Musar zu Schemot 4:32

First of all, the episode of the serpent, who spoke lashon hara of the Holy One Blessed be He and thereby brought death to the world. And (Bereshith 29:20): "If G-d will be with me and guard me," concerning which Chazal have said: "if He will guard me against lashon hara." And the episode of Joseph (Ibid. 37:2): "And Joseph brought their evil talk to their father," this being the catalyst of the descent of the Jews to Egypt. And (Shemoth 2:14): "In truth, the thing has become known" (see Rashi there and what we shall write below). There, too, (4:1) Moses our teacher, may peace be upon him, says: "But they will not believe me," and the Blessed L-rd counters (Ibid. 2): "What is this in your hand?" … (3) …and it became a serpent." Also there (6): "And, behold, his hand was leprous as snow." And (Ibid. 17:2): "And the people quarreled with Moses… (7) …over the quarrel of the children of Israel, etc." followed by (8): "And Amalek came and warred with Israel, etc." And (Ibid. 23:1): "You shall not bear a false report, which applies to both the speaker and the receiver [of lashon hara] (as we find in Makkoth 23a), followed by (2): "Do not be after many to do evil." And, in reference to the me'il [the outer robe of the ephod] (Ibid. 28:32): "A border shall there be to its mouth roundabout," and the entire section. And (35): "And its sound will be heard when he comes to the sanctuary, etc." And the entire section of Tazria and Metzora: the plague-spots of houses, the plague-spots of clothing, the plague-spots of men, (Vayikra 13:46): "Solitary shall he sit"— even outside of the camp of Israel. And his atonement— "chirping" birds. And (Ibid. 19:16): "Do not go talebearing among your people," (Ibid. 17): "Reprove, shall you reprove your neighbor, but you shall not bear sin because of him." And (Ibid. 25:17): "You shall not wrong, one man, his fellow," which relates to verbal wronging, which is also in the category of evil speech. And (Bamidbar 5:1): "And they shall send out of the camp every leper"— even if he were as great in Torah as Doeg. And (Ibid. 12:1): "And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses, etc." And the entire section of Shelach Lecha, which speaks about the spies. And (Ibid. 21:5): "And the people spoke against G-d and against Moses." And (Devarim 23:10): "When you go out as a camp against your foes, guard yourself against every evil thing [davar ra]," concerning which Chazal have said: "davar ra" may be read as "dibbur ra" [evil speech]. And in Tetze, the "giving out of an evil name [motzi shem ra]," and (Ibid. 24:9): "Remember what the L-rd your G-d did to Miriam, etc." And (Ibid. 27:24): "Cursed be he who smites his friend in secret," which refers to lashon hara. And it is known that all of the "cursings" were preceded by blessings; and they opened with blessing, saying: "Blessed is he who does not smite"— whence we derive that one who is heedful in this is blessed.

When I wrote that Abraham gave to Malki Tzedek both the מעשר and the תרומה, you may ask that one does not give מעשר to a priest but to a Levite, and that Malki Tzedek was a priest! The Arizal explains that Aaron was a re-incarnation of Malki Tzedek's soul, and that the prophet Samuel was a re-incarnation of Aaron's soul. This is hinted at by G–d when He said to Moses in Exodus 4,14: "Is there not Aaron your brother the Levite?" The prophet Samuel was a Levite, and Malki Tzedek was another name for שם the son of Noach. You will note that the first half of the name of the prophet שמואל is שם. Malki Tzedek, in addition to being a priest, as the Torah describes him in Genesis 14,18, was also a Levite, at least potentially.

