Parashath Tzav (Leviticus VI,1-VIII,36) 3/30/12

A.

וידבר ד' אל משה לאמר צו את אהרן ואת בניו לאמר זאת תורת העלה הוא העלה על מקדה על המזבח כל הלילה עד הבקר וגו' (“And Ha-Shem spoke to Moshe to say, This is the Torah of the ‘ola; that is the ‘ola on the fireplace upon the altar all night long until the morning....”). So begins our parasha.

It was pointed out last week that our parasha recounts the sacrificial service, the ‘avoda, of the Mishkan (and later, of the Béyth ha-Miqdash) from the point of view of the officiants, the kohanim who had been assigned the task of serving there.

With this in mind, our attention is drawn to an observation in the Talmud: "שיר המעלות הנה ברכו את ד' כל עבדי ד' העומדים בבית ד' בלילות" מאי בלילות? א"ר יוחנן אלו ת"ח העוסקים בתורה בלילה מעלה עליהן הכתוב כאלו עסוקים בעבודה (“‘A song of ascents, behold, Bless Ha-Shem all the servants of Ha-Shem who stand [ha-‘omëdim] in the house of Ha-Shem during the nights’ [Psalms CXXXIV, 1]? Said Rabbi Yohanan, 'These are talmidei hachamim who engage in Torah at night; Scripture considers them as if they are engaged in the ‘avoda'”; מנחות ק"י.).

The Maharsha asks: דלפי פשוטו דקאי אעבודת בית המקדש מאי "בלילות"? הא עיקר עבודה בימים הוא ולא בלילות (“Since, according to [the verse’s] simple meaning it refers to the ‘avoda of the Béyth ha-Miqdash, why [does it read] ba-léyloth [‘during the nights’]? After all, the essence of the ‘avoda is during the days, not during the nights....”), and responds that it is this which brings Rabbi Yohanan to see in the term ba-léyloth an allusion to talmud Torah at night. But this, it seems to me, still begs the question: Certainly it refers to some sort of activity at night, but what in the verse points specifically to talmud Torah? What really motivated Rabbi Yohanan to suggest this explanation?

B.

It seems to me that the key to Rabbi Yohanan’s thought process here may be discerned in the participle ha-‘omëdim.

Elsewhere in the Talmud (מגילה כ"א.), the gëmara learns from G-d’s instructions to Moshe on Mt Sinai, ואתה פה עמד עמדי (“And you, here, stand with Me...”; Deuteronomy V, 28) to instruct him in Torah, that one may not read the Torah publicly seated; rather, out of respect for the Torah, it must be read standing (עיי' רמב"ם הל' תפלה פי"ב הי"א ושו"ע או"ח סי' קמ"א סעיף א' ). Thus we see that the concept of ‘amida, of “standing,” is linked to the learning and transmittal of Torah.

In yet another place in the Talmud, we learn that אין שירות כשר אלא מעומד (“Service is not proper unless it is [performed whilst] standing”; זבחים כ"ג:), linking ‘amida to the concept of service, in a similar way to that in which it was related to Torah. Thus, the concept of ‘amida serves a sort of logical bridge, connecting talmud Torah and limmud Torah with ‘avoda. It is this, I believe, which enabled Rabbi Yohanan to connect the two ideas together, and tell us that talmidei hachamim involved in Torah may be considered as if they are involved in the ‘avodath Béyth ha-Miqdash.

But the Maharsha says that Rabbi Yohanan saw the remez, the allusion to talmud Torah specifically in the word ba-léyloth, and quite correctly noted that ‘avoda proper takes place by day, when the sacrifices per se are offered on the altar; the nights are reserved for “cleaning up”, as it were, burning the fats and limbs left over from the day (עיי' ברכות ב. במשנה ומגילה כ"א.).

We attest to this in our thrice-daily tëfilloth, even in the present intermediate age when we have no Béyth ha-Miqdash. It is only Shaharith, the morning service, and minha, the afternoon service, which are preceded by the reading of qorbanoth; Ma‘ariv, the evening service, contains no reference to the sacrificial service.

So that said, our question returns: Granted the logical link between Torah and ‘avoda provided by ‘amida, the same link could be applied to other mitzvoth, e.g. tëfilla, whose core is recited standing. The Maharsha tells us that allusion is to be found in ba-léyloth; how does ba-léyloth close the deal?

C. Ma‘ariv, the evening service, provides the clue. During Ma‘ariv we attest that divrei Torah are חיינו ואורך ימינו ובהם נהגה יומם ולילה (“our lives and the length of our days, and we review them day and night”). Here we could profitably ask: Why mention the day in the evening prayers?

The answer is that herein lies the ascendancy of Torah over the ‘avoda which, from our point of view, results from Torah, since without Torah the kohanim would not know how to be ‘ovéd. Talmud Torah takes place round the clock; it is the בריתי יומם ולילה, the “covenant by day and by night” which the prophet tells us justifies the world’s existence and the laws of nature (cf. Jeremiah XXXIII,27).

Hence, the verse’s reference to activity by night by ‘avdei Ha-Shem, ha-‘omëdim bë-véyth Ha-Shem, is an allusion to talmidei hachamim engaged in the activity which truly continues into the night; the béyth Ha-Shem is surely the béyth midrash as much as it is the Béyth ha-Miqdash.

