Musar su Salmi 7:78

Remember that Abraham's principal attribute was his characteristic of חסד. The mystical element of חסד is found in the מים העליונים, pure unpolluted waters of the Celestial Regions. The attribute of חסד is also the mystical domain of אהבה, love, as we shall explain. Once Abraham had acquired the virtue of חסד he could enter the domain of אהבה, love, and that is why G–d called him אוהבי. We are told in Song of Songs 8,7 that even מים רבים, many waters, cannot extinguish love. The waters referred to are the מקור מים חיים, the source of truly life-giving waters. There are, however, many cisterns, broken and yet filled, which cannot retain the waters in them. In Kabbalistic jargon these are called קליפות; they are alluded to in Genesis 37,24 as והבור רק אין בו מים, "the pit was empty it did not contain any water." We know from Psalms 52,3: חסד אל כל היום, that "G–d's חסד lasts all day long," though we also have a verse in Psalms 7,12 which appears to contradict this, namely א-ל זועם בכל יום, "G–d pronounces doom each day." The answer is simply that G–d pronounces doom over these קליפות, negative forces, reducing them to impotence. This is the חסד G–d performs all day long. Ezekiel 36,25 may have alluded to this when he says: וזרקתי עליכם מים טהורים וטהרתם מכל טמאותיכם, "I shall sprinkle on you pure waters and you will be cleansed from all your impurities. These waters wash off the accumulated pollution known as קליפות, the result of sins. It is these waters which are called מעטים, little. The reason that "a little water" is sufficient is that קליפות do not increase or multiply naturally, as opposed to קדושה, which increases and multiplies naturally; that is why מים רבים, many waters, are unable to extinguish the "fire" of love, and love continues forever. The principal aspect of the virtue of kindness is deeply rooted in the mystical domain of those מים רבים discussed above On occasion some of these waters have to be used in order to rinse off the קליפות and to "humble" such outgrowths due to sins. This is why Abraham spoke about "a little water to be taken."

But he who does kindness will receive kindness, and the more he does, the more he will receive. David would exult in possessing this good trait, striving to do kindness even to those who hated him, as written "but when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth; I afflicted my soul with fastings" (Tehilim 35:13), and "if I have repaid the one who did evil to me" (Tehilim 7:5).

Behold the story of Gedalia ben Achikam where it is clear to our eyes that due to his great Chasidut to not judge Yishmael ben Netanya negatively, nor to accept an evil report, he said to Yochanan ben Kareach "you are speaking falsely of Yishmael" (Yirmiyahu 40:16). What resulted from this? He was murdered, the Jews went into exile, and their last ember was extinguished. Scripture attributes the murder of these people as if Gedalyah himself murdered them, as our sages of blessed memory, said (Nida 61a) on the verse: "all the bodies of the men whom he had killed through Gedaliah" (Yirmiyahu 41:9).

I have found a similar interpretation by the Rekanati who writes as follows: "The plain meaning of the prayer in 21,8: 'do not burden the people of Israel with the guilt of shedding innocent blood' is undoubtedly the spilling of blood of the innocent. We must ask, however, why there is a need to pray to G–d not to burden us with a guilt we have not been guilty of? Who could imagine that G–d would punish without due process of law? Was this not precisely the response of Avimelech to G–d when he knew that he had not actually raped Sarah (Genesis 20,5)? He claimed that Sarah had misled him! King David in Psalms 7,5 said: "If I have dealt evil to my ally, etc." He defended himself against G–d not considering him worthy of intervention because of a sin he might have committed quite by accident. A similar passage is found in the Book of Jonah when the sailors about to go down with their ship reluctantly agreed to save themselves by throwing Jonah overboard (Jonah 1,14).

One must learn from the example of the Holy One Blessed is He. For He is the King of the Kings of Kings, yet He chose us out of all the peoples and tongues and called us “My firstborn son Israel” (Shemos 4:22), “the treasured people” (Devarim 7:6) and “Yeshurun” [a straight and honest people] (Devarim 32:15, Yeshayahu 44:2). However, if the children of Israel ignore the will of the Omnipresent, and follow their heart’s desire to engage in commerce and worldly pleasures, what satisfaction can the blessed Creator derive from them? Moreover, even if a person prays and dons tefillin and tzitzis on occasion, he prays hurriedly, giving only lip service to Hashem, while his heart is preoccupied with foreign thoughts. Then immediately after he finishes praying he runs to eat and drink. Concerning such a one the verse declares, “He labors with iniquity and brings forth falsehood” (Tehillim 7:15). Then, one day death suddenly strikes and the person discovers that he has prepared no provisions for the journey that lies before him.

Another insight to be aware of, and which I believe to be correct, is that when our teacher Moshe killed the Egyptian it seems to have been the beginning of Egypt’s downfall and from that time forth their guardian angel seems to have been on the wane. For the Ari writes (Likkutei Torah, 55a; Sha’ar HaPesukim, 26a) that Moshe killed the Egyptian with the Divine Name Y-CH-SH [יכ"ש], which is one of the components of the forty-two part Name. This name derives from the verse, “Who appointed you to be an officer or judge?” — Miy samcha le’ish sar veshofeit (Shemos 2:14). For this Name had the power to subdue the Egyptians and to wreak vengeance upon them. King Dovid alludes to it in the verse, “Judge me, Hashem, according to my righteousness” — Shafteini Y-H-V-H ketzidki (Tehillim 7:9), the acronym of which also spells out this Name.

In fact, Queen Esther would have liked to have evoked pure mercy, for the Divine name in its simple form [i.e., and not as an acronym] and in proper sequence is a Name of mercy. But if Esther had not mentioned this Name in an acronym of initial letters she would have been unable to defeat Haman. In her wisdom she knew that she must incorporate a small amount of judgment as well as mercy in order that this judgement would take revenge upon Haman, oppressor of the Jews. After this it is stated, “For he saw that the evil was concluded against him from the king” — Ki ra’ah kY chalsaH eilaV hara’aH mei’eis hamelech (Esther 7:7), the “king” being an allusion to the King of Universe. Note that the Divine name appears here in proper sequence indicating mercy for Israel. Nevertheless, it appears as an acronym of final letters to hint at the judgment and destruction that was to befall Haman and his sons. From here we can see the extent of the wicked Haman’s evil intentions towards Israel. In him was fulfilled the verse, “He excavated a pit and dug it out” (Tehillim 7:16). That is, he was ensnared by the very trap that he laid. Therefore the Torah has commanded us to wipe out the name of Amaleik and his seed and the seed of his seed. Thus the Sages have taught (Sifri, Devarim 25:19; Mechilta DeRashbi, Shemos 17:14) that one must blot out the name of Amaleik even from upon the trees and stones. This is the source of the custom — and the customs of Israel are Torah — to bang upon hearing Haman’s name, in order to wipe out his name and that of Amaleik. All the authorities, both earlier and later, have written that one must not abolish this custom.

In G–d's Master Plan the timetable for such developments has been recorded. If the Jewish people proceed irrespective of G–d's timetable, then they are liable for any damage which their sparks cause. If they act in accordance with G–d's timetable, they are not liable for damage inflicted on Esau. When the storekeeper placed his Chanukah lights at the side of the road on Chanukah, he had complied with G–d's timetable for the emission of such "sparks," hence Rabbi Yehudah holds that he is not liable for any damage inflicted on the flax. Jewish history has known periods when some people tried to hasten the arrival of the Messiah. The first time this occurred was when members of the tribe of Ephrayim (misreading G–d's timetable 30 years before the Exodus) rebelled, left Egypt and attacked the Philistines in d,. According to our tradition this resulted in the death of 200,000 of their number. (cf. Chronicles I 7,21. Zavad and his brother Shutelach are assumed to have been the leaders of that ill fated expedition. More about this in Sanhedrin 92). The metaphor of the camel laden with flax passing the "merchant's store" with a light lit before it, is an allusion to Esau passing G–d's Temple endangering it with hazardous material. G–d is the "merchant" in the Midrash. [He is perceived as extending credit to man and recording the amount of credit extended. Man repays by performing the מצות in the Torah. Ed] The store is a metaphor for the ארבע אמות של הלכה, the four cubits of Halachah that G–d claims on earth in our days. According to Berachot 8, this is all that G–d "owns" in our world since the day the Temple was destroyed. The site of these four cubits is where the Temple used to stand, seeing G–d loves the gates of Zion as we know from Psalms 87,2 and Berachot 8a. The Temple has been referred to as בירה, the same word used for the conflagration caused by the fire described in Talmud Baba Kama 62, when the burning flax sets fire to the building of the merchant i.e. G–d's Temple (in an example where the animal was so overloaded that part of the flax crossed the threshold of the store). In that example, the owner of the camel is liable.