The reason that the Midrash quoted the verse from Proverbs 3,15, was to substantiate the value that we accord to a natural firstborn. It interprets the word "פנינים," as derived from "פנים," front, or face. The question arises why is it not spelled פנים then? Why do we need the letter "נ" twice in that word? Another question is how do we prove that Gershon had not lost his rank as a firstborn? After all, the fact remains that the Torah gave precedence to Kehat counting him first! This question is answered by the Midrash quoting this verse which had the double "נ" in the word פנים. It is just like saying that in this case two families both ranked as panim, first. We must remember that G–d's original plan was that the Torah should be given to Adam, and this was the whole reason why he had been created. We have explained all this when we discussed the verse in Genesis 1,26, "נעשה אדם" Adam had been the "firstborn" of all mankind, since he was the first human being ever. We also have Israel being called "אדם." This in turn means that Israel is called "firstborn" as we know from Exodus 4,22: "My firstborn son Israel." Here, however, the rank of the Levites as firstborn outranks that of Israel as a whole, since the Levites represent the רוח אדם, whereas the remainder of the tribes of Israel only represent the נפש אדם. We have discussed this concept previously. To make certain that we appreciate this point, the Torah writes concerning the tribe of Levi in Deut. 33,10: יורו משפטיך ליעקב ותורתך לישראל, "They will teach Your laws to Jacob, and Your instructions to Israel." This refers to the revealed Torah, the תורת האדם, the practical Torah, the commandments that either have to be fulfilled, or the transgressions that have to be avoided. However, the spiritual Torah is the true "firstborn," having been created two thousand years before the universe; it is the Torah alluded to on the tablets that the Kehatites were carrying in the Holy Ark. The tablets after all, were מעשה אלוקים המה, "were the handiwork of the Almighty," (Exodus 32,16) just like the "spiritual Torah" which had preceded the written Torah. This Torah then must be viewed as the real בכור, "firstborn." It preceded the Torah that was given to אדם to perform. The Kehatites were mentioned first because they carried the Holy Ark containing the tablets, i.e. the spiritual essence of the Torah. From that aspect the Kehatites deserved to be considered as the בכור. It now is clear why they were counted first. We view Gershon as the "firstborn" in matters that have to be performed in this material world, and Kehat as the "firstborn" in matters that are exclusively the domain of the spiritual world. The very concept of the distinction of being the firstborn is enhanced by our understanding these nuances in the way the Torah is written.

The mystical dimension of the firstling of the pure male animals is an allusion to the people of Israel who have been described by G–d (Exodus 4,22) as His בכור, His first-born. They are without blemish, a perfect congregation whom G–d (Ezekiel 34,31) has also called צאן מרעיתי "sheep of My pasture." This is why they may only be eaten by the priests. The deeper reason why when such firstlings have become blemished and been redeemed, they may be eaten by ordinary Israelites is, that the Israelites themselves also possess some degree of sanctity, have been called אדם. Adam used to be holy. He would have remained holy had he not sinned. This firstling animal was also holy until it contracted a blemish, the equivalent of sin. Just as sinful man can redeem himself, as we know from Isaiah 43,4: "ואתן אדם תחתיך," | give men in exchange for you," so also can this animal be redeemed. This is the mystical dimension of the Azazel which carries our sins. The Torah (Leviticus 16,22) speaks of ונשא השעיר עליו את כל עונותם, which our Rabbis read as on עונות תם, that the he-goat of the Azazel carries on its head the sins of a firstling animal contracting a blemish. On the other hand, we are forbidden to inflict a blemish on it in order to be able to consume it (after redemption). It is quite obvious that such one must not benefit from such an action. It is also forbidden to use animals consecrated as an offering for any mundane task and to use their hair after it has been shorn. The reason for this is easy to understand when one considers that the tablets which Moses had shattered also retained their sanctity.

This is what our sages had in mind when they said: "Pinchas is none other than the prophet Elijah" (Baba Metzia 114), for G–d has said: "Lo, I will send Elijah to you before the coming of the awesome fearful day of the Lord" (Malachi 3,23). Targum Yonathan renders Exodus 4,13, where Moses declines the mission of leading the Jewish people with the words שלח נא ביד אשר תשלח, "Please make someone else Your agent," as: "Send Pinchas to be that leader," (seeing that he is ready and willing to accept this mission of the future, being identical with Elijah). We need to understand what prompted Yonathan ben Uzziel to derive this conclusion based on the verse in Exodus quoted.

And they were redeemed because of their faith, as it is written: "And the people believed" (Exod. 4:31). The Sages said of this verse, "Each one who takes upon himself one commandment with faith is worthy that the Holy Spirit shall dwell upon him." And the exiles are brought back through the merit of faith as it is said : "Look forth from the summit of Amanah (Faith)" (Eccl. 4:8). And it says further : "And I shall betroth thee to me with faith" (Hosea 2:22).

ויאמר ה' אליו מה זה בידך. G–d said: "what is this in your hand?" (Exodus 4,2). Moses was punished with צרעת for having said that Israel would not believe him, even though his motives in saying so had been pure, i.e. he had wondered how he could overcome that lack of belief. This teaches how careful one has to be not to impugn the honour of Israel.

Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai was sitting engaged in Torah study when an old man (i.e., the prophet Eliyahu) stood behind the wall and called to him: “Rabbi! Rabbi! Holy light! Arise and kindle the lamp. That is, the mitzvah lamp of the holy Shechinah (i.e., draw down an outpouring of illumination to the Shechinah, which is called the “mitzvah lamp”). For concerning it was it written, ‘Let a continual fire burn upon the altar, let it not be extinguished’ (Vayikra 6:6). And it is also written, ‘To kindle a continual lamp’ (Shemos 27:20). The Shechinah is certainly called the “lamp of Hashem.” It is the source of Adam HaRishon’s light, that is, his soul. Arise and kindle it!” So Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai stood on his feet (out of deference to the Shechinah) and then sat for a moment and said, “Master of All the Worlds, You are the ruler over kings and the revealer of secrets. Let it be Your will to arrange the words in my mouth in fulfillment of the verse, “And I will be with your mouth” (Shemos 4:12), so that I will not come before You in shame (after my death).”

We shall explain in detail this verse ["Remember what the L-rd your G-d did to Miriam on the way when you went out of Egypt"], so that every man of intelligence can see that our words are correct. The holy Torah noted for us in the mitzvah of remembering, four things: 1) "Remember what, etc."; that is, what was done. 2) To whom did He did it? To Miriam. 3) In what place did He do it? On the way. 4) When did this occur? When you went out of Egypt. Why does the Torah mention these four specifically? What difference does it make to us that the punishment was tzara'ath [leprosy] and not any other punishment? Or whether this happened in the house or on the way? Or whether it happened at some other time and not at the exodus from Egypt? But the truth is that these four details are essential for "remembering" and there is great benefit in reflecting upon them. And for this reason it is written "Remember what He did." That is, one should remember and reflect upon the greatness of the punishment inflicted upon her because of her speaking against Moses, our teacher, may peace be upon him. And that punishment was tzar'ath, an extremely severe punishment, which [illness] it is impossible to cure unless the Holy One Blessed be He conduct himself with him [the leper] above the bounds of nature. As we find in Midrash Rabbah Vayikra 16 on (Vayikra 14:5): "And the Cohein shall command and he shall slaughter the one bird" — Why does he slaughter one and release the other? To teach us that just as it is impossible for the slaughtered bird to return, so is it impossible [within the bounds of nature] for the plague-spots to return [there being no possible cure in the interim]." And [the degree of] his uncleanliness is extremely severe. For he must sit outside the three camps, as opposed to all the other unclean ones. And he also renders unclean all who enter his tent as mentioned in the verse [(an intimation that all those who keep company with the slandered become unclean, as he is)]. And he is also considered like a dead man, as Chazal have said (Nedarim 64b). This explains "Remember what He did, etc." And to whom did He do it? To Miriam, who was a great tzadeketh, in whose merit the well rose [for Israel], and also a prophetess, as it is written (Shemoth 15:20): "And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron took, etc." And she spoke only against her brother, whom she loved as herself, having risked her life to save him from the water. And she did not speak demeaningly of him, but only likened him to the other prophets (as Rambam writes at the end of Hilchoth Tumath Tzara'ath). And she did not speak to his face to shame him, and not in public, but only to her holy brother, in private, her intent being only the betterment of society. And he [Moses] was indifferent to all of these things, as it is written (Bamidbar 12:3): "And the man, Moses, was extremely humble, etc." And in spite of all this, all of her good deeds did not avail her, and she was punished with tzara'ath because of this. And in which place was this punishment inflicted upon her? "On the way," her merits not sufficing her to suspend her judgment until they came to camp in some place, where it would not have been so conspicuous. But now that she was punished immediately on the way, as they were walking, as it is written (Bamidbar 12:15): "And the people did not journey until Miriam had been gathered in," the greatness of her shame was revealed to all, as it is written (Ibid. 14): "Will she not be shamed, etc.?" And when did this happen? When they went out of Egypt, in the beginning of the second year of the exodus, when the greatness of its punishment was not yet known. (As to its being written in respect to Moses our teacher, may peace be upon him, [that his hand became leprous (viz. Shemoth 4:6)], it [the leprosy] was immediately removed from him, as it is written (Ibid. 4:7): "And, behold, it had resumed its fleshy appearance" — as opposed to what happened afterwards, when they had to enter Eretz Yisrael and this was aborted through the lashon hara of the spies. For in this instance the sin was far greater, their having witnessed the punishment of Miriam and not having taken mussar [reproof] — wherefore the parshah of Shelach was juxtaposed with that of Miriam (See Rashi there).

