וְהִנֵּ֨ה אָנֹכִ֜י עִמָּ֗ךְ וּשְׁמַרְתִּ֙יךָ֙ בְּכֹ֣ל אֲשֶׁר־תֵּלֵ֔ךְ וַהֲשִׁ֣בֹתִ֔יךָ אֶל־הָאֲדָמָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את כִּ֚י לֹ֣א אֶֽעֱזָבְךָ֔ עַ֚ד אֲשֶׁ֣ר אִם־עָשִׂ֔יתִי אֵ֥ת אֲשֶׁר־דִּבַּ֖רְתִּי לָֽךְ׃
At narito, Ako ay kasama mo, at iingatan kita saanman ka pumunta, at ibabalik kita sa lupang ito; sapagkat hindi kita iiwan hanggang sa magawa Ko ang ipinangako Ko sa iyo.”
Sha'ar HaEmunah VeYesod HaChasidut
However, even though all of the Maharal’s words are true. Yet, all of his arguments were proffered only in order to show how there is no change in God’s will when a miracle occurs. One could still assert that God’s knowledge can change, from which it follows that His will also changes. When God arranged the work of creation, it was His will that certain miracles would happen at a definite time in the future. If this plan is delayed in any way, then the primordial will must have changed. Since God programmed into the creation the condition that the sea would split with the Exodus, therefore He knew that it would split, which it eventually did. If so, how could we be taught that the Egyptians could have repented prior to the sea’s splitting, which would have cancelled the order for the sea to split. With this in mind, we also find it difficult to understand the statement of the Talmud (Berachot, 4a, Sotah, 36a), “At the time of Ezra,340And the nation’s return from the Babylonian exile. the nation of Israel was worthy of experiencing a miracle of the same magnitude that happened in the days of Yehoshua,341The miracle would have been their entering the land of Israel with a high hand, just as they left Egypt. Rashi. but the prevalence of sin prevented it.”342Instead, they could only return from Babylon by the permission of Cyrus. Rashi. The Gemara explains the verse in the Song of the Sea (Shemot 15:16), “until Your people shall pass over, O God, until they shall pass over...” is alluding to two “passing overs” into the Land – the first in the time of Yehushua, and the second in the time of Ezra. All this leads to conclusion that a miracle was supposed to happen at the time of Ezra, yet God’s will changed. R. Eliyahu Mizrahi, in his commentary on Rashi (Parshat Vayishlach), examines the situation of Yaakov Avinu returning to Israel, and confronting his brother Eisav and his army of four hundred men. The last Yaakov heard from Eisav was that he wanted to kill him, and he assumed, now twenty years later, that this was still true. Thus, the verse says, “and Yaakov was afraid,” on which Rashi comments, “He was afraid that he would be killed.” (The Lechem Mishnah, at the end of the fifth chapter of the Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah, also addresses this issue.) Yaakov was afraid that his own sins may have nullified God’s promise to protect him.343That is, G-d’s promise, made in Bereshit 28:15: “Behold, I am with you and will protect you wherever you go, and I will bring you back to this land. I will not abandon you until I have done that which I have promised you." Furthermore, we have the statement of the sages in the Gemara (Shabbat, 55a), “Rav Acha son of Chanina said: God never once broke His promise of bestowing good, and brought calamity in its stead.” We would have to bend over backwards with forced arguments in order to reconcile this contradiction. Based on the words of the sages, one would seem obliged to concede that God’s will can change. Yet based on all we have explained above, that all human knowledge is a created entity, and the whole order of existence is a created and arranged order, then we can also see that the borders and limits of what may change is also something that was arranged with the creation as an expression of God’s will. It is impossible that it could be only a change of will, for that very conception is no more than a created idea that can only be understood from our own greatly limited human perspective. At the time of the revelation of the miracle, it will be revealed that the miracle could occur even without any change in God’s will. It is the function of the Divine service of the Jew to arrive at this faith and to fix it permanently in his heart. Purely out of faith, man can reach a place above all orders of governance. Then it will be readily apparent that there is no difference between nature and miracles even from the perspective of created beings.
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 28,20. “If G’d will be with me, etc.;” Nachmanides’ comment that seeing G’d had already promised Yaakov in verse 15 that He would be with him, why did Yaakov question this with the word: אם, “if?” is well known. The answer given by Nachmanides is that Yaakov was afraid that G’d’s promise would be invalid if he became guilty of a sin before it could be carried out. (compare Bereshit Rabbah 76,2 that promises made to tzaddikim concerning happenings in this life are never absolute.) [If they were they would tie G’d’s hands if the tzaddik were to become a rasha. Ed.]
The answers given by the Midrash or quoted as such by the commentators, appear to contradict the specific promise for events in this life made to Yaakov in verse 15. I quote: (translation) “Remember, I am with you; I will protect you wherever you go and will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” Surely, after such a promise, how could Yaakov have had any doubt that what G’d had promised would occur in this lifetime on earth? Part of this promise implies that G’d the good, Who only does good, will assist the recipient of this promise to conduct himself in a manner that will ensure that G’d will feel obliged to honour His promise.
However, we must remember two points. 1) The Torah had reported G’d’s promise as being part of a dream,” i.e. ויחלום. The Torah did not preface the dream as a vision, i.e. וירא אליו ה'; Yaakov was not at all sure that what appears here as a solid promise was not a figment of his imagination. 2) We have discussed once before the fact that G’d wishes us to pray to Him for our needs, (that is why Rivkah did not become pregnant till after 20 years of marriage when both her husband and she prayed for this). Seeing that Yaakov is not on record as having actively asked G’d to assist him in what was a pretty desperate situation, G’d, by spelling out this promise, wished to provoke Yaakov into finally praying to Him for His help. (Compare also Bereshit Rabbah 45, Sarah being angry at Avraham for not having including her in his prayer when he said to G’d, (complainingly) “here I walk on this earth childless.” (Genesis 15,2) G’d dispenses largesse without waiting to be asked, to those of His creatures whom He has not equipped with a mouth to articulate their requests. Man, who has been so equipped is expected to use his powers to address his Creator in prayer.
According to B’rachot 17 the reason why our matriarchs were originally barren is summed up in Isaiah 46,12 שמעו אלי אבירי לב הרחוקים מצדקה! “Listen to Me, you who have lost heart, who are far from righteousness.” According to one interpretation of the above verse in the Talmud, some people are granted their livelihood because they use their intelligence to ask G’d for it. Others believe in their own strength, זרוע, their ability to work for a living, and secure it through this means. The people who are devoid of intelligence will be provided for by G’d, as they are too dim witted or physically unable look out for themselves. This is the meaning of שומר פתאים ה', “the Lord looks after the fools.” (psalms 116,6) Examples of such people are children having to eat at their father’s table. When the father of such children sees that they have become capable of fending for themselves, he no longer supports them. The same holds true of our Father in heaven, when He sees that we could fend for ourselves but prefer to have Him provide for us. The righteous are supposed to support themselves by using their arms, (to do work) not violence. Those who possess intelligence and do not use it to appeal to their Creator are not supported by G’d’s charity, צדקה.
The answers given by the Midrash or quoted as such by the commentators, appear to contradict the specific promise for events in this life made to Yaakov in verse 15. I quote: (translation) “Remember, I am with you; I will protect you wherever you go and will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” Surely, after such a promise, how could Yaakov have had any doubt that what G’d had promised would occur in this lifetime on earth? Part of this promise implies that G’d the good, Who only does good, will assist the recipient of this promise to conduct himself in a manner that will ensure that G’d will feel obliged to honour His promise.
However, we must remember two points. 1) The Torah had reported G’d’s promise as being part of a dream,” i.e. ויחלום. The Torah did not preface the dream as a vision, i.e. וירא אליו ה'; Yaakov was not at all sure that what appears here as a solid promise was not a figment of his imagination. 2) We have discussed once before the fact that G’d wishes us to pray to Him for our needs, (that is why Rivkah did not become pregnant till after 20 years of marriage when both her husband and she prayed for this). Seeing that Yaakov is not on record as having actively asked G’d to assist him in what was a pretty desperate situation, G’d, by spelling out this promise, wished to provoke Yaakov into finally praying to Him for His help. (Compare also Bereshit Rabbah 45, Sarah being angry at Avraham for not having including her in his prayer when he said to G’d, (complainingly) “here I walk on this earth childless.” (Genesis 15,2) G’d dispenses largesse without waiting to be asked, to those of His creatures whom He has not equipped with a mouth to articulate their requests. Man, who has been so equipped is expected to use his powers to address his Creator in prayer.
According to B’rachot 17 the reason why our matriarchs were originally barren is summed up in Isaiah 46,12 שמעו אלי אבירי לב הרחוקים מצדקה! “Listen to Me, you who have lost heart, who are far from righteousness.” According to one interpretation of the above verse in the Talmud, some people are granted their livelihood because they use their intelligence to ask G’d for it. Others believe in their own strength, זרוע, their ability to work for a living, and secure it through this means. The people who are devoid of intelligence will be provided for by G’d, as they are too dim witted or physically unable look out for themselves. This is the meaning of שומר פתאים ה', “the Lord looks after the fools.” (psalms 116,6) Examples of such people are children having to eat at their father’s table. When the father of such children sees that they have become capable of fending for themselves, he no longer supports them. The same holds true of our Father in heaven, when He sees that we could fend for ourselves but prefer to have Him provide for us. The righteous are supposed to support themselves by using their arms, (to do work) not violence. Those who possess intelligence and do not use it to appeal to their Creator are not supported by G’d’s charity, צדקה.