לֹא־יַעַרְכֶ֣נָּה זָ֭הָב וּזְכוֹכִ֑ית וּתְמ֖וּרָתָ֣הּ כְּלִי־פָֽז׃
황금이나 유리라도 비교할 수 없고 정금 장식으로도 바꿀 수 없으며
Rav Hirsch
V. 2. איש כי יפליא נדר. Siehe zu Kap. 22, 21. בערכך נפשת. Siehe zu Kap. 5, 15. ערך, seiner Grundbedeutung nach: Zusammengehöriges nebeneinander stellen, ordnen (lautverwandt mit ארג, weben, Verbindung parallel laufender Fäden), heißt auch: in der Beurteilung neben einander stellen, אין ערוך אליך: man kann dir nichts zur Seite stellen (Psalm 40, 6), ומה דמות תערכו לו (Jes. 40, 18). Daher auch: den Wert und die Bedeutung eines Gegenstandes vergegenwärtigen, das vergegenwärtigen, was dem andern zur Seite gestellt werden kann. לא יערכנה ,לא יערכנה זהב פטרת כוש, nicht Gold, nicht Edelstein vergegenwärtigen den Wert der Weisheit (Job, 28, 17 u. 19). ערך, die Vergegenwärtigung der Bedeutung, der Wertausdruck, לא ירע אנש ערכה (daselbst 13). ערך נפשות sind somit der Wertausdruck, die Vergegenwärtigung der Bedeutung von Personen. ערך נפשות לד׳: der Ausdruck des Wertes von Personen für Gott, d. i. für das Heiligtum, der Ausdruck der Bedeutung, die eine Person für das Heiligtum hat. Und ערכך נפשות: ein solcher nationaler, allgemeiner für die Nation feststehender Wertausdruck. Es ist dies עֵרֶך, wohl zu unterscheiden von כסף ישיב ,כסף (Schmot 21, 34). וחצו את כספו (daselbst 21, 35). כסף ist der Geldes wert, und so lange Sklavenhandel existiert, kann es auch einen Geldwert eines Menschen geben, es kann nach einem solchen Maßstab der Wert eines Menschen als Arbeitskraft für Menschen ebenso wie der Nutzwert eines andern Gegenstandes beurteilt werden. Ein solcher Geldeswert heißt in der jüdischen Gesetzessprache: דמים, und wäre, wenn jemand דמי פלוני עלי oder: דמי עלי ausspricht, von Fall zu Fall zu ermitteln. Ein solcher Geldwert ist ערך nicht. ערך und insbesondere ערכך, ist ein ideeller Wertausdruck, der Ausdruck des ideellen Wertes, den ein Mensch für Gott und sein Heiligtum hat. Dieser Wertausdruck ist ein allgemein feststehender, er sieht völlig ab von physischer, geistiger, sittlicher, sozialer Besonderheit und steigt und fällt nur nach Geschlecht und Alter. Diese Allgemeinheit findet schon ihre Andeutung in dem Ausdruck: ערכך נפשות, es kommen eben nur die נפשות als solche in Betracht, und jeder lebende Mensch ist ein נפש (siehe Arachin 2a u.f.).
Rabbeinu Bahya
I believe that when the Midrash speaks about “jealousy” between the angels and man we need to examine these words. Jealousy is an emotion which is the result of man being equipped with an evil urge. Seeing that G’d Himself is on record as denying that the angels possess an evil urge, how could they be described as being “jealous” of man? This fact is spelled out even more forcefully in Chagigah 15 where the Talmud states: “in the celestial regions such concepts as standing, being seated, jealousy and competition are non-existent.” It is a region in which all beings are inclined to agree with one another in the search for a deeper understanding of the Essence of their Creator. The nutrition of these celestial beings consists of their obtaining progressively deeper insights into the Essence of G’d. This ensures the continued existence of the ministering angels. Seeing that all these beings are united in the same aspirations, how could there exist amongst them something described as ‘jealousy?” At the same time, it is no secret that jealousy is a well known phenomenon amongst human beings which afflicts mostly people who are envious of their immediate superiors. You do not find that a king is envious or jealous of a simple villager, neither is the villager envious of the king seeing that the difference between their respective social situations makes comparisons pointless. A fool is not jealous of a scholar as he has no conception of what it means to be a scholar. The scholar is not envious of the fool as he has no need of him. Jealousy is reserved for people of similar status. A scholar may be jealous of another scholar, a warrior of another warrior who has achieved greater fame, etc. A rich man is jealous of someone richer than himself (compare Avodah Zarah 55). Having appreciated all this, how could one apply the term “jealousy” to a relationship between such unequals as human beings and the ministering angels?