We shall explain in detail this verse ["Remember what the L-rd your G-d did to Miriam on the way when you went out of Egypt"], so that every man of intelligence can see that our words are correct. The holy Torah noted for us in the mitzvah of remembering, four things: 1) "Remember what, etc."; that is, what was done. 2) To whom did He did it? To Miriam. 3) In what place did He do it? On the way. 4) When did this occur? When you went out of Egypt. Why does the Torah mention these four specifically? What difference does it make to us that the punishment was tzara'ath [leprosy] and not any other punishment? Or whether this happened in the house or on the way? Or whether it happened at some other time and not at the exodus from Egypt? But the truth is that these four details are essential for "remembering" and there is great benefit in reflecting upon them. And for this reason it is written "Remember what He did." That is, one should remember and reflect upon the greatness of the punishment inflicted upon her because of her speaking against Moses, our teacher, may peace be upon him. And that punishment was tzar'ath, an extremely severe punishment, which [illness] it is impossible to cure unless the Holy One Blessed be He conduct himself with him [the leper] above the bounds of nature. As we find in Midrash Rabbah Vayikra 16 on (Vayikra 14:5): "And the Cohein shall command and he shall slaughter the one bird" — Why does he slaughter one and release the other? To teach us that just as it is impossible for the slaughtered bird to return, so is it impossible [within the bounds of nature] for the plague-spots to return [there being no possible cure in the interim]." And [the degree of] his uncleanliness is extremely severe. For he must sit outside the three camps, as opposed to all the other unclean ones. And he also renders unclean all who enter his tent as mentioned in the verse [(an intimation that all those who keep company with the slandered become unclean, as he is)]. And he is also considered like a dead man, as Chazal have said (Nedarim 64b). This explains "Remember what He did, etc." And to whom did He do it? To Miriam, who was a great tzadeketh, in whose merit the well rose [for Israel], and also a prophetess, as it is written (Shemoth 15:20): "And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron took, etc." And she spoke only against her brother, whom she loved as herself, having risked her life to save him from the water. And she did not speak demeaningly of him, but only likened him to the other prophets (as Rambam writes at the end of Hilchoth Tumath Tzara'ath). And she did not speak to his face to shame him, and not in public, but only to her holy brother, in private, her intent being only the betterment of society. And he [Moses] was indifferent to all of these things, as it is written (Bamidbar 12:3): "And the man, Moses, was extremely humble, etc." And in spite of all this, all of her good deeds did not avail her, and she was punished with tzara'ath because of this. And in which place was this punishment inflicted upon her? "On the way," her merits not sufficing her to suspend her judgment until they came to camp in some place, where it would not have been so conspicuous. But now that she was punished immediately on the way, as they were walking, as it is written (Bamidbar 12:15): "And the people did not journey until Miriam had been gathered in," the greatness of her shame was revealed to all, as it is written (Ibid. 14): "Will she not be shamed, etc.?" And when did this happen? When they went out of Egypt, in the beginning of the second year of the exodus, when the greatness of its punishment was not yet known. (As to its being written in respect to Moses our teacher, may peace be upon him, [that his hand became leprous (viz. Shemoth 4:6)], it [the leprosy] was immediately removed from him, as it is written (Ibid. 4:7): "And, behold, it had resumed its fleshy appearance" — as opposed to what happened afterwards, when they had to enter Eretz Yisrael and this was aborted through the lashon hara of the spies. For in this instance the sin was far greater, their having witnessed the punishment of Miriam and not having taken mussar [reproof] — wherefore the parshah of Shelach was juxtaposed with that of Miriam (See Rashi there).

(Ibid. 4:1): "And Moses answered and he said: 'But they will not believe me, and they will not hearken to my voice; for they will say: 'The L-rd did not appear to you.'" (Ibid. 2): "And the L-rd said to him: 'What is this in your hand?' And he said: 'A staff.'" Why did G-d hold this against Moses? Should he not have questioned as he did? I heard from the Gaon, R. Eliyahu Schick, of blessed memory, that He took exception to the words "But 'Hen' they will not believe me," stated categorically. He should have said "Perhaps they will not believe me." [This explains what our sages of blessed memory said: "When the Holy One Blessed be He said to Moses (Devarim 31:14): "Hen your days have drawn near to die," Moses replied: "With 'Hen' did I praise You (viz. Ibid. 10:14): "Hen, to the L-rd your G-d are the heavens and the heavens of the heavens, etc.") and with 'Hen' do You answer me?" The L-red replied: "But you also said: 'But Hen they will not believe me.'" Ostensibly, this is unexplainable; but, according to the above interpretation, the meaning is clear: The Holy One Blessed be He said to him: "'Hen' your days have drawn near to die" — categorically. This was very difficult for Moses to accept, and he answered: "But I praised You with 'Hen," and do You answer me with 'Hen'!" And to this the L-rd replied, that this is "measure for measure" for his also having said 'Hen' [categorically].

