ייִדישער מחשבֿה אויף ישעיהו 41:2

The kind of tolerance G-d displays depends on who He needs to relate to. In the first instance there are the spiritual, completely disembodied beings inhabiting the "upper" world, who are closest to Him. Since these beings by their very nature are close to perfection, tolerating them does not require a major effort on G-d’s part. Also the bodies in outer space whose regular and constant orbit represent service of G-d on a non-stop basis, do not require a great deal of tolerance on the part of G-d. These heavenly bodies, which provide the four basic raw materials for our physical universe, in a sense support this earth. At the time of the garden of Eden being at man's disposal, G-d had a home in the material universe because His spirit was present within man. This was the connection between the worlds above the rakiyah, firmament, and the world "below." Both harbored the Divine spirit. The commandment, "Do not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil," meant "do not become engrossed in the material world except to the extent of doing good. Engrossing yourself in evil will make you part of this finite world, make you mortal." Since we have defined mavet, death, as being equal to ra, evil, and chayim, life, as being equal to tov, good, it is quite clear that contact with ra is contact with death (Deut. 30,15, compare our Chapter 7). Breaking this commandment, then, had to result in the Shechinah, G-d’s Presence withdrawing. Shechinah cannot associate with death; since there did not remain any immortal human beings on earth, there was no alternative but to withdraw to a level further removed from earth. At this point, the author describes successive withdrawals of G-d from different planets in outer space as being connected with the individual functions of these planets in our world. Abraham made up for the commandment that Adam had transgressed, by taking upon himself to command his offspring to observe the commandments of the Lord. G-d acknowledged this when He said, "As a result of Abraham having listened to My voice etc." (Genesis 26,5). Isaac repaired the damage done by Cain who had committed murder, when he voluntarily submitted to the command of His Creator, in contrast to Cain who had acted as if there were no judge or judgment in the world. His deed was acknowledged when the angel instructed Abraham, "Do not lay a hand on the lad, do not touch him" (Genesis 22,12). Jacob, who had been able to prevail on all his children to remain loyal to G-d and to proclaim His Unity when they said, "Hear O Israel, the Lord our G-d is One," enabled G-d to return His Presence still closer to earth. Jacob had thus repaired the damage done by Enosh who had been the first to introduce the concept of G-d not being One. When Levi appeared, risking his life to avenge the shame of the rape of his sister Dinah, he repaired the damage done by the generation of the deluge, who had practiced immorality, incest etc. Kehot was the leader of the Jewish people when the latter were forced to commence performing slave labor for the Egyptians. The Jews who had been singled out for this cruel treatment, because they had failed to assimilate to the Egyptians, maintained a profile of being different by keeping their Hebrew names, language, and religion in spite of persecution suffered. This fact enabled G-d to move still closer to earth, as the damage done by the collective insubordination of the generation that built the tower of Babel had now been repaired. Amram in turn repaired the damage done by the people of Sodom, who through lack of concern for their fellow man, had driven the Shechinah still further away. Amram demonstrated his concern for the future of his nation when he responded to the admonition of his daughter not to stop having children, even at the risk of a baby boy being drowned by the Egyptians. When Moses finally made his appearance, and instead of persecuting the just, stood up against terror, injustice, and "might is right," he repaired what Nimrad/Amrafel had destroyed when he made war against the weak who had not provoked him. G-d was thus able to feel at home again on earth since the counterweight to everything the serpent had helped ruin had appeared on earth, and had made its impact. The Talmud Yevamot 112 says that when Israel stood at Mount Sinai, their "filth" departed from them. What is meant is that they reverted to the state of innocence that existed when Adam had just been created. The book of Exodus deserves to be called the book of redemption, since it tells of the redemption of the Jewish people from a cruel and barbaric fate at the hands of a cruel and barbaric nation. Apart from the physical redemption from slavery, the promise of being given the land of Israel with all its abundant natural wealth, would enable the Jewish people to live a life of ease and to be tested if they would indeed prove obedient to G-d, so that He could allow His Presence to dwell amongst them. Moses’ss accomplishment in restoring G-d’s Presence to earth, made him the intermediary between G-d and His people. To be a good intermediary requires that the intermediary himself feels in harmony with the objectives and methods of the one who has made him intermediary. Such rapport can exist either naturally, or in spite of one's natural inclinations. When Moses was shown a kind of wood that sweetens the waters at Marah (Ex. 15,25), our sages are in two minds about the nature of this wood. Some say that it was sweet wood, and that the resultant sweetening of the waters was a natural process. Others maintain that the wood itself was bitter, in which case the transformation of the waters was miraculous (Mechilta Beshalach). We find that G-d employs both kinds of agents as leaders of the Jewish people at different times. Gideon, who abandoned his preoccupation with salvaging his harvest, and who challenged the angel about G-ds apparent abandonment of His people, demonstrated selflessness and lack of concern with his private business to such an extent that the angel could say to him "go forth with this strength of yours and save the Jewish people." (Judges 6,14) He succeeded because he possessed the major ingredient needed for leadership. The reverse may be the case when the emissary of G-d is motivated by a feeling of obedience to G-d, but