We must therefore understand this term when used by the Midrash to describe a situation prevailing in the celestial regions as a mere euphemism, a parable. Clearly, the angels were aware of the difference between human beings, creatures who were a fusion of body and soul, of the material and the spiritual. It is equally clear that they were aware that most of what is written in the Torah in the form of legislation was not addressed to them as they were not capable of fulfilling such commandments by reason of their being of a uniform “material,” i.e. disembodied creatures. What concerned the angels was that there was a “wisdom” which was deemed appropriate for creatures whom they considered inferior by definition precisely because they had bodies and urges which interfered with their serving their Creator at all times. They could not understand why such a superior wisdom would be entrusted to inferior beings instead of to them! They had assumed that the absence of a body made them superior to man by definition. They considered any matter which was a combination of materials as something inferior to matter consisting of a single element. Creatures which were the result of some fusion represented to the angels something of a dichotomy, containing built-in tensions. G’d, in a manner of speaking agreed with them, saying that precisely because of this built-in tension the superior wisdom represented by Torah was needed by man.
A superior person such as Moses attained the highest level of insight called ראשית, something not attained by any other living human being, as testified to in the Torah itself (Deut. 33,21) where we read: ”He saw (chose) for himself the ראשית, the best; for that is where the lawgiver’s portion is hidden.” He received this from the domain called ראשית. This attainment by Moses was not part of his prophetic qualities but an intellectual achievement on his part. This is why the Torah refers to it as וירא, “he saw,” i.e. he comprehended. The other outstanding achievement of Moses, the one called by our sages אספקלריא מאירה, “a clear vision,” was something that he attained as a prophetic quality. It was an insight into the workings of the attribute of Mercy. This was something which the patriarchs with whom G’d communicated in His dimension as the attribute of Justice had not comprehended as personal insights. [They had been aware of it as a phenomenon but not by personal experience applied to their lives. Ed.] All the other prophets who experienced various levels of revelations did not experience such revelations of the attribute of Mercy. This was an attribute which resulted in certain supernatural miracles becoming part of G’d’s manifestations during those days.
The word אספקלריא employed by our sages (Yevamot 49) to describe visions received by the prophets is an acronym composed of ספק קלריא, i.e. “supplied a degree of light, enlightenment.” It resembles the ability to look through a solid body because the material the body is made of is transparent glass. When the sages said that all prophets other than Moses received אספקלריא שאינה מאירה, the meaning is not that they received blurred visions which they could not decipher, but that G’d did not supply additional light so that what was beyond the solid material was lit up brilliantly. The “picture” they saw was clear, not blurred, but insufficiently illuminated to reveal to them every detail. When Moses received a similar vision, the “picture” was brilliantly illuminated so that he could distinguish every detail in it. To reflect this fact G’d made the skin of Moses’ forehead radiate light so brilliant that the people approaching him became intimidated by that light (Exodus 34,20). They could not absorb it, i.e. “digest it.” It blinded them. Proof that Avraham and the other patriarchs did not receive this level of prophetic insight is provided by the fact that Avraham never uttered the tetragrammaton when he addressed G’d but used the name א-ד-נ-י. Moses, on the other hand, used the name י-ה-ו-ה when addressing G’d. Moses employed both the attribute of G’d שדי as well as His attribute י-ה-ו-ה when he was active in his capacity as a prophet. When G’d reveals Himself to a prophet preparatory to performing “hidden” miracles, i.e. miracles which are not directly “impossible” in terms of the laws of nature, such revelations are also called אספקלריא שאינה מאירה, “unclear vision.”
