신명기 33:1의 차시두트

If we see in the words of our masters that the words of the prophet were ‘to teach repentance and instruction,’ one could erroneously think that the prophet was merely one who rebuked. Even in yesteryear, during the times of the prophets themselves, when people beheld the(se) ‘pillars of fire’¹⁷⁷That is, the prophets. before them and the flames of God flowing from the mouths of these holy ones—we see that the people nonetheless called the prophets by terms reflective of their utility. As the verse puts it, “for the prophet today used to be called the seer” (I Samuel 9:9). Why would one call him a seer when the Torah preceded him to call him a prophet, as in “I will establish a prophet?” The answer is, simply, that the names and terms we use cannot convey anything beyond the boundaries of human utility or sensory perception. After all, an angel [malakh] is referred to as such due to its function as a messenger, not according to its essential nature. The soul [neshamah] is referred to as such after the breath (see Rashi to Genesis 7:22).¹⁷⁸Genesis 7:22 reads: “All in whose nostrils was nishmat ruakh hayim beapaiv (the merest breath of life-JPS), all that was on dry land, died.” In some versions of Rashi’s commentary here, the term ‘nishmat’ is rendered ‘neshimah shel’, ‘the breath of,’ rather than ‘the soul of.’ R. Shapiro cites this as evidence that the soul is called the neshamah because of its association with the breath rather than as a true descriptor of its metaphysical essence. For we have no name for the essence of the angel nor the essence of the soul. So too, the term ‘prophet’ does not describe the essence of the prophet but merely that God has spoken with him (despite the biblical reference to a prophet as “man of God,” [see Berakha 1¹⁷⁹The reference is to Deuteronomy 33:1, the beginning of Parshat Vzot haBerakhah. and several times in Kings¹⁸⁰E.g. I Kings 13:1.], the Targum always translates “man of God” functionally, as “prophet of God”). Therefore the people named them (the prophets) in correlation to their needs, alternating their titles according to the functions which the prophets performed more frequently: when the prophets were primarily teaching Israel repentance and issuing instruction, they called them neviim, from the language of “niv sefatayim”¹⁸¹“Expressions of the mouth.” (Rashi to Exodus 7:10), and when they more often told the future and provided for other needs, they were called seers. “For the prophet today used to be called the seer”-i.e. the people called them as such.¹⁸²That is, these were colloquial nomenclature, not proper names.

Simchat Torah is a preparation for the whole year, to be regular in Torah [study]. It is as the sages, may their memory be blessed, said, "[Thousands of scholars died] because they did not recite the blessing over the Torah first." And that is why Simchat Torah is at the beginning of the year, so that a person should contemplate the greatness of the Torah, since it is the words of the living God. And through the desire and joy in clinging to the Torah, there remains afterward a clinging from the occupation with Torah [study]. It is as it is written in the Midrash, "This is the blessing (Deuteronomy 33:1), that there be a blessing on the Torah before it and after it." And likewise, even merchants, who are not always occupied with Torah the whole year, nevertheless fix it in their hearts, and it becomes difficult to separate from the words of Torah, because of the joy [simchah] at the beginning of the year. This assists him not to completely forget it, even when he is occupied with other things. And it is written, Rejoice, Zevulun, in your going out (Deuteronomy 33:18). But it is difficult, as why should he rejoice in this portion? Rather, it is good advice: That through the joy before he goes out for trade, he is thereby guarded upon his going out. And that is why Simchat Torah is at the beginning of the year, as mentioned above.

We hope to justify Akavyah’s using the language the ‎‎Mishnah recorded. Akavyah posits that a person in ‎evaluating himself, taking stock of himself, is tempted to look at a ‎list of his achievements first. If that person is a good person, ‎Akavyah reminds him that seeing that he is “descended” from an ‎evil smelling drop of semen he does not really have anything to ‎boast about. If he is a morally weak or inferior person, he is ‎reminded of his superior ancestors as his origin, something which ‎should make him ashamed for not living up to his forefathers’ ‎standards. Akavya was aware that there are two levels of “fear of ‎the Lord.” The lower level is called “fear of punishment,” whereas ‎the higher level is called ‎יראת הרוממות‎ “the awe of the ‎overwhelming superiority of the Creator.” He therefore addresses ‎both categories of individuals, assuming that each category finds ‎it difficult on occasion to resist the evil urge so that he may ‎commit a transgression. True ‎יראת השם‎ is only this latter category ‎of “awe and reverence of the Lord.” This is the level of ‎יראת שמים‎ ‎of the righteous, seeing that the ‎צדיק‎ always focuses on the ‎concept of the ‎אין סוף‎, “G’d as personification of infinity.” In Job ‎‎18,12 we have been taught that ‎חכמה ‏‎, “true wisdom,” is only ‎found in the realm described as ‎מאין‎, same letters as ‎אין‎ in ‎אין סוף‎. ‎The tzaddik always keeps reflecting on the fantastic ‎concept of the infinity of the Creator and how He is in charge of ‎millions of different categories of holy angels and a universe the ‎extent of which boggles the imagination. He thinks of how all ‎these angels are in constant awe of Him so that through his ‎preoccupation with such thoughts he does not fall victim to the ‎urge to taste the physical pleasures offered by the region into ‎which we have been placed by our fate. These physical urges, ‎after all, have become part of him only by genetic transmission ‎from his father and mother, whereas his divine soul, G’d’s ‎contribution to every human being as an integral part of Him, is ‎supplied by Him Who, most certainly is not subject to such urges. ‎It was Moses’ ability to concentrate on that “third” of his ‎ancestry, i.e. the ‎אין סוף‎, that resulted in his being described as ‎איש האלוקים‎, a “godly man.” (Deuteronomy 33,1) He had attained this ‎status by becoming what the Torah called: “the most humble ‎man on earth.” (Numbers 12,3) It follows from the Torah’s ‎definition of his personality that he had concentrated on the ‎closest possible connection with what was concealed from him, ‎‎(as well as from any living human being) i.e. G’d’s essence, so that ‎he considered himself as ‎אין‎, as if non-existent, immaterial.‎