(Shemoth 4:2): "What is this in your hand? And he said: 'A staff.'" (see Rashi, to the effect that He said to Moses: "Mizeh ["From this"] that is in your hand, you deserve to be smitten" [for having wrongly suspected the innocent]. From this we can understand that in all instances of lashon hara — it being known from Tosefta Peah that punishment is exacted for them in this world, with the principal remaining [for punishment] in the world to come — there is no necessity of adducing a distant cause for his punishment, but [it can readily be understood] as proceeding from what is immediately "at hand."

(Ibid. 3): "And he threw it to the ground and it became a serpent" (see Rashi). It is also possible to say that He intimated to him that by words of lashon hara there was created the serpent that "prosecutes" man above, desiring to "bite" him.

(Shemoth 4:6): "And the L-rd said to him again: 'Put your hand into your bosom, etc.'" (see Rashi). In this instance, He also intimated to him that he had spoken lashon hara, and that because of this he would be stricken with leprosy. And even though in the beginning, he had already received his punishment in dread of the serpent, this ["Put your hand into your bosom, etc."] was because of the second thing he had said, i.e., "And they will not hearken to my voice." And, in truth, it was not so [i.e., that they did not hearken], it being written afterwards (Ibid. 31): "And the people believed, and they hearkened, etc."

(Shemoth 4:6): "And the L-rd said to him again: 'Put your hand into your bosom, etc.'" (see Rashi). In this instance, He also intimated to him that he had spoken lashon hara, and that because of this he would be stricken with leprosy. And even though in the beginning, he had already received his punishment in dread of the serpent, this ["Put your hand into your bosom, etc."] was because of the second thing he had said, i.e., "And they will not hearken to my voice." And, in truth, it was not so [i.e., that they did not hearken], it being written afterwards (Ibid. 31): "And the people believed, and they hearkened, etc."

The person suffering from צרעת, however, is afflicted with the essence of the impurity, and there is no way for him to avoid it. Hence he has to leave all three camps as long as he is afflicted. Such impurity in any Jew is of the kind that infects even the נפש, i.e. part of the camp of the Israelites. This is in accordance with Proverbs 21,23 שומר פיו ולשונו שומר מצרת נפשו – that "he who guards his mouth and tongue, keeps his soul from troubles." The Zohar suggests that the reading of מצרת is equivalent to מצרעת, i.e. from that skin eczema. Our sages are agreed that evil gossip is a principal cause of this affliction. Classic examples are Miriam (Numbers 12,10), and Moses (Exodus 4,6), both of whom were punished for having made inappropriate comments about Moses or Israel respectively. We observe many slanderers in our day who are never afflicted with this disease; this makes the matter even worse for them, since they have already forfeited the part of the נפש that would be stricken, and they are therefore no longer capable of being rehabilitated through that disease and the subsequent purification process. The מצורע, at any rate, has to leave all three camps.

We know that G–d succeeded in this because the Torah tells us in 14,31: "They believed in G–d and in His servant Moses." The verse in question refers to the Israelites having seen מצרים dead in verse 30. The Zohar is at pains to point out that the Torah does not speak about מצריים, Egyptians, being viewed as dead, but מצרים, i.e. the שר של מצרים. G–d made a point of showing the dead שר to the Israelites. I believe that this is the plain meaning of the verses dealing with this episode.

We find two opinions in Bereshit Rabbah 22,12, as to the kind of "sign" G–d gave to Cain. Rabbi Yehudah says that G–d made the sun shine for him. Rabbi Nechemyah says that G–d certainly would not have gone out of His way to make the sun shine for such a sinner, rather the "sign" was a form of צרעת, skin excema, very visible. This comment is not to be understood as disagreement with Rabbi Yehudah. G–d said to Moses: "If they will not believe you, and not listen to the impact of the first "sign" (miracle), they will be convinced by the impact of the second miracle." The first sign was that Moses' face would shine like the sun, and Cain would benefit from this. Rabbi Nechemyah elaborates that Cain certainly would not benefit from this, until, when re-incarnated and his soul had been cleansed since he had accepted G–ds judgment, he had become Yitro. Only then would his sign be radiation of the face of Moses, rather than the sign of צרעת. We find a reference to this in Exodus 22,1: "If the thief is discovered in a hideout." The thief referred to is Cain who had tried to cheat G–d (גנבת דעת, see Rashi's comment on Genesis 4,9). The Torah in Exodus 22,1, continues: "If he is struck down and dies as a result, there is no blood (guilt)." However, if the sun shone upon him, (the thief) there is blood (guilt). What is meant is the גלגל החמה, i.e. after he had reformed and had become rehabilitated (galgal should be read gilgul metamorphosis).

