Chasidut su Genesi 49:6
בְּסֹדָם֙ אַל־תָּבֹ֣א נַפְשִׁ֔י בִּקְהָלָ֖ם אַל־תֵּחַ֣ד כְּבֹדִ֑י כִּ֤י בְאַפָּם֙ הָ֣רְגוּ אִ֔ישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָ֖ם עִקְּרוּ־שֽׁוֹר׃
Nel loro consiglio non entri la mia persona; nel loro congresso non ti unire, o mio onore: perocchè nella loro collera uccidono un uomo, e nella loro calma storpiano un bue.
Kedushat Levi
Genesis45,22. “he gave to each of them a change of clothes; to Binyamin he gave three hundred silver pieces and five changes of clothes.” Our sags in Megillah 16 ask: “is it really possible that Joseph erred in the same way as had his father when he showed Joseph preferential treatment? Was Joseph not aware that by what the Torah describes him as doing for Binyamin, he would arouse the brothers’ jealousy?” They answer that the Torah alluded to the five Royal garments that Mordechai, a descendant of Binyamin would be dressed in as we read in Esther 8,15.
Our author, clearly not too enthused with the Talmud’s answer, suggests a different way of understanding the Talmud’s answer. Our sages, understood that Joseph foresaw and hinted to Binyamin that Mordechai, a distant descendant of his brother Binyamin, would play a great part in the miracle of Purim. He intimated that he and Binyamin shared a similar experience, seeing that they were both the sons of the same mother, Rachel. He had attained high rank as a result of someone’s dream (Pharaoh’s) and Mordechai also rose to eminence as a result of a dream, as our sages in the Targum on the Book of Esther (chapter10) have told us. According to the Targum, on the night when the king could not fall asleep (again), he had been dreaming that Haman wanted to assassinate him. This is why he became angry at Haman and commanded him to dress Mordechai in the Royal robes, and paraded him throughout the capital on the king’s horse. Joseph had been paraded similarly. (41,43) Just as Joseph remained under the rule of Pharaoh at the time, so Mordechai would remain under the rule of Achashverosh. (Compare Rashi on 41,40)
This is another example of the approach of our sages to the details the Torah has revealed about the lives of our sainted forefathers, i.e. that they always were at pains to perform deeds that foreshadowed future, critical, events in the lives of their descendants. (Our author lists more examples of this theme when relating to Shimon and Levi’s killing the inhabitants of Shechem as being a forerunner of the Hasmoneans in the Chanukkah story). [I will omit the balance of the paragraph as, seeing this portion is also read sometimes on Chanukkah, the author felt compelled to introduce this subject here, although those events occurred in post-biblical times. It is somewhat forced, as it requires us to see in Levi rather than Shimon, the principal activist, otherwise the connection with the Hasmoneans who were priests is too tenuous. Ed.]
Our author, clearly not too enthused with the Talmud’s answer, suggests a different way of understanding the Talmud’s answer. Our sages, understood that Joseph foresaw and hinted to Binyamin that Mordechai, a distant descendant of his brother Binyamin, would play a great part in the miracle of Purim. He intimated that he and Binyamin shared a similar experience, seeing that they were both the sons of the same mother, Rachel. He had attained high rank as a result of someone’s dream (Pharaoh’s) and Mordechai also rose to eminence as a result of a dream, as our sages in the Targum on the Book of Esther (chapter10) have told us. According to the Targum, on the night when the king could not fall asleep (again), he had been dreaming that Haman wanted to assassinate him. This is why he became angry at Haman and commanded him to dress Mordechai in the Royal robes, and paraded him throughout the capital on the king’s horse. Joseph had been paraded similarly. (41,43) Just as Joseph remained under the rule of Pharaoh at the time, so Mordechai would remain under the rule of Achashverosh. (Compare Rashi on 41,40)
This is another example of the approach of our sages to the details the Torah has revealed about the lives of our sainted forefathers, i.e. that they always were at pains to perform deeds that foreshadowed future, critical, events in the lives of their descendants. (Our author lists more examples of this theme when relating to Shimon and Levi’s killing the inhabitants of Shechem as being a forerunner of the Hasmoneans in the Chanukkah story). [I will omit the balance of the paragraph as, seeing this portion is also read sometimes on Chanukkah, the author felt compelled to introduce this subject here, although those events occurred in post-biblical times. It is somewhat forced, as it requires us to see in Levi rather than Shimon, the principal activist, otherwise the connection with the Hasmoneans who were priests is too tenuous. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sha'ar HaEmunah VeYesod HaChasidut
There are those who criticize the Rambam for his commentary on the Ta’amei HaMitzvot (the meaning of the commandments), for at first glance it seems to give weak explanations. They dwell at length with such accusations. Besides that which is known to anyone possessing understanding, that the Rambam would conceal the depth of his intentions in the beauty of his language, and the depth of meaning is far more than what it seems to be in its external form, yet in addition to this, there is nothing irregular or strange about his words even at their face value. We have a principle, that all teachings on the Torah and mitzvot are dressed in the meager garments of this world. Who do we have who is greater than the RaDbaZ (Rabbi David ben Zimra, 1480-1573), who was both a master of the Talmud and a tremendous kabbalist, a leader of his generation? And in his work on the Ta’amei HaMiszvot, he introduces each commandment by quoting the Rambam’s explanation of its meaning as the basis from which to begin understanding. Then, for most of the mitzvot, the RaDbaZ explains the meaning provided by the Rambam according to the true inner meaning in the Kabbalah. Anyone who possesses understanding will clearly know that simple revealed meaning and the inner mystery are one, and join together as one. Anyone who asserts that the inner mystery is something other that the pshat,105פשט - Simple revealed meaning. of him it is said (Bereshit, 49:6), “let my soul not come into their council.” Even in a place where the RaDbaZ differed in his explanation from the Rambam, still he did not reject the Rambam’s words. Rather, he said that in this place the Rambam did not say enough, and it must be explained according to the sod.106סוד – the secret, or inner mystery. God willing, we will go on to explain how the simple revealed meaning is itself the inner meaning according to the mysteries of the Torah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy