Halakhah sobre Gênesis 6:27

Do educators enjoy a halachic right to confiscate items from students if those items are interfering with the learning in the classroom? The prohibition of theft is quite serious, as Chazal teach (Sanhedrin 108a, cited in Rashi to Breishit 6:13 s.v. Ki Malah) that the judgment of the generation of the flood was sealed due to its stealing. Thus, we must carefully investigate as to whether Halachah grants this right to educators.

And this is the intention of our rabbis z”l, when they say, “All who judge a judgement truthfully, it’s as if he is a partner with God in the creation of the world,” because God created the world to continue and the wicked who steal and commit acts of violence ruin the world through their actions. And similarly we find regarding the generation of the flood that the decree of their judgement was sealed only because of theft, as it is written, (Genesis 6:11) “For the earth is filled with violence,” and it says after this, (Genesis 6:13) “I will destroy them with the earth”. What emerges is that the judge who breaks the high arms of the wicked keeps the world going and completes the will of the Creator, blessed is His name, who created it to keep going, and it is as if they become partners with the Holy One ,Blessed Be He, in the creation. Abraham our forefather didn’t know God, and He called him (Isaiah 41:8) “My beloved” because he walked in the ways of justice and guided his children, as it is written, (Genesis 18:19) “For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of God, to do righteousness and justice…” And Moses our teacher a”h, master of all prophets, took advice from Yitro with regards to justice, to establish judges to caution Israel and to command them through justice, and God agreed with this. And Joshua afterwards established a covenant with Israel to serve God, he left his last word as justice, as it is written, (Joshua 24:25) “On that day Joshua made a covenant for the people, and there at Shechem he reaffirmed for them laws and justice.” [This is] because justice is the foundation and the great principle in the service of God, and following [Abraham] have each and every judge judged their generation, and bring them back from their evil ways to service of God to go in the way that Abraham paved to do righteousness and justice, and through this were they [i.e. the Jewish people] were saved from their enemies until Samuel the prophet came, God-faithful, (1 Samuel 7:15-16) “who judged Israel all the days of his life. And he went on a circuit year by year to Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpah. And he judged Israel in all these places.” And our sages tell us that the path he took one year was not the one he took the next, so that he could turn the hearts of the entire nation toward service of God, and to walk in the way of Abraham our forefather a”h, and he anointed David to be the king of Israel, and he too walked in the ways of God from all that was in front of him, as it is written,(2 Samuel 8:15) “And David did justice and righteousness. (1 Chronicles 11:8) “And Joab restored the rest of the city.” And our sages tell us that in the merit of the justice and righteousness of David, Joab restored the rest of the city, and had his child [Solomon] continue after him, the “Yedid Hashem”, who loved to go in the laws of his father David and would ask from God an understanding, listening heart to judge his people, to understand between good and bad, and it was good in God’s eyes, that which he asked regarding this. And He gave him a wise and understanding heart which has never been before, and no one has been like him since, and all of Israel was afraid of him because they saw that the wisdom of God was in his heart to do justice. And also Jehoshaphat, who took the paths of his father and raised his heart in the ways of God, was strengthened in justice, and he appointed judges in every city, and he said to the judges, “See what you do, for you are not judging for man but for God, and with you shall be justice.” Josiah as well, that Scripture testifies about him, “And no king was like him before, who returned to God with all his heart.” And also the King Messiah, who will be revealed speedily in our days, is praised by Scripture regarding justice, and it is written, (Isaiah 11:4) “And he will judge the destitute with justice, and decide with equity for the meek of the earth…” And according to the greatness of his reward will be the punishment for those who void and pervert it, as it is taught, “Destruction comes to the word based on lack of law and on the perversion of law.” And so did David say, (Psalms 119:121) “I have done justice and righteousness, leave me not to my oppressors.” This implies that without justice, he would have been left in the hands off oppressors. And Jerusalem was only destroyed, and Israel only exiled, because of the neglecting of justice, as it is written, (Isaiah 1:21) “She once was full of justice; righteousness used to dwell in her-- but now murderers.”... And God wants it more than all the sacrifices, as it is written, “Doing righteousness and justice is choicier to God than the zevach offerings.” It does not says “than sin and burnt offerings,” but rather “than zevach offerings.”

And this is the intention of our rabbis z”l, when they say, “All who judge a judgement truthfully, it’s as if he is a partner with God in the creation of the world,” because God created the world to continue and the wicked who steal and commit acts of violence ruin the world through their actions. And similarly we find regarding the generation of the flood that the decree of their judgement was sealed only because of theft, as it is written, (Genesis 6:11) “For the earth is filled with violence,” and it says after this, (Genesis 6:13) “I will destroy them with the earth”. What emerges is that the judge who breaks the high arms of the wicked keeps the world going and completes the will of the Creator, blessed is His name, who created it to keep going, and it is as if they become partners with the Holy One ,Blessed Be He, in the creation. Abraham our forefather didn’t know God, and He called him (Isaiah 41:8) “My beloved” because he walked in the ways of justice and guided his children, as it is written, (Genesis 18:19) “For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of God, to do righteousness and justice…” And Moses our teacher a”h, master of all prophets, took advice from Yitro with regards to justice, to establish judges to caution Israel and to command them through justice, and God agreed with this. And Joshua afterwards established a covenant with Israel to serve God, he left his last word as justice, as it is written, (Joshua 24:25) “On that day Joshua made a covenant for the people, and there at Shechem he reaffirmed for them laws and justice.” [This is] because justice is the foundation and the great principle in the service of God, and following [Abraham] have each and every judge judged their generation, and bring them back from their evil ways to service of God to go in the way that Abraham paved to do righteousness and justice, and through this were they [i.e. the Jewish people] were saved from their enemies until Samuel the prophet came, God-faithful, (1 Samuel 7:15-16) “who judged Israel all the days of his life. And he went on a circuit year by year to Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpah. And he judged Israel in all these places.” And our sages tell us that the path he took one year was not the one he took the next, so that he could turn the hearts of the entire nation toward service of God, and to walk in the way of Abraham our forefather a”h, and he anointed David to be the king of Israel, and he too walked in the ways of God from all that was in front of him, as it is written,(2 Samuel 8:15) “And David did justice and righteousness. (1 Chronicles 11:8) “And Joab restored the rest of the city.” And our sages tell us that in the merit of the justice and righteousness of David, Joab restored the rest of the city, and had his child [Solomon] continue after him, the “Yedid Hashem”, who loved to go in the laws of his father David and would ask from God an understanding, listening heart to judge his people, to understand between good and bad, and it was good in God’s eyes, that which he asked regarding this. And He gave him a wise and understanding heart which has never been before, and no one has been like him since, and all of Israel was afraid of him because they saw that the wisdom of God was in his heart to do justice. And also Jehoshaphat, who took the paths of his father and raised his heart in the ways of God, was strengthened in justice, and he appointed judges in every city, and he said to the judges, “See what you do, for you are not judging for man but for God, and with you shall be justice.” Josiah as well, that Scripture testifies about him, “And no king was like him before, who returned to God with all his heart.” And also the King Messiah, who will be revealed speedily in our days, is praised by Scripture regarding justice, and it is written, (Isaiah 11:4) “And he will judge the destitute with justice, and decide with equity for the meek of the earth…” And according to the greatness of his reward will be the punishment for those who void and pervert it, as it is taught, “Destruction comes to the word based on lack of law and on the perversion of law.” And so did David say, (Psalms 119:121) “I have done justice and righteousness, leave me not to my oppressors.” This implies that without justice, he would have been left in the hands off oppressors. And Jerusalem was only destroyed, and Israel only exiled, because of the neglecting of justice, as it is written, (Isaiah 1:21) “She once was full of justice; righteousness used to dwell in her-- but now murderers.”... And God wants it more than all the sacrifices, as it is written, “Doing righteousness and justice is choicier to God than the zevach offerings.” It does not says “than sin and burnt offerings,” but rather “than zevach offerings.”

A third blessing is “boray peri ha-gafen” – “Who created the fruit of the vine.” One cannot say that blessing the bread exempts one from saying it, because wine “attaches” a blessing to itself.⁷⁹An expression used by the Tosafot on b.Berakhot 44a. It would seem preferable for us to say “boray peri ha-etz” – “Who created the fruit of the tree” – but because of the high status of wine, they specified the name of the tree, that is, “the grapevine” [ha-gafen]. For had they not wanted to specify the name “the grapevine” because of wine’s importance, they could have fixed the blessing to say “boray peri ha-anavim” – “Who created the fruit of the grapes” because grapes themselves are the fruit of the grapevine, and wine is the fruit which comes from grapes, just as oil is the fruit that comes from olives. Accordingly, they fixed the blessing “boray peri ha-gafen” even though truthfully, grapes are the fruit of the vine, still, the drink which is pressed from the grapes is the fruit of the grapes themselves, and this is because it is considered more important than grapes, just as oil is considered more important than olives. And the Tosafists z”l went back and forth on this topic a lot, and they proved that wine is not called “fruit”, as it is taught in Massekhet Bikkurim:⁸⁰Chavel says this tradition appears in b.Hullin 102b, not in the Mishnah Bikkurim. “’from the first of every fruit of the earth:’ the fruit which you bring as first fruit offerings, and you do not bring drinks as first fruit offerings; therefore wine is not a fruit.” However, they brought these matters up again at the end, and said that wine is called “fruit” by gezerah shavah,⁸¹Verbal analogy, one of the classic forms of Talmudic hermeneutics. since in another context, the word “fruit,” namely “fruit of orlah”⁸²Orlah is the term for fruit that grows from a tree in the first three years after it was planted; it is forbidden to eat or profit from it (Lev.19:23). refers to wine, in Massekhet Orlah:⁸³Likewise Chavel found the source not here, but elsewhere in the Talmud. “They absorb the forty because of orlah only for what comes out of grapes and olives, namely, wine and oil.” And hear from this that just as in regard to orlah wine is called “fruit,” so in regard to blessings it is called “fruit.” The drinks that come from them are like them. And so from this one ought to say the blessing over wine with the expression “boray peri ha-gafen,” and thus to specify the name “gafen” by saying “peri ha-gafen.” And so our sages z”l explained it for us when they said in Massekhet Berakhot, “From where do we get that you only say a song over wine, as it is said, ‘But the vine replied, ‘Have I stopped yielding my new wine which gladdens God and men?’’⁸⁴Judges 9:13. If it gladdens men, how does it gladden God? From here you get that you only say a song over wine.⁸⁵In other words, since God does not actually drink wine, this tradition says that songs inevitably accompany wine-drinking, and must be what gladdens God. And thus an objection was raised among the Tosafists: “But surely it is over several things that we say Hallel, like when they came from battle, as it is said about Jehoshaphat in the Book of Chronicles,⁸⁶2 Chronicles 20:21. or on the Fourteenth of Nisan, when they slaughtered the paschal lamb!” They answered and explained thus, “From where do we get that a song is said over nothing that has to do with the sacrificial altar, such as the flinging of blood, the burning of incense, the water libation, and the rest of the activities of the altar – except for the wine libation, as it is said, ‘But the vine replied to them, ‘Have I stopped yielding my new wine [tiroshi]?’’⁸⁷Judges 9:13. And they said in the Aggadah: “Nine hundred twenty-six kinds of grapes were created in the world, the numerical equivalent of the letters of the word tiroshi – “my new wine,” but all of them were stricken when Adam sinned, and only one remained for us.”⁸⁸Chavel says he could not find the source for this midrash. The status of the grapevine is further enhanced in the way the prophets would always compare the community of Israel to a grapevine, and this is what Scripture meant when it said, “You plucked up a grapevine from Egypt.”⁸⁹Ps. 80:9. And there are still other weightier reasons, but it is not necessary to go into them at length here. Know that the point of human wine-drinking ought to be only in service of food for health reasons alone, so that the food and drink will be mixed internally in a moderate manner, and that one direct the way he conducts his drinking to overcome his hunger and thirst.

If the wine is changed, one must say a blessing, because even though he has already said “boray peri ha-gafen” when he was about to drink in the beginning, he is required to say a blessing for this change of wine, and this is the blessing “ha-tov ve-ha-metiv.”⁹⁴B.Berakhot 59b; Tur and Orah Hayim 175:1. So why did they say this for a change a wine, and not for a change of loaf or other things? For many reasons: (1) The crucial component for rejoicing at a meal is none other than wine. The way of kings is to change their wine, but not their loaf, and the people Israel are “the sons of kings.”⁹⁵B. Shabbat 67a. (2) Every table onto which they bring wine after wine is an expression of the multiplication of joy, but a person should not multiply his joy too much in this world, as it is said, “Our mouths shall be filled with laughter, our tongues with songs of joy. They shall say among the nations, ‘The Lord has done great things for them!’”⁹⁶Ps 126:2: Az yimalay s’hok pinu ulshonenu rinah az yomru ba-goyim. Higdil Adonai la’asot im eleh,” from Shir Ha-ma’a lot that we recite on holidays and Shabbat before birkat ha-mazon.Our rabbis taught in a midrash,⁹⁷B.Berakhot 31a. “When ‘will our mouths be filled with laughter’? When the nations (i.e., the Gentiles) say, ‘The Lord has done great things for them.’ Another verse completes this thought, “They will rejoice with trembling.”⁹⁸Ps. 2:11 They said, “In a place of rejoicing there will be trembling.” The explanation is that even in a place where there is rejoicing and joy from doing a mitzvah, there it is necessary that there be some trembling, too, to remember how the world is subject to the evil inclination and is shaken by it, so that it should not be shaken by our joy. Therefore it is a custom in a few Jewish communities at life cycle celebrations and meals celebrating a mitzvah to break there a vessel of glass or “flagons of grapes”⁹⁹Assisay ‘anavim, from Hos. 3:1– variously translated as “cups of the grapes” (JSB); “flagons of grapes (KJB); or even “cakes of raisins.” (RSV). to sadden those rejoicing, so that the simhah be mixed a little bit with trembling. And there is no greater simhah than Israel’s rejoicing at receiving the Torah [Simhat Ha-Torah] on Mt. Sinai, in the presence of the Holy One, about which it is written “like the Mahanayim dance,”¹⁰⁰Song of Songs 7:1. Mahana’im (lit., “two camps”) is the dual form of the word for “camp” – mahaneh. When Israel “married God” as it were at Mt. Sinai, the dancing at that “wedding,” that is the joy they expressed then, was like no other joy experienced on earth. Even the angels came down from heaven to celebrate and dance with them! This is an allusion to a midrash that applies this verse to Ex. 19:17 (M. Tanhuma Titzaveh 11), which R. Bahya brings in his Commentary on the Torah to Ex. 19:17: “Moses led the people out of the camp [mahaneh] toward God.” He says there
Our rabbis taught in a midrash, “600,000 ministering angels descended there corresponding to the 600,000 Israelites. And about them Jacob hinted, “He named that place Mahana’im.” (Gen 32:3), for there were two camps, one next to the other. And it is about this that King Solomon (peace be upon him) was talking when he said “like the Mahanai’m dance.” (S.S. 7:1). It was because the Israelites have been enslaved to four empires, and each one of them says that the Israelites should turn from their own faith and believe in them, which is why the verse in Song of Songs (7:1) repeats the imperative “turn” four times. And we today are subject to the fourth empire, who says, “Turn and let us seek out from among you” [nehezeh bakh], that is, “Let us make some of you political authorities, and give you all kinds of ruling power,” with the expression “nehezeh bakh” [literally, “let us gaze upon you”] having the same connotation a similar phrase has in Ex. 18:21: “You shall seek out from among all the people – tehezeh mikol ha-‘am – [all the capable men … to set them over the people as chiefs of thousands, hundreds, etc.”]. And our rabbis also taught this midrash (Song of Songs Rabbah 7:1): “’The Shulammite’ –is ha-ummah she-shalom ha-olamim dar be-tokhah– the people within whom the peace of the world resides [i.e., the Israelites], and she replies, ‘What would you ‘seek out’ [for leaders] from the Shulammite? [Mah tehezah ba-Shulamit?], that is, “What ruling power, status, and glory could you give to the Shulammite that you could ever find comparable to the state of joy the Israelites experienced at Mt. Sinai. This is “like the Mahanai’m dance:” two camps that would go out one before the other. And they compared the pleasure of the experience they achieved at the revelation there to a dance. To the same point our rabbis z”l taught, “In the future the Holy One Blessed be He will arrange a dance for the righteous in the Garden of Eden, so that I will never be able to turn to your [Gentile] faith, because I remember this dance – that is, like the one at Mt. Sinai. (Chavel, 2:173).
And yet, even at this peak of joy, there was the breaking of the tablets, like the breaking of the glass now to temper the pure joy at weddings. yet you know that even there, the tablets of the covenant were broken. And if you would think hard and lift up your eyes to “ever since God created human beings on the earth,”¹⁰¹Dt. 4:32. you will find in the Holy One Blessed Be He His boundless joy: “May the Glory of the Lord endure forever; may the Lord rejoice in his works!”¹⁰²Ps. 104:31.But His joy has a limit with respect to the human race, “because he too is flesh.”¹⁰³Gen 6:3. That is, humans are mortal. That is what is written about Him when it says: “And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and His heart was saddened.”¹⁰⁴Ibid. 6:6. Even in the Mishkan, which was a microcosm of the world, on the eight day of the priests’ assigned service, which was the day of the New Moon for the month of Nisan, on that very day there was nothing like it in its degree of joy, its intensity multiplied tenfold, to what our sages z”l referred when they said, “On that very day they got ten crowns”¹⁰⁵Sifra Shemini. – you already knew what happened, and to what end that joy came. On that very day Nadab and Abihu died, like whom, after Moses and Aaron, there were none among the Israelites to compare. And this is what Scripture meant when it said, “Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders of Israel ascended.”¹⁰⁶Ex 24:9. I.e., in that order was their “ascendence,” their status, relative to one another. And see also what Ecclesiastes says about the joy of this world: “Of revelry I said, ‘It is mad!’ Of joy (simhah), ‘What good is that?’”¹⁰⁷Eccl 2:2. And the explanation of this statement is that because joy and sorrow are brothers attached to one another like day is attached to night, just as a person is sure in the day that night will come after it, and as sure at night that the day will come after it, so is he sure that joy will come after sorrow, and likewise sorrow after joy. And so he said, “The heart may ache even in laughter, and joy may end in grief,”¹⁰⁸Prov 14:13. to explain about sorrow after joy, and he said, “From all grief there is some gain,”¹⁰⁹Prov 14:23. “Grief” (‘etzev) here and “sorrow” (‘itzavon) in 14:13 come from the same Hebrew root. to explain about joy after sorrow. From this you learn that the joy of this world can never be complete, but rather any good in it and contentment with it is “futile and pursuit of the wind,”¹¹⁰Eccl 1:14. all glory in it is to be mocked,¹¹¹An allusion to Ps 4:3. its “glorious beauty is but wilted flowers.¹¹²Is 28:1, referring specifically to the fleeting pleasures of the table: “Ah the proud crowns of the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is but wilted flowers on the heads of men bloated with rich food, who are overcome by wine!” For right at the moment when a person’s hopes are highest in the midst of joy, it stops, flickers out, and goes away. For this reason they ruled that the blessing over a change in wine should be “ha-tov ve-ha-metiv” (“Who is good and Who does good”), the same blessing they added to the grace after meals to remember the martyrs of Beitar when they were permitted to bury them.¹¹³B. Berakhot 48b. The battle at Beitar was the Bar Kochba revolt’s unsuccessful “last stand” against the Romans in 135 CE. The explanation: Ha-tov – “Who is good” – because He didn’t let the bodies putrefy; ha-metiv – “Who did good” – by letting the bodies be buried.¹¹⁴Ibid. And all this is to make human beings feel sadness, being fashioned from clay, composed of natural elements which are dead bodies, sunken in the desires of our senses – so that we’re brought back from a surfeit of joy to the middle way.

If the wine is changed, one must say a blessing, because even though he has already said “boray peri ha-gafen” when he was about to drink in the beginning, he is required to say a blessing for this change of wine, and this is the blessing “ha-tov ve-ha-metiv.”⁹⁴B.Berakhot 59b; Tur and Orah Hayim 175:1. So why did they say this for a change a wine, and not for a change of loaf or other things? For many reasons: (1) The crucial component for rejoicing at a meal is none other than wine. The way of kings is to change their wine, but not their loaf, and the people Israel are “the sons of kings.”⁹⁵B. Shabbat 67a. (2) Every table onto which they bring wine after wine is an expression of the multiplication of joy, but a person should not multiply his joy too much in this world, as it is said, “Our mouths shall be filled with laughter, our tongues with songs of joy. They shall say among the nations, ‘The Lord has done great things for them!’”⁹⁶Ps 126:2: Az yimalay s’hok pinu ulshonenu rinah az yomru ba-goyim. Higdil Adonai la’asot im eleh,” from Shir Ha-ma’a lot that we recite on holidays and Shabbat before birkat ha-mazon.Our rabbis taught in a midrash,⁹⁷B.Berakhot 31a. “When ‘will our mouths be filled with laughter’? When the nations (i.e., the Gentiles) say, ‘The Lord has done great things for them.’ Another verse completes this thought, “They will rejoice with trembling.”⁹⁸Ps. 2:11 They said, “In a place of rejoicing there will be trembling.” The explanation is that even in a place where there is rejoicing and joy from doing a mitzvah, there it is necessary that there be some trembling, too, to remember how the world is subject to the evil inclination and is shaken by it, so that it should not be shaken by our joy. Therefore it is a custom in a few Jewish communities at life cycle celebrations and meals celebrating a mitzvah to break there a vessel of glass or “flagons of grapes”⁹⁹Assisay ‘anavim, from Hos. 3:1– variously translated as “cups of the grapes” (JSB); “flagons of grapes (KJB); or even “cakes of raisins.” (RSV). to sadden those rejoicing, so that the simhah be mixed a little bit with trembling. And there is no greater simhah than Israel’s rejoicing at receiving the Torah [Simhat Ha-Torah] on Mt. Sinai, in the presence of the Holy One, about which it is written “like the Mahanayim dance,”¹⁰⁰Song of Songs 7:1. Mahana’im (lit., “two camps”) is the dual form of the word for “camp” – mahaneh. When Israel “married God” as it were at Mt. Sinai, the dancing at that “wedding,” that is the joy they expressed then, was like no other joy experienced on earth. Even the angels came down from heaven to celebrate and dance with them! This is an allusion to a midrash that applies this verse to Ex. 19:17 (M. Tanhuma Titzaveh 11), which R. Bahya brings in his Commentary on the Torah to Ex. 19:17: “Moses led the people out of the camp [mahaneh] toward God.” He says there
Our rabbis taught in a midrash, “600,000 ministering angels descended there corresponding to the 600,000 Israelites. And about them Jacob hinted, “He named that place Mahana’im.” (Gen 32:3), for there were two camps, one next to the other. And it is about this that King Solomon (peace be upon him) was talking when he said “like the Mahanai’m dance.” (S.S. 7:1). It was because the Israelites have been enslaved to four empires, and each one of them says that the Israelites should turn from their own faith and believe in them, which is why the verse in Song of Songs (7:1) repeats the imperative “turn” four times. And we today are subject to the fourth empire, who says, “Turn and let us seek out from among you” [nehezeh bakh], that is, “Let us make some of you political authorities, and give you all kinds of ruling power,” with the expression “nehezeh bakh” [literally, “let us gaze upon you”] having the same connotation a similar phrase has in Ex. 18:21: “You shall seek out from among all the people – tehezeh mikol ha-‘am – [all the capable men … to set them over the people as chiefs of thousands, hundreds, etc.”]. And our rabbis also taught this midrash (Song of Songs Rabbah 7:1): “’The Shulammite’ –is ha-ummah she-shalom ha-olamim dar be-tokhah– the people within whom the peace of the world resides [i.e., the Israelites], and she replies, ‘What would you ‘seek out’ [for leaders] from the Shulammite? [Mah tehezah ba-Shulamit?], that is, “What ruling power, status, and glory could you give to the Shulammite that you could ever find comparable to the state of joy the Israelites experienced at Mt. Sinai. This is “like the Mahanai’m dance:” two camps that would go out one before the other. And they compared the pleasure of the experience they achieved at the revelation there to a dance. To the same point our rabbis z”l taught, “In the future the Holy One Blessed be He will arrange a dance for the righteous in the Garden of Eden, so that I will never be able to turn to your [Gentile] faith, because I remember this dance – that is, like the one at Mt. Sinai. (Chavel, 2:173).
And yet, even at this peak of joy, there was the breaking of the tablets, like the breaking of the glass now to temper the pure joy at weddings. yet you know that even there, the tablets of the covenant were broken. And if you would think hard and lift up your eyes to “ever since God created human beings on the earth,”¹⁰¹Dt. 4:32. you will find in the Holy One Blessed Be He His boundless joy: “May the Glory of the Lord endure forever; may the Lord rejoice in his works!”¹⁰²Ps. 104:31.But His joy has a limit with respect to the human race, “because he too is flesh.”¹⁰³Gen 6:3. That is, humans are mortal. That is what is written about Him when it says: “And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and His heart was saddened.”¹⁰⁴Ibid. 6:6. Even in the Mishkan, which was a microcosm of the world, on the eight day of the priests’ assigned service, which was the day of the New Moon for the month of Nisan, on that very day there was nothing like it in its degree of joy, its intensity multiplied tenfold, to what our sages z”l referred when they said, “On that very day they got ten crowns”¹⁰⁵Sifra Shemini. – you already knew what happened, and to what end that joy came. On that very day Nadab and Abihu died, like whom, after Moses and Aaron, there were none among the Israelites to compare. And this is what Scripture meant when it said, “Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders of Israel ascended.”¹⁰⁶Ex 24:9. I.e., in that order was their “ascendence,” their status, relative to one another. And see also what Ecclesiastes says about the joy of this world: “Of revelry I said, ‘It is mad!’ Of joy (simhah), ‘What good is that?’”¹⁰⁷Eccl 2:2. And the explanation of this statement is that because joy and sorrow are brothers attached to one another like day is attached to night, just as a person is sure in the day that night will come after it, and as sure at night that the day will come after it, so is he sure that joy will come after sorrow, and likewise sorrow after joy. And so he said, “The heart may ache even in laughter, and joy may end in grief,”¹⁰⁸Prov 14:13. to explain about sorrow after joy, and he said, “From all grief there is some gain,”¹⁰⁹Prov 14:23. “Grief” (‘etzev) here and “sorrow” (‘itzavon) in 14:13 come from the same Hebrew root. to explain about joy after sorrow. From this you learn that the joy of this world can never be complete, but rather any good in it and contentment with it is “futile and pursuit of the wind,”¹¹⁰Eccl 1:14. all glory in it is to be mocked,¹¹¹An allusion to Ps 4:3. its “glorious beauty is but wilted flowers.¹¹²Is 28:1, referring specifically to the fleeting pleasures of the table: “Ah the proud crowns of the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is but wilted flowers on the heads of men bloated with rich food, who are overcome by wine!” For right at the moment when a person’s hopes are highest in the midst of joy, it stops, flickers out, and goes away. For this reason they ruled that the blessing over a change in wine should be “ha-tov ve-ha-metiv” (“Who is good and Who does good”), the same blessing they added to the grace after meals to remember the martyrs of Beitar when they were permitted to bury them.¹¹³B. Berakhot 48b. The battle at Beitar was the Bar Kochba revolt’s unsuccessful “last stand” against the Romans in 135 CE. The explanation: Ha-tov – “Who is good” – because He didn’t let the bodies putrefy; ha-metiv – “Who did good” – by letting the bodies be buried.¹¹⁴Ibid. And all this is to make human beings feel sadness, being fashioned from clay, composed of natural elements which are dead bodies, sunken in the desires of our senses – so that we’re brought back from a surfeit of joy to the middle way.

“This is the table which is before the Lord,¹Ez 41:22. who spreads the heavens like a canopy for a tent ²Is 40:22. sets earth over water ³Ps 135:6 and feeds the creatures of His home in three divisions: “the bottom, middle, and topmost decks.”⁴An allusion to Noah’s ark in Gen 6:16. In the highest realm are the ministering angels nearest to Him: the cherubim, the seraphim, the ofanim, and the arielim. They are attendants in His palace; in legions they feast on the light of His presence, from the flowing light of His own radiance. The middle realm is the “vest of the heavens,”⁵Chavel (457): the realm of the planets. an assembly of fire and water –rains constraining and constrained – by day and night God restrains them. The eyes of their minds see [tzofim] their Master’s delight as their food, far sweeter to them than choice honey [tzufim]. They hunger for the Cause of their existence;⁶Wonderful but untranslatable wordplay: sibat sivuvam sibatam nekhsafim. the pillars supporting their realm are suspended by the arm of His wisdom, and quake at His rebuke.⁷Allusion to Job 26:11. But the lowest dwelling, a circle radiating from its midpoint, has measurable dimensions. Our food is not their food. Their food is conceived in their mind, when they see the face of their Maker. Our food is meager bread, water, and tears,⁸Cf. Is 30:20, Ps. 80:6. gotten by hard work and toil.

(Gimmel) On the day that He created him, the Holy One, blessed be He, also gave over to man all of the forces of all of the creatures that He created previously. The ones below, the ones above and the ones above the above were all given over into his hand. [Henceforth man] could move [these forces] to wherever he desired. If he was righteous and went to the right, then all of the creatures, big and small, would also merit to rise in their levels. But if he went to the left and made his actions evil – God forbid – then they would also descend down the slope that he prepared for them. And so we find with the generation of the flood that the sin and calumny of man brought down all the forces of the creatures. And those that dwelled above and those that dwelled below – “all flesh had corrupted its ways on the earth” (Gen. 6:12), even the beasts and the animals. It is like the statement of the Sages, may their memory be blessed, [that] some of the angels fell to earth and their glory descended to the dirt because of their sins.¹⁴See Zohar 1:37a:11 and in other places. See also Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 572:5; Yoma 67b and Rashi ad loc. With this, the beginning of our statement in Paragraph Aleph is elucidated: “At the time that the Holy One, blessed be He, told the angels, ‘let us make man,’ etc.,” He said to them ‘that He mixed up all’ the powers of the creatures [in man], and ‘from there they would be scattered’ to all of the worlds and the creations. And according to how man’s spirit sought his way, [the angels would follow]. They would rise according to [man’s] will and they would descend according to his will. [God] also told them how He added a portion of His essence to them, as per their statement,¹⁵It is not clear to which statement the author is referring. See Louis Jacobs, “Rabbi Aryeh Laib Heller's Theological Introduction to His ‘Shev Shema'tata,’" Modern Judaism 1:2 (September 1981), Note 12. may their memory be blessed, on the verse (Gen. 2:7), “And He blew”; “Anyone who blows, blows from his self.” And it is elucidated in the writings of Ari¹⁶R. Yitschak Luria (Israel, Egypt, 16th century), the pioneer of Lurianic mysticism. that when a man compromises the commandments of God with his sins, the divine portion that he has returns to its original source, and He does not give of [this part of] His glory to another, and ‘His [protective] shade is removed from him.’ And so when the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the angels, “Let us make man” – meaning, that they should all give their portion [to man] to be raised when he is raised – they said to Him, “What are his ways?” He [then] said to them, such and such – meaning, his ascent and decline will be the cause [of what happens] to all the forces, and the ‘angels will climb and descend because of him.’ [So] they answered him (Ps. 8:5), “‘What is man that you should consider him and the mortal that you should remember him,’ – which is to say, his sins. As then ‘You will remove him a little from God,’ which is to say, the divine portion that He blew into his nostrils will return to You. It is only us that remain trapped in his net because of his evil. You have given him power over the works of Your hands, to move us according to his evil will and to do to us that which is in accordance with his will and his desire – like a person acts with that which is his.” Therefore they did not agree to his creation, as they said, “Let him not do good or evil to us.” [But] His wisdom, may He be blessed, decreed the creation of man, ‘to make many people live as today’; [both] ‘the many above,’ ‘and those dwelling below’, so as to move [the angels] to an independent life. [This is] because every action of man will be considered like their action, since all of the creatures mentioned above are combined into man. And so they too are in [the category of] the giving of a well. And this is the essence of creation.

(Alef) The Psalmist said in Ps. 50:18, 20, “When you see a thief, you fall in with him, and throw in your lot with adulterers. You are busy maligning your brother, defaming the son of your mother.” It appears to me [that this can be explained] according to that which is written in Netsach Israel, chapter 25:⁶⁸Maharal, Netsach Yisrael, pp. 126-127 in London edition.
We were asked, “How is it that Israelites are constantly yearning to [do] bad, etc.? As he seeks evil for the one who is his compatriot in Torah and in the commandments. And [yet] the Torah states (Lev. 19:18), ‘and you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” And I answered him, etc. However this trait is not in Israel from the angle of ‘an evil soul desires evil.’ As from the angle of their essence, this holy people is deserving of all the importance and status, etc. And the one who is important based on his own nature will [naturally] seek status (and this is what causes the Jews to hurt each other). As you will not find a villager jealous of a great minister, but rather a sage of another sage, a wealthy man of a wealthy man and a strong man of a strong man, etc. Rather this thing comes from [their appropriate] sense of importance. And the proof to this is that it is perfectly obvious that when one of them is in distress, all of them step forward like ‘a brother for adversity.’ And that is because Israel is one nation, etc. And it is not like the traits of licentiousness, etc., as that thing would show great lowliness, etc. And they are stiff-necked from repenting, etc. Because they are far from physicality, they are not [easily] impacted, but rather hold on to their traits, etc. [See there.]
And for this reason, he said, “When you see a thief, you fall in with him, and throw in your lot with adulterers” – and that is from the side of crass physicality and it is lowliness. But, “You are busy maligning your brother, etc.,” is from the side of an elevated form, and as is written in Netsach Yisrael. And they are two opposites of one issue. And ‘there should not be [lowliness] like this in Israel’ – the holy people that comes from a good nature. And that which is in Parashat Netzaivm (Deut. 29:21-26) is elucidated by this:
And later generations will ask—the children who succeed you, and foreigners who come from distant lands and see the plagues and diseases that the Lord has inflicted upon that land. All its soil burnt by sulfur and salt, etc. And all the nations will say, “Why did the Lord do thus to this land; wherefore that awful wrath?” And they will be told, “Because they forsook the covenant that the Lord, etc. And they turned to the service of other gods and worshiped them – gods whom they had not known and whom He had not allotted to them. So the Lord was incensed at that land, etc.”
And Rashi explained [the phrase], “whom they had not known,” [as] they had not known the strength of divinity in them. And Onkelos translated [it as, these gods] did not do good to them – as the one they selected for a god did not give them any inheritance or portion. See there. And at first glance, [this needs] precision – as had it given them an inheritance and a portion, the ‘prohibition [against worshiping it] would still stand in its place. [It is] as we expound in the Gemara,⁶⁹See Bamidbar Rabbah 20:9. “He exalts (masgi, which can also be read as fools) nations, then destroys them” (Job 12:23); such that it appears to them that they are healed by idolatry, etc. And see that with the generation of the flood it is written (Gen. 6:13), “and behold I will destroy them with the earth.” And the Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, expounded [it as] (Bereishit Rabbah 31:7), “with the land” – three handbreadths of the depth of a plow were despoiled. And the sin of the land was that the Lord said (Gen. 1:11) that the land should give forth “trees of fruit” – that the taste of the tree be like the fruit; but it made “trees that made fruit” (Gen. 1:12).⁷⁰Bereishit Rabbah 5:9. [It did this] because [its] material was coarse; and this caused man to incline towards physicality. And [so] the Lord said (Gen. 3:17), “Cursed is the earth for the sake of man” – as the damage was evident in man. And for this reason, [people] in the generation of the flood also sinned in physicality – violent theft, sexual immorality and murder; and this was because of the sin of the land. And therefore it was punished. And in the Guide⁷¹Guide for the Perplexed 1:36., [Rambam] wrote that we only find [the terms], awful wrath and jealousy [attributed to God] with idolatry, [since it is understandable that] the Lord has awful wrath about this. See there. But the sin of idolatry is from the angle of the form (the spiritual side) – and that it is the loss of the intellect, as it is written in Gur Aryeh.⁷²Perhaps the reference is to Gur Aryeh on Exodus 22:30. That is why the verse stated, “And all the nations will say, ‘Why did the Lord do thus to this land’” – since if their sin was from the spiritual side, the land did not sin. But if we say that the sin was from the side of physicality; you would still ask, “‘wherefore that awful wrath,’” as this is only with idolatry – as is written in the Guide – and that is from the angle of the intellect. “And they will be told, ‘Because they forsook, etc. and worshiped other gods’” – and the awful wrath was for that. And “whom they had not known and whom He had not allotted to them” – meaning that they did not apportion them any good and they did not know them [to be] with divine powers, and this was not from a confused intellect, such that ‘He fools the nations.’ Rather it was from the side of crass physicality that [such] anarchy was pleasing to them. And that was the sin of the land, and hence, “all its soil was burnt.” However, if people do righteous deeds, ‘the desolate land will be worked.’

