Chasidut zu Schemot 15:28
Kedushat Levi
Deuteronomy 26,17. “this day you have guaranteed that the Lord will forever be your G’d;” as a general rule the largesse dispensed by G’d for mankind is known as דבור, as we know from psalms 33,6: בדבר ה' שמים נעשו וברוח פיו כל צבאם, “by the word of G’d the heavens were made and by the breath of His mouth all their host.” Whenever the Jewish people are on a spiritually lofty plateau, it is as if they cause G’d to dispense His largesse for them, whereas if, G’d forbid, they have fallen from that level the Talmud (Gittin 56) likens them to Exodus 15,11 מי כמך באלם ה', which according to the Talmud should be read as מי כמך באלמים, “who is like You amongst the “dumb, i.e. silent ones, O Lord?”
[The Talmud arrives at this interpretation because the word אלים is written defectively, without the letter י which would indicate the plural mode, Ed.]
This is the allusion in our verse where the Torah speaks –in a complimentary fashion- of Israel as causing G’d to “speak,” i.e. dispense His largesse. Moses adds the word היום, “this day,” to indicate that as far as Israel’s status is concerned, each day is viewed as a separate unit, so that they can be credited with their spiritual accomplishments anew each day.
[The Talmud arrives at this interpretation because the word אלים is written defectively, without the letter י which would indicate the plural mode, Ed.]
This is the allusion in our verse where the Torah speaks –in a complimentary fashion- of Israel as causing G’d to “speak,” i.e. dispense His largesse. Moses adds the word היום, “this day,” to indicate that as far as Israel’s status is concerned, each day is viewed as a separate unit, so that they can be credited with their spiritual accomplishments anew each day.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 48,20. “He blessed them on that day, saying: may G’d make you like Ephrayim and Menashe; he positioned Ephrayim (the younger) in front of Menashe.”
Before commenting on this verse, let us first explain a puzzling passage in the Talmud Megillah, 15. The Talmud invites the reader to note that G’d’s way of doing (relating to) things is radically different from the way human beings do (relate to) things. A human being is in the habit of putting the pot on the stove before pouring water into it, whereas G’d first pours water into it before putting it on the stove to boil. The Talmud “illustrates” this by quoting Jeremiah 10,13 לקול תתו המון מים בשמים, “when He makes His voice heard there is rumbling of water in the heavens.” We have explained this in connection with Exodus 15,26 כל המחלה אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך כי אני ה' רופאך, “all the diseases that I brought upon Egypt I will not bring upon you, for I am the Lord your Healer.” We derive the rule that G’d arranges for the recovery before He brings on the plague from the above verse, where G’d describes Himself as our Healer prior to our having been smitten with any disease. When G’d brings on troubles to “good” Jews, the reason is only in order to make the victim aware of Who it is Who orchestrates his being saved from the consequences of disease or other troubles. Our author understands the word מחלה as an activity, not a state of being passively sick, as is the customary translation [The first letter מ is indicative of the person or cause who brings on the disease. Ed.] In other words, G’d is saying that the חולי, disease, that He brought upon the Egyptians, He will not bring upon the Israelites as even if the Israelites were to be struck by disease, the purpose would be a constructive one, namely to teach them Who will save them. In order for man, especially the Jewish man, to become a vessel fit to benefit fully from G’d’s kindness, largesse, etc., this vessel first has to undergo preparatory stages. Just as if one wants to convert a small vessel into a big vessel one first has to break up the small vessel, so G’d, in order to achieve the proper influence on the human being He desires to elevate, i.e. to make a “bigger” human being out of him, has to afflict him first with חולי, a disease, or its equivalent. In the above quoted parable with the pot and the water to be boiled in it, the disease is called “the pot,“ and the “water” represents the deeds of loving kindness bestowed on the individual or community by G’d. In other words, G’d first supplies the materials that will refine the human beings, and only then will He bestow the gifts testifying to His loving kindness, when the recipient will not let those gifts go to waste. The result will be a more mature and insightful personality.
The foregoing introduction will help the reader understand that the Torah writing that Yaakov placed Ephrayim, although the younger brother, in front of his older brother Menashe, was not another example of Yaakov showing preference for one of his grandchildren at the expense of the other grandchild, as he had done once when he showed preference for his son Joseph with almost tragic and irreversible consequences. There was no need for the Torah to repeat this aspect, as it had already told us that Yaakov had been adamant in placing his right hand on Ephrayim, the younger of the brothers in verses 13-15. The Torah uses the “names” of the two sons of Joseph to illustrate the point made in the parable in the Talmud in Megillah 15.
Before commenting on this verse, let us first explain a puzzling passage in the Talmud Megillah, 15. The Talmud invites the reader to note that G’d’s way of doing (relating to) things is radically different from the way human beings do (relate to) things. A human being is in the habit of putting the pot on the stove before pouring water into it, whereas G’d first pours water into it before putting it on the stove to boil. The Talmud “illustrates” this by quoting Jeremiah 10,13 לקול תתו המון מים בשמים, “when He makes His voice heard there is rumbling of water in the heavens.” We have explained this in connection with Exodus 15,26 כל המחלה אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך כי אני ה' רופאך, “all the diseases that I brought upon Egypt I will not bring upon you, for I am the Lord your Healer.” We derive the rule that G’d arranges for the recovery before He brings on the plague from the above verse, where G’d describes Himself as our Healer prior to our having been smitten with any disease. When G’d brings on troubles to “good” Jews, the reason is only in order to make the victim aware of Who it is Who orchestrates his being saved from the consequences of disease or other troubles. Our author understands the word מחלה as an activity, not a state of being passively sick, as is the customary translation [The first letter מ is indicative of the person or cause who brings on the disease. Ed.] In other words, G’d is saying that the חולי, disease, that He brought upon the Egyptians, He will not bring upon the Israelites as even if the Israelites were to be struck by disease, the purpose would be a constructive one, namely to teach them Who will save them. In order for man, especially the Jewish man, to become a vessel fit to benefit fully from G’d’s kindness, largesse, etc., this vessel first has to undergo preparatory stages. Just as if one wants to convert a small vessel into a big vessel one first has to break up the small vessel, so G’d, in order to achieve the proper influence on the human being He desires to elevate, i.e. to make a “bigger” human being out of him, has to afflict him first with חולי, a disease, or its equivalent. In the above quoted parable with the pot and the water to be boiled in it, the disease is called “the pot,“ and the “water” represents the deeds of loving kindness bestowed on the individual or community by G’d. In other words, G’d first supplies the materials that will refine the human beings, and only then will He bestow the gifts testifying to His loving kindness, when the recipient will not let those gifts go to waste. The result will be a more mature and insightful personality.
The foregoing introduction will help the reader understand that the Torah writing that Yaakov placed Ephrayim, although the younger brother, in front of his older brother Menashe, was not another example of Yaakov showing preference for one of his grandchildren at the expense of the other grandchild, as he had done once when he showed preference for his son Joseph with almost tragic and irreversible consequences. There was no need for the Torah to repeat this aspect, as it had already told us that Yaakov had been adamant in placing his right hand on Ephrayim, the younger of the brothers in verses 13-15. The Torah uses the “names” of the two sons of Joseph to illustrate the point made in the parable in the Talmud in Megillah 15.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 14,21. “Moses inclined his hand above the sea, etc;” there is a statement in Sh’mot Rabbah 21,6 according to which Moses commanded the sea in the name of G’d to divide itself so as to let the Israelites march through; the sea demurred, saying to him: “son of Amram, I am greater than you, etc.,’”
Naturally, the Midrash is an allegory, but we must understand what the author of the Midrash is trying to convey to us. G’d has assigned nature its tasks in broad outlines, and one of the rules by which the sea is governed is to perform its task loyally. In the course of the thousands of years that nature performs its task, which is mostly to act as an agent of G’d’s largesse for the benefit of mankind, nature tends to forget that what it does is no more than to carry out the will of the Creator, and it begins to think of itself as an independent, sovereign force. When the Creator becomes aware of this, He decides to remind nature that He is the “boss,” and that had it not been for Him, nature would be completely impotent. If at the time when Moses addressed the sea in the name of G’d, the sea would have responded immediately, it would not have had to humble itself beyond a minimum and have to be turned into dry land, as it did after having insisted that seeing it had been created on the third day of creation whereas man was only created on the sixth day, man had no authority to issue orders to it even in the name of the Creator.
[This commentary is presumably inspired by G’d having told Moses already in verse 16 to perform this miracle, whereas only in verse 22 does it begin to occur, and G’d Himself is involved, in addition to Moses‘ “hand.” Ed.]
According to the midrash, (Sh’mot Rabbah 23,14) the opening line in Moses’ שירת הים, Song of thanksgiving after the crossing of the sea, (Exodus 15,1) which contains the words: כי גאה גאה, “For He is highly exalted,” was inspired by the haughty response the sea had used to deny Moses’ initial command to divide its waters to permit the Israelites to cross. This is also alluded to in Exodus 14,21 ויולך ה' את הים ברוח קדים עזה כל הלילה וגו', “Hashem made the sea travel all night long driven by a strong easterly wind, etc;” this was the punishment for the sea that had boasted to Moses that it considered itself as greater than he. The expression עזה instead of חזק which would be the customary word used for a “strong” wind, suggests that the sea was being repaid measure for measure for its arrogance. Due to G’d making use of this strong easterly wind, the sea was forced not only to split, but to turn its bed into dry land. G’d wished to prove to the sea how quickly it could be turned into its very opposite. The “greater” something in this material world of ours, the easier and the more utterly can it be destroyed with one fell swoop.
Naturally, the Midrash is an allegory, but we must understand what the author of the Midrash is trying to convey to us. G’d has assigned nature its tasks in broad outlines, and one of the rules by which the sea is governed is to perform its task loyally. In the course of the thousands of years that nature performs its task, which is mostly to act as an agent of G’d’s largesse for the benefit of mankind, nature tends to forget that what it does is no more than to carry out the will of the Creator, and it begins to think of itself as an independent, sovereign force. When the Creator becomes aware of this, He decides to remind nature that He is the “boss,” and that had it not been for Him, nature would be completely impotent. If at the time when Moses addressed the sea in the name of G’d, the sea would have responded immediately, it would not have had to humble itself beyond a minimum and have to be turned into dry land, as it did after having insisted that seeing it had been created on the third day of creation whereas man was only created on the sixth day, man had no authority to issue orders to it even in the name of the Creator.
[This commentary is presumably inspired by G’d having told Moses already in verse 16 to perform this miracle, whereas only in verse 22 does it begin to occur, and G’d Himself is involved, in addition to Moses‘ “hand.” Ed.]
According to the midrash, (Sh’mot Rabbah 23,14) the opening line in Moses’ שירת הים, Song of thanksgiving after the crossing of the sea, (Exodus 15,1) which contains the words: כי גאה גאה, “For He is highly exalted,” was inspired by the haughty response the sea had used to deny Moses’ initial command to divide its waters to permit the Israelites to cross. This is also alluded to in Exodus 14,21 ויולך ה' את הים ברוח קדים עזה כל הלילה וגו', “Hashem made the sea travel all night long driven by a strong easterly wind, etc;” this was the punishment for the sea that had boasted to Moses that it considered itself as greater than he. The expression עזה instead of חזק which would be the customary word used for a “strong” wind, suggests that the sea was being repaid measure for measure for its arrogance. Due to G’d making use of this strong easterly wind, the sea was forced not only to split, but to turn its bed into dry land. G’d wished to prove to the sea how quickly it could be turned into its very opposite. The “greater” something in this material world of ours, the easier and the more utterly can it be destroyed with one fell swoop.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
An alternate explanation of the line: אשה כי תזריע וילדה זכר, “when a woman orgasms before her partner, the resulting infant is a male.” (Compare Rashi based on B’rachot 60 and Niddah 25.)
This also helps to explain the disagreement between the sages if the universe was created in Nissan or in Tishrey, and that the final redemption will also occur in the month corresponding to the creation of the universe. (Compare Rosh Hashanah 10)
We subscribe to the rule that G’d, even without being aroused by man through his actions to extend compassion, will occasionally do so without prompting. On other occasions, He waits with manifesting His compassion until actions by His creatures, i.e. positive actions by the Jewish people, His people, encourage, i.e. “awaken” Him to do so. The “actions” we refer to are the dutiful and joyful performance of the commandments laid down in G’d’s Torah. When G’d’s compassion has been aroused through mitzvah performance, the result of G’d’s manifesting His compassion and providing His largesse will be far more impressive than if He had had to display it without having been “awakened.” The Torah occasionally refers to G’d as איש, “man,” albeit in the construct sense as an attribute, of course, not as part of His essence.
[Example: (Exodus 15,3) ה' איש מלחמה, “G’d is a man of war,” or when an angel appears to Joshua in the guise of a human being and is referred to as איש before identifying himself as an angel, (Joshua 5,13) and similar examples where the expression איש אלוקים, appears to minimize the difference between creature and Creator. Ed.]
Whenever the Torah uses the term איש as a simile for Divinity, the accompanying term אשה also is to be viewed as Divinity, i.e. the feminine receptive aspect of Divinity, or His creatures.
When the Talmud states that when אשה מזרעת תחלה, normally translated as “when the woman orgasms first,” the deeper meaning is when the woman initiates the conception of life, i.e. she has aroused G’d’s compassion, then the “birth” of the resulting זכר, male, did not have to contend with obstructions by negative forces in the universe, whereas when the part of the איש, the part that should have been the initiating part in this interchange has been reduced to that of merely being responsive, the product described is called נקבה, “a female,” i.e. reflecting the fact that it had not been initiated by man’s good deeds, but by G’d’s magnanimity in displaying His compassion without having specific reason to do so.
