Kaisipang Hudyo sa Levitico 23:27: Akeidat Yitzchak

אַ֡ךְ בֶּעָשׂ֣וֹר לַחֹדֶשׁ֩ הַשְּׁבִיעִ֨י הַזֶּ֜ה י֧וֹם הַכִּפֻּרִ֣ים ה֗וּא מִֽקְרָא־קֹ֙דֶשׁ֙ יִהְיֶ֣ה לָכֶ֔ם וְעִנִּיתֶ֖ם אֶת־נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶ֑ם וְהִקְרַבְתֶּ֥ם אִשֶּׁ֖ה לַיהוָֽה׃

Gayunman, sa ikasampung araw ng ikapitong buwang ito ay ang Araw ng Kapatawaran (Yom Kippur); magkakaroon kayo ng isang banal na pagtitipon, at pahihirapan ninyo ang inyong mga sarili, at maghahandog kayo ng handog na pinaraan sa apoy para sa Walang-Hanggan.

Akeidat Yitzchak

(5) The changing of the priestly garments must be mentioned so that we will know that certain actions are not considered as falling within the definition of avodah; service. For instance, reading from the Torah in public on that occasion by the High Priest, is not avodah in the strict sense of the word. The purpose of the fast and the discomfort to be experienced, is to make the need for such a day redundant, as we read in Isaiah 58,3-14, G'd wishes that He could replace all fast days with days of joy instead. (Zachariah 8,18-19) The fasting by itself is no accomplishment. Also, fasting is not in order to attain our requests from G'd, but to cleanse us of our sins which we committed because of the enjoyment that indulging in such sins has afforded us. Compensating with discomfort for comfort obtained illegally previously, does not constitute any entitlement on our part. The word tzom, derived from the root tzamtzem, limiting oneself, can have three meanings when applied to man. This "restriction" can apply to all three parts of man, his physical functions, his emotional functions, and his intellectual functions. (6) The fact that this innuy, discomfort, affliction, is mentioned three times then, is to ensure that we understand that the Day of Atonement fulfils its function optimally only when we appreciate all the dimensions of the fast, (see comment in Parshat Emor) The fact that our sages in Yoma 81, explain the repetitions as relating to multiple discomfort such as washing, not wearing leather shoes, etc. in no way conflicts with our explanation, as the Talmudic commentary is halachah mi-Sinai, i.e. not based on any conceptual understanding of the legislation. (9) The Torah connects the prohibition of work with the fasting, to illustrate that no other activity is to interfere with our concentration on the purpose of the fast and what it stands for. That is also the reason for the word nefesh. The whole personality must be involved in the fasting process, not merely the body. The penalty for not involving the entire personality in the innuy, discomfort, is karet, since it revealed misunderstanding of the purpose of the fast. This penalty embraces the whole personality in all its three aspects, as discussed. When the Torah speaks of the work prohibition however, unconnected with the innuy aspect (as in chapter 23,31), the penalty is not spelled out. The reason for repeating the work prohibition at all, may be in order to stress the difference between mechanical offences, and those that involve one's personality. When coupled with Yom Kippur, Day of Atonement, and the specific demands of Yom Kippur, such offence invalidates the spirit of the day completely, and constitutes a grave error. This is the only holyday which demands a complete work-prohibition like the Sabbath, including all food preparation. (7) The innuy, discomfort, commences on the ninth of the month in the evening, though the effects may not be noticeable till the morning of the tenth of the month. In order for that discomfort to be felt on the tenth, it has to be commenced by abstention already on part of the ninth. (8) The word ach, in chapter twenty three, is employed to establish the connection with the avodah, sacrificial service legislation outlined in chapter seventeen of our Parshah.
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Akeidat Yitzchak

Lastly, the "kind deeds" parts of his statement is contained in the very fact that forgiveness and atonement are possible, and are granted by G'd. He who is aware of the inherent weakness of man, has generously made provision for man's rehabilitation. It is not a Jewish characteristic to indulge in wholesale killing, even if great wrongs have been committed. The Torah has to exhort us not to have mercy in such cases as the ir hanidachat, the city whose majority have indulged in idol worship, whose inhabitants have to be executed. The Torah therefore emphasizes that administering the death penalty has as its objective to turn aside G'ds wrath against those who tolerate wrongdoing. This is proof that were it not for this consideration, we might not administer a death penalty at all. Kings who desire the adulation of their subjects, certainly indulge in generosity when sinned against. Even Haman had to keep secret the identity of the people he wished to murder, and not use the word "murder," but "destroy," meaning "neutralise," so as not to offend the sensibilities of the king. Another motivation for generosity is that forestalling the desire for revenge by his subjects, as well as fear to trigger hostile action by those to be killed. He who feels threatened, will try to act in self defense. Ahasverus, who had shown that he craved popularity by throwing lavish banquets, had no choice but to execute Bigtan and Teresh. He executed Haman when he had become aware of the latter's machinations. Heretofore he had put quite a different interpretation on what Haman had meant when the latter had asked permission le-abdam, to destroy them, (compare story in megillat Esther) Being generous and forgiving is therefore seen as a character trait that is conducive to self-preservation. It keeps civilisation going. The King of Kings certainly does not desire mass death of His subjects, but wishes to inspire teshuvah, repentance, through the retribution exacted from the few. G'd, who had first considered creating the universe by using the yardstick of justice, i.e. midat hadin, had reconsidered when He realised that the world would not be able to endure on that basis. This is because no man could be expected never to sin. (Bereshit Rabbah 12) This is why when the Torah relates the story of creation a second time in chapter 2,4, we find that G'd has acquired a new attribute in addition to elokim. He is now also called hashem, "the merciful One." These two attributes of G'd are reflected in the two holy days Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur, i.e. New year's day and Day of Atonement. The former reflects the din, justice aspect of G'ds rule, the other the rachamim, mercy aspect. On the former day everyone is judged according to his "present" state. Even the beynonim, the people whose merits are balanced by their errors, debits, are treated according to the yardstick of justice, since G'd waits until the Day of Atonement to see which way the scales will tip at that time. However, repentance is accepted from all on Yom Kippur, meaning that G'd relaxes the rule of strict justice. This is what is called lifnim mishurat hadin. The hint in scripture confirming that this is so, is found in Psalms 47,6, Elokim arose at the sound of truah, but Hashem at the sound of the shofar. Since the term truah is found in the Torah in connection with Rosh Hashanah, whereas only the term shofar is found in connection with Yom kippur, the hint is reasonably clear. If, as we said before, Samael, i.e Satan, has no control over man on Yom Kippur, as long as man exploits the day properly, it follows that he who ignores the opportunity presented by that day will fall irretrievable victim to Samael. This is the "bribe" that G'd gave to Satan. The attribute of mercy, when ignored, causes utter destruction of the soul for all those who have ignored it. A hint of all this is found in the numerical value of the word "Satan." It adds up to 364, i.e. Satan has control on 364 days of the year, not on the 365th day, the Day of Atonement. (Yuma 19) The last sentence in the Yom Kippur service (16,34) is to remind us that the function of Yom Kippur is not affected by the existence or non existence of the holy Temple and the ability to offer the sacrifices. The need is for penitence brought on through innuy, discomfort. The day alone does not achieve atonement.
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy