Chasidut zu Ijow 22:31
Kedushat Levi
14,20. “Hashem said: ‘I have forgiven according to your word.’” In his commentary on this verse Rashi amends the word דברך, “your word” (singular), to דבריך “your words.” He does so, in order that we understand that Moses’ “word” which G’d referred to would be understood clearly as the “words” מבלתי יכולת ה', “that G’d had killed His people because he was not able to make good on His promise to dispossess the Canaanites in their favour,” and surely G’d would not wish to create such an impression. At first glance we do not see what Rashi’s commentary added to the understanding of this verse.
I believe that what Rashi had in mind was that the principal concern in Moses’ prayer at this time was to avoid that the Israelites’ sin would result in a public desecration of G’d’s name, i.e. the impression being created that G’d was not omnipotent. Moses specifically pointed to the reaction the destruction of the Jewish people would cause in Egypt, the Egyptians being able to point out that the Israelites had been far better off while they had been slaving for them before their Exodus. Surely this is a very weak argument seeing that G’d is able to mislead human beings in the conclusions they draw when observing certain events.
[There comes to mind an example cited by the Torah itself in Exodus 14,2 when G’d commanded the Israelites to encamp at פי החירות for the express purpose of making the Egyptians think that they had lost their way. Ed.] Seeing that G’d is free to do this, Moses’ argument appears to be very feeble.
We must however remember that the mere words uttered by G’d make an indelible impression. [The author quotes Job 22,28 “You will decree and it will be fulfilled” in support of this. Ed.] It would follow from the above that the mere mention of the possibility of an act by G’d that would result in His name being desecrated worldwide, would undermine a subsequent reversal when the decree is not carried out.
I believe that what Rashi had in mind was that the principal concern in Moses’ prayer at this time was to avoid that the Israelites’ sin would result in a public desecration of G’d’s name, i.e. the impression being created that G’d was not omnipotent. Moses specifically pointed to the reaction the destruction of the Jewish people would cause in Egypt, the Egyptians being able to point out that the Israelites had been far better off while they had been slaving for them before their Exodus. Surely this is a very weak argument seeing that G’d is able to mislead human beings in the conclusions they draw when observing certain events.
[There comes to mind an example cited by the Torah itself in Exodus 14,2 when G’d commanded the Israelites to encamp at פי החירות for the express purpose of making the Egyptians think that they had lost their way. Ed.] Seeing that G’d is free to do this, Moses’ argument appears to be very feeble.
We must however remember that the mere words uttered by G’d make an indelible impression. [The author quotes Job 22,28 “You will decree and it will be fulfilled” in support of this. Ed.] It would follow from the above that the mere mention of the possibility of an act by G’d that would result in His name being desecrated worldwide, would undermine a subsequent reversal when the decree is not carried out.
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
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 15,2. “Avram said: ‘My Lord, what will You give me., seeing that I walk on earth without a biological heir?’”
15,7. G’d responded immediately, by saying:והנה דבר ה' אליו לאמור וגו', it is difficult to understand the word לאמור, “saying, or to say,” since to whom was Avram supposed to tell what follows next?
We may better understand this formulation by looking at Numbers 14,13-20 where Moses asks G’d how by wiping out the Jewish people at that time, His name would be exalted amongst the gentiles; on the contrary the gentiles would interpret this as a sign of G’d’s inability to keep His promise to His people. Upon listening to Moses’ argument at that time, G’d relented and forgave the people in accordance with Moses’ argument. On the last words, Rashi comments: “on account of Moses having said due to G’d’s inability, etc.” It is difficult to see in what way Rashi added anything to what Moses had said, as reported by the Torah.
Upon reflection, Moses’ comment to G’d about what the Egyptians would say if G’d were to wipe out the Jewish nation is difficult. Did Moses really think that omniscient G’d needed him to tell Him about this? It appears from the fact that Moses bothered to mention this to G’d that the words of a tzaddik do have an influence on G’d’s decisions. This is confirmed in Job 22,28, ותגזר אומר ויקם לך, “you will decree and it will be fulfilled;” In the verses quoted from Numbers 14 we find that G’d immediately responded to Moses’ argument by changing the decree. Had G’d wanted to prevent the Egyptians to make the kind of comments Moses had assumed they would make if Israel would be destroyed, He could have brought this about. The fact that He did not, and preferred to cancel His own decree, bears witness to the effectiveness of Moses’ prayer. Moses’ prayer prompted G’d to say: סלחתי, “I have forgiven, etc.” It is this that Rashi had in mind when he commented on our verse above by saying. “on account of Moses having said, etc.”; Rashi meant if Avram not mentioned the fact that he had no biological heir to G’d, G’d would not have changed a heavenly decree that had been in existence since before he had been born. In order for the decree that Avram would not sire any children to be rescinded or altered, he himself had to mention his grief about such a decree in a prayer. Only then could G’d respond to this prayer. G’d had to use provocative statements in order to get the obedient and unquestioningly loyal Avram to be provoked into making a comment that appeared to question G’d’s promise that he would have children to be converted. The word לאמור in verse 1 is the Torah’s hint that G’d engaged Avram in the conversation following in order for him in the course of this conversation to reveal to Him that he experienced mental anguish at not having children of his own. Once Avram had revealed this in an unmistakable manner, G’d was able to take into consideration the prayer of a tzaddik and to change the decree Avram had read in the stars. Accordingly, Avram had to be induced to say that Eliezer would be his heir.
15,7. G’d responded immediately, by saying:והנה דבר ה' אליו לאמור וגו', it is difficult to understand the word לאמור, “saying, or to say,” since to whom was Avram supposed to tell what follows next?
We may better understand this formulation by looking at Numbers 14,13-20 where Moses asks G’d how by wiping out the Jewish people at that time, His name would be exalted amongst the gentiles; on the contrary the gentiles would interpret this as a sign of G’d’s inability to keep His promise to His people. Upon listening to Moses’ argument at that time, G’d relented and forgave the people in accordance with Moses’ argument. On the last words, Rashi comments: “on account of Moses having said due to G’d’s inability, etc.” It is difficult to see in what way Rashi added anything to what Moses had said, as reported by the Torah.
Upon reflection, Moses’ comment to G’d about what the Egyptians would say if G’d were to wipe out the Jewish nation is difficult. Did Moses really think that omniscient G’d needed him to tell Him about this? It appears from the fact that Moses bothered to mention this to G’d that the words of a tzaddik do have an influence on G’d’s decisions. This is confirmed in Job 22,28, ותגזר אומר ויקם לך, “you will decree and it will be fulfilled;” In the verses quoted from Numbers 14 we find that G’d immediately responded to Moses’ argument by changing the decree. Had G’d wanted to prevent the Egyptians to make the kind of comments Moses had assumed they would make if Israel would be destroyed, He could have brought this about. The fact that He did not, and preferred to cancel His own decree, bears witness to the effectiveness of Moses’ prayer. Moses’ prayer prompted G’d to say: סלחתי, “I have forgiven, etc.” It is this that Rashi had in mind when he commented on our verse above by saying. “on account of Moses having said, etc.”; Rashi meant if Avram not mentioned the fact that he had no biological heir to G’d, G’d would not have changed a heavenly decree that had been in existence since before he had been born. In order for the decree that Avram would not sire any children to be rescinded or altered, he himself had to mention his grief about such a decree in a prayer. Only then could G’d respond to this prayer. G’d had to use provocative statements in order to get the obedient and unquestioningly loyal Avram to be provoked into making a comment that appeared to question G’d’s promise that he would have children to be converted. The word לאמור in verse 1 is the Torah’s hint that G’d engaged Avram in the conversation following in order for him in the course of this conversation to reveal to Him that he experienced mental anguish at not having children of his own. Once Avram had revealed this in an unmistakable manner, G’d was able to take into consideration the prayer of a tzaddik and to change the decree Avram had read in the stars. Accordingly, Avram had to be induced to say that Eliezer would be his heir.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy