>What is the meaning of 'For I will proclaim the name of the Lord?' Rabbi Shimon answers: "give glory to our G–d!" Rabbi Abba comments as follows: "The words 'give glory' are a reference to גדולה or the emanation חסד." The words: הצור תמים פעלו, "The Rock, whose works are perfect," are a reference to the emanation גבורה. The words:כי כל דרכיו משפט, "for all His ways are justice," are a reference to the emanation תפארת. The words: אל אמונה, "a faithful G–d," refer to the emanation נצח, whereas the words אין עול, "never false," refer to the emanation הוד. The word: צדיק, "the righteous One," alludes to the emanation יסוד, whereas the word: וישר, "the upright One," refers to צדק, another name for the emanation מלכות. All these expressions combined form the name of G–d. This is why Moses said: "I will proclaim the name of G–d." Rabbi Chiyah added that he had learned a great deal from this verse and that what Rabbi Abba said was certainly appropriate. In view of the fact that so many attributes are all part of G–d's name, it would be easy to err and to think in terms of a number of different powers instead. In order to prevent us from making such an error the Torah employs an apparently superfluous pronoun when it writes the word הוא at the end of verse 4. This pronoun is to emphasize that, the various attributes notwithstanding, they are all qualities of one and the same G–d. He was, He is, and He will be forever.</i> Thus far the Zohar.
  The Torah continues: שחת לו לא בניו מומם, "It (Israel, Adam who had been created in the image of G–d), became corrupt, etc." when they departed from the ways of the Torah. The reason we have the word לו here spelled with the letter ו is an allusion to the damage Israel's perversions cause to the throne of G–d. So as to forestall the impression that this "damage" is actual, the Torah quickly "corrects itself" by repeating the word as a negative, i.e. לא. This emphasizes that our actions do not cause corruption in the Celestial Regions, though G–d's image is impaired when His chosen people do not live up to His expectations. The Torah next explains how Israel become blemished precisely because they are G–d's children and G–d loves them. He only has their welfare in mind and wishes to shower them with His goodness, but is prevented from doing so through the crooked and perverse behavior of a certain generation.
  To sum up: Whenever Israel conduct themselves in accordance with G–d's laws they add power and glory to His stature in the Celestial Regions.
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  In my treatise on Yuma I have written at length about all the moral/ethical lessons to be learned from these three portions. Therefore, I will not add anything here under this heading.
  
  V'Zot HaBerachah
  
  Ner Mitzvah
  
  This section is named ברכת התורה.
  The very fact that Moses uses this whole portion to bless the Jewish people according to their tribes teaches that bestowing a blessing is a great מצוה. We find the following comment by the Zohar (Sullam edition Bamidbar page 3) on this subject at the beginning of the Book of Numbers. <i>"A person who praises the good qualities of a friend or neighbor, his sons or his wealth, should pronounce a blessing to express his thanks for the beneficence bestowed upon such a person. Whence do we know this? We know this from Moses. When Moses said of the Jewish people in Deuteronomy 1,10: "You are today as numerous as the stars in the sky," he immediately added a blessing, i.e. "May the Lord the G–d of your fathers increase your numbers a thousand fold, and bless you as He promised you." This verse contains two blessings: Moses blessed G–d, Moses asking G–d to bless Israel." He blessed the Lord for having blessed Israel thus far. If someone were to praise his friend's qualities without at the same time acknowledging the source of his friend's good fortune by adding a blessing, he would be punished, i.e. he (the friend) will suffer damage on account of the failure of the friend who admires him acknowledging G–d as the source of his good fortune. If, on the other hand, he does bless the friend in question, he himself will also be blessed on that account. It is essential that one pronounce such a blessing with a generous heart and not just by reluctantly going through the motions. When one pronounces a blessing for G–d one most certainly must do so with an עין טובה ולב טוב, "generously, and with a well meaning intention." G–d expects us to be full of love; this is why the Torah commands in 6,5: "Love the Lord your G–d with all your heart".</i> Thus far the Zohar.
  