If we now look at the second clause of our parasha’s initial verse, we see that it, too, can be read as an allusion to this vital ascendancy of Torah.

Zoth Torath ha-‘ola...Note that it does not read, as we might expect, zoth huqqath ha-‘ola, “this is the law of the ‘ola”(cf. e.g. Exodus XII,43; Leviticus XVII,7; Numbers XIX,2; XXXI,21). This suggests that we may learn something of Torah and its nature; and what is that? Hi’ ha-‘ola ‘al moqda ‘al ha-mizbéah, that it is ‘ola, “ascendant”, over the fireplace, over the altar (for so the preposition ‘al may also be read), the reason being that it is an occupation which continues kol ha-laila ‘ad ha-boqer (“all night long until morning”), unlike the ‘avoda, whose sacrifices must at least be laid upon the altar by day.

D. Next week we celebrate another Passover. In those periods of our history when we have merited the existence of a Mishkan or Béyth Miqdash, the centre-piece of the séder is the qorban Pesah, a form of shëlamim, as was explained in last week’s parasha. But whether we have the qorban or not, we recite the Haggada shel Pesah, which tells the story of the moral courage of our ancestors in rejecting the Egyptians’ gross idolatry, and thus – barely – meriting their miraculous redemption from that land.

The Haggada also tells us the secret of Israel’s survival throughout the long and bitter exile which has now characterized so much of our history. The passage reads: והיא שעמדה לאבותינו ולנו שלא אחד בלבד עמד עלינו לכלותנו אלא שבכל דור ודור עומדים עלינו לכלותנו והקדוש ברוך הוא מצילנו מידם (“and it is she has stood [she-‘amëda] for us and for our fathers, for not only one has stood upon us to destroy us; rather, in each and every generation they have stood upon us to destroy us; and the Holy One, Blessed is He, rescues us from their hand”).

The feminine pronoun’s antecedent is Torah. It is the merit of Torah, its study and appli-cation, which has stood by us and kept us in existence despite everything. It will be the merit of Torah which will bring about our eventual redemption and the reëstablishment of the ‘avoda, as the prophet tells us: והביאותים אל הר קדשי ושמחתים בבית תפלתי עולותיהם וזבחיהם לרצון על מזבחי כי ביתי בית תפלה יקרא לכל העמים (“And I shall bring them to My holy moun-tain, and I shall make them rejoice in My house of prayer, their ‘oloth and [other] sacrifices acceptable on My altar; for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations”; Isaiah LVI,7).

May it happen speedily in our time.

Parshath Va-Yiqra’ (Leviticus I,1-V,24) 3/23/12

A.

As our parasha opens, Moshe is called to the newly erected Mishkan, where Ha-Shem instructs him in the order of sacrifice to be offered there. There are two Hebrew words which are generally rendered “sacrifice” in English, zevah and qorban. The latter is the most common and, as many different commentators have noted, is derived from the same root as qarov, “near, close,” signifying the purpose of the qorbanoth, to bring man and nation near to G-d, to establish a closeness between them.

Our parasha is concerned with the qorbanoth from the point of view of the individual on whose behalf the qorban is offered, and discusses four broad categories: The qorban ‘ola, or “elevation sacrifice,” an animal offering which is burnt up entirely on the altar; the qorban minha, or “gift offering”, which comes in several sub-categories, but generally consists of fine flour, oil, and lëvona (“frankincense”), shared between the kohanim and the altar; the zevah shëlamim, or “peace offering” (an animal sacrifice shared between the altar, the kohanim, and those offering it); and the hattath, or “sin offering”, brought for overt (if not necessarily intentional) actions in violation of one of the mitzvoth, shared between the kohanim and the altar.

Since the discussion of the qorban minha begins with the words נפש כי תקריב מנחה (“For a soul will offer a minha”; II,1), as opposed to the term adam, “human being,” used in connection with the other qorbanoth, Hazal understand its purpose to be some sort of corrective for the soul, though they do not specify what particular condition or affliction it is intended to correct (עיי' בענין זה ויקרא רבה פ"ג סי' א'-ד'). The Nëtziv, in his Ha‘améq Davar seeks further clarification, and suggests on the basis of I Samuel XXVI,19, in which David says to King Sha’ul, who has been persecuting him. אם ד' הסיתך בי ירח מנחה (“If Ha-Shem has incited you against me, let Him smell a minha”)שבא להשיג כפרה ורצוי על השחתת הנפש במדות (“that it comes to obtain atonement and conci-liation for the ruin of the soul through [bad] qualities [middoth]”), which seems to imply that the minha is also a sort of hattath.

This, then, suggests a problem with the logical sequencing of the four categories of qorbanoth in our parasha, since it would appear that the minha and hattath should be grouped together; why does the zevah shëlamim intervene between them?

B.

