Pemikiran Yahudi Kejadian 2:4: Akeidat Yitzchak, Olat Reiyah & Guide for the Perplexed

Lastly, the "kind deeds" parts of his statement is contained in the very fact that forgiveness and atonement are possible, and are granted by G'd. He who is aware of the inherent weakness of man, has generously made provision for man's rehabilitation. It is not a Jewish characteristic to indulge in wholesale killing, even if great wrongs have been committed. The Torah has to exhort us not to have mercy in such cases as the ir hanidachat, the city whose majority have indulged in idol worship, whose inhabitants have to be executed. The Torah therefore emphasizes that administering the death penalty has as its objective to turn aside G'ds wrath against those who tolerate wrongdoing. This is proof that were it not for this consideration, we might not administer a death penalty at all. Kings who desire the adulation of their subjects, certainly indulge in generosity when sinned against. Even Haman had to keep secret the identity of the people he wished to murder, and not use the word "murder," but "destroy," meaning "neutralise," so as not to offend the sensibilities of the king. Another motivation for generosity is that forestalling the desire for revenge by his subjects, as well as fear to trigger hostile action by those to be killed. He who feels threatened, will try to act in self defense. Ahasverus, who had shown that he craved popularity by throwing lavish banquets, had no choice but to execute Bigtan and Teresh. He executed Haman when he had become aware of the latter's machinations. Heretofore he had put quite a different interpretation on what Haman had meant when the latter had asked permission le-abdam, to destroy them, (compare story in megillat Esther) Being generous and forgiving is therefore seen as a character trait that is conducive to self-preservation. It keeps civilisation going. The King of Kings certainly does not desire mass death of His subjects, but wishes to inspire teshuvah, repentance, through the retribution exacted from the few. G'd, who had first considered creating the universe by using the yardstick of justice, i.e. midat hadin, had reconsidered when He realised that the world would not be able to endure on that basis. This is because no man could be expected never to sin. (Bereshit Rabbah 12) This is why when the Torah relates the story of creation a second time in chapter 2,4, we find that G'd has acquired a new attribute in addition to elokim. He is now also called hashem, "the merciful One." These two attributes of G'd are reflected in the two holy days Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur, i.e. New year's day and Day of Atonement. The former reflects the din, justice aspect of G'ds rule, the other the rachamim, mercy aspect. On the former day everyone is judged according to his "present" state. Even the beynonim, the people whose merits are balanced by their errors, debits, are treated according to the yardstick of justice, since G'd waits until the Day of Atonement to see which way the scales will tip at that time. However, repentance is accepted from all on Yom Kippur, meaning that G'd relaxes the rule of strict justice. This is what is called lifnim mishurat hadin. The hint in scripture confirming that this is so, is found in Psalms 47,6, Elokim arose at the sound of truah, but Hashem at the sound of the shofar. Since the term truah is found in the Torah in connection with Rosh Hashanah, whereas only the term shofar is found in connection with Yom kippur, the hint is reasonably clear. If, as we said before, Samael, i.e Satan, has no control over man on Yom Kippur, as long as man exploits the day properly, it follows that he who ignores the opportunity presented by that day will fall irretrievable victim to Samael. This is the "bribe" that G'd gave to Satan. The attribute of mercy, when ignored, causes utter destruction of the soul for all those who have ignored it. A hint of all this is found in the numerical value of the word "Satan." It adds up to 364, i.e. Satan has control on 364 days of the year, not on the 365th day, the Day of Atonement. (Yuma 19) The last sentence in the Yom Kippur service (16,34) is to remind us that the function of Yom Kippur is not affected by the existence or non existence of the holy Temple and the ability to offer the sacrifices. The need is for penitence brought on through innuy, discomfort. The day alone does not achieve atonement.

The constant prayer of the soul¹There are three primary aspects of soul which Rav Kook addresses in the introduction. When appropriate, neshama has been left in transliteration, ruach translated as spirit, nefesh as vital soul. Here are examples of how Rav Kook uses these terms elsewhere.
נשמה – התכונה הרוחנית העליונה של שפעת חיי המחשבה והרצון, המתעלה בעילוי האלוקי (ע"ר א טו)
The neshama is the highest spiritual aspect, the outpouring of the life of thought and will which rises up in Divine elevation (see Olat Reiyah I p.15)
רוח – הרצון (ע"ר א רנ), מכון השכל (שם קיט)
The ruach is the will (ibid p.250), the dwelling place of the intellect (ibid p.119)
נפש – היסוד התמציתי של החיים הטבעיים (ע"ר א יז), מכון הרצון (ע"ר א קיט)
The nefesh is the essential foundation of natural life (ibid p.17), and the dwelling place of the will (ibid. 119)
See this source text from Olay Reiyah
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul and all your might
The heart is the dwelling place of the spirit (ruach), and the essence and primary foundation of choice reside in the aspect of ruach, which is the definitive level of humanity. Through the ruach the vital soul (nefesh) is elevated, drawing down upon itself more of the light of the higher soul (neshama). The place of the ruach and the nefesh is within man’s body, and they are certainly bounded by it. But the neshama can never in its entirety enter the body, rather the embodied intellect is illuminated by her sparks, because in her greatness she cannot enter into and be limited by any vessel. The vessel cannot bear the light, and this is why she is called ‘might,’ which indicates something abundant and magnified. This is the precision of meaning found in the homily of our Sages: ’and all your might (m’odecha)’ with every measure (middah) which He measures (moded) out for you.” The feeling of love in the heart could never be from the aspect of the nefesh, certainly not toward something which might cause one pain. So too, the love of a sick person for the doctor who amputates a painful limb does not flow from the nefesh, because one’s nefesh suffers from this act. Rather it comes from the ruach, the will that receives its impression only after awareness of the ultimate good which flows from this act has been fixed in one’s intellect. But the love of God must be magnified by things whose ultimate good cannot be quantified, but rather simply draw us toward the love of His great glory. This cannot be impressed on the will and is also not possible from the perspective of ruach, but rather only ‘with all your might,’ which is the neshama, can such a love come, where for every measure that He measures out for you, you can be filled with a mighty gratitude, through the exalted value of the highest intellectual feeling.
ואהבת את ד' אלהיך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאדך.
הלב הוא משכן הרוח ,ועקר הבחירה וראשית יסודה הוא בבחינת הרוח,שהוא מדרגת האדם, וע"י הרוח מתרוממת הנפש, וממשיך עליו יותר אור הנשמה. והנה הנפש והרוח מקומם בגוף האדם ומוגבלים בו בודאי, אבל הנשמה אי אפשר כלל שתכנס בשלמותה בגוף, רק מאיר ממנה אור בניצוץ השכל המורגש בגוף, כי לפי גדולתה אי אפשר לה להכנס בכלי ולהגבל בו ולא יוכל הכלי לסבול את האור, ולכן היא נקראת בשם מאד שהוא מורה על הרבוי וההפלגה. ולפיכך מכוונת היא דרשת רז"ל בכל מאדך בכל מדה ומדה שהוא מודד לך. כי הרגש האהבה שבלב אי אפשר כלל שיהיה מצד הנפש למה שהוא מרגיש ממנו דבר מכאיב, כמו שאהבת החולה לרופא החותך אבר המכאיב אינה מצד הנפש, שהרי נפשו מצטערת במעשה זה, רק מצד הרוח שהוא הרצון המתרשם אחרי שכבר נקבעה בהכרת השכל תכלית הטוב היוצא מזה. אבל אהבה להשי"ת צריכה להתגבר מצד דברים שלא ישער כלל תכלית טובם, רק ימשך לאהבת כבודו הגדול לבדו, וזה לא יתרשם בחלק הרצון ולא יתכן גם מצד הרוח, רק בכל מאדך, שהיא הנשמה, תוכל לבוא אהבה זו, אשר על כל מדה ומדה שהוא מודד לך תהא מודה לו במאד מאד, ברוממות ערך ההרגשה השכלית העליונה.
The constant²The vision of prayer as one’s natural state of being is rooted in the second story of creation, particularly as read through the midrashic lens provided by Rashi (see Bereshit 2:4-8 with Rashi). Rashi (on 2:5), in the words of the midrash, makes it clear all of creation is in a state of potential, in a state of ‘not yet.’ Even the rains themselves await the prayer of man. Rashi then outlines a process in which prayer is man’s tool for moving creation from potential to actual. He says that man was needed to begin working the ground, to see the goodness that rain could bring, to feel its lack in the world and then turn to G–d in prayer. There is a practical approach to prayer which can be explored in this structure, but the question here is – how was Adam to know that rain was good if it had never yet fallen? The answer comes in lines 6 and 7. When G–d forms Adam from the dust of the earth, Rashi notes that the mist which rose from the ground allowed G–d to knead the raw substance of Adam into his form. This means that the water which the world required, which the prayer of man was meant to evoke, was the very stuff of Adam’s being. “The very waters that man is going to pray for, become the stuff of which he is made. Do you realize how deep that is? And I believe the deep understanding of that, is that man is made of that which he prays for in his most initial prayer, because the world, so to speak, produces man, so that man will pray for it.” R. Daniel Kohn prayer of the neshama strives continually to move from hidden to revealed, to spread over all the forces of life of the spirit and of the vital soul, and all the powers of embodied life. She yearns as well to reveal her essence and the power of her actions over all her surroundings, over all the world and life, and toward this end we require the accounting of the world (See Baba Batra 78b) which comes through Torah and wisdom. And so we find that the whole work of the Torah and all its wisdom is the constant revelation of the hidden prayer of the neshama³Notice that this is a revolution in the traditional understanding of the relationship between Torah learning and prayer. Here the purpose of learning appears to be to give us an orderly conception of the world which will then allow the soul’s prayer to reveal itself to the fullest. Compare to the Maharal at the very end of Netiv haTemimot “Torah comes from the highest source, where as tefillah is the inner source itself, which reaches to the source of highest blessing…”. “Let the breath of all life (nishmat kol chay) bless Your name, oh Lord our G–d…”⁴The poem Nishmat kol chay is said at the transition in Shabbat morning prayer between psukei d’zimra (songs of preparatory praise) and the acceptance of Divine kingship that comes through saying Shema Yisrael and its blessings. See translation at the end of this comment for more on this transition.
The oldest reference to the poem is found on gem. Pesachim 118a, where R. Yochanan says it is the “blessing of the song” named by the Mishna as the concluding blessing to Hallel of seder night, which it remains in the present Haggadah. The standard translation is “let the breath of all living things bless Your name…” In light of the role that the soul’s prayer plays in giving voice to all creation (see paragraphs 6 & 7 in this section) R’ Kook is pointing a reading as – “let the breath of all Life bless Your Name… (through the soul which reveals herself in prayer as an engagement of the wholeness of creation.)
See Olat Reiyah, Pesukei dezimra 122 .

“A tanna teaches like R. Yosi bar R. Chanina – Avraham established the morning prayer, as it says ‘Avraham rose early in the morning to the place where he had stood before G–d…’ (Bereshit 19:27) and there is no standing (amidah) other than prayer, as it says ‘ Pinchas stood up and prayed.’ (Tehillim 106:30) Yitzchak established the afternoon prayer, as it says ‘Yitzchak went out to converse (lasuach) in the field at evening time…’ (Bereshit 24:63) and there is no conversation (siach) other than prayer, as it says ‘A prayer of the afflicted, when he faints and pours out his complaint (sicho) before G–d.’ (Tehillim 102:1) Yaakov established the nighttime prayer, as it says ‘He encountered (va’yifgah) the place, and stayed the night there…’ (Bereshit 28:11) and there is no encounter other than prayer, as it says ‘Therefore pray you not for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, nor make intercession (tifgah) to me…’ (Yermiyahu 7:16)” [Berachot 26b]
These three expressions – standing, conversing and encounter, are aligned with three principle benefits that prayer brings to the service of G–d. The first act of prayer is to root firmly in the heart all the holy concepts and lofty images, the foundations of awe and morality which one has acquired in their soul, so that they will not falter under the storm winds which devastate morality and Divine service through desires of the heart and the passions of the time. The primary time for this rooting is the morning. That before one turn to the business of life and the inevitable feelings of bodily desire, they prepare a strong and well-founded moral posture for themselves which will standup under the oppositional trials of the waves of the times; therefore, the prayer which is oriented toward this activity is known as amidah, standing. To this end our father Avraham, first of the faithful, who withstood ten wondrous trials, and against all the multitude that opposed the path which rises in the light of G–d, who stormed in order to scatter and push him aside, was most fit; he fought to find a well-founded and enduring place to stand.
Prayer is called sichah⁵⁴See gemara Avodah Zarah 7b where siach is the language associated with personal prayer (conversation), sharing a name with the plants and trees which are called sichim⁵⁵See Bereshit 2:5 which in this light could be read as “before there was any conversation.” This fits the nature of the second story of creation, which in its opening verse (Bereshit 2:4) uses the form of the word creation הבראם (in their being created) in contrast to the form ברא (created) in the first verse of the Torah. In general one can explore these two story as the first representing a subject/object relationship between G–d and creation and the second a subject/subject relationship. Hence the appearance of conversation at the outset of the second story. See footnote 2., due to the blossoming of the soul with new powers, which branch out naturally through the excitation of the soul in the service of the heart. This is most fit to the time of the evening offering, (see Tehillim 141:2) when one is close to casting off their troubles. Then their soul can elevate her nature, and the natural holy emotions stored up in her, to join to the living G–d and overflow with His pure love and awe, increasing fertile fruit and sending out shoots and branches, taking the likeness of a mighty tree⁵⁶It is this aspect of prayer which ties the disparate pieces of creation together into a whole, a conversation. Note that the in the first story of creation there are individual plants (see Bereshit 1:11-12) but there is no field. It will take the type of prayer conversation which emerges in the second story, the siach hasadeh (see Rashi on Bereshit 2:5), to bind the blades of grass, the pieces of creation, into a whole that could be named a field. See Orach Chaim 61:3 and the Rama’s statement about how the gematria of two names of G–d, that which represents essence and that which represents expression, combine to equal 91, which is also the gematria of ilan, tree. The Maharal Be’er HaGolah, be’er chamishi says – know, that this world is similar to a single tree (ilan) which stretches from the root to the end of the tree, and it has many branches, drawn one after the other. So too it is with the world which is drawn from the First Cause that is the root, which is what we mean when we call heresy ‘to deny the root principle.’Its parts descend one after another until the final descent of the pieces of existence. - one of the sichim.⁵⁷One of the pieces of creation, or ‘in the conversation.’ This natural blossoming from within the rightness of the soul is the root of the judgment which is passed upon the one who turns aside from the straight path of life. The attribute of judgment, in so far that it has a natural law, is exacting with one who changes its ways and strays from its path; and this is the attribute of Yitzchak, as it is written “Were it not that the G–d of my father, the G–d of Avraham and the Fear of Yitzchak, had been with me…” (Bereshit 31:42), as our Sages taught with thorough explanation.
However, there is another great advantage to prayer, that she find her essential purpose in those of the highest level and value, the highest holy ones who draw near to G–d, who rise up in prayer and lift themselves to the level of prophecy, or near to it, as is written in Tur/Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 98; they encounter states well beyond the ways of nature, because they are lifted up far beyond the natural condition and cleave to the living G–d in purity of heart and soul. And the night is best suited for this, in its respite and solitude, as the chasid explained in The Duties of the Heart⁵⁸R Bachya ibn Pakudah wrote Duties of the Heart in Arabic in 1040 under the title "Al Hidayah ila Faraid al-Ḳulub" (Guide to the Duties of the Heart), it was translated into Hebrew by Judah ibn Tibbon under the title "Ḥobot ha-Lebabot. R’ Bachya was a court judge and philosopher in Saragossa Spain. This work is the first systematic presentation of Jewish ethics and drew heavily from contemporary Arab thinkers. It presents ethics and philosophical understandings as the duties of ‘the heart’ in opposition to those of ‘the limbs’ which are the outward observance of the Law (Gate of Love of G–d, ch. 6) on the advantage of nighttime prayer, which also facilitates visitation of sacred lofty visions and awesome intellectual fruits, that cannot be apprehended in the company of the physical senses. Things grasped from beyond the conceptual processes embedded in nature come not according to the natural gradual order of simple to profound, or through individual analytic pathways gathered together into a framework. Rather the great light of the sweetness of G–d is revealed suddenly, happy is the one who merits to it! Prayer is called encounter (pgiya), as when one happens upon something, as a result not only of the nature of the path which the traveler takes but also of the immanent nearness of the one encountered. And so it was for our father Yaakov, peace be upon him, for it is a certainty that his prayer prepared him for the lofty prophetic vision of the ladder and all its particulars (see Bereshit 28:10-17) , and that is why the name encounter is associated with his prayer, “and he encountered the place.” This is befitting the nighttime prayer.