We must therefore understand this term when used by the Midrash to describe a situation prevailing in the celestial regions as a mere euphemism, a parable. Clearly, the angels were aware of the difference between human beings, creatures who were a fusion of body and soul, of the material and the spiritual. It is equally clear that they were aware that most of what is written in the Torah in the form of legislation was not addressed to them as they were not capable of fulfilling such commandments by reason of their being of a uniform “material,” i.e. disembodied creatures. What concerned the angels was that there was a “wisdom” which was deemed appropriate for creatures whom they considered inferior by definition precisely because they had bodies and urges which interfered with their serving their Creator at all times. They could not understand why such a superior wisdom would be entrusted to inferior beings instead of to them! They had assumed that the absence of a body made them superior to man by definition. They considered any matter which was a combination of materials as something inferior to matter consisting of a single element. Creatures which were the result of some fusion represented to the angels something of a dichotomy, containing built-in tensions. G’d, in a manner of speaking agreed with them, saying that precisely because of this built-in tension the superior wisdom represented by Torah was needed by man.
A superior person such as Moses attained the highest level of insight called ראשית, something not attained by any other living human being, as testified to in the Torah itself (Deut. 33,21) where we read: ”He saw (chose) for himself the ראשית, the best; for that is where the lawgiver’s portion is hidden.” He received this from the domain called ראשית. This attainment by Moses was not part of his prophetic qualities but an intellectual achievement on his part. This is why the Torah refers to it as וירא, “he saw,” i.e. he comprehended. The other outstanding achievement of Moses, the one called by our sages אספקלריא מאירה, “a clear vision,” was something that he attained as a prophetic quality. It was an insight into the workings of the attribute of Mercy. This was something which the patriarchs with whom G’d communicated in His dimension as the attribute of Justice had not comprehended as personal insights. [They had been aware of it as a phenomenon but not by personal experience applied to their lives. Ed.] All the other prophets who experienced various levels of revelations did not experience such revelations of the attribute of Mercy. This was an attribute which resulted in certain supernatural miracles becoming part of G’d’s manifestations during those days.
The word אספקלריא employed by our sages (Yevamot 49) to describe visions received by the prophets is an acronym composed of ספק קלריא, i.e. “supplied a degree of light, enlightenment.” It resembles the ability to look through a solid body because the material the body is made of is transparent glass. When the sages said that all prophets other than Moses received אספקלריא שאינה מאירה, the meaning is not that they received blurred visions which they could not decipher, but that G’d did not supply additional light so that what was beyond the solid material was lit up brilliantly. The “picture” they saw was clear, not blurred, but insufficiently illuminated to reveal to them every detail. When Moses received a similar vision, the “picture” was brilliantly illuminated so that he could distinguish every detail in it. To reflect this fact G’d made the skin of Moses’ forehead radiate light so brilliant that the people approaching him became intimidated by that light (Exodus 34,20). They could not absorb it, i.e. “digest it.” It blinded them. Proof that Avraham and the other patriarchs did not receive this level of prophetic insight is provided by the fact that Avraham never uttered the tetragrammaton when he addressed G’d but used the name א-ד-נ-י. Moses, on the other hand, used the name י-ה-ו-ה when addressing G’d. Moses employed both the attribute of G’d שדי as well as His attribute י-ה-ו-ה when he was active in his capacity as a prophet. When G’d reveals Himself to a prophet preparatory to performing “hidden” miracles, i.e. miracles which are not directly “impossible” in terms of the laws of nature, such revelations are also called אספקלריא שאינה מאירה, “unclear vision.”
Rashi
will visit you lit. your visitors. Heb. ביקרותיך. The “kaph” is punctuated with a “dagesh” because it is an expression of visiting, although it is preceded by a “yud.” I saw in Rav Saadia’s punctuation that this word is arranged with (Isa. 42:24), “Who subjected Jacob to plunder (למשיסה),” which is written with a “yud” although the “sammech” is punctuated with a “dagesh.” Menachem, however, associated it as an expression of value, as (Job 28:16): “with precious (יקר) onyx.