As should be obvious to anyone possessed of a חוש חי לשפה העברית (“living sense of the Hebrew language”), the word shëlamim is derived from the same root as shalom, “peace,” whence its translation “peace offering”. Hazal tell us, גדול שלום שכל הברכות טובות ונחמות שהקב"ה מביא על ישראל חותמין בשלום – בק"ש "פורס סוכת שלום", בתפלה "עושה שלום", ובברכת כהנים "וישם לך שלום" ואין לי אלא בברכות בקרבנות מנין? "זאת התורה לעלה למנחה ולחטאת ולאשם ולמילואים ולזבח השלמים" וגו' (“Great is peace, for all the blessings, good things, and consolations which the Holy One, Blessed is He, brings upon Israel are sealed with peace: In reading the Shëma‘ [in the evening, it is followed by] ‘Who spreads the shelter of peace’; in the tëfilla, [it ends with] ‘Who makes peace’; and in the birkath kohanim [Numbers VI], ‘and He will grant you peace’; and I have only [these examples] on blessings – whence [do I see this] with qorbanoth? ‘This is the Torah concerning the ‘ola, minha, hattath, ashan, the installations [of Aharon and his sons as kohanim] and the zevah ha-shëlamim’....”; ויקרא רבה פ"ט סי' ט'). In next week’s parasha, the phrase ‘this is the Torah’ introduces each of the categories there discussed, and shëlamim come at the very end.

In his commentary on the Haggada shel Pesah, the Maharal mi-Prag observes that, from the same root as shëlamim and shalom is derived the word shalém (“whole, complete, perfect”) with its abstract noun shëlémuth, and remarks that in the above examples the bërachoth are “sealed” with shalom כי השלום הוא סוף של דבר כדכתיב "כי אחרית לאיש שלום" כי על ידי השלום הדבר הוא בשלמות והשלמות הוא בסוף כי בהתחלה אין הדבר בשלמות וכאשר הדבר הוא בשלום הוא בשלמות כי לכך נקרא שלום וגו' (“for shalom is the end of a matter, as it is written, ‘for the culmination of a man is shalom’ [Psalms XXXVII, 37], for through shalom the matter comes to be in shëlémuth, and shëlémuth is at the end [of a process], for at the beginning the matter is not in shëlémuth, and when the matter is at peace [bë-shalom] it is in shëlémuth, for it is for this reason, it is called shalom....”; מתוך דרוש נאה לשבת הגדול).

In short, the reason that the qorban shëlamim occurs at the end of the series is because it is reflective of the perfection which comes at the end of a process. This is a fine explanation concerning the order in next week’s parasha, but why, in ours, does it fall between the minha and hattath?

C.

The essence of the qorban ‘ola is expressed by its name. As the Maharal remarks elsewhere (נתבות עולם ח"ב נתיב הענוה פ"ב), a human being is elevated by the very hithma‘atuth, (“diminution or reduction of self”) implied by the total dedication of this part of his capital to Ha-Shem, from which he derives no physical benefit, since it is burnt completely on the altar. This measure of dedication is the very tachlith, the purpose, of human existence, and so stands at the very beginning of the process.

As Rashi points out in comments on I, 3, and II, 1, both the qorban ‘ola and the minha are in the class of qorbënoth nëdava, “voluntary sacrifices” (as opposed to the hattath, which is a hova, an “obligation” or “debt” owed by the hoté’, the sinner seeking atonement. Rashi thus explains the use of the word nefesh, the “animal soul” of the offeror, אמר הקב"ה מעלה אני עליו כאלו הקריב נפשו (‘said the Holy One, Blessed is He, I consider it for him as though he has brought his soul as a sacrifice”).

Since the minha is not necessarily a hova, this implies that the “atonement” or kappara of which the Nëtziv writes is not necessarily occasioned by some specific failing caused by bad middoth, the hashhathath ha-nefesh to which he refers in the case of Sha’ul, but rather more generally a reference to tiqqun ha-middoth, the effort required to adjust the measures (the true translation of middoth) of the various character traits inherent in the nefesh to bring them into line with the Divine expectations outlined in the Torah, “bringing close” one’s soul to G-d, after its alienation through insertion into the body.

Only in this way can shëlémuth, in any meaningful sense of the word, be accomplished by mortal human beings. That it can be accomplished is evidenced by the Oral Torah’s insistence both that אין מיתה בלא חטא (“there is no death without sin”; שבת נ"ה.) and also, e.g., that Mt Nëvo was so called שנקברו בו ג' מתים הללו שמתו לא בידי עבירה זה משה אהרן ומרים (“since three people were buried there who had died not through any violation: Moshe, Aharon, and Miriam”; ספרי האזינו פיסקא ל"ג). Nëvo is derived from the word nëvu’a, “prophecy” (עמק הנצי"ב הגהות וביאורים שם).

Our parasha considers the sacrifices from the point of view of each individual on whose behalf they are carried out. It is for this reason, I believe, that the sacrifices are ordered ‘ola, minha and shëlamim, and only then hattath; because of those rare individuals capable of achieving shëlé-muth through a process of pure dedication and applied Torah, in the form of tiqqun ha-middoth.

But there are not many of them, and so when, in next week’s parasha, we go on to consider the qorbanoth from the point of view of the kohanim who officiate in the Mishkan/Miqdash and bring the qorbanoth on behalf of everybody, the hattath and asham precede the shëlamim. For the vast majority of us, the path to ehëlémuth lies through tëshuva, through repentance and return to Ha-Shem.

D.

We are now in the run-up to Passover. In this light, it is worthwhile remembering that the qorban Pesah is a special case of shëlamim.

Hazal compare the yétzer ha-ra‘ to the së’or sheba-‘isa, the “yeast in the dough” (ברכות י"ז.), because just as the leaven puffs up the dough with gases, increasing its volume without adding any substance to it all (indeed, it consumes a certain amount of the dough), so does the yetzer ha-ra‘ affect the human nefesh through such middoth ra‘oth as ga’ava (“pride”). Hence, whilst cleaning hamétz, leavened material, out of our homes, the sëfarim ha-qëdoshim advise that we should be striving to remove the spiritual hamétz from our souls. Hence, the entire preparation for Pesah is a process of tëshuva.

Done correctly, the resultant national shëlémuth will lead to the restoration of the Béyth ha-Miqdash and the renewal of the qorban Pesah, the shëlamim, and shalom, at the end of the journey.

Parashath Va-Yaqhél (Exodus XXXV,1-XXXVIII,20) 3/16/12

A.

Our parasha opens, as Rashi informs us, on the day after Yom ha-Kippurim, just under six months after the Exodus. Moshe has returned from his second trip up the mountain with the second pair of tablets, ויקהל משה את כל עדת בני ישראל ויאמר אלהם אלה הדברים אשר צוה ד' לעשות אתם: ששת ימים תעשה מלאכה וביום השביעי יהי' לכם קדש שבת שבתון לד' כל העשה בו מלאכה יומת: (“And Moshe caused all the community of bënei Yisra’él to be gathered together and said to them, 'These are the things which Ha-Shem has commanded to do them: Six days mëlacha will be done, and on the seventh day you will have a qodesh, a Sabbath of resting [shabbath shabbathon] for Ha-Shem; anyone who does a mëlacha on it will be put to death”).

The parasha then goes on to recount Moshe’s instructions to collect the materials and make the Mishkan and its furnishings and accessories, as we have been discussing over the past three weeks. But this juxtaposition begs a question which must occur to anyone perusing the Book of Exodus Why does Moshe begin his pronouncement to this gathering with an admonition about shabbath? After all, the bënei Yisra’él had been aware of the laws concerning shabbath since before they had approached Mt. Sinai (cf. XV, 25, Rashi ad loc.).

B.

The reason, Rashi says, that הקדים להם אזהרת שבת לצווי מלאכת המשכן לומר שאינו דוחה את השבת (“he placed the admonition of shabbath before the commandment of the mëlacha of the Mishkan to say that [the mëlecheth ha-Mishkan] does not supersede shabbath”). Thus, “six days of mëlacha will be done,” the definition of mëlacha being those categories of activities necessary to fabricate and erect the Mishkan.

And no mëlachoth are to be done on the seventh day. Cessation of those activities necessary to make the Mishkan, which represents, as we have seen, the universe at large, is thus emblematic of G-d’s resting on the seventh day after Creation. Indeed, the Or ha-Hayyim tells us that this passage implies כי לא יקומו ששה ימים במלאכתו אשר הכינם ד' לעשות אלא אם יום הז' יהי' להם קדש אבל אם לא ישמרו שבת לא יהי' הששת ימים כי שבת הוא נפש קיום העולם וגו' (“that the six days would only arise though His mëlacha which Ha-Shem established to be done if the seventh day would be a holy thing [qodesh] to them; but if they would not keep shabbath, the six days would not be in existence, for shabbath is the soul of the universe’s existence [nefesh qiyyum ha-‘olam]....”).

“The soul (or, perhaps better, life-force) of the universe’s existence....” Why this is so becomes a bit clearer with a laconic remark of the Ba‘al ha-Turim, שעיקר התורה בשבת כשאדם פנוי מעסקיו (“that the essence [‘iqqar] of the Torah is inherent in shabbath, when a man is free of his pursuits”) and can devote more time to learning than otherwise. We are thus reminded that the Torah is both the plan according to which the universe was designed and made (אסתכל קב"ה באורייתא וברא עלמא, “The Holy One, Blessed is He, looked into the Torah and created the universe”; בראשית רבה פ"א סי' ב'), as well as the end and purpose of the Creation. Israel’s covenantal acceptance of the Torah and use of the various aspects of Creation to observe it within this world is, as the prophets and Hazal remind us, why the universe is here: התנה הקב"ה עם מעשה בראשית וא"ל אם ישראל מקבלין התורה אתם מתקיימים ואם לאו אני מחזיר אתכם לתוהו ובוהו (“The Holy One, Blessed is He, made a condition with Creation an said to it, If Israel accept the Torah, you are in existence; and if not, I am returning you to chaos!”; שבת פ"ח:), and: כה אמר ד' אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי (“Thus says Ha-Shem, If My covenant is not [observed] by day and by night, the laws of heaven and earth I did not set!”; Jeremiah XXXIII, 27).