“Birth” of a נקבה, “female,” is a simile for obstacles of a spiritual nature having accompanied the preceding “pregnancy,” [and it is no wonder that the period of ritual impurity of the mother after she has giving birth to a female infant is so much longer than when she gave birth to a זכר, “male. Ed.]
According to our author the lengthy debate in the Talmud Rosh Hashanah about the month during which the final redemption will occur, does not reflect a dispute. [The introductory “argument” about the “month” in which G’d created the universe is used only as a parallel, seeing that “Time” had not been created at the point when G’d said: “let there be light.” Ed.]
According to our author there is not really any argument between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua about the “month” when the final redemption will occur. The month of Tishrey is a symbol in which the letters appears in the reverse order of the aleph bet, reflecting the concept of the אור חוזד, G’d’s original light returning after having absorbed human input, especially human input welcome to G’d, i.e. teshuvah repentance. The month of ניסן symbolizing as it does אביב, spring, the letters אב appearing in their normal order, symbolizes the original light emanating from G’d, something that contained no human input. If the Jewish people at the time of the final redemption deserve it, the redemption is viewed as occurring in Tishrey, whereas if they do not deserve it, it is viewed as occurring in Nissan, a period when the attribute of Justice has no foothold as the world was created by pure חסד by G’d, there not having being any need to co-opt the attribute of Justice at that time. Neither of the sages claimed to be a prophet who had foreseen what the moral condition of the Jewish people would be at the time of the redemption.
This also helps to explain the disagreement between the sages if the universe was created in Nissan or in Tishrey, and that the final redemption will also occur in the month corresponding to the creation of the universe. (Compare Rosh Hashanah 10)
We subscribe to the rule that G’d, even without being aroused by man through his actions to extend compassion, will occasionally do so without prompting. On other occasions, He waits with manifesting His compassion until actions by His creatures, i.e. positive actions by the Jewish people, His people, encourage, i.e. “awaken” Him to do so. The “actions” we refer to are the dutiful and joyful performance of the commandments laid down in G’d’s Torah. When G’d’s compassion has been aroused through mitzvah performance, the result of G’d’s manifesting His compassion and providing His largesse will be far more impressive than if He had had to display it without having been “awakened.” The Torah occasionally refers to G’d as איש, “man,” albeit in the construct sense as an attribute, of course, not as part of His essence.
[Example: (Exodus 15,3) ה' איש מלחמה, “G’d is a man of war,” or when an angel appears to Joshua in the guise of a human being and is referred to as איש before identifying himself as an angel, (Joshua 5,13) and similar examples where the expression איש אלוקים, appears to minimize the difference between creature and Creator. Ed.]
Whenever the Torah uses the term איש as a simile for Divinity, the accompanying term אשה also is to be viewed as Divinity, i.e. the feminine receptive aspect of Divinity, or His creatures.
When the Talmud states that when אשה מזרעת תחלה, normally translated as “when the woman orgasms first,” the deeper meaning is when the woman initiates the conception of life, i.e. she has aroused G’d’s compassion, then the “birth” of the resulting זכר, male, did not have to contend with obstructions by negative forces in the universe, whereas when the part of the איש, the part that should have been the initiating part in this interchange has been reduced to that of merely being responsive, the product described is called נקבה, “a female,” i.e. reflecting the fact that it had not been initiated by man’s good deeds, but by G’d’s magnanimity in displaying His compassion without having specific reason to do so.
“Birth” of a נקבה, “female,” is a simile for obstacles of a spiritual nature having accompanied the preceding “pregnancy,” [and it is no wonder that the period of ritual impurity of the mother after she has giving birth to a female infant is so much longer than when she gave birth to a זכר, “male. Ed.]
According to our author the lengthy debate in the Talmud Rosh Hashanah about the month during which the final redemption will occur, does not reflect a dispute. [The introductory “argument” about the “month” in which G’d created the universe is used only as a parallel, seeing that “Time” had not been created at the point when G’d said: “let there be light.” Ed.]
According to our author there is not really any argument between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua about the “month” when the final redemption will occur. The month of Tishrey is a symbol in which the letters appears in the reverse order of the aleph bet, reflecting the concept of the אור חוזד, G’d’s original light returning after having absorbed human input, especially human input welcome to G’d, i.e. teshuvah repentance. The month of ניסן symbolizing as it does אביב, spring, the letters אב appearing in their normal order, symbolizes the original light emanating from G’d, something that contained no human input. If the Jewish people at the time of the final redemption deserve it, the redemption is viewed as occurring in Tishrey, whereas if they do not deserve it, it is viewed as occurring in Nissan, a period when the attribute of Justice has no foothold as the world was created by pure חסד by G’d, there not having being any need to co-opt the attribute of Justice at that time. Neither of the sages claimed to be a prophet who had foreseen what the moral condition of the Jewish people would be at the time of the redemption.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Likutei Halakhot
And each and every year we must work at this rectification on Rosh Hashanah, for that is the day they were created and when they should have made this rectification, but instead the did the opposite. That is why our service on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur is related to this rectification, as brought in the Kabbalistic texts. Therefore, the essence of the rectification of Rosh Hashanah is to work at restoring everything to order, repenting for all of one's sins, which are caused by disorder, by haughtiness, completely surrendering oneself to G-d in order to elevate the entire world that was created at this time of year; in other words, restoring disorder back into order. This is the aspect of 'sleep' on Rosh Hashanah, as mentioned in the Kabbalistic texts, "G-d cast a slumber" (Pri Etz Chaim, Rosh Hashanah, 2, 4). Sleep represents surrender. Order and disorder correspond to Chochmah and Malchut, Adam and Eve, and 'Eve' must be submissive to 'Adam', knowing that the entire world which seems to be ruled by Malchut, by Eve, all comes from G-d alone, "for Kingship is G-d's" (Ps. 22:29) and everything in existence and all life on earth is absolutely nothing before Him. It is a great mitzvah to know and declare this knowledge. It is the main source of sustenance for man and for all the worlds, and is what brings everything back into order. But when disorder, represented by judgments, is empowered, which is on Rosh Hashanah, when the world, corresponding to disorder, was created, and on which Adam and Eve sinned, thus empowering disorder, we must at this time completely surrender ourselves into sleep. In other words, we must completely relinquish and abandon our intellect, as if we have no knowledge at all, but rather declare G-d as King with utmost faith and simplicity, without any sophistication. This is our main work on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, on which we are completely involved in revealing His kingship without any sophistication. On these Days of Awe, we completely set aside our knowledge and surrender ourselves, devoting ourselves to prayers, beseeching, song and praise from Psalms and other types of requests and liturgy. All this represents sincerity and simplicity without any sophistication, for that is how we reveal G-d Kingship. This is the meaning of the 'sleep' on Rosh Hashanah as mentioned in the Kabbalistic texts. It is explained there that this 'sleep' is the disappearance of the Supernal Mind from the Zeir Anpin, and then Mind and sustenance are drawn directly into the Malchut from Binah, the Supernal Mother, rather than through the Zeir Anpin, and then, through the shofar, new Mind is drawn after this 'sleep'. After the arousal from this 'sleep', the Malchut is severed, etc. The 'sleep' represents the disappearance of the Mind; it is intentionally removed so that disorder, haughtiness, the main blemish of the mind, as mentioned in the Kabbalistic texts, will not become attached to it. Therefore, Ga'Avah, גַּאֲוָה (haughtiness) is numerically equivalent to Yah (15), which represents the Mind. The main blemish of haughtiness is in saying, 'I shall rule' and the main sustenance of the Malchut is from wisdom, as in, 'Wisdom sustains life', as Rabbeinu z"l explains in the lesson. The Malchut must be elevated to its source, as in, "The Kingship will be G-d's" (Ovadiah 1:21), to know that all the worlds and everything in them, which correspond to Malchut, were all created and are solely guided by G-d's Kingship, which rules over all. Therefore we must completely surrender ourselves to G-d and to be nothing in our own eyes, as in "we are מ"ה" (Ex. 15:7) , for sustenance comes mainly from מ"ה, as in, 'מ"ה us our life'. But when one is haughty and says 'I shall rule' and seeks to draw 'kingship' to himself, this is because in his haughtiness, he believes that he has already achieved some intelligence, that he is a scholar, a kabbalist, a tzaddik, and deserves some status of power. He thus desires to overturn order and take the Malchut for himself, as if he has power and knowledge to sustain the Malchut which is sustained mainly by wisdom, to draw wisdom into disorder and to empower disorder over order. It is certainly possible to draw kingship to oneself other than by means of wisdom, which sustains the Malchut. Therefore, this haughty person who says 'I shall rule' blemishes wisdom in wanting to draw the mind into the kingship of evil, which is haughtiness. Therefore, as long as disorder is not yet ameliorated, that is, at the beginning of Rosh Hashanah, one must completely relinquish and set aside one's mind so that disorder, judgments, will not be able to attach itself to it. And during this complete surrender, corresponding to 'sleep', in that we do not use any wisdom at all, we then rise above human wisdom, for sincerity, simplicity and faith rise above the Mind and Wisdom, as we have explained elsewhere. Then we are able to declare G-d as King with all sincerity and without any sophistication. This corresponds to drawing the Mind and sustenance into the Malchut, bypassing the Zeir Anpin, as known. Now we reveal G-d's Kingship without any wisdom at all, but solely by means of surrender, when we are submerged into Binah, the Supernal Mother, which comprises the upper three Sefirot, from where His Kingship is revealed. Then, through the shofar, new mind is drawn and we are aroused from sleep, for by means of the sleep and the surrender, we are then able to receive great intellect, and the Malchut is severed and becomes a complete partzuf/structure on its own. For when we attain holy intellect, G-d's Kingship is revealed with complete knowledge to all, for the drawing of the mind is only for the purpose of revealing His Kingship, to know and declare that He is the Creator. Then, disorder is ameliorated and absorbed into order, as in, 'Wherever there is masculine, the feminine is not mentioned' for she surrenders to him. When the mind is in its perfect state of holiness, we need not be afraid of disorder, since we know that everything is solely from G-d, when all disorder completely disappears. Therefore, arousal from sleep is mainly by means of the sound of the shofar, for sound corresponds to Mah, the Divine Name representing order, as stated in the Tikunei Zohar, "YHVH is in sound an speech is in man". These correspond to order and disorder, for sound arouses intention, which is in the mind. This is the meaning of what our Sages said, "Blowing the shofar is wisdom and not a creative act" (Rosh Hashanah 29b). The sound of the shofar corresponds to wisdom, to Mah, to sound that arises the intention of the mind. Sound itself cannot be grasped. One cannot understand a person by his voice alone, for sound corresponds to Mah, to the power of wisdom by itself. With the shofar we evoke only sound, which corresponds to Mah, to order, so as to empower order. Then, with sound, we build speech, which is prayer, represented by the prayers we recite on Rosh Hashanah after the shofar blowing.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
The tzaddikim, thanks to their service of the Creator with all their hearts, enable G’d to “clothe Himself” in an attribute reflecting a certain degree of “pride,” i.e. satisfaction that free willed creatures whom He has created have turned to Him, although they had options that appeared to them as an easier way of coping with life on earth. [Some of these words are mine, Ed.] Once G’d has clothed Himself in that attribute, He looks at the wicked with disdain, withholding His largesse from them. In due course, this process results in the wicked on earth suffering a total defeat and this is what Moses referred to in Exodus 15,1 when he described G’d as אשירה לה' כי גאה גאה סוס ורוכבו רמה בים, “let me raise my voice in song to Hashem, Who has taken ‘pride’ in triumphing, hurling both horse and its rider into the sea.” The downfall of the gentiles occurs simply because G’d no longer supervises their fates.
It follows that it can be said of the tzaddikim that by means of their good deeds they are directly responsible for how, to whom, and in what quantities G’d’s largesse is dispensed. The vessels, i.e. instruments, used by the tzaddikim, are the musical instruments with which the Levites accompany the sacrificial offerings presented by the priests. The Levites would raise or lower their voices on occasion when singing, in accordance with the norms used by musicians. Raising their voices meant that they wished G’d’s largesse to be withheld from the wicked, whereas lowering their voices was an invitation to G’d to dispense His largesse to all His creatures in the lower regions, including the wicked, such largesse being the result of G’d’s mercy and love for His creatures.
It is a rule, and that is why it is referred to in our sages’ parlance as כלל, something inclusive, all-embracing, that while G’d’s largesse is in transit to earth, having commenced in the celestial regions, this largesse does not have a specific colour, i.e. is not addressed to anyone specifically. It is only when this largesse reaches the creatures on earth that it is directed to specific addresses.
When we speak of largesse in general terms, we view this as comprising all the letters in the alphabet, whereas when we speak about specifics, we view this as the respective letters in the alphabet. Different deserving people have different needs, so that if someone is in need of being well received by the prospective employer to whom he applies for a position, he needs to be endowed with חן, projecting an outgoing pleasant personality. It is the task of G’d’s largesse in this case to be converted into the letters that spell חן, charm, grace. If another tzaddik is in need of immediate parnassah, livelihood, for himself and his family, the means to purchase food, then G’d’s largesse needs to be translated into the letters of the alphabet appropriate for this. This process of the largesse being translated into immediately usable form is known as רוחב, “width;” as it alludes to the ability of G’d’s largesse to adapt to the individual needs of different people. The word רוחב is especially appropriate in this connection, as width may be extended in either direction, i.e. the tzaddikim are free to direct relatively more of G’d’s largesse in the direction of the righteous or the wicked, as they may see fit.
It follows that it can be said of the tzaddikim that by means of their good deeds they are directly responsible for how, to whom, and in what quantities G’d’s largesse is dispensed. The vessels, i.e. instruments, used by the tzaddikim, are the musical instruments with which the Levites accompany the sacrificial offerings presented by the priests. The Levites would raise or lower their voices on occasion when singing, in accordance with the norms used by musicians. Raising their voices meant that they wished G’d’s largesse to be withheld from the wicked, whereas lowering their voices was an invitation to G’d to dispense His largesse to all His creatures in the lower regions, including the wicked, such largesse being the result of G’d’s mercy and love for His creatures.
It is a rule, and that is why it is referred to in our sages’ parlance as כלל, something inclusive, all-embracing, that while G’d’s largesse is in transit to earth, having commenced in the celestial regions, this largesse does not have a specific colour, i.e. is not addressed to anyone specifically. It is only when this largesse reaches the creatures on earth that it is directed to specific addresses.
When we speak of largesse in general terms, we view this as comprising all the letters in the alphabet, whereas when we speak about specifics, we view this as the respective letters in the alphabet. Different deserving people have different needs, so that if someone is in need of being well received by the prospective employer to whom he applies for a position, he needs to be endowed with חן, projecting an outgoing pleasant personality. It is the task of G’d’s largesse in this case to be converted into the letters that spell חן, charm, grace. If another tzaddik is in need of immediate parnassah, livelihood, for himself and his family, the means to purchase food, then G’d’s largesse needs to be translated into the letters of the alphabet appropriate for this. This process of the largesse being translated into immediately usable form is known as רוחב, “width;” as it alludes to the ability of G’d’s largesse to adapt to the individual needs of different people. The word רוחב is especially appropriate in this connection, as width may be extended in either direction, i.e. the tzaddikim are free to direct relatively more of G’d’s largesse in the direction of the righteous or the wicked, as they may see fit.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Mevo HaShearim
He even, at times, reveals to them a ‘hands-breadth’510See Talmud Nedarim 20b. description of his spiritual rungs; of how, when he recites ‘from one world to the next You are God,’511Citation of the Sabbath and holiday liturgy. he literally sees the world, and how He fills the world; and when he recites “this is my God and I will glorify Him,”512Exodus 15:2, recited in the daily morning prayers. he feels or sees before him He who speaks to him, and so forth. He also speaks of more lofty matters, above our grasp, all in proportion to the rebbe and the fellowship. They hear not only his words but also feel his soul which emerges as he speaks, until they see something of what he sees, and become aflame from his passion. When they come close together and are connected as described above, the rebbe’s avodah of selfhood begins to affect them, and theirs on him. This is an avodah which cannot be transcribed in a book. Much light which had been concealed within the rebbe is now revealed to himself and to them, as they are all given an effluence of new light. All arise higher and higher each time, till over time they rise to great holiness. Is it possible to capture the effect on the avreikh-hasid when he came to the rebbe and entered this holy fellowship, and how he prayed and sang songs and praises to God, Who is so revealed to their hearts, minds, and entire being along with these servants of God, priests of the Almighty?513See Genesis 15:18.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
We may understand the word אתם better when comparing with Exodus 14,4 “I have reinforced Pharaoh’s heart so that he will pursue you, etc.” You will note that during the entire song of thanksgiving after the drowning of the Egyptians, in spite of frequent repetitions of the many aspects of this miracle, Moses did not for a single time refer to the fact that the Israelites had been saved, although he extols the annihilation of Egypt’s armed might. This was in spite of the fact that the major aspect of the miracle was the saving of the Israelites who had been between a “rock and a hard place,” completely helpless before that miracle.
The Talmud in Pessachim 118 is at pains to point out that the Israelites of that generation were very weak in their level of faith in G’d, so much so that they reasoned that just as they themselves had been able to climb out of the sea bed on one side, the Egyptians might have been able to do the same on the opposite side of the shore. Why would such a thought be justification to describe the Israelites as lacking in faith? Furthermore, what does the Talmud mean by the words: כשם שאנו עולים, “just as we climbed out, etc.?” How could they compare their situation to that of the Egyptians? Besides when had they posed a threat to the Egyptians? In order to understand this better we must remember that there are two different levels of faith. The first and highest level is called אמונה שלמה, “absolute unshakable faith.” It includes that one believes absolutely without reservation in the G’d of our forefathers, reveres Him and loves Him. The second level of “faith,” is not “self generated,” but is the result of experiencing mind-boggling events, such as the miracles the Israelites had experienced both in Egypt and in even greater measure at the sea of reeds. A look at what the Sifssey chachamim has to say on Rashi’s explanation of Yitro’s words in Exodus 18,11 עתה ידעתי כי גדול ה' מכל האלוקים, “now I know that Hashem is greater than any other deity.” Rashi had interpreted this line to mean that in the past Yitro had not left any religion untried until he had found it wanting. The Sifssey chachamim points out that Rashi had come to this conclusion from the apparent contradiction of the word עתה, ”now,” and the word ידעתי, “I was familiar with,” in the past tense. Yitro therefore meant that although in the past he had been familiar with every deity, by now he had convinced himself of Hashem’s absolute superiority.
However, the Egyptians, far from reacting positively to the performance of G’d’s miracles reacted negatively by becoming ever more obstinate. This is indicated clearly in Exodus 15,4 when Moses describes the choicest of the Egyptians’ captains being flung into the sea to drown. (15,4) The expression ובמבחר, “and from the choice(st)” instead of ומטוב “and from the best,” is a double entendre, and hints at the choice the Egyptians had made to rather drown than acknowledge the superiority of Hashem. Watching G’d perform miracles had left open the choice for them to do teshuvah even though G’d had performed one or two acts designed to give them confidence that they could defeat the Israelites and their G’d. The same miracles which had brought the Jewish people closer to G’d, had the opposite effect on the Egyptians, confirming them in the belief that their deity Baal Tzefon had proved superior to the Jewish G’d.
The Talmud in Pessachim 118 is at pains to point out that the Israelites of that generation were very weak in their level of faith in G’d, so much so that they reasoned that just as they themselves had been able to climb out of the sea bed on one side, the Egyptians might have been able to do the same on the opposite side of the shore. Why would such a thought be justification to describe the Israelites as lacking in faith? Furthermore, what does the Talmud mean by the words: כשם שאנו עולים, “just as we climbed out, etc.?” How could they compare their situation to that of the Egyptians? Besides when had they posed a threat to the Egyptians? In order to understand this better we must remember that there are two different levels of faith. The first and highest level is called אמונה שלמה, “absolute unshakable faith.” It includes that one believes absolutely without reservation in the G’d of our forefathers, reveres Him and loves Him. The second level of “faith,” is not “self generated,” but is the result of experiencing mind-boggling events, such as the miracles the Israelites had experienced both in Egypt and in even greater measure at the sea of reeds. A look at what the Sifssey chachamim has to say on Rashi’s explanation of Yitro’s words in Exodus 18,11 עתה ידעתי כי גדול ה' מכל האלוקים, “now I know that Hashem is greater than any other deity.” Rashi had interpreted this line to mean that in the past Yitro had not left any religion untried until he had found it wanting. The Sifssey chachamim points out that Rashi had come to this conclusion from the apparent contradiction of the word עתה, ”now,” and the word ידעתי, “I was familiar with,” in the past tense. Yitro therefore meant that although in the past he had been familiar with every deity, by now he had convinced himself of Hashem’s absolute superiority.
However, the Egyptians, far from reacting positively to the performance of G’d’s miracles reacted negatively by becoming ever more obstinate. This is indicated clearly in Exodus 15,4 when Moses describes the choicest of the Egyptians’ captains being flung into the sea to drown. (15,4) The expression ובמבחר, “and from the choice(st)” instead of ומטוב “and from the best,” is a double entendre, and hints at the choice the Egyptians had made to rather drown than acknowledge the superiority of Hashem. Watching G’d perform miracles had left open the choice for them to do teshuvah even though G’d had performed one or two acts designed to give them confidence that they could defeat the Israelites and their G’d. The same miracles which had brought the Jewish people closer to G’d, had the opposite effect on the Egyptians, confirming them in the belief that their deity Baal Tzefon had proved superior to the Jewish G’d.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sha'ar HaEmunah VeYesod HaChasidut
However, even though all of the Maharal’s words are true. Yet, all of his arguments were proffered only in order to show how there is no change in God’s will when a miracle occurs. One could still assert that God’s knowledge can change, from which it follows that His will also changes. When God arranged the work of creation, it was His will that certain miracles would happen at a definite time in the future. If this plan is delayed in any way, then the primordial will must have changed. Since God programmed into the creation the condition that the sea would split with the Exodus, therefore He knew that it would split, which it eventually did. If so, how could we be taught that the Egyptians could have repented prior to the sea’s splitting, which would have cancelled the order for the sea to split. With this in mind, we also find it difficult to understand the statement of the Talmud (Berachot, 4a, Sotah, 36a), “At the time of Ezra,340And the nation’s return from the Babylonian exile. the nation of Israel was worthy of experiencing a miracle of the same magnitude that happened in the days of Yehoshua,341The miracle would have been their entering the land of Israel with a high hand, just as they left Egypt. Rashi. but the prevalence of sin prevented it.”342Instead, they could only return from Babylon by the permission of Cyrus. Rashi. The Gemara explains the verse in the Song of the Sea (Shemot 15:16), “until Your people shall pass over, O God, until they shall pass over...” is alluding to two “passing overs” into the Land – the first in the time of Yehushua, and the second in the time of Ezra. All this leads to conclusion that a miracle was supposed to happen at the time of Ezra, yet God’s will changed. R. Eliyahu Mizrahi, in his commentary on Rashi (Parshat Vayishlach), examines the situation of Yaakov Avinu returning to Israel, and confronting his brother Eisav and his army of four hundred men. The last Yaakov heard from Eisav was that he wanted to kill him, and he assumed, now twenty years later, that this was still true. Thus, the verse says, “and Yaakov was afraid,” on which Rashi comments, “He was afraid that he would be killed.” (The Lechem Mishnah, at the end of the fifth chapter of the Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah, also addresses this issue.) Yaakov was afraid that his own sins may have nullified God’s promise to protect him.343That is, G-d’s promise, made in Bereshit 28:15: “Behold, I am with you and will protect you wherever you go, and I will bring you back to this land. I will not abandon you until I have done that which I have promised you." Furthermore, we have the statement of the sages in the Gemara (Shabbat, 55a), “Rav Acha son of Chanina said: God never once broke His promise of bestowing good, and brought calamity in its stead.” We would have to bend over backwards with forced arguments in order to reconcile this contradiction. Based on the words of the sages, one would seem obliged to concede that God’s will can change. Yet based on all we have explained above, that all human knowledge is a created entity, and the whole order of existence is a created and arranged order, then we can also see that the borders and limits of what may change is also something that was arranged with the creation as an expression of God’s will. It is impossible that it could be only a change of will, for that very conception is no more than a created idea that can only be understood from our own greatly limited human perspective. At the time of the revelation of the miracle, it will be revealed that the miracle could occur even without any change in God’s will. It is the function of the Divine service of the Jew to arrive at this faith and to fix it permanently in his heart. Purely out of faith, man can reach a place above all orders of governance. Then it will be readily apparent that there is no difference between nature and miracles even from the perspective of created beings.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Likutei Halakhot
Therefore leaven is permissible throughout the year, and only on Passover must we eat unleavened bread, while leaven is very strictly forbidden, even in the minutest amount. This is because on Passover, which represents the Exodus from Egypt, we must eat only unleavened bread, representing Providence, while leaven, which represents nature, we must completely eliminate so that it will not be seen or found in our homes. For the truth is that nature itself is also divine providence, but since pharaoh and the Egyptians greatly overpowered us and denied G-d by saying (Exodus 5:2) "who is G-d?", therefore it is impossible to take leave of Egypt other than by means of a very great revelation of providence. Therefore, during the Exodus, G-d revealed His providence with a very great revelation, performing for us awesome wonders. For this reason, we must eat on Passover only unleavened bread, which corresponds to Providence and not leaven, which corresponds to nature. On account of the intensity of the exile in Egypt, which comprised all the exiles, it is impossible to take leave of it other than by a revelation of Providence alone. Nature though, represented by leaven, must be completely eliminated, not to be seen or found. Nature would have empowered the Egyptians and then, due to their great power over the Israelites at the time, it would have been impossible to leave. For this reason, we must eat on Passover only unleavened bread, which corresponds to Providence and not leaven, which corresponds to nature. But since for seven days we eat unleavened bread, corresponding to Providence, we can then eat leaven throughout the year. Once we have already left Egypt and the knowledge of providence has been revealed by having eaten unleavened bread, we are then allowed to eat leaven, corresponding to nature. By means of the great revelation of providence we truly know that nature is itself providence, that G-d created everything and guides everything according to His will, and therefore we may eat leaven for the rest of the year. Only at the beginning, during the Exodus, it is completely for bidden to eat leaven, for at that time, due to their great power, it was forbidden to acknowledge nature at all, for that would have even further empowered them and we would not have been able to be redeemed. But after having left Egypt and Providence was revealed, we know that even leaven, representing nature, is also divine providence, and we are then allowed to eat leaven after Passover. This corresponds to what is stated in the holy Zohar, that once we received the matzo, the medicine, we may then eat leaven (Zohar II 183b). This means that after providence was revealed, we may eat leaven, for knowledge was increased and we know that even nature is really Providence. Therefore, leaven only became permissible after the splitting of the Red Sea on the seventh day of Passover, for that was the ultimate fall of Egypt. Providence was then revealed more than ever by the many miracles that took place then. Natural sciences, corresponding to the great power of the nations, were then subdued and eliminated, for they all were very terrified by the revelation of providence that took place, as written (Exodus 15:15) "then the princes of Edom were terrified". Thus the revelation of providence also revealed that nature itself is really providence and therefore, after the seventh day of Passover, it became permissible to eat leavened bread.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
This is why we explained the verse (31) וירא ישראל את היד הגדולה, “Israel saw the great hand, etc,” which at first glance is hard to understand, as the Israelites were busy running away from the Egyptians and an impenetrable wall of fire was behind them. Also the Ari’zal’s commentary that the words היד הגדולה, “the great hand,” are an allusion to G’d’s attribute of chessed, “loving kindness,” appear difficult to understand. However, when you consider our exegesis that the Israelites’ faith was reinforced when they realized that even in death G’d had given these Egyptians an opportunity to be מקדש את השם, to aggrandize His name through their dead bodies inspiring faith in G’d, this can all be understood without difficulty. It was the very fact that G’d had smitten their long time oppressors that opened the Israelites’ mental eyes to G’d’s greatness. As a result they not only believed more strongly in G’d but also in His prophet Moses, absolutely. They realized that G’d had used the Egyptians as an instrument to inspire belief in Him. Having appreciated this, we can also answer the question of the Or Hachayim mentioned earlier. The reason that the oceans had been able to tolerate these dead Egyptian bodies in their midst was that they had now become symbols of G’d’s greatness, not of His failure in educating man. These Egyptians had finally “come alive” through the manner in which they had died, as they now inspired others to believe in the One and only Creator and His Power. Moses alluded to all this when he sang about מרכבות פרעה וחילו רמה בים ומבחר שלישיו טבעו בים וגו', “Pharaoh’s chariots and his army He has flung into the sea; and the choicest of his officers are drowned in the sea of reeds.”
Exodus 15,6. “Your right hand, O G’d, glorious in power; Your right hand shatters the enemy.” Moses is aware of the fact that G’d’s “right hand” symbolizes חסד, loving kindness, and he expresses his awareness that in shattering the enemy, Egypt in this instance, He did not resort to גבורה, the attribute of Justice. As proof of this he describes the manner in which the choicest of Pharaoh’s captains went deep down, something that is the reverse of what normally occurs in drowning, as the sea, as we pointed out, basically rejects dead bodies. It follows that by their very death these captains of Pharaoh’s chariots actually “lived,” i.e. made a worthwhile contribution to their having existed on earth previous to this. Their contribution, of course, was a passive one, recognition of G’d’s greatness not having been their conscious intent when dying a painful “death.” The Israelites realized what had happened, and that is why the Torah describes them as וירא ישראל את היד הגדול אשר עשה ה' במצרים וגו', “Israel saw the great hand which G’d had brought to bear on the Egyptians, etc.” The word: במצרים, usually understood as “in Egypt,” is somewhat difficult, seeing that G’d’s crowning achievement was the destruction of the entire Egyptian military might at the sea of reeds. Accordingly, we would have expected the Torah to have written: היד הגדולה בקריעת ים סוף, “the great hand G’d had demonstrated by the splitting of the sea.”
Exodus 15,6. “Your right hand, O G’d, glorious in power; Your right hand shatters the enemy.” Moses is aware of the fact that G’d’s “right hand” symbolizes חסד, loving kindness, and he expresses his awareness that in shattering the enemy, Egypt in this instance, He did not resort to גבורה, the attribute of Justice. As proof of this he describes the manner in which the choicest of Pharaoh’s captains went deep down, something that is the reverse of what normally occurs in drowning, as the sea, as we pointed out, basically rejects dead bodies. It follows that by their very death these captains of Pharaoh’s chariots actually “lived,” i.e. made a worthwhile contribution to their having existed on earth previous to this. Their contribution, of course, was a passive one, recognition of G’d’s greatness not having been their conscious intent when dying a painful “death.” The Israelites realized what had happened, and that is why the Torah describes them as וירא ישראל את היד הגדול אשר עשה ה' במצרים וגו', “Israel saw the great hand which G’d had brought to bear on the Egyptians, etc.” The word: במצרים, usually understood as “in Egypt,” is somewhat difficult, seeing that G’d’s crowning achievement was the destruction of the entire Egyptian military might at the sea of reeds. Accordingly, we would have expected the Torah to have written: היד הגדולה בקריעת ים סוף, “the great hand G’d had demonstrated by the splitting of the sea.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Mareh Yechezkel on Torah
And behold, the purpose of every thing is called [its] beginning. And that is the meaning of that which he wrote, “At first, it came up in [God’s] thought” – that the purpose that came up in thought before Him, may His name be blessed, was to create the world with the attribute of strict justice, such that [man] receive his reward in the world to come according to strict justice, such that it not be, ‘bread of embarrassment.’ But in order that a claimant not come to argue and say, “Did he not already receive his reward in the world” – hence He had the trait of mercy join and be placed first; such that what one benefits in this world is from the angle of kindness and a gift, rather than the receipt of a reward. And it is an obvious thing that He was also able to create the world with thought (as opposed to speech), as it is written (Exodus 15:6), “Your right hand, O Lord, is grand in power” – as was written by the Binah LeIttim: “And He did not need speech, except that it went up in His will to create [the world] with the attribute of mercy and to plough over the trait of strict justice. And it is as it was written by Binah LeIttim, regarding the matter of the “strong hand” that is mentioned about Egypt. And that is what he wrote: “I said that which I need speech in creating the world is because ‘the world is built upon kindness.’” And that is the meaning of that which is written (in the prayer book), “Blessed is the One who spoke and created the world.” And therefore there was a need for speech in each and every creation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sha'ar HaEmunah VeYesod HaChasidut
Indeed, we find various distinctions and levels in the miracles performed by various prophets and their awakenings, based upon the level to which they prepared their souls. The miracles performed by Moshe could actually transform things to their very opposite, as the Midrash teaches us (Beshalach), “‘And God showed him a tree’ (Shemot, 15:25). It was a bitter branch, and the bitter sweetened the bitter.”393Shortly after passing through the sea, the Children of Israel camped at an oasis called Marah – named so because its waters were bitter and undrinkable. G-d told Moshe to throw a tree into the waters, to sweeten them. According to the Midrash, this tree was itself bitter. So too with the brass serpent, which healed the snakebites.394In Numbers 21, the Children of Israel complain unnecessarily about the hardship of their travels. G-d is angered, and sends poisonous serpents to bite them. The people repent, and G-d commands Moses to forge a snake made of brass, and place it atop a pole. Whoever was bitten by a snake, yet looked upon the brass snake, would be healed. Again, that which kills and that which heals is the same. Also with the splitting of the Red Sea, where the waters congealed against the laws of nature, where (Shemot 15:8), “the depths congealed in the heart of the sea.” This, too, also an example of opposites, because water usually begins to freeze at the surface, and here it began in the middle of the sea, which, according to nature, would be the last place to freeze. The miracle of the splitting of the sea happened in the exact opposite way nature would have had it. Thus, with all of Moshe’s miracles, things were changed to their complete opposite. Moshe’s level of prophecy was greater than all of the other prophets, for he would see the Divine form at once. This is written in the Midrash Tanhuma (Hayei Sara) and in the Tikkunei Zohar (Tikkun 18, 32a).395God has no form. However, prophets receive their prophecy through a vision of the Divine body. All of the other prophets would behold a vision of a part of the Divine body. Moshe differed, in that he could see the King in His entirety. Therefore the miracles associated with him would change a thing over to its complete opposite. Similarly, with Yeshayahu, we find a miracle within a miracle, and the transformation of one thing to its complete opposite. As he said (38:21), “Take a lump of figs, and smear it on the boil, and he shall recover.” The Midrash tells us that it is the nature of figs to cause the wound to rot. Yeshayahu knew that this would have the opposite effect. This is because Yeshayahu’s prophecy had an aspect of Moshe’s prophecy. It is said in the Midrash on Tehillim (90), “Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rav Yossi ben Zimra, all of the prophets would prophesize, and not be conscious of their prophecy. This was not so for Moshe and Yeshayahu. Moshe said (Devarim, 32), ‘My doctrine shall drop as the rain.’ And Yeshayahu said (Yeshayahu, 8:18), ‘Behold, I and the children whom God has given me are for signs and tokens in Israel from the Lord of Hosts who dwells in mount Zion.’ Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rabbi Yossi, even Shmuel, the master of prophets, would speak prophecy, and not know what prophecy he was speaking. This is as it is said (Shmuel 1, 12), ‘And God sent you Yeruval and Badan and Yiftah and Shmuel.’396He was speaking to the people, and as he was not aware of what he was saying, he said, “Shmuel,” instead of “me.” This is because he was not aware that he was speaking.” On the other hand, the miracles performed by Elisha occurred mostly through an awakening of salvation through prayer. That is, his miracles were answers to his prayer. Most of them were effected through hints contained in his prayer to heal the waters of Yericho, as he said (Melachim 2, 2), “Bring me a new bowl and put salt in it.” As it is said in the tractate Berachot, “Just as salt will sweeten meat, so will it sweeten water.” Elisha also said (Melachim 2, 4), “Take flour and put it in the bowl.” He was praying, “God who said flour will be man’s food, so shall He say that these fields will bring forth food.” And also (Melachim 2, 6), when one of the sons of the prophets lost his axe in the river, Elisha cut down a branch and threw it in the river. His prayer was, “The one who said wood floats can also tell the iron to float.” For Elisha to perform various miracles at various times, he had to prepare his heart for each situation. In this way, he was showing how God’s miraculous governance is hidden within nature.397The implication is that because Elisha’s prophecy was on a lesser, more concealed level than Moshe’s, his prayers did not achieve a total uprooting of nature, but merely an extension of natural laws.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sha'ar HaEmunah VeYesod HaChasidut
Indeed, we find various distinctions and levels in the miracles performed by various prophets and their awakenings, based upon the level to which they prepared their souls. The miracles performed by Moshe could actually transform things to their very opposite, as the Midrash teaches us (Beshalach), “‘And God showed him a tree’ (Shemot, 15:25). It was a bitter branch, and the bitter sweetened the bitter.”393Shortly after passing through the sea, the Children of Israel camped at an oasis called Marah – named so because its waters were bitter and undrinkable. G-d told Moshe to throw a tree into the waters, to sweeten them. According to the Midrash, this tree was itself bitter. So too with the brass serpent, which healed the snakebites.394In Numbers 21, the Children of Israel complain unnecessarily about the hardship of their travels. G-d is angered, and sends poisonous serpents to bite them. The people repent, and G-d commands Moses to forge a snake made of brass, and place it atop a pole. Whoever was bitten by a snake, yet looked upon the brass snake, would be healed. Again, that which kills and that which heals is the same. Also with the splitting of the Red Sea, where the waters congealed against the laws of nature, where (Shemot 15:8), “the depths congealed in the heart of the sea.” This, too, also an example of opposites, because water usually begins to freeze at the surface, and here it began in the middle of the sea, which, according to nature, would be the last place to freeze. The miracle of the splitting of the sea happened in the exact opposite way nature would have had it. Thus, with all of Moshe’s miracles, things were changed to their complete opposite. Moshe’s level of prophecy was greater than all of the other prophets, for he would see the Divine form at once. This is written in the Midrash Tanhuma (Hayei Sara) and in the Tikkunei Zohar (Tikkun 18, 32a).395God has no form. However, prophets receive their prophecy through a vision of the Divine body. All of the other prophets would behold a vision of a part of the Divine body. Moshe differed, in that he could see the King in His entirety. Therefore the miracles associated with him would change a thing over to its complete opposite. Similarly, with Yeshayahu, we find a miracle within a miracle, and the transformation of one thing to its complete opposite. As he said (38:21), “Take a lump of figs, and smear it on the boil, and he shall recover.” The Midrash tells us that it is the nature of figs to cause the wound to rot. Yeshayahu knew that this would have the opposite effect. This is because Yeshayahu’s prophecy had an aspect of Moshe’s prophecy. It is said in the Midrash on Tehillim (90), “Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rav Yossi ben Zimra, all of the prophets would prophesize, and not be conscious of their prophecy. This was not so for Moshe and Yeshayahu. Moshe said (Devarim, 32), ‘My doctrine shall drop as the rain.’ And Yeshayahu said (Yeshayahu, 8:18), ‘Behold, I and the children whom God has given me are for signs and tokens in Israel from the Lord of Hosts who dwells in mount Zion.’ Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rabbi Yossi, even Shmuel, the master of prophets, would speak prophecy, and not know what prophecy he was speaking. This is as it is said (Shmuel 1, 12), ‘And God sent you Yeruval and Badan and Yiftah and Shmuel.’396He was speaking to the people, and as he was not aware of what he was saying, he said, “Shmuel,” instead of “me.” This is because he was not aware that he was speaking.” On the other hand, the miracles performed by Elisha occurred mostly through an awakening of salvation through prayer. That is, his miracles were answers to his prayer. Most of them were effected through hints contained in his prayer to heal the waters of Yericho, as he said (Melachim 2, 2), “Bring me a new bowl and put salt in it.” As it is said in the tractate Berachot, “Just as salt will sweeten meat, so will it sweeten water.” Elisha also said (Melachim 2, 4), “Take flour and put it in the bowl.” He was praying, “God who said flour will be man’s food, so shall He say that these fields will bring forth food.” And also (Melachim 2, 6), when one of the sons of the prophets lost his axe in the river, Elisha cut down a branch and threw it in the river. His prayer was, “The one who said wood floats can also tell the iron to float.” For Elisha to perform various miracles at various times, he had to prepare his heart for each situation. In this way, he was showing how God’s miraculous governance is hidden within nature.397The implication is that because Elisha’s prophecy was on a lesser, more concealed level than Moshe’s, his prayers did not achieve a total uprooting of nature, but merely an extension of natural laws.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Numbers 23,19. “G’d is not man that He should lie, nor mortal that He should repent;” Our sages in Taanit 23, commenting on Job 22,28 ותגזור אומר ויקם לך ועל דרכיך נגה אור commonly translated as “You will decree and it will be fulfilled; and light will shine on Your affairs,” divide this verse into two halves, the first half referring to what man decrees on earth, and the second to what G’d fulfils in heaven. This is a way of explaining how it is that the tzaddik can “reverse G’d’s decree.” [The problem is that if so, how can Bileam say that the difference between man and G’d is that the latter does not “lie,” i.e. that His decrees cannot be upset by forces other than Him? The subject has to be studied in the Talmud where the sages debated the right of Choni ham’agel to pray insistently for rain, when apparently G’d had decree a drought. Ed.]
