A.
When Moshe returns to the mountains to receive the second set of tablets after Israel are forgiven for the Golden Calf: וירד ד' בענן ויתיצב עמו שם ויקרא בשם ד': ויעבר ד' על פניו ויקרא ד' ד' א-ל רחום וחנון ארך אפים ורב חסד ואמת: נצר חסד לאלפים נשא עין ופשע וחטאה ונקה וגו' (“And Ha-Shem descended in a cloud and stood with him there, and [Moshe] called in the name of Ha-Shem. And Ha-Shem passed before him and he called: Ha-Shem, Ha-Shem, merciful and gracious G-d, long-suffering and great of kindness and truth, preserving kindness for the thousands, bearing iniquity and rebellion and sin, and absolving....”; XXXIV, 5-7).
Every observant Jew recognises in this passage the Thirteen Middoth ha-Rahamim (Measures of Mercy”), at the heart of the Sëlihoth (“Forgiveness”) service recited before Rosh ha-Shana. Most early authorities identify them as follows: Ha-Shem (1) Ha-Shem (2) É-l (3) Rahum (4) vë-Hanun (5) Erech Appayim (6) vë-Rav hesed (7) ve-emeth (8) Notzér hesed la-alafim (9) Nosé’ ‘avon (10) va-fesha‘ (11) vë-hata’a (12) vë-naqqeh (13), based upon the Talmud (ראש השנה י"ז:), where we find: מלמד שנתעטף הקב"ה כש"ץ והראה לו למשה סדר תפלה אמר לי' כל זמן שישראל חוטאין לפני יעשו כסדר הזה ואני אמחול להם עונותיהם "ד' ד' " אני הוא קודם שיחטא האדם ואמי הוא אחר שיחטא האדם ויעשה תשובה. "א-ל רחום וחנון ארך אפים ורב חסד ואמת", אמר רב יהודה ברית כרותה לי"ג מדות שאינן חוזרות ריקם וגו' (“‘It teaches that the Holy One, Blessed is He, clothed Himself as a cantor and showed Moshe the order of prayer; He told him, 'Anytime that Israel sin before Me, let them act according to this order and I shall forgive them their sins: ‘Ha-Shem, Ha-Shem’ – I am He before a person sins, and I am He after a person sins and does tëshuva; ‘É-l.... ve-emeth’; said Rav Yëhuda, a covenant was cut for the Thirteen Middoth that they do not return empty-handed....”).
Tosafoth [ד"ה שלש עשרה] quote Rabbeinu Tam דשני שמות הראשומות הם שני מדות כדאמרינן הכא כו' ד' מדת רחמים הוא ולא כאלקים שהוא מדת הדין "עין ופשע וחטאה ונקה" הם נמנים בד' כדאיתא ביומא [ל"ו:] דעונות אלו זדונות פשעים אלו המרדים וחטאות אלו השגגות (“that the first two names are two middoth, as we say here... Ha-Shem [indicates] the midda of mercy, and not like Eloqim which is the midda of judgment; ‘avon va-fesha‘ vë-hata’a vë-naqqeh are counted as four [middoth]... such that ‘avonoth are deliberate transgressions, pësha‘im acts of rebellion, and hata’oth acts of ngligence....”).
Tosafoth then go on to quote an alternate opinion: דרבינו נסים אין מונה שם ראשון שיש פסיק בין השמות משום דהכי קאמר קרא הקב"ה ששמו ד' רחום וחנון ונוצר חסד לאלפים מונה בשם מדות דנוצר חסד היינו מדה אחת "לאלפים" מדה אחרת שמדה טובה מרובה חמש מאות על מדת פורענות דהתם כתיב "על רבעים" והכא כתיב "לאלפים" (“Of Rabbeinu Nissim [who] does not count the first term, for there is a pause [as marked in the pointed text] between the names, because it says: 'Ha-Shem, whose name is Ha-Shem the merciful and gracious, called’; and ‘notzér hesed la-alafim he counts as two middoth, notzér hesed being one and la-alafim another, for a good midda is 500 times greater than a midda of disaster, and [at the end of the passage] it states ‘for the fourth ones’ and here, ‘for the thousands’ [i.e., the minimum possible value of ‘thousands’ is 2,000, hence 500 x 4 = 2,000]”).
What are the ramifications of the difference between Rabbeinu Tam’s view of the Thirteen Middoth and Rabbeinu Nissim’s?
B.
In order to understand Rabbeinu Tam’s view, we must first understand why the three Divine Names which head up the list are termed middoth. Ramban agrees with Rabbeinu Tam’s view, and explains: והחכמים יקראו אותן מדות כי הם מדת בעל התשובה ומדת רחמיו ומדת טובו, והשם המיוחד לא יתרבה בהן (“and the Hachamim call them middoth, for they represent the midda of the Owner of tëshuva [‘repentance’] and of His mercies and of His goodness, and the unique Name –i.e. the tetragrammaton] is not multiplied through them”). The Ma’or va-Shemesh clarifies the last statement: כלומר שאין להם חידוש בפעולות שפועלים המדות, כי הוא פועל בהם ואין הם בו, ולפי שכולם רחמניות נכתבו בשם ד' ואפילו האחרת שהוא מדת א-ל היא רחמניות דכתיב "א-ל ד' ויאר לנו" (“i.e. they have no originality in the functions which the middoth carry out, for He operates through them and not they through Him; and since all they are all expressions of mercy, they were written with the Tetragrammaton. And even the other one, which is the midda of É-l, is an expression of mercy, as it is written: ‘É-l is Ha-Shem, and shines forth for us’ [Psalms CXVII, 27]”).