Now with the Ba‘al ha-Turim’s help, we see that the prime focal point, the ‘iqqar, of Torah is shabbath, and are reminded that Ha-Shem Himself commanded: ושמרו בני ישראל את השבת לעשות את השבת לדרתם ברית עולם: ביני ובין בני ישראל אות הוא לעולם כי ששת ימים עשה ד' את השמים ואת הארץ וביום השביעי שבת וינפש (“And the bënei Yisra’él will keep the shabbath, to make the shabbath for their generations an eternal covenant. Between Me and the bënei Yisra’él it is a sign forever that [in] six days Ha-Shem made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He desisted and relaxed [va-yinnafash]”; XXXI, 16-17. It will surely not be lost on the sharp-eyed reader with a living sense of the Hebrew language that the last word in this passage shares its root with the word nefesh). על כן ברך ד' את יום השבת ויקדשהו (“Therefore, Ha-Shem blessed the Sabbath day and sanctified it [va-yëqaddëshéhu]”; XX,22).

C.

In a comment on this last verse, the Or ha-Hayyim writes: לא עשה בתכונת בריאתה שיעמדו אלא ששת ימים ומעתה יצטרך ד' לחדש הבריאה בכל יום א' ובאמצעות נפש העולם שהוא שבת שברא ד' נח מהתמד' המלאכה וכמאמרם ז"ל שהי' העולם רופף ורועד ובבא שבת עמד בקיומו והוא אמרו "וינח" ביום הזה ויום זה מעמיד העולם עוד ששה ימים ובכל יום ששי לערב שכלתה תכונת העולם יבא שבת ויקיים העולם עוד ששת ימים אחרים וגו' (“[Ha-Shem] did not provide in his establishment of creation for [the heavens and the earth] lasting more than six days, and from that point Ha-Shem had to renew the creation every Sunday. By means of he nefesh ha-‘olam, which is shabbath, which He created, Ha-Shem desisted from perpetuating the mëlacha; as Hazal say, the world was provisional and conditional, and when shabbath arrived it stood in its exist-ence; and this is why He said, ‘and he desisted’ on this day; and this day sets the world for another six days. And on every Friday, toward evening, when the establishment of the world is coming to an end, shabbath comes and effects the world’s existence for yet another period of six days....”).

Had Ha-Shem not desisted from the hathmadath ha-mëlacha, the “perpetuation of the mëlacha”, the universe would have remained provisional and conditional, unfinished, not in a final configuration, since all of the creative functions would have been ongoing. G-d’s “resting”, then, froze the universe’s configuration as of twilight of the sixth day. As G-d Himself tells it: ויכלו השמים וכל צבאם: ויכל אלקים ביום השביעי מלאכתו אשר עשה כו' ויברך אלקים את יום השביעי ויקדש אתו כי דבת מכל מלאכתו אדר ברא אלקים לעשות: (“And the heavens and the earth were finished, and all their content. And G-d finished on the seventh day His mëlacha which He had done.... And G-d blessed the seventh day and sanctified [va-yëqaddésh] it, because on it He rested from all his mëlacha which He had created to do”; Genesis II, 1-4).

From this point on, the Or ha-Hayyim tells us, the creative processes had to be renewed for another six days, then “set” again in the configuration’s next iteration.

And then Israel arrived on the scene.

D.

The Torah consistently and very strikingly uses in the passages cited above, as well as many others relating to the “sanctification” of shabbath the pi‘él or factitive verbal form of the root quf-dalet-shin, which conveys the sense of “holy, sacred”, qiddésh, rather than the hif‘il, causative form, hiqdish. The reason appears to be that hiqdish is used to render a previously existing thing or entity sacred; an example is an animal dedicated for sacrificial purposes. Such a thing or entity is thus said to become heqdésh, and is divorced from the profane world.

A factitive verb, by contrast, brings into being a state, condition, or entity which did not previously exist; in this case, something sacred, shabbath. The term designating such a sacred entity is qodesh.

As the Torah tells us, this is what G-d did on the arrival of the first shabbath, and then on every subsequent seventh day throughout the 26 generations stretching from the advent of the first man until Israel’s fateful encounter at the foot of Sinai: He blessed the Sabbath day, va-yëqaddëshéhu.

Once Israel had come into being through acceptance of the Torah on that occasion, the factitive function of “making a qodesh” in this world at the end of each six-day period devolved on the new Torah-nation. This is what we are actually doing, every Friday night, when we (as the colloquial phrase has it) “make qiddush.” The animating force of the universe, its nefesh, has been placed in our hands.

We attest to this fact numerous times in the course of the week, for instance, when we recite Proverbs III, 17-18, which begins by telling us of the Torah, עץ חיים היא , “It is a tree of life” (עיי' זוה"ק ח"ב קכ"א. ברעיא מהימנא, וע"ע המגיד מישרים לפר' בשלח) or, perhaps most tellingly, in the blessing said by each ‘ole la-Torah as his ‘aliya ends, and he recites the bëracha containing the words וחיי עולם נטע בתוכנו; “and the life of the universe He has planted within us” (עיי' נפש החיים ש"ד פכ"ו).

A thought to keep in mind, as we “make qiddush this shabbath, and from now on.

Parashath Ki Thissa’ (Exodus XXX,11-XXXIV,35) 3/7/12

A.

Our parasha begins with a commandment concerning one of the tërumoth discussed in more general terms in parashath Tëruma, two weeks ago; this one involves a census: כי תשא את ראש בני ישראל בפקודיהם ונתנו איש כפר נפשו לד' בפקד אתם ולא יהי' בהם נגף בפקד אתם: זה יתנו כל העבר על הפקדים מחצית השקל בשקל הקדש עשרים גרה השקל מחצית השקל תרומה לד': כל העבר על הפקדים מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה יתנו תרומת ד': העשיר לא ירבה והדל לא ימעיט ממחצית השקל לתת את תרומת ד' לכפר על נפשתיכם: (“For you will elevate the head of the bënei Yisra’él in their census, and each man will give a substitute for his life [kofer nafsho] to Ha-Shem when they are counted, and there will not be amongst them a plague when they are counted. This shall they give, each one who passes by the counting: Half a sheqel of the holy she-qel – twenty géra the sheqel – half a sheqel tëruma for Ha-Shem. Each one who passes by the counting, from 20 years and up, will give tërumath Ha-Shem. The rich will not give more and the poor will not give less than half a sheqel, tërumath Ha-Shem to atone for your lives [lë-chappér ‘al nafshotheichem]”; XXX, 12-15).

Note that the passage defines the coin to be given in great detail: Mahatzith ha-sheqel (“half a sheqel”), defining the sheqel in question as sheqel ha-qodesh (“the holy sheqel”) since, after all, the word simply means “weight,” to differentiate it from various other coins then in circulation with that or similar names, and defines the specific weight as twenty géra. Indeed, Hazal tell us that when G-d said, “This they will give”, he showed Moshe a fiery simulacrum of the coin to be donated (ירושלמי שקלים פ"א ה"ג).

It is thus evident that this specific coin and its half-sheqel weight is somehow crucial to the matter at hand. Why is this? What lesson are we to draw from it?

The ‘Arvei Nahal reports in the name of qëtzath mëfarëshim (“some commentators”) that the point of mahatzith ha-sheqel is שידע כל אדם שאין בו שום שלימות והוא רק חצי דבר וצריך מי שישלימו וזהו מדה טובה באדם וכמו שא"ה "הנני נשפט אותך על אומרך לא חטאתי" יורה כי אף שחטא אם יודע בעצמו חטאו ופחיתותו לא יכעוס ד' עליו כי זהו תחלת הרפואה מה שמכיר חסרונו וכמש"ה "כרפאי לישראל ונגלה עון אפרים" (“that every person should know that there is no perfection in him whatsoever, and he is only half a thing, and needs someone to perfect him; and this is a good quality in a person, and is as Scripture says, ‘Behold, I shall be judged with you, because you say, “I have not sinned” [Jeremiah II, 35],’ teaching that even if one has sinned, if he knows his sin and his shortcoming by himself, Ha-Shem will not be angry with him, for this is the beginning of healing, that he recognizes his own fault, as Scripture says, ‘When I heal Israel, and Efrayim’s transgression is uncovered’ [Hoshéa VII, 1]”).

This idea appears to find some support in our passage from the occurrence of such phrases as kofer nafsho and lë-chappér ‘al nafshotheichem, which link the mahatzith ha-sheqel to the concepts of reparation and atonement. But this begs another question: What has this mitzva to do with a census?

B.

To approach an answer to our questions, let us first consider the nature of the sacrifi-cial service. The ba‘alei musar tell us concerning the verse: והפשיט את העלה ונתח אתה לנתחי'

(“And he will strip the ‘ola and cut it up into its parts”; Leviticus I, 6) that this is indicative of the sort of self-analysis each of us must be continually engaged in. The ‘ola (feminine active participle of the verb ‘ala, “ascend”) is so called because the entire sac-rifice ascends in smoke on high from atop the altar. This is thus a fit metaphor for any feeling of superiority a person may have. Such feelings are often accompanied by ga’ava (“pride, arrogance”), and are best combated by stripping the feeling bare, and breaking it down into its constituent parts, analyzing it and coming to recognize it for what it us.

It is also true that the sacrifices generally stand in place of human beings, singly and collectively. There are some sacrifices which represent both the physical and the metaphysical, both body and soul, such as shëlamim, of which the blood and the hélev, the tallow in the animal’s hind-quarters, are burnt up completely, but the meat is given to the owners (cf. Leviticus III); and there are others, such as the ‘ola, which, being burnt up entirely, represents only the soul. Hazal tell us that the ‘ola is offered to atone for hirhu-rei ha-lév, improper thoughts or feelings (מדרש תנחומא פרשת תצוה ט"ו וצו י"ג וע"ע זוה"ק ח"ג רמז. ורנ"ד:), which are obviously matters of the soul; hence, in such matters, as much as in the case of actual actions, one must be careful to engage in a constant self-analysis, as suggested by our verse.

Whenever one has feelings of ‘aliya, then, one must “strip” them of their veneer, look underneath and analyze, “cut up,” dissect what one finds, to reveal the problems which still exist, to see what remains to be worked on. In that way, ‘aliya, elevation to some higher state, will not lead to ga’ava and can still be coped with.

With this, then, I believe that wee can proceed to answer the question of what all this has to do with counting Israel.

As has been argued in discussing the last two parashoth, the universe was brought into being according to the blueprint of the Torah, in order that Israel would accept the Torah, and the Torah would be properly observed in the universe, the goal being to elevate the physical universe, so profoundly alienated from its Divine source, back to a level where it would once again be in contact with that source, and resonate with it. To that end, Israel erected the miqdash, to set up a feed-back loop of qëdusha which would spiral ever higher, building up a “signal strength” such that the Shëchina would be implanted in the universe’s heart, that very miqdash, and overflow into the world at large.

Each individual human being, we asserted, is also constructed according to the blueprint of Torah, and there exists a one-to-one correspondence between all of the organs and limbs of the human body and the mitzvoth of the Torah. A little reflection will reveal that it is obviously true of the nation of Israel, as much as it is of each individual member of the Holy Nation.

Consider the 613 mitzvoth: There are many which each and every individual of Israel can observe: Shabbath, kashruth, kibbud av va-ém, and so on. Then, there are some mitzvoth which some merit and others do not: Not everyone happens upon a bird’s nest such that he can perform the mitzva of shilluah ha-qan, of sending away the mother bird in order to collect the eggs, for instance. And then there are entire classes of mitzvoth which can only be performed by certain people: Only the kohanim and Lëviyyim can serve in the miqdash, for instance, and their service there is not interchangeable; similarly, no kohén can engage in the mitzvoth of taharath ha-méthim, “cleansing the dead,” and burying them. Observance of the Torah with all its mitzvoth requires the entire nation of Israel.

So, just as it is necessary for each individual to look beneath his surface, to “strip” himself of his exterior and examine all of his parts, analyzing and judging which “limb” is performing its mitzva satisfactorily and which needs work, so too must the entire nation, as a nation, be subjected to such analysis. As we count our limbs to enumerate the mitzvoth to be performed and judge their performance, then, so was Moshe commanded to count Israel, to ascertain and demonstrate that there were enough of each category to proceed in the mission which Israel had been set.

D.

The mitzva of the half sheqel is still in effect today; the half sheqel was collected in every synagogue and béyth midrash in which the mëgilla was heard this Purim. The purpose of the tëruma remains the same: To demonstrate to us that we are all imperfect, and in need of someone to perfect us. To that end, our rebbé’im exist in each and every generation, teaching us Torah, providing us with living examples of how to conduct a life of Torah and mitzvoth, how to bring about again the great perpetual qëdusha machine which Israel and the miqdash (may it be rebuilt speedily in lour days) are meant to be.

Moshe was the first and greatest of our faithful rebbé’im, and taught all Israel. Thus, in his day, he was the “heart” of the nation. As the heart circulates life-giving nutrients to all the limbs and organs of the body, so did Moshe circulate the words of Torah, כי הם חיינו ואורך ימינו (“for they are our lives and the length of our days”), as we say with each ma‘ariv.

A census such as the one described in our parasha casts the harsh, actinic, prophetic light of din on all those singled out by the count, a light which throws into sharp relief every shortcoming and fault of every individual involved. This is the reason why one might expect a negef, a “plague”, as the result of such a census. By counting coins rather than people, the light is deflected somewhat, a measure of shade, as it were, is spread over the group being counted. If at the same time the coin bears the message that the people being so singled out understand that they fall short, that they are still a work in progress with “no perfection in them whatsoever” (to paraphrase the ‘Arvei Nahal’s wording), it deflects any Divine wrath altogether, as we have seen.

Some years ago, a family friend came to a Purim së‘uda dressed as a representative of “Queen Esther’s Cleaning Service,” wearing a sign on her back warning: “Only 30 cleaning days till Passover.” With this in mind, we can appreciate that the ‘Arvei Nahal provides us with a very clear reason for collecting the half sheqel on Purim.

For this does indeed mark the beginning of the season to begin cleansing every Jewish home of hamétz, of leavened material. Leavened bread is characterized by gases released as the yeast cultures ferment the dough, causing it to become puffed up. This, the sëfarim ha-qëdoshim tell us, is emblematic of what the yétzer ha-ra‘ does to the human soul; it is emblematic of ga’ava.

By stating at the very outset of the process by which we remove the hamétz from our souls simultaneously with cleaning the hamétz from our homes, we are, as the ‘Arvei Nahal assures us, beginning the necessary process of healing.

Parashath Tëtzavve (Exodus XXVIII,2-XXX,10) 3/2/12

A.

Our parasha continues the instructions concerning the Mishkan. Having completed the description of most of the Mishkan’s furniture, the discussion now turns to the production of the pure olive oil to be used in the mënora, the activities of the kohanim in tending the great lamp, and the garments to be worn by the kohanim whilst serving in the Mishkan, followed by their installation in that service.

I say “most” of the furniture, for after all this, suddenly: ועשית מזבח מקטר קטרת עצי שטים תעשה אתו: אמה ארכו ואמה רחבו ואמתים קמתו ממנו קרנתיו: וצפית אתו זהב טהור כו' (“And you will make an altar for the burning of incense; of shittim wood you will make it. An amma is its length and an amma its width, and two ammoth its height; from [its top], its horns. And you will cover it in pure gold....”; XXX, 1-3).