The same author, Teshuvot Radvaz, IV, no. 1,357 (286) responded in a similar vein to another query as well. A divorce was executed on behalf of a woman accused of adultery on the condition that the wife not marry her paramour. It became evident that, despite the condition, the couple intended to marry with the result that the get would be nullified retroactively. Radvaz was asked whether it would be appropriate for the first husband to execute a second, unconditional divorce in order to preserve the couple from the sin of adultery. Radvaz responded by noting that, even if she were properly divorced by means of a second, unconditional get, the wife would remain forbidden to her paramour.²⁷Cf., however, Iggerot Mosheh, Even ha-Ezer, III, no. 5 and IV, no. 4, who adopts a different position with regard to obviation of mamzerut, or bastardry. Iggerot Mosheh contends that the concern in preventing bastardy is not for the sinner but reflects a societal concern for prevention of future unsuspecting marriage between mamzerim and persons of legitimate birth. In addition, as stated in Bereshit Rabbah 26:10, cited by Rashi, Genesis 6:13, mamzerut brings in its wake physical and social ills “and kills both good and evil.” Thus, in striving to diminish instances of adultery, society’s concern is not the spiritual welfare of the sinner but the interests of its own innocent members. See also Teshuvot Ḥelkat Ya’akov, II, no. 16 and III, no. 31, sec. 5 and ibid., note 1 as well R. Joseph Konwitz, Teshuvot Divrei Yosef, no. 9.
See also R. Ben-Zion Uziel, Piskei Uzi’el be-She’elot ha-Zman, no. 63, sec. 2, who implicitly accepts his interlocutor’s contention that hal’itehu la-rasha is irrelevant when the concern is the benefit of the community but dismisses it as not germane in the case of a woman seeking to convert to Judaism in contemplation of marriage to a kohen. Although the infraction of consorting with a person with whom one has had a previous adulterous liaison is far less severe than adultery itself, nevertheless, declares Radvaz, the principle "gorge the wicked" obviates any need to mitigate the transgression.²⁸Cf., Teshuvot Sho’el u-Meshiv, I, no. 5. Similarly, Teshuvot Radvaz, III, no. 873, refuses to sanction a religious marriage ceremony for a couple already civilly married because the parties were suspected of having engaged in a sexual liaison while the woman was yet married to another man. Teshuvot Maharsham, VII, nos. 104 and 106, forbade relaxation of the rabbinic restriction against remarriage of a woman during the period of lactation in order to avoid violation of the laws of niddah. Teshuvot Ḥelkat Ya’akov, I, no. 13, applies the principle hal’itehu la-rasha in forbidding the conversion of a woman of whom it is known that she will transgress the laws of family purity. [Cf., however, idem, I, no. 142, regarding non-interference in the marriage of a divorcée to a kohen in order to assure the execution of a get.] Piskei Uzi’el be-She’elot ha-Zman, no. 63, sec. 2, invokes the principle of hal’itehu la-rasha in refusing to convert a gentile woman married to a kohen but cf., ibid., no. 60 and idem, Mishpetei Uzi’el, I, Yoreh De’ah, no. 14, Yoreh De’ah, II, nos. 53 and 58 and Even ha-Ezer, II, no. 25. Many other authorities similarly refuse to sanction a lesser infraction in order to avoid a graver infraction. See, inter alia, Teshuvot Radvaz, IV, no. 1,357 (286) and VII, no. 11; Teshuvot Ḥatam Sofer, Even ha-Ezer, I, no. 36; R. Judah Aszod, Teshuvot Maharya, Even ha-Ezer, II, no. 140; R. Shlomoh Kluger, Teshuvot Ha-Elef Lekha Shlomoh, Even ha-Ezer, no. 92; R. Yechiel Ya’akov Weinberg, Seridei Esh, II, no. 44, s.v. ve-ra’iti; R. Ya’akov Yitzchak Weisz, Teshuvot Minḥat Yiẓḥak, VI, no. 106; Ẓiẓ Eli’ezer, VII, no. 22, IX, no. 36, XI, no. 55, and XX, no. 1; R. Betzalel Stern, Teshuvot Be-Ẓel ha-Ḥokhmah, I, no. 27; and R. Ovadiah Yosef, Teshuvot Yabi’a Omer, I, Yoreh De’ah, no. 15, sec. 15 and IV, Yoreh De’ah, no. 7, sec. 4. Ḥelkat Ya’akov, I, no. 107, sec. 10, refuses to allow compromise even with regard to matters of established custom in order to prevent some individuals from eating non-kosher food. Cf., however, Rambam, cited infra, notes 53-54 and accompanying text. See also R. Isaac Arama, Akeidat Yiẓḥak, Parashat Va-Yera, sha’ar 20, discussed infra, note 30. Cf. also, Teshuvot Ḥelkat Ya’akov, I, no. 142.
For discussion of a similar issue in the case of a penitent see Rambam, Teshuvot Pe’er ha-Dor, no. 132. See also Piskei Uzi’el, no. 61, who notes that Rambam sanctions only an infraction that is forbidden merely le-khatḥilah, i.e., before the fact, but not an infraction that remains forbidden post factum even though the perpetrator would thereby be spared a more severe transgression. Moveover, it should be noted that Rambam himself maintains that hal’itehu la-rasha applies only when the resultant infraction is more severe than the infraction that is obviated. See infra, notes 53-54 and accompanying text.
The principle hal’itehu la-rasha is similarly cited by Levush, Yoreh De’ah 334:1; Teshuvot Ḥatam Sofer, Ḥoshen Mishpat, no. 177; and Teshuvot Ḥelkat Ya’akov, I, no. 142, in justification of the ruling of Rema, Yoreh De’ah 334:3, providing for excommunication of a transgressor even in situations in which there is reason to fear that imposition of that sanction will not only fail as chastisement but will lead the transgressor to abandon Judaism entirely. Cf., however, Taz, Yoreh De’ah 334:1.
For sources ruling that conversion for purposes of marriage may not be performed in order to avert threatened apostasy see R. Ezriel Hildesheimer, Teshuvot Rabbi Ezri’el, Yoreh De’ah, no. 234 and Iggerot Mosheh, Even ha-Ezer, II, no. 4. See, however, R. David Zevi Hoffman, Teshuvot Melamed le-Ho’il, Yoreh De’ah, no. 83, who permitted improper conversion of a man for purposes of marriage in order to prevent more serious infractions on the part of his Jewish paramour. Cf., R. Shlomoh Kluger, Tuv Ta’am va-Da’at, I, no. 130, who, under such circumstances, permitted a man to marry a proselyte with whom he had consorted prior to her conversion. See also R. Eliyahu Chazan, Ta’alumot Lev, III, no. 31, followed by Piskei Uzi’el, no. 60, who sanction the marriage of a female convert within the statutory three-month waiting period in order to avoid more serious infraction.
See also ibid., no. 61, secs. 6-7 and no. 63, sec.1, which record Rabbi Uziel’s ruling permitting conversion for the sake of marriage for the same reason. That position was earlier formulated in his Mishpetei Uzi’el, I, Yoreh De’ah, no.14; II, Yoreh De’ah, nos. 53 and 58; and Even ha-Ezer, II, no. 25. Rabbi Uziel invokes Pe’er ha-Dor, no. 132, in declaring that parties to such marriages are “penitents” for whom restrictions that are imposed only le-khatḥilah, i.e., before the fact, may be suspended. However, since a kohen who marries a convert must, post factum, divorce her, Rabbi Uziel is not prepared to sanction conversion for the purpose of marrying a kohen. There is, however, an apparent inconsistency between that ruling and his earlier-cited ruling permitting conversion of a woman consorting with a Jewish man in circumstances in which it is clear that the parties will not abstain from sexual relations for the mandated ninety-day period. That prohibition applies even post factum in the sense that it is ongoing and remains in force even if a valid marriage has been contracted.
[Parenthetically, Rabbi Uziel’s citation of Pe’er ha-Dor as precedent is not apropos. Rambam addresses situations in which, ante factum, contracting a marriage is forbidden but once the marriage has been contracted the relationship is not disturbed. Sanctioning of the ongoing relationship is evidence of the diminished severity of the infraction. Rabbi Uziel assumes as a matter of course that a bet din that accepts the candidacy of a convert motivated by prospects of marriage incurs an infraction. That is also the position of many other authorities. See, for example, R. David Zevi Hoffman, Melamed le-Ho’il, Yoreh Deah, no. 83. Cf., however, Iggerot Mosheh, Even ha-Ezer, II, no. 4. Nevertheless, a conversion carried out under such circumstances is valid. However, the validity of such a conversion is entirely unrelated to the infraction committed by the bet din. It is the act of conversion per se that is interdicted either by formal prohibition or procedural rule. Validity of the conversion has no bearing upon the prohibited nature of the bet din’s act of conversion; the bet din is prohibited from performing a perfectly valid conversion. The distinction between ante factum and post factum is irrelevant to the act performed by the bet din and hence there is no basis for regarding that infraction as one of diminished severity.] Radvaz adds a tentative comment (karov ani lomar) to the effect that even in the absence of suspected adultery no attempt should be made to regularize the union "to satisfy the wicked" since, even if there was no prior adultery, the parties transgressed by entering into a civil marriage.²⁹Although his statement is somewhat ambiguous, Radvaz states explicitly that the partners to a civil union are “wicked” even if they have not consorted. In this case Radvaz may have considered them “wicked,” not because of entry into a civil marriage per se, but for having done so while the woman was still married to another man. However, in another responsum, VII, no. 11, Radvaz seems to deem the groom to be “wicked,” and hence unworthy of assistance in rendering the bride permissible to him, even if he is not suspected of having had a liaison with her.

In addition, a number of sources, including the Palestinian Talmud, Berakhot 8:6; Bereishit Rabbah 11:2, 12:6 and 82:17; Midrash Tehillim 92:4; and Pesikta Rabbati 23:6, record that there was no period of darkness during the very first Sabbath which came after the six days of creation; rather, there was a period of thirty-six hours of daylight followed by nightfall marking the conclusion of the Sabbath day. Yet that thirty-six hour period included a "day" deemed to be the Sabbath and was followed by a day deemed to be the first day of the following week.³³R. David Spira, Teshuvot Bnei Ẓion, III, Kuntres Midot ha-Yom, sec. 21, cites these aggadic sources as evidence that the length of a day is determined on the basis of twenty-four clock hours. Again, it may be postulated that terrestrial time was temporarily transcended rather than suspended³⁴Cf., however, Bein ha-Shemashot, p. 54. Rabbi Tucatzinsky suggests that even on the first Shabbat the sun set at its normal time and that the illumination that was perceived was provided by the primordial light that was created before the sun. That explanation is supported by a comment found in Bereshit Rabbah 11:1. and that, when normal time patterns based upon alternating periods of light and darkness marked by sunrise and sunset resumed, time continued as if it had not been interrupted.³⁵For a discussion of calculation of time during the period of the Deluge when, according to one opinion recorded in the Palestinian Talmud, Pesaḥim 1:1, as well as in Bereshit Rabbah 25:2 and 34:15, the constellations did not move in their orbits, see Siftei Ḥakhamim, Genesis 8:22, Teshuvot Minḥat Elazar, IV, no. 42; R. Jonathan Eibeschutz, Tiferet Yonatan, Genesis 6:18; and Divrei Yaẓiv, no. 108, sec. 6, and no. 109. See also Rav Pe‘alim, II, Sod Yesharim, no. 4, who cites that source in support of the position that days are calculated in terms of twenty-four hour periods.