Rashi as well as other commentators also explain the words רב לך אל תוסף דבר אלי עוד בדבר הזה "Enough for you; do not continue to speak to me about this subject" in a variety of ways. Seeing that so many commentators have had their say on this subject, I will add something of my own. This was part of the wars of conquest. The fact that Moses distributed these lands to some of the tribes who made their homes there proved that it was part of the land of Israel. If G–d did not allow all the land to be conquered by Joshua surely this was because He had relented from the decree in Numbers 20,12! Moses had good reason to believe this. When Moses quoted G–d (3,27) as having said to him: "You will not cross this Jordan," he was guilty of an inaccuracy. The Torah had not mentioned this. When he quoted G–d as saying: "instruct Joshua, imbue him with strength and courage, for he shall go across at the head of the people, and he shall allot to them the land that you only see," this too is something that seems quite irrelevant at this juncture. Moses said: "You have begun," i.e. the beginning of conquest and distribution of the land of Israel has been carried out by me. Why did You not let Joshua do the whole thing seeing that he is prepared for this task? Moses' reasoning here is similar to what he had said to G–d (Exodus 4,13) at the burning bush: שלח נא ביד תשלח, which the Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel understands as a reference to Pinchas, i.e. the prophet Elijah who will proclaim the advent of the final Redemption in the future. Moses had felt then that Pinchas was the suitable candidate to lead the Jewish people into the Holy Land also on the first occasion. When considering the fact that he had been allowed to commence the conquest and the distribution of the land we understand why Moses thought that the decree to deny him this task had been lifted. Although Moses had been told the exact boundaries of ארץ ישראל in Numbers 34,3-12, and these boundaries did not include the lands formerly occupied by Sichon and Og, Moses thought that there had been no need for the Torah to list those boundaries as the lands had already been distributed Moses was convinced that these lands were part of the Holy Land, and he was proven right when the Jews returning from the Babylonian exile sanctified them. Moses surmised that the reason that G–d had rescinded His decree against his leading the Jewish people in the conquest could only have been to enable him to acquire still greater insights into the phenomenon of a G–d who rules in Heaven and on Earth as described in 3,24. As a result of such considerations he prayed: "Please let me cross and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan, the good Mountain and the Lebanon" (3,25). He prayed to remain the leader. The expression אעברה is basically the same as when Moses said in Numbers 27,17 that the leader of the Jewish people should be at their head when going to war and should be the last one to return from war. Moses' major concern was not that he wanted to continue to exercise authority, but that this authority would be the means whereby he would gain greater insights. As a result of Moses, Israel's leader, gaining greater spiritual insights, the spiritual level of the whole people would also be raised. When we look at Moses' request in this light we appreciate that he asked not only for himself but also for his people.

The next item that Rabbi Bachyah listed in his comparison between the acts of creation when the universe came into being and the construction of the Tabernacle was the creation of the luminaries during the six days of creation and the construction of the candlestick in the Tabernacle. The hidden parts of the soul are alluded to here. A person observing the Sabbath properly prepares himself spiritually before joining his wife in order to fulfil the commandment of "be fruitful and multiply." His soul is elevated and influenced by the symbolism represented by the cherubs on the Holy Ark. I have explained elsewhere why the cherubs appeared like man and wife joining, and how the mystical element of the union between husband and wife is related to the זכור aspect of the Sabbath legislation, the performance of the positive commandment of Sabbath observance. When speaking about the negative commandments of the Sabbath, the שמור aspect, we also find two, respectively four categories. The visible aspect of the performance or non-performance of such negative commandments by the soul is the דבור, the articulation of the thought. Certain kinds of speech are forbidden on the Sabbath. One is not supposed to discuss mundane matters relating to one's business, etc. Rabbenu Bachyah alluded to this when he referried to the creation of man. i.e. a talking spirit. When speech is employed constructively it is called דבור and makes a positive impact in the Celestial Regions. When speech is not employed constructively it is called הבל פה, "vain mouthings," reminding us of הבל הבלים of Solomon in Kohelet. The Midrash mentioned the appointment of Aaron as High Priest during the construction of the Tabernacle as the activity which corresponded to the creation of man during the six days of creation. Aaron knew when to speak, (Exodus 4,14,) and he knew when to keep silent (Leviticus 10,3).

In earlier eras all such sacrifices were performed with firstling animals, as indicated by the phrase קרבן ראשית in Leviticus 2,12. Moses' whole mission to Pharaoh was to inform the latter that Israel's was G–d's true firstling, i.e. בני בכורי ישראל (Exodus 4,22). As a result it was appropriate that the Jewish people first and foremost should perform עבודה for G–d. The only reason Jacob had purchased the birthright from Esau was to qualify as the first-born in order to perform this service to G–d. Jacob would not otherwise have been been qualified to perform this service, [at a time when the Levites had not yet replaced the first-born as priests. Ed.]