Ramban defines the rest of the middoth שהם מקרים באדם הן עשר מדות רחום וחנון וכו' וכו' ומצד אחר השלש הן שמות עצם והעשר מדות, והמדות נאמרו בשמות כי חנון ורחום וארך אפים בא-ל עליון, על כן לא אמר מרחם וחונן ומאריך אפים, כי השם פעול למדות האלו (“which are human occurrences, are ten, the midoth rahum and hanun etc.... and from another view, the [first] three are nouns and the ten qualities which are said of the nouns, for rahum and hanun and erech appayim [apply] to the Supernal G-d; therefore, he did not say mërahém and honén and ma’arich appayim, for [each] noun is brought into effect for these middoth....”).
Ramban’s point is based on the fact that rahum and hanun are passive participles, and erech a descriptive substantive in combination with appayim. Were the first three terms intend to refer directly to the ineffable and infinite Deity, they would have been expressed as factitive or causative participles, since the Eternal Infinite is the Author of the middoth. The first three terms are in fact created loci, brought into existence by the force of the emanated middoth.
So Ramban continues: ורב חסד ואמת נוצר חסד לאלפים במדת הרחמים שהוא מרבה חסד על גבורתו (“and Rav hesed ve-emth, notzér hesed la-alafim are applied to the middath ha-Rahamim [the second of the first three terms], which overwhelms His might with kindness”), ובטובו הוא נושא עון ופשע וחטאה (“and in His goodness [the third term] He bears ‘avon and pesha‘ and hata’a”).
The final midda, naqqeh, embraces the passage’s last clause, לא ינקה פוקד עון אבות על בנים ועל בני בנים על שלשים ועל רבעים (“absolves not, imposing the sin of the fathers on the sons and grandsons, on the third ones and fourth ones”). Should the sinner not repent, the correction of the cosmic distortion caused by his sin comes not a in a sudden paroxysm of fury, but is spread over the generations of those who perpetuate their fathers’ evil ways, a final act of Divine hesed; if the sons repent and become tzaddiqim, the imposition is lifted (ע"ע ילקוט שמעוני פרשתנו רמז שצ"ח ).
This is Rabbeinu Tam’s view.
C.
The Maharal mi-Prag explains Rabbeinu Nissim’s view כי מפרש "ויקרא ד' " שהש"י הוא הקורא (“that he explains that Ha-Shem is the one calling”). If so, he suggests, the first three terms are actual Divine Names, not to be counted amongst the Middoth, finding support from Hazal in two places in the Zohar. In the first, we learn: דתניא תליסר מכילין דרחמי מעתיקא קדישא כו' לקבל דא א-ל רחום וחנון וגו' (“that it is taught, the thirteen measures of mercy are from the Ancient Holy One... apposite É-l rahum vë-hanun....”; ח"ג קל"א:) and again, a bit later: ובג"כ אמר משה זמנא אחרא "דק ארך אפים ורב חסד" ואילו אמת לא קאמר משום דרזא דמילה אינון תשעה מכילין דנהרן מעתיק יומין לזעיר אנפין (“And for this reason, Moshe said another time, ‘Ha-Shem, long-suffering and great of kindness’ [Numbers XIV, 18], though emeth he did not say, for the essence of the word is those nine measures which radiates from the Ancient of Days to [the lower metaphysical realm]”; שם ק"מ.).
From these two passages, the Maharal understands the actual Thirteen Middoth to begin with erech appayim and run through to the end of verse 7. On this basis, he concludes that that the three Divine Names refer to the Source from which the hesed and rahamim flow, and therefore that the middoth are actually defined in the rest of the passage incuding the final clause: מ"מ אין להזכיר זה בתפלה כאלו הוא מבקש דבר זה בתפלתו ולכך אין להזכיר זה בפירוש והוא נרמז בג' שמות הראשונים (“nonetheless, one should not mention this [final clause] in a prayer, as if one is asking for such a thing in his prayer; and therefore this should not be mentioned directly, and it is alluded to in the first three Names....”; נתיבות עולם ח"ב נתיב התשובה פ"ו וע"ע שם נתיב הזריזות סוף פ"ב ).
D.
From the Maharal’s explanation of Rabbeinu Nissim, we can see that the apparent conflict between him and Rabbeinu Tam is much less than meets the eye.
Both agree that the middoth of mercy originate with the one, unique, ineffable Ha-Shem. Rabbeinu Tam (in Ramban’s explanation) says that, once the middoth have been emanated, they bring into existence three portals into this world (since the actual middoth are grouped in threes), which are simulacra of the Divine attribute of mercy, and so called by the appropriate Divine Names. These may be understood as the qualities of mercy as they work out in human beings (note that, in the account of Creation, the only Divine Name which occurs is Eloqim, the middath ha-din, until the first human being appears, when Ha-Shem first occurs; cf. Genesis II, 1), or as attributes of the three simulacra. The simulacra, quâ simulacra, are thus themselves middoth.
Rabbeinu Nissim, it seems, would not dispute this chain of events, but asserts that the Divine Names in fact refer to the Author and Emanator of the Middoth, noting that the Thirteen Middoth themselves are ramifications of the rest of the passage. For him, the three portals are simply not mentioned, and the three Names are called middoth in allusion to those middoth derived from part of the text which it is not prudent to mention in a penitent’s prayer.
No comments:
Post a Comment