Our author tries to explain these apparent contradictions in a variety of ways. When Moses is referred to as איש האלוקים, in psalms 90,1 the reason is that he tried to be like G’d through invoking repeal of G’d’s harsh decrees against His people. We find something analogous in psalms 106,23 where the psalmist credits Moses with reversing G’d’s decree to annihilate the Jewish people. Our author views the use of the word אלוקים when applied to man as G’d “dressing up” in human garb and then complying with the requests made in the tzaddik’s prayerThis “dressing up” of G’d in human garb occurs only when the prayer of the righteous human being is for G’d’s help to the Israelites. Since wicked Bileam intended to enlist G’d’s support to curse the Israelites, he explains to Balak that לא איש א-ל, that G’d in such circumstances would not “dress up as a human being” in order to facilitate such prayers by Bileam. Subterfuge, i.e. ויכזב, does not qualify for G’d’s support.
This “dressing up” of G’d in human garb occurs only when the prayer of the righteous human being is for G’d’s help to the Israelites. Since wicked Bileam intended to enlist G’d’s support to curse the Israelites, he explains to Balak that לא איש א-ל, that G’d in such circumstances would not “dress up as a human being” in order to facilitate such prayers by Bileam. Subterfuge, i.e. ויכזב, does not qualify for G’d’s support.
This is also the meaning of the words: ה' איש מלחמה ה' שמו, “the Lord is a ‘man’ of war, his name is Hashem.” (Exodus15,3) Moses extols G’d’s “dressing up” in human garb when He destroys the mortal enemies of the Jewish people. He will perform what the tzaddik requests of Him when avenging the wrongs committed by the gentile nations against His chosen people. He will do so, since in the process His name will become sanctified and glorified.
While at first glance it may appear strange that G’d will assume the role of a “warrior” at the behest of one of His tzaddikim when this results in the destruction of His creatures, [something He is so loath to do this that His angels are not allowed to applaud it by singing a song, Ed.], the fact remains that the destruction of the wicked at the hands of G’d represents a major sanctification of G’d’s name, and this is why in the victory song of Moses in Exodus 15, He is described not as אלוקים, the attribute of Justice, but as Hashem, the attribute of Mercy, as the merits of this sanctification of His Name accrue to the “victims”, though not knowingly, seeing that at least their death has resulted in the sanctification of G’d’s Name. He thus performed an act of loving kindness for His enemies even while depriving their bodies of their lives.
Our author tries to explain these apparent contradictions in a variety of ways. When Moses is referred to as איש האלוקים, in psalms 90,1 the reason is that he tried to be like G’d through invoking repeal of G’d’s harsh decrees against His people. We find something analogous in psalms 106,23 where the psalmist credits Moses with reversing G’d’s decree to annihilate the Jewish people. Our author views the use of the word אלוקים when applied to man as G’d “dressing up” in human garb and then complying with the requests made in the tzaddik’s prayerThis “dressing up” of G’d in human garb occurs only when the prayer of the righteous human being is for G’d’s help to the Israelites. Since wicked Bileam intended to enlist G’d’s support to curse the Israelites, he explains to Balak that לא איש א-ל, that G’d in such circumstances would not “dress up as a human being” in order to facilitate such prayers by Bileam. Subterfuge, i.e. ויכזב, does not qualify for G’d’s support.
This “dressing up” of G’d in human garb occurs only when the prayer of the righteous human being is for G’d’s help to the Israelites. Since wicked Bileam intended to enlist G’d’s support to curse the Israelites, he explains to Balak that לא איש א-ל, that G’d in such circumstances would not “dress up as a human being” in order to facilitate such prayers by Bileam. Subterfuge, i.e. ויכזב, does not qualify for G’d’s support.
This is also the meaning of the words: ה' איש מלחמה ה' שמו, “the Lord is a ‘man’ of war, his name is Hashem.” (Exodus15,3) Moses extols G’d’s “dressing up” in human garb when He destroys the mortal enemies of the Jewish people. He will perform what the tzaddik requests of Him when avenging the wrongs committed by the gentile nations against His chosen people. He will do so, since in the process His name will become sanctified and glorified.
While at first glance it may appear strange that G’d will assume the role of a “warrior” at the behest of one of His tzaddikim when this results in the destruction of His creatures, [something He is so loath to do this that His angels are not allowed to applaud it by singing a song, Ed.], the fact remains that the destruction of the wicked at the hands of G’d represents a major sanctification of G’d’s name, and this is why in the victory song of Moses in Exodus 15, He is described not as אלוקים, the attribute of Justice, but as Hashem, the attribute of Mercy, as the merits of this sanctification of His Name accrue to the “victims”, though not knowingly, seeing that at least their death has resulted in the sanctification of G’d’s Name. He thus performed an act of loving kindness for His enemies even while depriving their bodies of their lives.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Likutei Halakhot
This corresponds to the 4 cups of wine at the Passover Seder. Wine has two parts, as our Rabbis Z"L said, "if a person is worthy it makes him a head and if he is not worthy it makes him a poor person". Yoma 76b. This means that a person's knowledge is elevated by the wine, and being that the essence of knowledge is the revelation of providence, knowledge of providence is enhanced by drinking wine and one becomes a 'head'. But when a person is not worthy, the opposite happens and one becomes poor, for the true pauper is he who lacks knowledge, which is the main cause of material poverty. When a person lacks knowledge of providence, which is the essence of knowledge, this causes poverty, as in, "you shall eat it with despair" (Genesis 3:17), representing oppression and poverty that come on account of the blemish of eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which corresponds to natural sciences. Furthermore, nature corresponds to darkness and night, corresponding to the blemish of the moon, which is the root source of poverty, as is known. Wine is therefore comprised of both elements: it brings on sleep, which corresponds to nature, which corresponds to night and sleep, and when one is worthy, it arouses from sleep, as in, "your pallet is like good wine which makes the lips of the sleeping speak". Song of songs 7:10. Good wine, which comes from the realm of holiness, arouses a person from sleep, represented by speech. During sleep, speech disappears, while good wine arouses from sleep and evokes speech, which comes from knowledge, as in 'makes the lips of the sleeping speak', which corresponds to providence, corresponding to the arousal from sleep. And since wine is comprised of both elements, when a person is worthy it represents knowledge, Providence, as in, "wine that makes glad", corresponding to the world of the future, as in "wine makes glad" (Psalms 104:15). And when one is not worthy it is an intoxicating wine, which confuses knowledge and errs with natural sciences, which corresponds to sleep. Therefore wine must be carefully guarded from the touch of a non-Jew, more than anything else. Nothing else in the world besides wine becomes forbidden by the touch of a non-Jew. As soon as a non-Jew touches wine, and touch is with the hands, the wine is drawn into the realm of nature, which corresponds to the non-Jew, since the wine itself is comprised of both aspects. Therefore a non-Jew, who corresponds to nature, makes the wine impure with the touch of his hand, for the wine is immediately drawn into the realm of nature, and is therefore unsuitable for a Jew, who is above nature, and whose food and drink should be holy, since the knowledge of providence is drawn through food and drink. Therefore, the blemish of the wine is specifically by their touch with the hands, for the blemish of the knowledge of providence is mainly through a blemish of the hands, of the 28 phalanges of the hands, which correspond to the 28 letters of creation. The hands of the non-Jews though, are the opposite of this, and are in the category of "the hands are the hands of Esau" (Genesis 27:22), corresponding to the mistaken belief in nature, corresponding to "my power and the might of my hand", and therefore wine is blemished by the hand of a non-Jew. This forbidden wine is then in the category of the mistaken belief in natural sciences, which corresponds to sleep. This is alluded to in the word Nesekh, נֶסֶךְ, the term for forbidden wine, as in, "For G-d Nasakh נָסַךְ (poured) a spirit of slumber" (Isaiah 29:10), which refers to stargazers who have a mistaken belief in the constellations. Therefore at the time of the Exodus from Egypt, when Providence was revealed, it is a commandment to drink 4 cups of wine, for wine is then in the category of 'if one is worthy the one becomes a head', for now at the Passover Seder, knowledge is elevated and providence is greatly revealed through the wine, for G-d drew Providence and broke the night, the sleep, as in "around midnight I will go out within Egypt". Wine is then in the category of 'wine makes glad' and a person is able to speak and tell the story of the Exodus from Egypt on this night, by means of the wine as in 'wine makes the lips of the sleeping speak'. This corresponds to "song is only recited on wine". Berachot 35b. For all songs are drawn from the world of the future, when song will be aroused in the world, as stated in the holy Zohar III 286b, as in, "Then Moses will sing". Exodus 15:1. It does not say 'sang', in the past tense, but 'will sing' in the future, teaching us that he will sing in the world of the future. Sanhedrin 91b. This is because the essence of song comes from the world of the future, when Moses will sing, for song will then be aroused in the world. This is the source of all songs - song in this world over miracles, for all miracles come about by G-d drawing providence from the end of the world, from the world of the future, into this world. And when a miracle takes place, we draw song from the world of the future into this world, which is all the songs for the miracles that we sing. Therefore, song is only recited over wine, for wine will then be absorbed into holiness, corresponding to knowledge of providence, for the essence of song is drawing providence, which is the song for the miracle, into this world, which is why song should be over wine. This is represented by the 4 cups of wine at the Passover Seder, corresponding to the Four Kingdoms. When wine is absorbed into holiness, corresponding to Providence, all exiles of the Four Kingdoms are subdued, for their main power is through nature, and by means of the Providence that is revealed by the knowledge that is drawn by the 4 cups of wine, they are all eliminated.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,1.“then Moses and the Children of Israel sang this song and they said: saying;” first we must understand that the essence of joy is what a person feels in his heart; seeing that this is so, what need is there to express these feelings in speech and song or poetry at the time of his joy?
The reason is that joy in one’s heart, unless formulated in word and song is bound to subside and cease altogether in short order. By giving verbal expression to one’s joy and composing a song and writing poetry one prolongs and intensifies this feeling of joy. The Israelites were aware of this psychological axiom, and this is why they yearned to give proper expression to their joy. They yearned to share their joy with the Creator, Who had been the architect enabling them to harbour such joyous feelings in their breasts. This is the reason why the Torah adds the words: ויאמרו לאמור “they said, saying;” the word לאמור presumably refers to extraneous words, not included in the actual song that follows; if this were not so, who was there that they could have spoken to about this other than their peers who had all experienced the same salvation?
The reason is that joy in one’s heart, unless formulated in word and song is bound to subside and cease altogether in short order. By giving verbal expression to one’s joy and composing a song and writing poetry one prolongs and intensifies this feeling of joy. The Israelites were aware of this psychological axiom, and this is why they yearned to give proper expression to their joy. They yearned to share their joy with the Creator, Who had been the architect enabling them to harbour such joyous feelings in their breasts. This is the reason why the Torah adds the words: ויאמרו לאמור “they said, saying;” the word לאמור presumably refers to extraneous words, not included in the actual song that follows; if this were not so, who was there that they could have spoken to about this other than their peers who had all experienced the same salvation?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sha'ar HaEmunah VeYesod HaChasidut
The Psalmist said (Tehillim, 140:9), “Do not further his evil plan, lest he go and laud himself because of this.” This is as it is written in the Midrash Rabbah (Tavo), “One who learns Torah and does not fulfill it receives a greater punishment than one who did not learn it at all. From where do we derive this? It is written (Yeshayahu, 26:10), ‘Favor will be shown to the wicked, who did not learn righteousness.’413The Midrash is freely interpreting this verse. The literal reading is: “Even if an evil person is shown favor, he will still not learn righteousness..” Whereas, if he learned the Torah and does not fulfill its commandments, he is not shown favor.” It may be asked, “Perhaps a person is wicked because he did not learn the path of righteousness?” This question is addressed in the Talmud (Megillah, 6a): Rav Yitzhak also said: What is the meaning of the verse, “Favor will be shown to the wicked, who did not learn righteousness”? Yitzhak Avinu said to the Holy One, blessed be He, “Master of the Universe, show mercy upon Esav.” God replied. “He is wicked.” Yitzhak said to Him, “He did not learned righteousness!”414Meaning, Esav did not learn Torah, and thus should not be requited for his evil deeds. God replied (with the continuation of the verse), “Even in a land of uprightness (nekhochut), they continue doing evil.” Yitzhak said, “If so, ‘let him not behold the majesty of God.’” When Yitzhak said, “He has not learnt righteousness,” he sought to judge Esav favorably. He argued that Esav’s actions were determined by the limits of his understanding. God answered Yitzhak, “Even in the land of the nekhochut (“uprightness,” or “presence”) he will continue doing evil.” That is to say, even if Esav were in the presence of God, he would still not act righteously, but use his elevated consciousness to deliberately and knowingly sin. This being the case, Yitzhak said, “Let him not behold the majesty of the God.” 415Yitzhak asks G-d to show compassion on his brother, Esav, the sinner. He argues that Esav is unaware of the greater context of his actions. Like one who sins withough having learned Torah (Torah, here, being synonymous with an awareness of G-d’s plan.) Esav’s sins are only in terms of his own, constricted consciousness. From G-d’s perspective, even in sinning, he is fulfilling G-d’s will. However, G-d responds that even if Esav saw things from the higher perspective, he would still intent to rebel against G-d. If so, Yitzchak replies, then do not let him see Your Glory; that is, do not let him see how he is fulfilling Your will through his sins. What does it mean to not see the majesty of God? It means that even though God uses his entire creation, including the wicked, for His own purposes and to achieve His desired ends, nonetheless, the wicked cannot see how God is using them as an agent of His design. This is, “he shall not see the majesty of God,” even when it is actualized through him. Similarly, we find that the glory of God was revealed through Pharaoh. The Mekhilta (Ch. 8) has Pharaoh saying, “Who is like You among the powers O God!” (Shemot, 15:11) This was also true with Haman in the days of Purim. The Talmud says (Megillah, 10b), “‘And it shall be to God for a name’ (Yeshayahu, 55:13)416Just before this the verse said, “and from under the brier shall sprout the myrtle tree (Hadas, in Hebrew.) The point is that Hadas is another name for Queen Ester. – this refers to the days of Purim. (The verse continues) ‘For an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off’ – this refers to the reading of the Megillah.” Though Pharaoh and Haman were used as God’s agents to perform miracles and reveal the Glory of Heaven in the world, they themselves had no portion whatsoever in that sanctification of God’s name that came about through them. This is as it is written in the Talmud (Megillah, 6a), “What is the meaning of the verse (Tehillim, 140:9), ‘O God, do not grant the desires of the wicked, do not further his evil plan, lest he go and laud himself because of this?’ Yaakov said before the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘Master of the Universe, Do not grant the evil Esav the desire of his heart.’ ‘Do not further his evil plan,’ this refers to Germamia of Edom (an evil king that would descend from Esav).” Study this passage in greater depth, and see how God confounded them.417This passage in the Talmud continues, “this refers to Germamia of Edom, for should they but go forth they would destroy the whole world. Rav Khama ben Khanina said, ‘There are three hundred crowned heads in Germamia of Edom and three hundred and sixty-five chieftains in Rome. Every day one goes forth to meet the other, one of them is killed, and they have all the trouble of appointing a new king.” The words, “lest they praise themselves (pen yaroomu),” could also mean, “they shall be raised above.”418The verse from Tehillim would then read: “Do not further his evil plan, for [Your hidden purposes] are far above him [above his comprehension].” This means that God leads them in a place far above their ability to comprehend, and they themselves take no credit from the Glory of God which is magnified through them.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 40,10. “and there were three branches on the vine.” According to one (Rabbi Eleazar hamodai) of numerous allegorical explanations in Chulin 92, the vine is symbolic of Jerusalem; whereas the three branches are symbolic of the Temple, the King, and the High Priest, respectively. The words: והיא כפורחת עלתה נצה הבשילו אשכלתיה ענבים, usually translated as: “it had barely blossomed when out of it came its blossoms and its clusters ripened into grapes,” is understood allegorically by the Talmud. The reference is to the young priests who will mature and offer libations in the Temple. In order to explain this somewhat far fetched allegory, although the one preferred by the Talmud, our author quotes Yuma 29 where the rhetorical question of why Queen Esther has been compared to an אילה, a gazelle, hind, the Talmud defining the gazelle in psalms 22,1 as אילת השחר, Queen Esther as being like a gazelle in the morning, i.e. at the end of the night, sees in Esther and her experiences the last chapter belonging to the period of history described in the Bible. No overt miracles in Jewish history have been reported in the Bible subsequent to her period.
What did the Talmud have in mind when suggesting that after Mordechai and Esther, [in whose time these ”miracles,” were already not overt, Ed.] no more miracles occurred?
We must distinguish between two kinds of wars. Usually, when we speak of “war,” we refer to an armed confrontation between warring nations.
The second type of “war,” is one that originated in G’d subjecting the Jewish people to attacks by external enemies, in order to strengthen their faith in Him when He would save them from a fate which they were powerless to escape by any other means. Psalms 91,2 refers to the psalmist acknowledging such miraculous escapes of the Jewish people. It is remarkable that the psalmist, in referring to his trust in the Lord, does so in the future tense, i.e. אלוקי אבטח בו, “my G’d in Whom I will put my trust,” instead of, as we would have expected, “in Whom I have put my trust.” The psalmist acknowledges that he now understands the purpose of the “war” that had befallen his people as having been a test, teaching the Jewish people to put their trust only in the Lord. The same theme is found in psalms 118,10 כל גויים סבבוני בשם ה' כי אמילם, “all nations have surrounded me; by the name of the Lord I will surely cut them down.” The psalmist does not predict what he is about to do, but refers to what G’d had in mind by allowing His people to face such impossible odds, i.e. to strengthen their faith when they will be saved by Him. The psalmist makes it even plainer In verse 21 of the same psalm, when the words אודך כי עניתני ותהי לי לישועה, must be understood as: “I will express my thanks to You for having afflicted me so that You could demonstrate how You will be my salvation.”
When G’d “rescues” the Jewish people, this occurs in either of two ways. The most easily recognizable way are overt miracles in which His mastery over nature is demonstrated by His breaking all the “rules” that scientists have taught us are inviolate. The best known examples of this are the 10 plagues G’d visited upon the Egyptians, crowned by the splitting of the sea of reeds in which the Egyptian army drowned to a man, while the Israelites crossed the bottom of that sea safely. Although in the song of thanks by the Jewish people after the drowning of the Egyptians the text is full of G’d being lauded for His performing “wonders,” (Exodus 15,11) what are “wonders” performed by G’d in our eyes, are, of course, nothing extraordinary when viewed from His vantage point, seeing that He had made the rules, He is certainly able to suspend them when it suits Him. The Jewish people praised Him not so much for what He had done, but for having found the Jewish people worthy to be saved by such spectacular means, involving the undoing of what G’d had done during the six days of creation.
What did the Talmud have in mind when suggesting that after Mordechai and Esther, [in whose time these ”miracles,” were already not overt, Ed.] no more miracles occurred?
We must distinguish between two kinds of wars. Usually, when we speak of “war,” we refer to an armed confrontation between warring nations.
The second type of “war,” is one that originated in G’d subjecting the Jewish people to attacks by external enemies, in order to strengthen their faith in Him when He would save them from a fate which they were powerless to escape by any other means. Psalms 91,2 refers to the psalmist acknowledging such miraculous escapes of the Jewish people. It is remarkable that the psalmist, in referring to his trust in the Lord, does so in the future tense, i.e. אלוקי אבטח בו, “my G’d in Whom I will put my trust,” instead of, as we would have expected, “in Whom I have put my trust.” The psalmist acknowledges that he now understands the purpose of the “war” that had befallen his people as having been a test, teaching the Jewish people to put their trust only in the Lord. The same theme is found in psalms 118,10 כל גויים סבבוני בשם ה' כי אמילם, “all nations have surrounded me; by the name of the Lord I will surely cut them down.” The psalmist does not predict what he is about to do, but refers to what G’d had in mind by allowing His people to face such impossible odds, i.e. to strengthen their faith when they will be saved by Him. The psalmist makes it even plainer In verse 21 of the same psalm, when the words אודך כי עניתני ותהי לי לישועה, must be understood as: “I will express my thanks to You for having afflicted me so that You could demonstrate how You will be my salvation.”
When G’d “rescues” the Jewish people, this occurs in either of two ways. The most easily recognizable way are overt miracles in which His mastery over nature is demonstrated by His breaking all the “rules” that scientists have taught us are inviolate. The best known examples of this are the 10 plagues G’d visited upon the Egyptians, crowned by the splitting of the sea of reeds in which the Egyptian army drowned to a man, while the Israelites crossed the bottom of that sea safely. Although in the song of thanks by the Jewish people after the drowning of the Egyptians the text is full of G’d being lauded for His performing “wonders,” (Exodus 15,11) what are “wonders” performed by G’d in our eyes, are, of course, nothing extraordinary when viewed from His vantage point, seeing that He had made the rules, He is certainly able to suspend them when it suits Him. The Jewish people praised Him not so much for what He had done, but for having found the Jewish people worthy to be saved by such spectacular means, involving the undoing of what G’d had done during the six days of creation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 21,25. “Avraham rebuked Avimelech on account of the well, etc.” Avimelech rejected the accusation, claiming he had not known about what his servants had done.
Normally, we have a rule that when a tzaddik engages in rebuking someone, he points out that the trespass committed by the wicked concerned was a sin against G’d and His Torah.
In this instance, Avraham accused Avimelech of having committed a wrong when it had been his servants who had stolen the water from Avraham. He reminded Avimelech that G’d created the world, and that He gave us laws by which to conduct ourselves, and that robbery was definitely forbidden. The person violating G’d’s law receives a warning in the form of the tzaddik rebuking him. The letters in the words uttered by the tzaddik when he rebukes the sinner light up in the face of the guilty party, thus affording him an opportunity to immediately do penance.
One of the names of G’d is: מי, as we know when Pharaoh challenged Moses by saying: מי ה'? This is what Avimelech meant when he said to Avraham לא ידעתי מי עשה את הדבר הזה, “I do not know of this מי who has done this;” i.e. “I have never heard of a Creator who has created the universe, hence I do not know of a prohibition to steal or rob.” Another one of G’d’s names is the word זה, as we know from Exodus 15,2 זה א-לי ואנוהו, “זה is my G’d and I will glorify Him.” We also find the word as a reference to one of G’d’s names when Isaiah 25,9 said זה ה' קוינו לו, “we have been hoping for the Lord זה.” Avimelech tells Avraham that he had heard of all this theology only from the mouth of Avraham, he had never previously been informed of this. He adds that even now he has not heard or “seen” the letters that make up the alphabet of the Torah from Avraham’s mouth, i.e. גם אתה לא הגדת לי. The word הגדת, derived from גד, is similar to גד גדוד יגודנה in Genesis 49,19, where it refers to “good fortune,” similar to what Gad’s mother proclaimed בגד, viewing herself as having good fortune seeing that she had born 6 of the twelve tribes. (Genesis 30,11) The word is a simile for good fortune in the sense of מזל טוב. Avimelech had not yet seen the letters that would trigger his doing teshuvah for the wrong he had been guilty of. The word אתה is an allusion to the letters from א to ת in the Hebrew alphabet, the letters of the Holy Tongue.
When Avimelech adds: וגם אנכי לא שמעתי בלתי היום, “and I also have not heard about all this until this day,” he uses the word אנכי, the first word of the Ten Commandments with which G’d revealed Himself at Mount Sinai, as meaning that on this day G’d’s sovereignty was revealed to him, and he could now perceive these letters of the Holy Tongue. On that day Avimelech had learned from Avraham about three aspects of G’d, i.e. מי, זה, אנכי.
Normally, we have a rule that when a tzaddik engages in rebuking someone, he points out that the trespass committed by the wicked concerned was a sin against G’d and His Torah.
In this instance, Avraham accused Avimelech of having committed a wrong when it had been his servants who had stolen the water from Avraham. He reminded Avimelech that G’d created the world, and that He gave us laws by which to conduct ourselves, and that robbery was definitely forbidden. The person violating G’d’s law receives a warning in the form of the tzaddik rebuking him. The letters in the words uttered by the tzaddik when he rebukes the sinner light up in the face of the guilty party, thus affording him an opportunity to immediately do penance.
One of the names of G’d is: מי, as we know when Pharaoh challenged Moses by saying: מי ה'? This is what Avimelech meant when he said to Avraham לא ידעתי מי עשה את הדבר הזה, “I do not know of this מי who has done this;” i.e. “I have never heard of a Creator who has created the universe, hence I do not know of a prohibition to steal or rob.” Another one of G’d’s names is the word זה, as we know from Exodus 15,2 זה א-לי ואנוהו, “זה is my G’d and I will glorify Him.” We also find the word as a reference to one of G’d’s names when Isaiah 25,9 said זה ה' קוינו לו, “we have been hoping for the Lord זה.” Avimelech tells Avraham that he had heard of all this theology only from the mouth of Avraham, he had never previously been informed of this. He adds that even now he has not heard or “seen” the letters that make up the alphabet of the Torah from Avraham’s mouth, i.e. גם אתה לא הגדת לי. The word הגדת, derived from גד, is similar to גד גדוד יגודנה in Genesis 49,19, where it refers to “good fortune,” similar to what Gad’s mother proclaimed בגד, viewing herself as having good fortune seeing that she had born 6 of the twelve tribes. (Genesis 30,11) The word is a simile for good fortune in the sense of מזל טוב. Avimelech had not yet seen the letters that would trigger his doing teshuvah for the wrong he had been guilty of. The word אתה is an allusion to the letters from א to ת in the Hebrew alphabet, the letters of the Holy Tongue.
When Avimelech adds: וגם אנכי לא שמעתי בלתי היום, “and I also have not heard about all this until this day,” he uses the word אנכי, the first word of the Ten Commandments with which G’d revealed Himself at Mount Sinai, as meaning that on this day G’d’s sovereignty was revealed to him, and he could now perceive these letters of the Holy Tongue. On that day Avimelech had learned from Avraham about three aspects of G’d, i.e. מי, זה, אנכי.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
A different approach to the verses commencing with אהיה אשר אהיה. What follows is based on the common perception that the name of G’d (tetragram) known as הויה, refers to His activity in the present, whereas the name אהיה suggests G’d’s being active in the future, as we know from Sotah 14 where the Talmud quotes Deuteronomy 3,25 in which Moses pleads to be allowed to cross the Jordan before his death. The Talmud there examines what prompted Moses to be so anxious to cross the Jordan, and concludes that Moses was concerned to perform commandments of the Torah that are only capable of fulfillment when on the soil of the Holy Land.
From this we learn that the Jewish people while in Egypt had acquired only the potential merit of performing these commandments, a merit which could not be fully acquired until after their arrival in the Holy Land. G’d explains this to Moses when He tells him in verse 12 that once He will let Moses take the people out of Egypt, this is preparatory to their serving the Lord i.e. בהוציאך את העם ממצרים תעבדו את האלוקים. He thus links the people’s serving G’d to Moses’ taking them out of Egypt and (presumably) bringing them to the Holy Land where they will be able to claim the credit for fulfilling the Torah. Actually, it had been G’d’s desire to bring the people to the Holy Land in order that they could “cash” His I.O.U. there by performing the commandments. Seeing that the capacity of the Jewish people to understand such lofty ideals was limited by their present sorry condition, G’d first stressed the physical qualities of the land of Israel, comparing it favourably with the land of Egypt which has been described in Genesis as “like a garden planted by G’d.” (Genesis 13,11) By describing the land of Israel as a land flowing with milk and honey, a land in which rain falls regularly, without farmers having to bring water for irrigation to their fields, G’d had to arouse the people’s desire to leave a land which was as excellent for its owners as Egypt.
[We know that even after the Egyptians had been drowned in the sea the Israelites wanted to return there and take over that land, rather than to march through the desert to a land they did not know. (Compare Exodus 15,22, ויסע משה את ישראל “Moses forced Israel to journey forward.”)] Once the Israelites would reach their destination they would appreciate that life in the land of Israel involved much more than their bodies being “elevated;” their spiritual horizons would be broadened due to their performing the commandments applicable only in that land. This is the reason why in verse 13 in our chapter G’d stresses the fact that the patriarchs had lived in that land, i.e. the fact that they lived in that land had enabled them to become the founding fathers of this holy nation. This is why in connection with the patriarchs we find the name of G’d, i.e. הויה, present tense, whereas in respect to their descendants, at this stage G’d has to speak of His name as something primarily still in the future, אהיה.
From this we learn that the Jewish people while in Egypt had acquired only the potential merit of performing these commandments, a merit which could not be fully acquired until after their arrival in the Holy Land. G’d explains this to Moses when He tells him in verse 12 that once He will let Moses take the people out of Egypt, this is preparatory to their serving the Lord i.e. בהוציאך את העם ממצרים תעבדו את האלוקים. He thus links the people’s serving G’d to Moses’ taking them out of Egypt and (presumably) bringing them to the Holy Land where they will be able to claim the credit for fulfilling the Torah. Actually, it had been G’d’s desire to bring the people to the Holy Land in order that they could “cash” His I.O.U. there by performing the commandments. Seeing that the capacity of the Jewish people to understand such lofty ideals was limited by their present sorry condition, G’d first stressed the physical qualities of the land of Israel, comparing it favourably with the land of Egypt which has been described in Genesis as “like a garden planted by G’d.” (Genesis 13,11) By describing the land of Israel as a land flowing with milk and honey, a land in which rain falls regularly, without farmers having to bring water for irrigation to their fields, G’d had to arouse the people’s desire to leave a land which was as excellent for its owners as Egypt.
[We know that even after the Egyptians had been drowned in the sea the Israelites wanted to return there and take over that land, rather than to march through the desert to a land they did not know. (Compare Exodus 15,22, ויסע משה את ישראל “Moses forced Israel to journey forward.”)] Once the Israelites would reach their destination they would appreciate that life in the land of Israel involved much more than their bodies being “elevated;” their spiritual horizons would be broadened due to their performing the commandments applicable only in that land. This is the reason why in verse 13 in our chapter G’d stresses the fact that the patriarchs had lived in that land, i.e. the fact that they lived in that land had enabled them to become the founding fathers of this holy nation. This is why in connection with the patriarchs we find the name of G’d, i.e. הויה, present tense, whereas in respect to their descendants, at this stage G’d has to speak of His name as something primarily still in the future, אהיה.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15:1 “let me raise my voice in song to the Lord, Who is most triumphant, He has flung horse and rider into the sea.” According to Onkelos, the words גאה גאה mean that Hashem is more exalted than any exalted creature anywhere. The very concept of exaltation is His. Moses attempts to rationalize why The Creator, Who is so far above any of His creatures that in a confrontation between Him and His adversaries the onlookers would think that the combatants are so unevenly matched that the Creator would not have to resort to deeds that impress, as He could blow away His opponent with the mere breath of his mouth. When we read the “song,” it sounds like an accolade for the victor who had exerted himself in order to overcome a powerful opponent, something that is simply not so. Having heard the prophet Isaiah 40,17 proclaim a basic truth, that כל הגוים כאין נגדו, “all the nations of the world (combined) are as nothing when arraigned against Him,” why does Moses portray G’d’s victory of the Egyptians as such a heroic deed? The rhetorical question just posed has already been voiced by the liturgist in one of his poems on the eighth day of Passover. The answer given there is that G’d appeared to exert Himself, taking with Him myriads of angels in order to show the Israelites how much He loved them. Had He blown the Egyptians away with the mere breath of His mouth, the Israelites would not have been impressed. While the Israelites would not have been impressed, the gentiles, instead of being profoundly impressed with the power of our G’d, would have denied that the disappearance without a trace of the armed might of Egypt had been due to the interference in history by an Eternal Creator altogether. Moses expresses his thanks to Hashem for having gone to so much trouble to accomplish what He could have accomplished in the fraction of a second without ”grandstanding.” Grandstanding when it is intended for the benefit of the spectator, as opposed to when it is meant to show off the party setting it in motion, is a valuable tool in the hands of the Creator, and not to be denigrated as it should be when displayed by one of G’d’s creatures.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 16:1 “He flung horse and its rider high into the sea.” We need to understand why Moses described the “tossing” of the Egyptian cavalry into the sea by using a word referring to an upward motion of G’d’s arm, instead of simply writing הפיל בים, “He dropped them into the sea.” Besides, seeing that in verse 4 Moses describes Hashem as מרכבות פרעה וחילו ירה בים, “G’d threw (same word as “he shot,”) the chariots of Pharaoh and his army into the sea,” why did Moses choose the word רמה in verse 1? Since the only kind of shooting in those days was the shooting of arrows, it was mandatory that the trajectory first involve the rising of the arrow before it could descend and hit its target, so that there was no reason for Moses not to have used the customary word for “shooting.”
Our sages in the Mishnah Sanhedrin 6,4 describe the platform or the “house,” בית הסקילה, from which the penalty of stoning to death was carried out as being two stories (the height of two average sized persons) high. From that platform the criminal or sinner convicted to death by stoning would be pushed down. The “stoning” would commence after the fall if it had not been fatal. The wording in the Torah is: סקול יסקל או ירה יירה, “he will surely be stoned or shot,” (Exodus 19,13). The word ירה alone therefore might have been misleading.
Another expression which poses a difficulty in our verse is: ומבחר שלישיו טבעו בים, “and the choicest of his officers drowned in the sea.” It would have sufficed to state that “his officers drowned;” that would have included both the junior and the senior officers.
The answer to these questions may be gleaned from the words of the Midrash (Yalkut Reuveni, B’shalach) where the protective angel, שר, of the Egyptians is quoted as having complained that seeing that both the Israelites and the Egyptians had been idol worshippers, why would the Egyptians be singled out for such harsh punishment.
We further need to understand why G’d resorted to the stratagem of encouraging the Egyptians to pursue the Israelites through commanding the Israelites to turn back at Baal Tzefon (Exodus 14,2), after they had already left Egypt and both politically and economically, the Super Power Egypt had suffered a lethal blow. Had G’d not found an excuse that misled the Egyptians to believe that their deity had frightened the Israelites, the entire pursuit of the Israelites and the resultant drowning of the Egyptian army would never have taken place. We must therefore conclude that G’d paid heed to the complaint of the protective angel of the Egyptians, and had to show him that his protégées were totally wicked, having reneged on their not only having released the Israelites but having expelled them. (Exodus 12,33 and 39). The words רמה בים, may be understood as a reference to the illusion that the Egyptians harboured that they might succeed due to favourable astrological constellations at the sea where they had failed on land. Secondly, the word מבחר, instead of being a reference to the choicest of the Egyptian officers, is an allusion to the freedom of choice, בחירה, that G’d gave the Egyptians at that time, i.e. they had brought their death upon themselves by having made the wrong choice in pursuing the Israelites, even after witnessing that the G’d of the Israelites had split the sea for them. After having seen this, even the protective angel of the Egyptians no longer had any complaint against G’d.
Our sages in the Mishnah Sanhedrin 6,4 describe the platform or the “house,” בית הסקילה, from which the penalty of stoning to death was carried out as being two stories (the height of two average sized persons) high. From that platform the criminal or sinner convicted to death by stoning would be pushed down. The “stoning” would commence after the fall if it had not been fatal. The wording in the Torah is: סקול יסקל או ירה יירה, “he will surely be stoned or shot,” (Exodus 19,13). The word ירה alone therefore might have been misleading.
Another expression which poses a difficulty in our verse is: ומבחר שלישיו טבעו בים, “and the choicest of his officers drowned in the sea.” It would have sufficed to state that “his officers drowned;” that would have included both the junior and the senior officers.
The answer to these questions may be gleaned from the words of the Midrash (Yalkut Reuveni, B’shalach) where the protective angel, שר, of the Egyptians is quoted as having complained that seeing that both the Israelites and the Egyptians had been idol worshippers, why would the Egyptians be singled out for such harsh punishment.
We further need to understand why G’d resorted to the stratagem of encouraging the Egyptians to pursue the Israelites through commanding the Israelites to turn back at Baal Tzefon (Exodus 14,2), after they had already left Egypt and both politically and economically, the Super Power Egypt had suffered a lethal blow. Had G’d not found an excuse that misled the Egyptians to believe that their deity had frightened the Israelites, the entire pursuit of the Israelites and the resultant drowning of the Egyptian army would never have taken place. We must therefore conclude that G’d paid heed to the complaint of the protective angel of the Egyptians, and had to show him that his protégées were totally wicked, having reneged on their not only having released the Israelites but having expelled them. (Exodus 12,33 and 39). The words רמה בים, may be understood as a reference to the illusion that the Egyptians harboured that they might succeed due to favourable astrological constellations at the sea where they had failed on land. Secondly, the word מבחר, instead of being a reference to the choicest of the Egyptian officers, is an allusion to the freedom of choice, בחירה, that G’d gave the Egyptians at that time, i.e. they had brought their death upon themselves by having made the wrong choice in pursuing the Israelites, even after witnessing that the G’d of the Israelites had split the sea for them. After having seen this, even the protective angel of the Egyptians no longer had any complaint against G’d.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,2. “The Lord is my strength and might; He has become my deliverance.” Moses describes the process as being that the Children of Israel by dint of their prayers “awakened” the attribute of Mercy including all the largesse that G’d is willing and capable of putting at His creatures’ disposal. We must never lose sight of the fact that even when we carry out G’d’s will and desires, we would never be able to do even this unless we enjoyed a measure of Divine assistance. This is what the Talmud in Kiddushin 30 taught us when it states that without the ongoing assistance by G’d we could never stand up successfully against the evil urge. If this is so, it follows that even our good deeds are the product of Divine assistance, so how can our good deeds and prayers “awaken” the attribute of Mercy?
My revered and saintly teacher Rabbi Dov Baer, has provided us with one of his “pearls” of Torah insights by means of a parable. Let us say that a father is trying to teach his son a difficult lesson. He keeps trying but the son remains unresponsive, does not understand what is expected of him. What does the father do? He provides his son with some clue to the solution of the problem he had posed. Seeing that his father is actively helping him, the son is encouraged and redoubles his efforts to find the missing parts of the puzzle with which this father had confronted him. G’d, our Father in heaven, deals similarly with us. Realising that unless He helps us we might, G’d forbid, become the victims of the evil urge, He furnishes us with clues.
My revered and saintly teacher Rabbi Dov Baer, has provided us with one of his “pearls” of Torah insights by means of a parable. Let us say that a father is trying to teach his son a difficult lesson. He keeps trying but the son remains unresponsive, does not understand what is expected of him. What does the father do? He provides his son with some clue to the solution of the problem he had posed. Seeing that his father is actively helping him, the son is encouraged and redoubles his efforts to find the missing parts of the puzzle with which this father had confronted him. G’d, our Father in heaven, deals similarly with us. Realising that unless He helps us we might, G’d forbid, become the victims of the evil urge, He furnishes us with clues.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,3.“The Lord is a man of war, nonetheless His name is Hashem, i.e. the Merciful One.” The author refers to a commentary of his on psalms 90,1 תפלה למשה איש האלוקים, “a prayer by Moses, the man of G’d.” He repeats a theme he has dwelled on repeatedly, that it is the primary effort of the righteous during all of their lives to make their contribution to G’d dispensing the maximum amount of His largesse for His creature. The prayers of the righteous are not concerned with asking for their personal well being, but with asking for the well being of the community within which they live. We perceive of G’d as “garbing” Himself in the mantle woven by the prayers of the righteous. This explains why Moses referred to G’d as איש, “man.” A righteous person in our time is comparable to Moses in his time. The Talmud in Shabbat 101 confirms this by saying that every righteous person in our time may be called “Moses,” hence the commencement of psalm 90 with the words תפלה למשה, do not refer only to the original Moses. The message of the psalm is that the prayers of the righteous in our generation are as effective in their effect on G’d as the prayers of Moses in his time. G’d garbing Himself with the prayers of the righteous is something that is the case only when the result (G’d’s largesse) is to become manifest immediately as beneficial. When G’d responds negatively to our prayers He is never referred to as איש. Hence the meaning of Bileam’s blessing in Numbers 23,19 לא איש א-ל ויכזב, “G’s is not like man who deceives,” teaches that the negative virtue of deceiving is called כזב. We never find the term איש applied to G’d when He is active in His attribute of Justice, decreeing punishment on His people. This remains true even if in answer to the prayers of the righteous He decrees judgment on our adversaries. In such instances He may be referred to as גבור, Warrior, or some other name depicting His attribute of Justice. [This is the difference between G’d as איש מלחמה and elsewhere as גבור מלחמה, (Isaiah 3,2; psalms 24,8) To make the distinction clear, Moses, repeats ה' שמו, His name, predominantly is Hashem, the Merciful One].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,3.“The Lord is a man of war, nonetheless His name is Hashem, i.e. the Merciful One.” The author refers to a commentary of his on psalms 90,1 תפלה למשה איש האלוקים, “a prayer by Moses, the man of G’d.” He repeats a theme he has dwelled on repeatedly, that it is the primary effort of the righteous during all of their lives to make their contribution to G’d dispensing the maximum amount of His largesse for His creature. The prayers of the righteous are not concerned with asking for their personal well being, but with asking for the well being of the community within which they live. We perceive of G’d as “garbing” Himself in the mantle woven by the prayers of the righteous. This explains why Moses referred to G’d as איש, “man.” A righteous person in our time is comparable to Moses in his time. The Talmud in Shabbat 101 confirms this by saying that every righteous person in our time may be called “Moses,” hence the commencement of psalm 90 with the words תפלה למשה, do not refer only to the original Moses. The message of the psalm is that the prayers of the righteous in our generation are as effective in their effect on G’d as the prayers of Moses in his time. G’d garbing Himself with the prayers of the righteous is something that is the case only when the result (G’d’s largesse) is to become manifest immediately as beneficial. When G’d responds negatively to our prayers He is never referred to as איש. Hence the meaning of Bileam’s blessing in Numbers 23,19 לא איש א-ל ויכזב, “G’s is not like man who deceives,” teaches that the negative virtue of deceiving is called כזב. We never find the term איש applied to G’d when He is active in His attribute of Justice, decreeing punishment on His people. This remains true even if in answer to the prayers of the righteous He decrees judgment on our adversaries. In such instances He may be referred to as גבור, Warrior, or some other name depicting His attribute of Justice. [This is the difference between G’d as איש מלחמה and elsewhere as גבור מלחמה, (Isaiah 3,2; psalms 24,8) To make the distinction clear, Moses, repeats ה' שמו, His name, predominantly is Hashem, the Merciful One].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,8.“at the blast of Your nostrils the waters piled up;” Onkelos translated the words נערמו מים as: “the waters acted intelligently.” This may be understood with the help of Proverbs 8,12: אני חכמה שכנתי ערמה, “I, wisdom, live with prudence;” we have discussed that if a person wishes to gain an understanding of the superior nature of G’d, he must first of all divest himself of all the materialistic “garments” that are part of his daily outfits. This is the first step in approaching the degree of awe and reverence. Having reached that degree, he may consider himself as possessing some חכמה, wisdom. This is also the meaning of Job 28,28: הן יראת אד-ני היא חכמה וסור מרע בינה, ”See fear of the Lord is wisdom ; to shun evil is understanding.” The root of the word נערמו in the verse quoted at the beginning of this paragraph is ערום,” intelligent, smart, as in Genesis 3,1 where the serpent is described as the smartest of all the creatures of the field. The sea possessed awe and reverence for G’d, being eager to fulfill the will of the Creator; this is what Onkelos wished to convey when he translated the “sea” as being intelligent, smart. [Possibly, as opposed to the earth, which had buried the blood of Hevel, thereby hiding a monstrous sin by Kayin. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,11.“Who is comparable to You among the divinities O Lord?” G’d’s intention in splitting the sea had been to humble the idol worshippers and to reveal their idols as impotent. The Egyptians’ major deity had been the river Nile (since it was the source of their economic survival) According to our sages in Sh’mot Rabbah 21,6) at the time of the splitting of the sea of reeds all bodies of water, world wide, experienced a similar “splitting.” The Midrash derives this from the words ויבקעו המים: “the waters split, (plural mode) instead of ויבקע המים singular mode. (Compare 14,21) If all the waters that had been created during the six days of creation split, the waters of the river Nile were included. What better way was there to prove to the Egyptians (and other nations) that there is only one Creator of all the phenomena in the universe?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Another approach to the line: מי כמוך באלים ה'...נורא תהלות עושה פלא, “Who is like You o Lord, among the celestials, …awesome in splendour, working wonders!” It is an accepted criterion of our faith that when a person denies his ego the way is paved to his becoming wise. This concept is spelled out in Job 33,33: אם אין אתה, שמע לי החרש ואאלפך חכמה, “if you are (prepared to be) ‘nothing’, listen to Me, and be still, and I will teach you wisdom.” As the author has mentioned several times, חכמה, true wisdom, is the result of divesting oneself totally of one’s “ego;” as we know from another verse in Job 28,12 והחכמה מאין תמצא, “and wisdom you will find through negating “ego”, becoming “nought,” i.e. אין. A closer look at the word אלף which symbolizes the beginning of everything in our world, will show you that when read backwards it reads פלא, “something transcendental, miraculous.” Moses alludes to this when describing G’d as the source of פלא, “wonders.” What we have previously described as אין, is also a reference to בינה, insight, which, as the word indicates, is something internal, therefore invisible, hidden, another aspect of the root פלא or מופלא. Negation of self, of ego, results in one’s becoming privy to the hidden insights, פלא.
The author sees in Exodus 31,14, ושמרתם את השבת כי קודש היא לכם, “you shall “observe” the Sabbath for it is holy for you,” an allusion to our “viewing” the concept of the Sabbath as our looking at its holy origin. The word “seeing” is understood as the person who “sees” receiving an image, i.e. he is a recipient of revelations of one sort or another. A painter cannot paint a painting until he has first seen an image which he tries to reproduce on canvas, or paper, or any other suitable surface. In the case of “observing” the Sabbath, we are privy to receiving “images” from the אין, from a dimension of the universe, the celestial dimension, that is devoid of a body and its attendant limitations. A Sabbath properly “observed,” is a day in which we distance ourselves from most of our physical needs, [except, of course, fulfilling the commandments that are prescribed and make our bodies participants in this holy experience. Ed.].
The author sees in Exodus 31,14, ושמרתם את השבת כי קודש היא לכם, “you shall “observe” the Sabbath for it is holy for you,” an allusion to our “viewing” the concept of the Sabbath as our looking at its holy origin. The word “seeing” is understood as the person who “sees” receiving an image, i.e. he is a recipient of revelations of one sort or another. A painter cannot paint a painting until he has first seen an image which he tries to reproduce on canvas, or paper, or any other suitable surface. In the case of “observing” the Sabbath, we are privy to receiving “images” from the אין, from a dimension of the universe, the celestial dimension, that is devoid of a body and its attendant limitations. A Sabbath properly “observed,” is a day in which we distance ourselves from most of our physical needs, [except, of course, fulfilling the commandments that are prescribed and make our bodies participants in this holy experience. Ed.].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Still another exegesis of the words: נורא תהלות עושה פלא, “awesome in splendour performing miracles.” Every activity, project, is propelled by a “cause,” and its successful conclusion is meant to provide the person performing it with some pleasure or satisfaction. The “cause,” though experienced in the material world, originates in the spiritual world, even though it underwent many changes on its path to its eventual destination. Its origin was the אלף, also known as אין, the “nought,” the domain totally devoid of such concepts as “ego.” Moses refers to this origin as being lofty, far removed from our means of perception, so that it is פלא, hidden from the eyes of mortal human beings.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,13. “in Your love You lead the people You redeemed; in Your strength You guide them to Your holy abode.” Moses refers to the fact that the redemption from Egypt was not linked to any particular commandments that had to be fulfilled. [I presume that the slaughtering and eating of the Passover lamb is understood as simply saving the firstborn Israelites from dying on that night. Ed.] Ezekiel 16,7 refers to the “nakedness” of the people at that time with the words ואת ערום ועריה , meaning that they did not enjoy the merit of having fulfilled any of G’d’s commandments. As a result, the redemption was purely an act of G’d’s loving kindness for His people. Hence Moses stresses this by saying: נחית בחסדך. This situation, however, was limited to the original redemption. It implies that during a future redemption the Jewish people will be armed with merits, i.e. נהלת בעזך אל נוה קדשך, a veiled reference to the ultimate redemption.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,13. “in Your love You lead the people You redeemed; in Your strength You guide them to Your holy abode.” Moses refers to the fact that the redemption from Egypt was not linked to any particular commandments that had to be fulfilled. [I presume that the slaughtering and eating of the Passover lamb is understood as simply saving the firstborn Israelites from dying on that night. Ed.] Ezekiel 16,7 refers to the “nakedness” of the people at that time with the words ואת ערום ועריה , meaning that they did not enjoy the merit of having fulfilled any of G’d’s commandments. As a result, the redemption was purely an act of G’d’s loving kindness for His people. Hence Moses stresses this by saying: נחית בחסדך. This situation, however, was limited to the original redemption. It implies that during a future redemption the Jewish people will be armed with merits, i.e. נהלת בעזך אל נוה קדשך, a veiled reference to the ultimate redemption.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,16. “Your Terror and dread descend upon them; through the might of Your arm they are still as stone; till Your people cross over;” the holy tongue is composed of letters (consonants) and vowels. The “letters” without the vowels accompanying them are lifeless; the vowels give “life” to the consonants. All subjects that are directly relevant to the “higher” worlds are alluded to in the Torah by the combination of consonants and vowels. As a result, at times when radical changes occurred in the laws of nature, such as during the splitting of the sea (waters) the “connection” between these letters and the celestial domains was interrupted, i.e. נדמו כאבן, “they were silent as stone.” We know that אבן is also referred to as אות, letter, from the reference in the Sefer Yetzirah to שני אבנים. This is what is meant by Moses saying: בגדול זרועך, i.e. on account of Your great Arm, (performing miracles) the letters and vowels were completely silenced and paralysed. [The Sefer Yetzirah revolves around the basic significance of the letters as paths to wisdom, the letters forming a major part of these paths. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 15,18. “the Lord will reign forever.”
In psalms 146,10 David rephrases this by saying: ימלוך ה' לעולם אלוקיך, “the Lord shall reign forever, your G’d.” Moses mentions the subject first, whereas David mentions the subject’s activity, i.e. “reigning,” first. In the Zohar I 148 we find the following commentary on psalms 132,9 כהניך ילבשו צדק וחסידיך ירננו, “Your priests are clothed in righteousness, whereas Your pious ones sing for joy.” The Zohar substitutes the word לוויך, “Your Levites,” for the word חסידיך, “Your pious ones.” He justifies this by claiming that the psalmist, David, considers himself the “entertainer” of the King (G’d). Seeing that he had become qualified to “invite the King,” i.e. selecting a site for the Temple, where G’d was to reside, he realized that it was not enough for the King to be “entertained,” i.e. hosted, by an ordinary Israelite, and thus elevated himself to the status of the Levite, as only the priests and the Levites were ministering to the King’s needs, i.e. performing service in the Temple.
However, there is still another dimension to this parable. It is that even though the good fortune was a daily routine for the rich person in our parable, he did not take his good fortune for granted or as proof of his being worthy of this, but he did not lose sight of the origin of his good fortune and remained aware that he had no claim to it. Perhaps, this is even more noteworthy than the songs presented to G’d by the poor person in our story. The rich person realized that rather than his enjoying his good fortune personally, i.e. his ego thanking the Lord, he understood that it was his task to ensure that G’d will enjoy his prayers of thanksgiving, and that he had afforded him an opportunity to provide Him with a feeling of נחת רוח, “pleasurable satisfaction” at having created the person who had the option of feeling smug about his good fortune instead.
In psalms 146,10 David rephrases this by saying: ימלוך ה' לעולם אלוקיך, “the Lord shall reign forever, your G’d.” Moses mentions the subject first, whereas David mentions the subject’s activity, i.e. “reigning,” first. In the Zohar I 148 we find the following commentary on psalms 132,9 כהניך ילבשו צדק וחסידיך ירננו, “Your priests are clothed in righteousness, whereas Your pious ones sing for joy.” The Zohar substitutes the word לוויך, “Your Levites,” for the word חסידיך, “Your pious ones.” He justifies this by claiming that the psalmist, David, considers himself the “entertainer” of the King (G’d). Seeing that he had become qualified to “invite the King,” i.e. selecting a site for the Temple, where G’d was to reside, he realized that it was not enough for the King to be “entertained,” i.e. hosted, by an ordinary Israelite, and thus elevated himself to the status of the Levite, as only the priests and the Levites were ministering to the King’s needs, i.e. performing service in the Temple.
However, there is still another dimension to this parable. It is that even though the good fortune was a daily routine for the rich person in our parable, he did not take his good fortune for granted or as proof of his being worthy of this, but he did not lose sight of the origin of his good fortune and remained aware that he had no claim to it. Perhaps, this is even more noteworthy than the songs presented to G’d by the poor person in our story. The rich person realized that rather than his enjoying his good fortune personally, i.e. his ego thanking the Lord, he understood that it was his task to ensure that G’d will enjoy his prayers of thanksgiving, and that he had afforded him an opportunity to provide Him with a feeling of נחת רוח, “pleasurable satisfaction” at having created the person who had the option of feeling smug about his good fortune instead.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Flames of Faith
Shiras Ha-Yam: The Song of the Sea (Exod. 15:1-19), which the Jews sang after God miraculously split the Red Sea to enable Jews to cross on dry land.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy