Kaisipang Hudyo sa Isaias 58:13: Akeidat Yitzchak

Concerning Ben Zoma's definition of who is an honoured and respected person, Ben Zoma agrees with the prevailing philosophies, adding from his own wisdom. According to Aristotele, ethics section one chapter two, honour is not a true possession, but remains forever outside the person himself. If it were a true possession, it would have to be at one's disposal constantly and irrevocably. This is clearly not the case, since control of one's honour resides with one's peers, one's superiors or one's inferiors. It cannot therefore, be an attribute that is desirable for its own sake. Honour is desired in order to impress the beholder with the stature of the person being accorded that honour. Being beloved is superior to being accorded honour. Being accorded honour, merely gives the impression that one is beloved, substitutes the image for the substance. It is clearly desirable therefore, to be beloved, in order for the "honour" to become something of substance rather than remain a phantom. What better way to achieve that substance then but to accord honour to others, thereby gaining friendship and goodwill from those whom one honours. Since true virtues, at any rate, are desirable for the good the owner can accomplish through them, honour is not a virtue unless it is used to achieve that goal of doing good. Ben Zoma teaches that by honouring others, one's own honour becomes a vicarious virtue. We find the Almighty described as the "King of glory" in Psalms 24,9. This term is used because HE accords honour to His creatures, not because they honour Him. Rabbi Shimon points out in Numbers Rabbah 14, that it is to those who respect Him that G'd accords honour. Similarly, kings of flesh and blood accord honour to deserving subjects. Ahasverus wanted to know what honour to accord to Mordechai (Esther 6,6). This kind of honour is described by the Midrash as being like jewels that deserve to be set in a golden mounting. However, if someone were to mount a stone or piece of wood in a golden setting fit for jewels, he would surely cause himself to be ridiculed. Therefore, Solomon says in Proverbs 26,8, "as a pebble in a heap of stones, so is he who accords honour to a fool." If someone takes note of a pebble amongst a heap of precious stones, he is acting foolishly. We learn therefore, that the degree of honour accorded a person must be commensurate with the person's worth. Only in this manner can the objective of according someone honour be realised. Indiscriminate honour heaped on all one's fellow men is counterproductive, and will merely alert the citizenry to the foolishness of its ruler. Thus the end of the quotation Ben Zoma cited, "those who fail to honour Me, will become objects of derision." Such people demean themselves by withholding honour from Him who is deserving of it. They will end up being of no consequence themselves. All these examples show that the way to saintliness lies in observance of all these virtues. If, instead of equating a wise man with a person who feels superior to everyone around him, we equate him with personifying humility; if instead of equating bravery with the conquests of countries and nations, we equate it with self control; if instead of "rich" meaning that one is in control of vast amounts of material wealth , we equate it with "serene and content," then such persons are well on the way to saintliness which is the objective of the third category of people discussed at the outset. Holiness is not achieved merely by abstaining from everything forbidden, only by the judicious rejection of even those pleasures which are inherently permissible but are not permitted when used simply to afford one an opportunity to indulge one's senses. When viewed in this manner, the string of negative commandments following the instruction to become holy, may at first glance be in conflict with the view we have advanced. Leviticus 19,3-4,5-10,11-20, all deal with prohibitons. It is remarkable that our sages said that the reason the chapter dealing with immorality, (Leviticus 18) is followed by the command to be holy, is because wherever we find immorality held in check, holiness is close by. On the surface, this appears to mean that whosoever does not indulge in immoral acts, is already holy. This is, of course, quite preposterous.

By appointing a day a week when we forsake preoccupation with all matters that are of a transient nature, we have the opportunity to listen to the Torah's instruction, each person according to the level of the faculties he has been endowed with, of course. Spiritual contentment is attained through such Torah study. The Talmud Yerushalmi Shabbat 16, halachah 3, goes so far as to say that the Sabbath was given to Israel primarily to enable us to study. This is an aspect of the neshama yeteyrah, additional soul, which the Talmud Beytzah 16, says we possess on that day, due to the preparations we make to welcome the arrival of the Sabbath. This refers to preparations made by both lecturers and listeners. This is also one of the reasons we find the Sabbath described as "equivalent to all the other commandments combined." Scriptural proof is available from all three parts of the Bible. All of this is due to the intensive preparation involved in getting ready to observe the mitzvah of Shabbat. We could find additional proof in our very Parshah where we have the juxtaposition " these are the words which the Lord commanded to be kept," followed by "six days work shall be done and the seventh day shall be a holy Sabbath for you unto G-d." It seems as if the rest of Torah legislation is equated with Sabbath observance. The Rabbis who composed the grace after meals, have expressed the same juxtaposition in the insert we recite on the Sabbath. "Be pleased, O Lord our G-d, fortify us by Your commandments,"-- "and by the commandment pertaining to the seventh day." Because of the importance of this day, we find many more types of prohibitions associated with this commandment than with any other commandment. We also have the penalty of "stoning" for wilful transgression after due warning. We learn from the frequent repetition of the Sabbath laws in the Torah that even mental preoccupation with weekday matters is taboo, see Isaiah 58, 13. A true Sabbath observer is someone who does not engage in idle chatter on that day. (Shabbat 150) One's conversation should not be like that on weekdays. Some people do not speak anything but Hebrew on the Sabbath. The definition of melachah work, is usually an activity planned in advance. (machashavah) It is only this kind of work that is subject to the severe penalties of the Torah. All manner of activity which tends to sow hatred, disharmony etc. is likewise forbidden under the euphemism "do not light fire in any of your dwellings," (35,3) which appears adjacent to the main legislation. Anyone who fails to utilise the opportunity the Sabbath offers him to study Torah, is in fact contributing to his own death. It is this that Rabbi Ami had in mind when he went on record (Yerushalmi Moed Katan 2, halachah 3) "If I had found someone who would agree with me, I would have permitted work on the intermediate days of the festival.." Since the work prohibition on those days has as its purpose to free people to eat, drink and study Torah, and the people ignored the part about studying Torah, better they should at least work than belittle the sanctity of these days by not studying Torah.

5) The blessing bestowed seems to contradict the inactivity that is inherent in the Sabbath concept.