The angel himself alluded to that kind of life when he said that his return would take place כעת חיה, ולשרה בן, "at a time of eternal life, when Sarah would have a son" (18,10). The news about the birth of Isaac was the message that it was through Isaac that such idyllic times would eventually return. This is also what is meant in Shabbat 89 when Isaiah 63,16 is discussed. The prophet says: "You are our father, for we did not know Abraham, and we were not familiar with Israel (Jacob); You Lord have always been our Father and Redeemer." The Talmud reported a conversation between G–d and Abraham in which G–d accuses the Jewish people as having sinned, and Abraham suggests that they be wiped out for the sake of G–d's Holy Name. Thereupon G–d says: "I shall tell this to Jacob who has understanding for the difficulty of raising children, perhaps he will pray for mercy for them." Jacob's response however, was the same as Abraham's. Finally, G–d spoke to Isaac: "Your children have sinned!" Isaac replied: "Are they only my children and not Yours?! When they volunteered to accept the Torah saying "we shall do and we shall hear" (Exodus 19), You called them "My first born son" (Exodus 4,22); now that they have sinned they suddenly are mine? Isaac continued to argue with G–d in this vein. As can be seen, in that conversation Isaac proves to be the only one of the patriarchs who defends Israel. This is what Isaiah referred to when he has Israel deny the other two patriarchs. Many readers are non-plussed by this Aggadah in the Talmud, seeing that we associate Abraham with the attribute of חסד, love, and Isaac with the attribute גבורה, justice, and we would have expected Isaac to have been rigid in his attitude and Abraham to have made excuses for his children. Jacob, who represents a mixture of these two attributes, should also have found it in his heart to come to the defense of his children in Isaiah's story. How then can we explain that the real good devolved upon the people of Israel through their patriarch Isaac?

Datan and Aviram accused Moses and Aaron of misleading the people when they said in 16,14: "should you gouge out those men's eyes? we will not come!" These words alluded to a metaphysical dimension, that Korach was the reincarnation of Cain. All our commentators say that when Moses slew the Egyptian (who was part of Cain's reincarnation as we have explained), it was Datan and Aviram who told on him and who made an issue of Moses' taking the law into his own hands, etc. (Exodus 2, 13/14). Now they concentrated on their greed for money. This was because, according to tradition, they had become impoverished as a result of having reported Moses' action to Pharaoh. When Moses had been bidden to return to Egypt the Torah said that all the people who had sought his death had already died (Exodus 4,19). Since Datan and Aviram were obviously still "alive," this meant that they had lost their influence to cause harm, since "poor people, childless people, leprous people, and blind people are considered dead people" (Zohar Beha-alotcha 153, Nedarim 64). Our sages also say that while in Egypt both Datan and Aviram were childless, and not like the other Jews who had been blessed with an abundance of children. They now lost the children they had fathered since the Exodus, due to their rebellious behaviour. It is almost certain that they were afflicted with צרעת, seeing that this is the standard penalty for malicious gossip, something they had certainly been guilty of. Even if their bodies had not been afflicted by that disease, certainly their souls had become afflicted by it. The Zohar explains Proverbs 21,23, "He who guards his mouth and tongue guards his soul from troubles," i.e. מצרות נפשו. He says we should read instead מצרעת נפשו, from afflicting his soul with "leprosy." By sarcastically asking: "Are you going to gouge out the eyes of these men, etc.?" Datan and Aviram described a method of "death" of someone who is compared to the dead since he does not possess eyesight. This explains Rashi's comment on Exodus 4,19, where he quotes Nedarim 64 that the poor are considered as if dead. Their sin consisted of greed, the opposite of the virtue of enjoying one's share, which is the true wealth.

We have a tradition that after Yitro, i.e. Yeter, or Re-uel, converted to Judaism, his name was changed to יתרו to indicate that he had accepted the 613 commandments. If this is so, why was his name changed to one whose numerical value is 616 instead of 613? It seems to me that after Yitro converted to Judaism he was only entitled to a name whose numerical value is 606, since by converting Yitro assumed only an additional 606 commandments. He had been obligated to observe the 7 Noachide commandments already prior to his conversion. We have the example of Ruth the Moabite, whose name was changed to רות=606. Ruth's new name symbolised these 606 additional commandments she assumed at the time of her conversion. Yitro therefore should have been called תרו. He had the letter י added to his name as a special acknowledgment of the efforts he had made to find the true greatness of G–d and His Name. Even the letter ו in his name represents an acknowledgment of his contribution to the Jewish people through his suggestion (18,21) that Moses appoint heads of thousands, heads of hundreds etc. We have his name on record as merely יתר in Exodus 4,18. Rashi (18,21) points out that 600 judges were installed when the heads of thousands were appointed; the appointment of the heads of of hundreds involved another 6,000 judges. Appointing heads of fifty involved the appointment of another 12,000 judges, and the appointment of heads over each ten Israelites involved the appointment of another 60,000 judges. The whole world wonders why Rashi gave us a lesson in arithmetic here? Were we not able to figure this out by ourselves?

David ruled for forty years. This figure is alluded to in the name Samuel which is comprised of the letters in the name Saul, שאול, with the letter 40=מ added. The first four letters allude to Royalty, the last to the 40 years David reigned. Samuel was from the tribe of Levi which wore the "crown" of Torah. Samuel himself was considered as equal to Moses and Aaron combined. Although he was known as a Levite, being a member of that tribe, he combined within himself elements of the priesthood, being traditionally considered the re-incarnation of the High Priest Aaron. When G–d told Moses in Exodus 4, 14: הלא אהרון אחיך הלוי וכו', "Is there not your brother Aaron the Levite?" He implied that there would be a Levite who at the same time was Moses' brother Aaron, i.e. Aaron's re-incarnate, the prophet Samuel. This secret has been revealed by the Arizal, and I have quoted his words on a previous occasion.

There is a comment by the Midrash Hagadol on the words וישמע ראובן, in 37,21 which illustrates that the brothers did not understand Joseph's true motives. We are told there that the objective of the Torah in telling us of the purity of Reuben's motive, though he dared not express it at the time, was to tell us how highly G–d rates the performance of a good deed when such deed is performed without ulterior motives. Had Reuben known that his deed would be recorded by the Torah and be read in public for millennia, he would have carried Joseph back to his father on his shoulder without delay. Another example of the same idea is Aaron's meeting Moses when the latter returned from Midian to assume the leadership of the Jewish people. Aaron's joy and lack of envy of his younger brother is extolled by the Torah in Exodus 4,14. The Midrash adds that if Aaron had known that the Torah would compliment him on his deed, he would have organised a musical band to welcome Moses home to Egypt instead of merely going to meet him all by himself. The Midrash goes on with a similar comment about the way Boaz treated Ruth amongst the gleaners (Ruth 2,14). Boaz is reported there as inviting Ruth to dip her morsel in vinegar. Had he known that this gesture would have been recorded in Scripture for all to know, he would have offered her all kinds of delicacies.

To get back to the subject of the cruse made of earthenware to be eventually exchanged for the קרן, horn. Not only will the פך be traded for a קרן in the future, but even the כף will undergo תיקון, metamorphosis, and instead of representing כף חובה, the side of the scale containing our debits, will become כף זכות, the side of the scale containing our merits. When the princes each brought their offerings on the occasion of the dedication of the Holy Tabernacle recorded in Numbers chapter 7, each one of them brought כף אחת מלאה קטורת, one spoonful of incense. The princes alluded to the תיקון, rehabilitation of original man, by each one including in their offering a bowl of silver weighing 130 (unspecified units of silver) thus alluding to the 130 years that Adam had failed to perform the commandment to be fruitful and to multiply. Rashi elaborates on this theme in Numbers 7,19. In Psalms 139,5: ותשת עלי כפכה, "You have laid Your hands upon me," we find an allusion to the diminution of man to the numerical equivalent of one hundred=כף, something caused by the serpent, as we know from Exodus 4,4 when G–d showed Moses that his staff turned into a serpent while in his כף. In the future we will witness fulfillment of Kings II 11,12: ויכו כף, ויאמרו יחי המלך, "They clapped their hands and shouted "long live the king!" (The subject dealt with is the crowning of Yoash, last surviving member of the Davidic dynasty after Athaliah had murdered all the others. Yoash's reign ushered in a rejuvenation of the kingdom of Yehudah under a king loyal to G–d and tutored by a pious High priest Yeho-yadah.) The כף in the verse quoted symbolizes the positive aspect of the word, and is an allusion to a similar event of far greater dimensions in the future. The כף full of incense, would be offered by Aaron (or his sons if suitable) in the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement. The כף will be כפופה, closed, because when we are worthy we will experience the blessing of Deuteronomy 15,4 that there will not be anyone who is destitute (in need of a כף פתוחה, a handout from an open hand). The פ in that word which is open, will reflect the emotions expressed in Psalms 126,2 which deals with the return of G–d to Zion, and which describes our mouths as filled with laughter and joy.