  Torah Ohr
  
  The written Torah concludes with the word ישראל and commences with the word בראשית. We may view the end as firmly connected with the beginning and the beginning as firmly connected with the end. We demonstrate this on שמחת תורה by reading from the beginning of פרשת בראשית as soon as we have concluded the last passage in וזאת הברכה. Our sages have provided an allusion for this when they said: בראשית ברא בראשית, i.e. בשביל התורה וישראל שנקראו ראשית. Israel is the whole purpose of the creation of the universe. It is appropriate therefore that the Torah begin with the word בראשית and end with the word ישראל. The Torah commences with the letter ב, which our sages in the Midrash describe as the letter symbolizing ברכה, blessing. The essence of any blessing is the expansion and the intensification of the prevailing abundance provided by G–d. The purpose of the benediction is to ensure the continuance of these abundant blessings by G–d indefinitely. Torah too is eternal, hence it represents the essence of all blessings. This idea is also alluded to in Psalms 29,11: ה' עוז לעמו יתן ה' יברך את עמו בשלום, "May the Lord grant strength to His people; may He bestow well-being on his people." A question is asked in the Sefer Ha-Bahir as well as in the Ziyoni "Whence do we know that the Torah itself is a blessing?" As an answer the authors cite Moses' blessing in 33,23: "And full of the Lord's blessing the West (sea) and the South, conquer it!" We have a tradition that "West" is a hyperbole for Torah because it is written in Job 11,9: "and broader than the West (sea)." Thus far the Tziyoni.
  Blessing is essentially threefold, hence Torah is threefold, i.e. the Pentateuch, the Books of the Prophets and the Hagiographa. It was given to us by a person who was the third child in the family, i.e. Moses. It was given to Israel which comprises priests, Levites and Israelites. All parts of the nation are included in the blessing. The Torah was given to Israel in the third month after their departure from Egypt. 
  When Moses refers to G–d having "arrived from Sinai" (33,2), he refers to an event which occurred on the third day of the week, i.e. the numerical value of the word בא in this verse is 3. You will now understand why the Torah commences with the letter ב as a symbol of blessing. There is an interesting Aggadah in the Otiyot d'Rabbi Akiva: They asked the letter ב who had created it, whereupon the letter pointed at the letter א with its עוקץ, the "sting" projecting from the right side of the bottom of this letter. It is a fact that when the Torah was actually given to the Jewish people, i.e. when G–d revealed Himself by means of communicating the Ten Commandments, these commandments commenced with the letter א i.e. אנכי ה' אלוקיך. This shows that the letter א is the true root of blessing. This root is אור, light, the original light which was concealed from this earth at the time Adam sinned in Paradise. We quoted the Midrash as saying that the world was created for the sake of Torah which is called ראשית; we may deduce that the letter ב preceding this word is a reference to the two Torahs, i.e. the written and the oral Torah. These two Torahs may also be meant when the Torah reported the creation of the "two great luminaries, the great luminary and the small luminary" (Genesis 1,16). The "great" luminary would be the מעשה מרכבה, the esoterics, as expressed by the written Torah which is a combination of letters of the Holy Name of G–d; the "small" luminary would refer to what the Talmud describes as the הויות של אביי ורבא, the discussions exploring the oral law which were carried on by such Talmudic giants as Abbaye and Rava. The written Torah is symbolized by the letter א, the great light which nowadays is kept hidden and which contains the secrets called "the soul of souls" (Zohar on פרשת בהעלותך). These secrets will remain hidden till such distant future when Man too will be able to wear the garments made of אור, light -as had been the case before the sin- and to benefit from this great light. Nowadays, when we are forced to make do with כתנות עור, garments made of hide, i.e. a corrupt form of "light" spelled with the letter ע, we must be content with "only" seventy facets of the written Torah, i.e. with the letter ע symbolizing the light of the written Torah. Once our world will be filled with knowledge of G–d as envisaged by Isaiah 11,9 this letter ע will be replaced by the mystical dimension of עין, "eye." At that time all the hidden secrets which no human eye has ever beheld will be revealed. Why does the "sting" of the letter ב point at the letter א? Because the oral Torah [being merely based on unwritten tradition. Ed.] is always at pains to demonstrate its validity by establishing a link with the written Torah. The relationship of the oral to the written Torah is similar to the relationship between the first woman and the first man, about which Adam said: כי מאיש לוקחה זאת, "for she has been detached from Man" (Genesis 2,23). The oral Torah is perceived of as having been derived from the written Torah. The relationship of איש to אשה is the same as the relationship of זה וזאת; hence the relationship of the written Torah to the oral Torah is as the relationship of זה to Tת. Oral Torah in fact has its origin in the written Torah. This is the reason why the Talmud keeps raising the question: מנלן, i.e. "where is the source for this teaching in the written Torah?" The word אור appears five times in the story of creation. This alludes to the five books comprising the written Torah.
  As I have already mentioned the essence of blessing is the expansion of the abundance G–d has provided in this world and the assurance of its continuing indefinitely. This idea also applies to the light which has been "hidden." Although in our present state this source of light is not visible to us, yet it is the source of all blessing; the blessings we experience originate in that domain. This is the mystical dimension of אצילות, a domain beyond that of the עולם הבריאה, a domain in which the principle of אין סוף operates, in which nothing is finite. When G–d said to Moses (Numbers 11,17): ואצלתי מן הרוח אשר עליך ושמתי עליהם, "and I shall draw upon the spirit which rests on you and put it on them," this was not to be understood as a diminution of Moses' spirit but on the contrary, as an expansion of his spirit which G–d proceeded to allocate to the seventy elders. Onkelos underlines this when he renders these words as "I will provide additional spirit." Nowadays when we are in exile, the only expansion of Torah knowledge we can look forward to is by means of the study of the oral Torah. The hidden secrets i.e. the נשמה לנשמה still remain concealed from us. While it is true that there are in our midst מארי דסתרי תורה, masters of the Kabbalah, their knowledge of Torah secrets can only be classified as נשמות, not the secrets known as נשמה לנשמות. This will only be revealed to the righteous in the future. The whole subject matter may be better appreciated by comparison to the names of G–d. In these our days we limit ourselves to the enunciation of the name of G–d by sounding the letters א-ד-נ-י when mentioning the name of G–d. In the future, however, the Tetragrammaton, i.e. the name י-ה-ו-ה will be articulated by us as a matter of course. This name is known to us from the "written" Torah, but we must not as yet use it orally. Once we may do so the Torah may truly be described as תורת ה' תמימה, as being complete in all its aspects. This is the mystical dimension of the emanation תפארת. The name spelled א-ד-נ-י represents the kingdom of the oral Torah (emanation מלכות) as well as blessing, for it expands in accordance with the 13 acceptable methods of interpreting the Torah. The existence of these rules has given rise to many halachic discussions and therefore results in increased blessing for all those engaged in Torah exegesis. There is a statement in the Tractate Nedarim 38 that originally only Moses had been granted the facility of studying Torah by means of פלפול, dialectics, but that he taught this facility to the whole Jewish people. 
  We find the Torah described as G–d's, i.e. תורת ה'; we also find it described as Moses' Torah, i.e. תורת משה. I have dealt with this apparent anomaly in the introduction to my treatise called תולדות אדם as well as in my treatise מסכת שבועות. G–d gave Moses a number of general rules when He gave him the Torah. This is alluded to in Exodus 31,18: ויתן אל משה ככלתו לדבר אתו הר סיני, "G–d gave to Moses when He finished speaking with him at Mount Sinai, etc." Our sages in Shemot Rabbah 41,6 comment that this gift refers to the principles of Torah exegesis that G–d gave to Moses at that time. Moses realized then that there is an oral Torah also. G–d confirmed to Moses that this was indeed so. This is why the oral Torah is called תורת משה, i.e. Moses' bride. Once Moses had formed this relationship with his spiritual bride he gave up his physical bride, i.e. he no longer lived with his wife as man and wife. This is why the Zohar describes Moses' title as איש האלוקים with the words בעלה דמטרניתא, "husband of this spiritual 'matron'" (who has her root in the emanation תפארת and whose mystical dimension דעת was previously refined by passing through the emanations חכמה and בינה). We find a further allusion to this concept in Job 28,12: והחכמה מאין תמצא ואיזה מקום בינה, "But where can wisdom be found; where is the source of understanding?" The Tziyoni writes that the word מאין is the mystical dimension of the letters in the name משה. The numerical value of the word זנגזגאל, Moses' teacher, is the same as that of the word מאין, i.e. 101. [the angel that called to Moses from the burning bush, cf. Targum Yonathan ben Uzziel Exodus 3,2. Ed.] This number 101 is reminiscent of the statement of our sages that in order to ensure that one understands what one has learned one has to study it 101 times (Chagigah 9b). While it is true that the title איש אלוקים has been accorded by the Bible not only to Moses but to a total of ten personalities namely Elkanah, Samuel, David, Shayah, Iddo, Elijah, Elisha, Michah and Amotz, yet there is a difference between the other nine men and Moses. Whenever Moses is described by this title he is referred to as איש אלוקים. This means that he was the "husband" of the Divine i.e. the emanation מלכות, much as Elimelech is described as the husband of Naomi, i.e. איש נעמי in Ruth 1,3. The same term with the other prophets means "a man of G–d," i.e. someone who has displayed close affinity with G–d. Another difference which marks the description of Moses as איש אלוקים is that whenever Moses' name is mentioned in such a connection Moses' own personal name always precedes his description as איש האלוקים, such as in our portion in 33,1. The same does not hold true with the other men who have been accorded the title איש אלוקים. When our Rabbis stated: אין בעל מת אלא לאשתו, "a husband's death affects primarily his wife" (Sanhedrin 22a), they may well have alluded to the "marriage" between Moses and Matronita. When the period of mourning observed by Israel after Moses' death is described in the Torah (34,8) we find the expression: ויתמו ימי בכל אבל משה, "The days of weeping and mourning for Moses came to an end." Note that the numerical value of the word בכי, weeping is 32, and the word אבל is 33. Adding these two words you arrive at the numerical value of the current name of G–d א-ד-נ-י=65. Allegorically speaking, this means that Moses was mourned by his "wife" i.e. the (junior) attribute of G–d Matronita with whom he shared the last 40 years of his life on earth. 
  The author tries to demonstrate at this point that the statement of our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 100,13) that Moses' blessings commenced with the words with which Jacob's blessings concluded, whereas David's blessings commenced with the words with which Moses' blessings ended indicate that David's blessings for the Jewish people were the most comprehensive.
  
  To return to our subject. There is a Torah of G–d and a Torah of Moses. The latter is called תורת האדם. Torah scholars throughout the generations endeavor to find additional meanings by studying this Torah; when our sages describe G–d as "learning" from the mouths of Torah scholars, and when the Talmud quotes G–d as saying: "My son so and so has said the following," these are references to new Torah insights discovered by Torah scholars in our world. The hidden secrets are called תורת ה' and these will be revealed in the future to those righteous whom G–d refers to as His יראיו."
  Moses speaks of G–d as וזרח משעיר למו הופיע מהר פארן "He shone upon them from Se'ir, He appeared from Mount Paran" (33,2); Moses alludes to the partial revelation of this hidden light at the time the Torah was given on Mount Sinai. The Zohar on Parshat Balak (Sullam edition pages 54-56) described in detail how G–d first offered the Torah to the nations of the world, and how they not only rejected it but suggested G–d offer it to Israel, even offering bribes so that Israel could be persuaded to accept it and hopefully be found inadequate. [We have quoted all this in Torah Ohr section of Parashat Yitro]. 
  
  
  
  
  Moses said next: אתא מרבבות קודש, a veiled reference to the domain where all these holy secrets are stored in the meantime. Our sages report the ministering angels as asking Israel in the future: "what are the works of G–d?" (cf. Yalkut Shimoni on Numbers 23,23) This is proof that Israel will then occupy a position closer to the throne of G–d than that of the ministering angels. Had Israel not sinned with the golden calf and had they not thereby unhitched one of the four supports of G–d's מרכבה (Tanchuma Ki Tissa 21), they would have been granted the garments made of אור, light, that Adam had worn prior to the sin and would thus have benefitted from the part of the Torah symbolized by the letter א. At that time, i.e. at the time Israel accepted the Torah, מימינו אש דת למו, "the fire of His law flashed to His right." [The author understands Israel as being the subject of the word למו i.e. a reference to Israel as opposed to the angels. Ed.]
  Verse 3, i.e. the words אף חובב עמים, require analysis. Rashi writes that the two words mean that G–d displayed this additional love for Israel by treating each tribe as a whole nation. He bases this on G–d's blessing of Jacob in Genesis 35,11 where He refers to the as yet unborn Benjamin as a "nation." Rashi's comment on this verse is generally understood to mean that the title "nation" bestowed on a mere tribe indicates special fondness for that tribe. I do not believe that this is what Rashi had in mind. I believe that Rashi referred to the words אף חובב as meaning "a different dimension of fondness." The word אף indicates something additional. We have evidence of this in the statement in Avot 3,14: חביבין ישראל שנקראו בנים למקום, followed by the words: חיבה יתירה נודעת להם שנקראו בנים למקום. "Israel are beloved of G–d for they are called 'children of G–d.' They enjoy an additional degree of fondness (by G–d) for they have been called 'children of G–d.'" The very repetition of the wording in these two statements in the Mishnah makes it plain that the author wanted to tell us that the "fondness," חיבה, described here is not of the ordinary variety. Rashi meant to convey the same idea, i.e. that the fondness displayed by G–d for Israel is not of the ordinary variety. The verse refrains from spelling out the nature of this different dimension of "fondness" G–d displays for the Jewish people. The example Rashi quoted is only an illustration of the fact that Israel the nation is referred to in the plural i.e. as עמים, instead of merely as עם. This is why Rashi quoted the example of the tribe of Benjamin itself as being called a nation. The additional dimension of G–d's fondness for Israel then is that the whole nation is called עמים (pl.), and not that a single tribe of it is called עם. Personally, I feel that these words allude to something else. Since the Torah has many facets I may be allowed to state my own view. I understand the word אף here as hinting to us that the words חובב עמים should be read as if they had been repeated, the message being that the Torah also alludes to the light which has been hidden and will only be revealed to the righteous in the future. Since it is going to be revealed to them exclusively, this represents an additional dimension of G–d's fondness for us because we cleave to G–d.
  Let me introduce my thoughts by a quotation from the ספר יצירה. The ten emanations are symbolized in our having ten fingers on our hands. We similarly have ten toes on our feet. The latter may be viewed as the shadow of the ten fingers of our hands, as explained in Pardes Rimonim at the beginning of his book. Man, i.e. אדם, was created in the image of G–d and Israel have been called אדם. This is why he has been equipped with ten fingers to correspond to the ten emanations. These ten fingers are viewed as man's "beginning," for when one extends one's arms over one's head these fingers are found to be the "highest" part of man, higher even than his head. When he lets his hands hang down, his fingers extend to below his torso so that symbolically speaking the torso is sanctified by being "enclosed" by the fingers. When man stands on his ten toes, this alludes to the fact that he is in the shadow of G–d, i.e. under His protection. 
  Even if the impure nations of the world i.e. man in the image of אדם בליעל, were to refine themselves, (the ones who have achieved a degree of piety or the ones who converted to Judaism), the highest spiritual plateau they could attain would be תחת כנפי השכינה, "under the protective cover of the wings of G–d's Presence;" this is because in the higher regions, the region represented by the "hand," i.e. the ten fingers, there is only Israel. Any converts to Judaism can only occupy the region allocated to the "feet." This is what our verse tells us here. אף חובב עמים, "even when the Gentiles have achieved a level where they are beloved by G–d, only the Jewish people כל קדושיו, 'His holy ones,’ achieve the level described a בידך, 'Your hands,’ whereas הם תכו לרגלך, 'they, i.e. the converts from the faiths of the Gentiles are crouched at Your feet.'"
  Another way of explaining this additional dimension of fondness is that it refers to the two "lights," the light of the written Torah, the hidden light, as well as the light of the oral Torah, i.e. the Talmud. The words מימינו אש דת למו, would refer to the dialectics, the sometimes fiery debate employed by the sages in clarifying halachic points in the Talmud. It is interesting to note that the letters in the words דת למו spell תלמוד when re-arranged. The arguments between scholars reported in the Talmud are quarrels for the sake of Heaven, i.e. the "fire" generated by these debates is holy, not destructive. Concerning such arguments David says in Psalms 29,11: "May the Lord give strength to His people, may he bless His nation with harmony." I have written earlier on the meaning of the word שלום. Our sages have explained Numbers 21,14: את והב בסופה as an allusion to the harmony which eventually results from quarrels which are carried on by people who harbor pure motives (Kidushin 30b). Our verse may contain a similar hint; though concerning the subject matter under discussion the Rabbis engaged in the debate were at opposite sides, this had no bearing on their personal relations with one another which remain harmonious. In fact they made a point of emphasizing this at the end of such discussions. This is why they are described as "beloved by G–d. The words אשדת למו also are a hint at what is related in Taanit 4a: Constant apparent anger in certain young scholars has its root in Torah (discussions); this is referred to in Jeremiah 23,29: "Behold! My word is like fire, says the Lord." The fire alluded to in our verse is the fire of anger. It is caused by debate of points of Torah. The young scholars become angry when they observe people making all kinds of excuses for themselves while observing the strict letter of Torah law. Their anger is comparable to the anger and jealousy Pinchas felt on behalf of G–d when he slew Zimri. Most people who find excuses to ignore certain parts of the Torah object to interpretations of the law as stated in the Talmud.
  From all the above we arrive at the rule that there are two blessings represented by the two luminaries. One is the blessing of the Torah which comprises the letters of the Holy name of G–d, the written Torah, the light of which has largely been hidden; the other is the blessing which accrues to us through the expansion of Torah knowledge by means of the study of the oral Torah which has itself been blessed by the written Torah. This thought helps us to understand the two benedictions we recite when reading from the Torah. We read in Baba Metzia 85 that Rabbi Yehudah stated in the name of Rav that the sages had left the following verse (Jeremiah 9,11) unexplained. The prophet asks: "What man is so wise that he understands this? To whom has the Lord's mouth spoken so that he may explain it? Why is the land in ruins, laid waste like a wilderness with none passing through?" The prophets did not explain this verse either until G–d Himself provided the explanation when He said in the verse following: "Because they forsook the Teaching I had set before them." Rabbi Yehudah, quoting Rav, said that the sin the Jewish people were guilty of was their failure to pronounce a benediction before they commenced their Torah studies. Rashi comments that Rav deduced this from the apparently superfluous words: "which I set before them." The benediction that this Rabbi refers to is: אשר נתן לנו תורת אמת, "who has given us a true Teaching," which is part of the benediction everyone recites when he is called up to the Torah. The failure to introduce Torah study by a benediction is tantamount to declaring that the gift of Torah is not of much value. Thus far the Rashi on the subject.
  One may ask what the Talmud meant when Rabbi Yehudah said that neither the sages nor the prophets provided an explanation for the verse in question. Why did the Talmud repeat that Rabbi Yehudah was the author of this comment? Since it is clear from the beginning of the quotation that Rabbi Yehudah did intend to reveal the meaning of the verse, why did he first stress that the Rabbis had not provided an explanation? Mentioning his name once more was clearly superfluous then!
  We have another statement regarding the failure of the scholars of that time to recite a benediction before commencing Torah study. Ravina states in Nedarim 81a that Torah scholars frequently have sons who do not become scholars because their fathers failed to recite a benediction before studying the Torah. He cites Rabbi Yehudah's saying in Baba Metzia as his source, adding the end of verse 12 of Jeremiah, i.e. "they did not listen to My voice nor follow it." We are struck by the difference between the version of this saying in Baba Metzia and the parallel saying in Nedarim. In the former the Rabbis and prophets are reported as mentioning the verse in Jeremiah without explaining it. In the latter the Rabbis or prophets are not mentioned as having quoted scripture on the subject. The former does not quote the end of the verse in Jeremiah which spells out the sin; the latter does. This forced Rashi in Baba Metzia to quote the words "which I have set before them," as the source of Rabbi Yehudah's interpretation. The version in Nedarim also seems to repeat the words: "Rabbi Yehudah said in the name of Rav" needlessly.
  It is a duty to recite a benediction when setting out to study or to read the written Torah as well as to recite a benediction when setting out to study the oral Torah. The two benedictions are different, however, in their mystical dimensions. The benediction recited over the written Torah focuses on the awakening of the hidden light, imploring G–d to expand some of it so we may be enlightened by it. It is an example of the fact that any blessing is by definition an expansion of an already existing measure of blessing granted by G–d. The fact that we recite this blessing "awakens" the blessing, so to speak. The same will happen in the future when we can access this light completely. The benediction recited before studying oral Torah is an acknowledgement that this Torah has already developed like a fountain that keeps on gushing forth water, constantly adding new water. Similarly, our preoccupation with the oral Torah constantly affords us new insights, some of them never before articulated. It is these new insights which our Rabbis referred to when they said that G–d Himself quotes such insights taught by the scholars. The discussion in the Talmud as to why the earth was destroyed revolves around this concept. The purpose of creating the earth was that the earth should be "good," i.e. the world should be refined and that man should be clothed in garments of light, and that the light which is now hidden should pervade the whole universe. G–d hid this light upon observing the deeds of man. As a result the whole material the earth was constructed of coarsened, and man was forced to wear garments made of hide, etc. In spite of this coarsening process there was a small part of the earth which retained its original holiness, i.e. ארץ ישראל. Even this small corner of the earth which had retained its original holiness lost it, however, due to our sins, i.e. at the time of the destruction of the Holy Temple. At that time darkness descended even on this part of the earth, as the prophet Jeremiah tells us in Lamentations 3,6. Just as the light was removed immediately Adam had sinned, so in the case of Jerusalem. We read in Jeremiah 32,31: "This city has aroused My anger and My wrath from the day it was built until this day; hence it must be removed from My sight." This condition will continue until the land laid waste will be restored to be like גן עדן. I have repeatedly explained that terrestrial ארץ ישראל is "opposite" Celestial ארץ ישראל which is the mystical dimension of the oral Torah. 
  Keeping this in mind you will understand that the loss of refined "Man" is the reason that until this day we cannot regain this hidden light as it was בתחלה, "in the beginning." This then is the meaning of the saying "על שלא ברכו בתורה תחלה." This explains Rashi's meaning when he referred to the words "אשר נתתי לפניהם" i.e. the previous, or original condition when G–d had made Torah available to man at the time of creation as a source of absolute enlightenment. There is yet a deeper meaning of the whole episode. We could have asked: If G–d knew He was going to have to conceal this light almost immediately, why did He bother to create and provide it in the first place? The answer to this is that the Celestial Spheres respond to stimulants originating in our spheres. G–d is only waiting until we provide the necessary stimulus by our conduct to once more place this light at our disposal. In order for this to happen this light first had to exist. Without such a stimulus forthcoming from the terrestrial regions the hidden light will remain forever hidden. It is this fact which the sages and prophets had been unaware of. They did not expound on this aspect though they were all perfectly aware of the existence of the hidden light, and many prophets had prophesied concerning its eventual restoration. Our sages have based the text of many prayers on the assumption that this light will be restored. They had not known that this development would depend on the benediction of the Torah.
  [The עין יעקב edition of the passage in Nedarim 81, as distinct from the regular editions of the Talmud, includes the ministering angels as also unable to explain the meaning of the verse in Jeremiah under discussion. The parallel passage in Baba Metzia does not mention the ministering angels. The author now explains why only the passage in Nedarim mentions these angels. Ed.] The hidden light will be revealed in the future only to the righteous who will occupy a position closer to the throne of G–d than that of the angels. In fact, as we have mentioned, the angels at that time will inquire from the righteous about G–d's activities. It is easy to comprehend therefore that the Talmud in Nedarim did not mention the righteous as inquiring about this state of affairs from the angels. They were privy to greater secrets than had been revealed to the angels. The situation is similar to the Talmud asking: "If Rabbi Yehudah did not know the source of a certain law, how could one expect his nephew Rabbi Chiyah to know the answer to such a problem?" If the prophets and sages did not know how to explain the meaning of the verse in question there was no point in even inquiring from the ministering angels.
  Rabbi Yehudah is mentioned twice in the same passage (saying) because he addressed two separate aspects of the same problem. He first spoke about the loss or destruction of "the earth," i.e. the loss of the refined matter the earth consisted of prior to G–d having removed the original light. He then spoke about the loss of the "earth," referring to the Holy Land, a land which used to belong to us, in which we resided, and from which we have been exiled. The version in Baba Metzia has Rabbi Yehudah first speak about the state of the earth as a whole, whereas at the end of his statement he made it plain that there was another aspect to this problem of the destruction of the earth, namely the loss of ארץ ישראל as a Holy Land, i.e. the statement attributed to him in Nedarim. The version reported by the Talmud in Nedarim may be understood as following the reverse sequence of the one in Baba Metzia.
  Let me quote a few lines from the Bet Yosef on Tur Shulchan Aruch Or Hachayim section 47, before explaining the passage in Nedarim 81. "One needs to be extremely careful about reciting the benedictions before Torah study because of Ravina's statement in Nedarim 81 that failure to do so may result in Torah scholars not having sons who become scholars. Ravina meant that one has to recite these benedictions at the very beginning of the day, on a daily basis, not only when one sets out to study a certain portion. Failure of these scholars -whose major preoccupation is Torah study- to recite these benedictions in the morning immediately may result in their forfeiting the blessing associated with Torah study, i.e. that their children and children's children will become לומדי תורה, as we say in our daily morning prayer immediately following the benediction לעסוק בדברי תורה. Our great and revered teacher Rabbi Yitzchak Abravanel writes that the reason scholars fail to produce children who grow into Torah scholars is that the father's failure to recite these benedictions is proof that he does not study Torah לשמה, for its own sake, but rather treats Torah as one does any other profession or skill." Thus far the Bet Yosef. 
  Let me expand on this a little further: I have already outlined that a blessing is the expansion of something G–d has already granted us. We also know that the world was created for the sake of Torah and for the sake of Israel who are to study its commandments. The object of such study is to perform the commandments one has studied. Study is great only because it leads to practice. We recite the desired sequence of our relationship to Torah study in the morning prayer אהבה רבה before קריאת שמע. Anyone who relates to Torah by observing the sequence listed in that prayer, i.e. ללמוד וללמד לשמור ולעשות ולקיים is someone of whom it can be said that he studies לשמה. The expression: "for its own sake" means: "in order to observe what is written in it." A student therefore is perceived as if he were someone reading the decree of a king in order to obey it. 
  The Torah's greatest command is to see to it that its teachings expand to as many Jews as possible, certainly including one's own children, in order to perpetuate the chain of Torah knowledge in one's family. The latter is clearly stated in Deut. 11,19 and numerous other places. It is this the sages had in mind when they said (Rashi Genesis 6,9) that the principal descendants of the righteous are their good deeds. This means that it is the fondest hope of the righteous that they become fruitful and multiply in order that their children may perform good deeds such as the study of Torah for its own sake and all that results therefrom. Concerning such an attitude Solomon has said in Kohelet 12,11: "The words of the scholars are like goads and like well driven nails i.e. נטועים." Our sages understand the word נטועים here as referring to offspring. Just as a plant is called permanent when securely planted, so one's children assure one of a degree of permanence and continuity on earth by their very existence. Words of Torah have a similar characteristic. They are fruitful and multiply like an unending fountain whose waters never cease The important thing is that preoccupation with Torah should not become a sterile intellectual exercise but something dynamic, creative. This is the reason that the Rabbis said that when one teaches one's neighbor's child Torah it is as if one had begotten him, i.e. performed a dynamic life-giving act. The same applies in even greater degree to when one teaches Torah to one's own children. The earth was given to man on condition that he live according to these principles, and the atmosphere of the land of Israel is particularly suited to further Torah study. We find an allusion to this in the positioning of the verse (11,19) instructing us to teach our children Torah immediately before the verse: "so that you will enjoy long years on the land the Lord your G–d has sworn to your forefathers to give to them, etc." (11,21). This is why this dimension is mentioned in the above quoted prayer והערב נא which we recite every morning immediately following the benediction לעסוק בדברי תורה. Our sages have formulated this prayer/blessing to include both our own offspring, וצאצאינו, as well as that of others, i.e. וצאצאי עמך בית ישראל. Anyone failing to recite this benediction may find that his children themselves will not develop to be Torah scholars. If such failure occurs on a broad basis even the atmosphere of the land of Israel, which is so suited to the spread of Torah knowledge, will become "lost," i.e. it will no longer be a built-in assist to the spread of Torah. The land's characteristic is closely bound up with the scholars residing in it practicing the virtues associated with their Torah knowledge.
  This is why Ravina said in the passage quoted from Nedarim that the reason some Torah scholars do not have children who follow in their footsteps is the failure of these children's fathers to have recited the appropriate benediction every morning before they commenced to busy themselves with the Torah. He quoted the statement of Rabbi Yehudah in the name of Rav although the latter had only spoken about the "loss of the earth," i.e. the "Land of Israel." Since the continued existence of ארץ ישראל as a Holy Land is tied closely to the people who learn תורה לשמה in that land, the two statements are conceptually closely linked to one another.
  Nowadays, when we all recite the appropriate benedictions, our Torah study can be classified as לשמה. In the final analysis, of course, only G–d knows if our Torah study is truly motivated by the proper thoughts; the matter is left to our hearts, it can never be demonstrated. The Torah frequently writes: ויראת מאלוקיך, "you shall fear the Lord;" such instructions refer to matters which cannot be proved except to G–d, for no man can look into our hearts. Neither do the ministering angels know what goes on in our hearts. They are only able to see what G–d has revealed to them. We know this from the Zohar's comment on Genesis 18,9 (Sullam edition Vayera 33) where the angels asked Abraham about Sarah's whereabouts. [Sarah's laughter which she did not articulate was something that G–d had revealed to these angels specifically then. Ed.] Tosafot in Shabbat 12 question how it is possible that the angels do not understand Aramaic seeing they can even see what goes on in our hearts. I have dealt with this apparent contradiction elsewhere; the overwhelming consensus among all our sages is that (normally) the ministering angels do not know what goes on in our hearts. Hence we have one version in which the explanation of Jeremiah 9,11 was sought from the prophets, the sages, and the ministering angels. They could not provide an answer since they did not know our thoughts and and therefore were unable to know if we study Torah לשמה or for ulterior motives. The Talmud therefore says that the meaning had to be explained by G–d Himself, since only He knows what goes on in our hearts. It follows that the passage in Nedarim mentioning that "the earth was lost" refers to the land of Israel.
  