lacks the characteristics that put him in harmony with the purpose of his Sender. When attacking Amalek, Saul allowed considerations of economic gain to persuade him not to kill the best of the herds; he also displayed pity just when G-d had forbidden pity. This led to tragic results for his dynasty (Samuel I Chapter 15). His downfall can be traced not to lack of basic obedience, but to internal conflict between his own aims and methods, and G-ds aims and methods. Therefore, G-d looked for another man, David, who would be in tune with His objectives heart and soul, and who is held up as a model human being whose inner strivings coincide with G-d’s. When Jerobam is chastised by Achyah (Kings I 14,8-9), the point emphasized is that he failed to be with G-d "like My servant David, who observed My commandments, who followed Me with his whole heart to do only what is right in My eyes." This same David describes his own world outlook in Psalms 139,20 in the following words, "Those who hate You O G-d, I hate, and those who rebel against You, I quarrel with." When the Messiah is described, three characteristics are described as essential (Psalms 72,12-14). "For he will deliver the defenseless man who cries, and the poor who has no helper; he will care for those who have been brought low." "He will redeem their souls from malice and violence, and their blood will be precious to him." Our Parshah tells us that Moses possessed the qualities enumerated in Psalms and that therefore he was the ideal intermediary and saviour for Israel. When Moses, on his first outing to his brethren, saw an Egyptian torture a Jew, he could not stand this and he slew the Egytian. This corresponds to the line, "He will deliver the defenseless man who cries out." On the second day, when he observed injustice being perpetrated among his Jewish brethren, he stood up for the victim, the defenseless, as he did when he helped the daughters of Yitro at the well. In each case he risked his life or safety. Despite his disappointing experiences, he continued to involve himself in other peoples' problems. It is clear then that with the advent of Moses, G-d had found the person who was likely to lead the Jewish people successfully.

The answer, as I see it, is as follows. A man may escape the influence of an adverse mazal in two ways: the first, by not being in the place where the mazal manifests itself, or being there but protecting himself in such a way that the mazal [though potent] cannot injure him; the second, though being in a place where the mazal normally manifests itself, neutralizing the power of the mazal so that it leaves no impression whatsoever upon him. This is analogous to saying that one may escape being burned by fire in two ways: the first, moving away from it and standing in a place where it cannot harm him, or smearing himself with salamander blood so that it cannot injure him, though it does not lose its potency thereby; the second, standing in a place where it would, indeed, injure him if it retained its potency, but neutralizing its potency by extinguishing it. Similarly, a person may escape the adverse influence of a mazal in these two ways, if they obtain. First, by not being in the place where the mazal manifests itself, or, if he finds himself in that place, by doing something as a result of which the mazal will not affect him adversely, though it will not lose its potency. So that, for example, if the mazal system dictated intense, burning heat, he could place himself within the framework of cold and thus escape the influence of the mazal without detracting from its potency in any way. This is the first expedient by which one can rescue himself from the evil of the mazal or the stellar system. And in this connection R. Chanina and R. Yochanan are in complete agreement, differing in no way whatsoever. For even R. Chanina, who says: "There is a mazal for Israel, will admit that by this expedient one can escape the power of the mazal, that is, by the Blessed One's putting it in the hearts of the doers of His will to perform acts which will save them from the adverse influences of the mazal system, without the system being weakened in any way. R. Abraham (Ibn Ezra has already testified to this.) And on this will hinge all of the material rewards of the Torah and all of our daily prayers according to R. Chanina. But as to whether a man can, through his merit, weaken the power of the mazal itself without taking any defensive measures — simply to attenuate its power so that it makes no impression upon him, as was the case with Chananiah, Mishael, and Azariah in the fiery furnace, their entering into it and employing no stratagem whatsoever to save themselves, in spite of which it had no adverse effect whatsoever upon them — whether one can thus neutralize a mazal is where R. Chanina and R. Yochanan disagree, R. Chanina holding that this is absolutely impossible, and R. Yochanan holding, that this, too, is possible, that a mitzvah in itself can prevent a mazal from adversely affecting the one who observes it. And the context itself shows this to be the case, viz. (Shabbath 156a): "And Rav, too, holds that there is no mazal for Israel, for R. Yehudah said in the name of Rav: 'How do we know that there is no mazal for Israel? For it is written (Genesis 15:5): "And He took him Abraham outside…" Abraham said: "L-rd of the Universe, I have looked at my mazal and seen that I am not fit to have children," at which the L-rd answered: "Go out of your mazal, for there is no mazal for Israel. What leads you to this conclusion? The fact that Tzedek is in the west? I shall turn it around and set it up in the east." And this is the intent of the verse (Isaiah 41:2): "Who caused Tzedek to rise in the east?"'" He does not say that He will create conditions that will protect him from the effect of the mazal, but that He will change the mazal itself, so that the mazal itself can make no impression upon him. And the other episodes recorded there ("The episode of Shmuel also demonstrates that there is no mazal for Israel"; "The episode of R. Akiva also demonstrates that there is no mazal for Israel"; "The episode of R. Nachman b. Yitzchak also demonstrates that there is no mazal for Israel") — all of these indicate that the mitzvah itself can neutralize the mazal with no other expedients being necessary.