  There is an anomaly in verse 8 of our portion where the normal sequence of describing the אורים ותומים has been reversed. The normal version seems more logical: When the High Priest consulted G–d individual letters would protrude on the breastplate; only after they had already protruded would these letters combine to form the answer in the shape of words.
  Let me preface the answer by reminding you that the yardsticks used by G–d are not necessarily those employed by man. G–d proceeds from the hidden to the revealed when it pleases Him. When man wants to find the answer to a problem he proceeds from the elements he knows, the ones that are revealed, to those which are still unknown to him. This is alluded to (Psalms 16,8) in the slogan שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד, "I am ever mindful of G–d's presence." [in the author's view: "I try to be constantly 'opposite' G–d." Ed.] When someone stands opposite his friend, his own "right " is opposite his friend's "left," and vice versa. Imagine that you introduce some object into a funnel which is closed at the other end. Whatever you insert first can only be retrieved after you have retrieved everything that you inserted subsequently. You must also appreciate that the eventual level of spiritual heights achieved by the תומים exceeds the spiritual level achieved by the אורים, seeing that letters are only part of a whole but words are the whole. The spirituality represented by the words is therefore closer to the source of holiness. The "source," is, of course, in the highest, most hidden domain. From that domain the words and letters spread a degree of holiness into our domain by stages, the letters being akin to the branches of a tree, the words being the tree. This is the holiness represented by the תומים ואורים when viewed from G–d's vantage point. From our vantage point, however, i.e. when the High Priest consults G–d via his breastplate, he first receives an answer from the אורים. This answer becomes clearer when the אורים form themselves into words, i.e. תומים. 
  In our verse the words תומיך ואוריך, are to be understood as addressed to the שכינה. I believe that this is what Rashi had in mind when he commented: "he is speaking vis-a-vis the שכינה." G–d's holy spirit must have hovered over Rashi when he wrote these words, how else could he have succeeded in revealing such a profound thought in so few words!
  
  Derekh Chayim
  
  ויהי בישרון מלך בהתאסף ראשי עם . Rashi comments that this means that such a situation prevails when all parts of Israel gather together in a single group in peace and harmony. While strife prevails G–d is not perceived as Israel's king.
  ויתא ראשי עם צדקת ה' עשה ומשפטיו עם ישראל . I have heard a commentary according to which the tribe of Gad is praised for having conducted itself with more than the required amount of piety not only by marching with the other tribes in the war of conquest under the leadership of Joshua, but also by being in the vanguard. According to the agreement made with Moses In Numbers chapter 32 all that was required of this tribe was to put every able-bodied man under the joint command. This is why Moses says: ומשפטיו עם ישראל, "according to the law agreed with him he had to go with Israel." Gad, however, did more than was required, hence Moses mentions his צדקה, his righteousness.
  As to the reason why Gad is singled out here and no mention is made of the other one and a half tribes who were a party to the same agreement, I think it may well be that since the Torah had reported the tribe of Gad as the first to demand its share of the land on the East bank, this tribe had been more suspect than its partners as perhaps unwilling to share the problems of the other tribes. When even this tribe assumed a greater burden than had been required, the Torah rewarded it by mentioning it first always.
  ולדן אמר דן גור אריה . How can we reconcile this description with Jacob's description of Yehudah as a גור אריה, while in the same blessing he called Dan a serpent?  Did Dan possess the characteristics of a serpent or that of a lion?
  Perhaps we can best explain this with the help of the Zohar (Sullam edition Vayechi 229) on Jacob's blessing in Genesis. According to this Dan displayed the characteristics of a serpent during the reign of Jerobam. The stress on the words "on the way" in that blessing is a reference to Kings I 12,29 where it is reported that Jerobam placed one of the two golden calves [designed to deter the Israelites under his rule from making their pilgrimages to Jerusalem. Ed.] on the principal highway in the territory of Dan. This means that Dan became a hindrance, a stumbling block to Israel's serving G–d (like a serpent, another word for idol-worship). When the time came for Moses to bless the people and he saw Dan in his mind's eye coiled up like a snake, he decided to connect Dan with the lion, the symbol of חסד. The first of the flags the Israelites had in the desert featured the picture of a lion. When the Israelites assumed marching order, Yehudah was the leader of the first army group whereas Dan was the leader of the rearguard. Moses described Dan as a lion in order to symbolize a close relationship between the leading camp and the last camp. Thus far the Zohar.
  There is also a story about lion-like heroic deeds which will be performed in the future during the reign of the משיח בן יוסף which are described in the Zohar on Parshat Balak. After these exploits the משיח בן דוד will materialize. This makes the connection between Yehudah, i.e. the dynasty of David, and Dan even more plausible. Our verse here in reality applies the words גור אריה to Yehudah, not to Dan. Rashi explained already in Genesis 49,9 why Jacob compared Yehudah to a lion.
  אין כאל ישרון רוכב שמים בעזרך ובגאותו שחקים. אשריך ישראל מי כמוך  . We find a daring statement in the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakaneh to the effect that if someone studies Torah לשמה he is גומל חסד, performs an act of kindness for the Almighty. He quotes the above verse רוכב שמים בעזרך ובגאותו שחקים as his source, explaining that the Torah says that as a result of such study G–d helps us and enables us to ride the heavens; this in turn leads to G–d's majesty expressing pride in the skies. Thus far the Midrash. 
  This Midrash provides us with knowledge of an additional dimension of the importance of serving the Lord in a proper manner. It is an illustration of the concept we have described previously that we can initiate activities in our world which trigger positive responses in the Celestial Spheres. With the help of this Midrash we can also better understand why G–d told Moses that he should have assisted Him when he entered the Celestial Regions and found G–d busy with fashioning crowns for the letters of the Torah (Shabbat 89a). I have written on this at length previously and only want to stress what impact our actions have on the higher World. On the other hand, if we fail to observe the Torah and are exiled G–d's Presence accompanies us, i.e. is also demoted, so to speak. When we return from exile the Divine Presence also returns to its proper site i.e. עם נושע בשם the people and G–d will be saved simultaneously. In other words: G–d's throne and His name are not whole until Israel is whole. 
  
  Torah Shebe'al Peh
  
  Introduction
  
  
  
  Kelal Middot
  
  
  
  Kelal Rabbi
  
  
  
  Kelal Tosefta
  
  
  
  Kelal Tanna B'ra
  
  
  
  Kelal Amoraim
  
  
  
  Kelal Halachot
  
  
  
  Kelal Yeshiva
  
  
  
  Kelal Kaf
  
  
  
  Kelal Aleph
  
  
  
  Kelal Lamed
  
  
  
  Kelal Heh
  
  
  
  Kelal Baraitot
  
  
  
  Kelal Leshonot Sugyot
  
  
  
  Kelal Peh Kadosh
  
  
  
  Kelal Yagdil Torah
  
  
  
  Kelal Rabanan
  
  
  
  Kelal Drushim VeAgadot
  
  
  
  Kelal Kevod Elohim
  
  
  
  Kelal Iyun
  
  
  
  Kelal Halacha
  
  
  
  Kelal YaAL KaGaM
  
  
  
  Kelal Yichusei Chachamim
  
  
  
  Kelal Batrai
  
  
  
  Kelal Rashi
  
  
  
  Kelal Tosafot
  
  
  
  Kelal Yitzchak
  
  
  
  Kelal Keritut
  
  
  
  Asara Hillulim
  
  Shaar HaYichud
  
  
  
  Shaar HaBechina
  
  
  
  Shaar Avodat Elohim
  
  
  
  Shaar HaBitachon
  
  
  
  Shaar Yichud HaMaaseh
  
  
  
  Shaar HaKeniah
  
  
  
  Shaar Teshuva
  
  
  
  Shaar Cheshbon HaNefesh
  
  
  
  Shaar HaPrishut
  
  
  
  Shaar HaAhavah
  
  
  
  Vavei HaAmudim
  
  Introduction
  
  
  
  
  
  