So, the question to be asked is: Why is this mizbah ha-zahav, this “golden altar” for incense, not included together with the other items intended to furnish the Mishkan which were described last week?

B.

In last week’s parasha we learnt that the Mishkan, and its later, permanent replacement in Yërushalayim, the Béyth ha-Miqdash, were Divinely conceived and ordered to constitute a model of the cosmos. Hence, Hazal proclaim that its erection was tantamount to a recreation of the universe (מדרש תנחומא פרשת פקודי סי' א'). For this reason, G-d said of Bëtzal’él ben Uri, tasked with the design’s execution, ואמלא אתו רוח אלקים בחכמה ובתבונה ובדעת וגו' (“And I filled him with the spirit of G-d, with wisdom [hochma] and with discernment [tëvuna] and with knowledge [da‘ath]....”; XXXI, 3), for, as King Shëlomo tells us, these are the three bases on which the universe was established: ד' בחכמה יסד ארץ כונן שמים בתבונה בדעתו תהומות נבקעו (“Ha-Shem with hochma founded the earth; He established the heavens with tëvuna; with His da‘ath were the depths split”; Proverbs III,20, וע"ע זוה"ק ח"ב רנ"א. ורל"א:). Hence, Hazal say, יודע הי' בצלאל לצרף אותיות שנבראו בהם שמים וארץ (“Bëtzal’él was knowledgeable in the combinations of letters by which the heavens and earth were created”; ברכות נ"ה:).

We further established that a human being, an adam, constitutes in himself a microcosmos, and that just as it is so, that the universe was brought into being in accordance with all the requirements of the Torah, as Hazal say; ,אסתכל קוב"ה באורייתא וברא עלמא (“The Holy One, Blessed is Hem looked into the Torah and created the universe”; בראשית רבה פ"א סי' ב'), and continues in existence only because Israel accepted the Torah and faith-fully observe it (התנה הקב"ה עם מעשה בראשית וא"ל אם ישראל מקבלים התורה אתם מתקיימין ואם לאו אני מחזיר אתכם לתהו ובהו [“The Holy One, Blessed is He made a condition at Creation: If Israel accept the Torah, you continue in existence; and if not, I return you to chaos!”; שבת פ"ח.], and: כה אמר ד' אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי [“Thus says Ha-Shem, If My covenant is not (in effect) by day and by night, I have not set in place the laws of heaven and earth”; Jeremiah XXXIII, 25), so it follows that there is likewise a direct correspondence between the Torah’s mitzvoth and every limb and organ of the human body, thus justifying their existence in the scheme of things.

Hence, the actual purpose of the miqdash was to serve as a focal point, establishing a feedback loop of the qëdusha generated by each adam mi-Yisra’él’s observance of the Torah’s mitzvoth, redistributing the qëdusha back to Israel, so that it would raise their level yet higher, in a continuous exchange intended to produce an ever increasing spiral of sanctity, bringing about the hashra’ath ha-Shëchina, the infusion of the Divine Presence into the heart of the universe, the miqdash itself.

As a model of the universe in miniature, a microcosmos, each individual member of Israel ideally experiences his own hashra’ath ha-Shëchina as a benefit of the feedback loop, a fact which finds subtle allusion in the Torah’s wording: ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם (“And they will make for Me a miqdash and I will dwell bë-thocham”; XXV8). The lat word is translatable as “in their midst”, but there are other ways to say that (e.g., bë-qirbam, beineihem, beinotham), which leads us to consider the alternate interpretation: “And I shall dwell within them”.

C.

The Sforno, in his comment on XXX, 1, notes that the above verse is immediately followed by: ככל אשר אני מראה אתך את תבנית המשכן ואת תבנית כליו וכן תעשו (“According to all that I show you, the plan of the Mishkan and the plan of its accoutrements [kélim], and so shall you do”). From this juxtaposition it follows that the constituent parts and accessories of the Mishkan profoundly represent the composition both of the greater cosmos and of the microcosmos, such that their contemplation and proper use prepares the way both for the individual and the collective hashra’ath ha-Shëchina.

G-d Himself implies this when He says to Moshe, concerning the kapporeth, the lid of the aron qodesh: ונועדתי לך שם ודברתי אתך מעל הכפרת אשר על ארון העדת את כל אשר אצוה אותך אל בני ישראל (“And I shall appear to you there at appointed times, and speak to you from atop the kapporeth which is upon the aron ha-‘éduth with everything which I shall command you for the bënei Yisra’él”; XXV, 22), which Moshe later passed on to Israel: זה הדבר אשר צוה ד' תעשו וירא אליכם כבוד ד' (“...This is the thing: What Ha-Shem has commanded you should do, and the glory of Ha-Shem will appear to you”; Leviticus IX, 6).

But not the golden altar; it is separated from the other kélim because it does not share their purpose. Rather, says the Sforno, its purpose is לכבד את הא-ל יתברך אחרי בואו לקבל ברצון עבודת עמו בקרבנות הבקר והערב (“to honor G-d after His arrival to accept favorably His people’s service through the sacrifices of the morning and evening”; cf. XXX, 7-8).

D.

‘Ad kan the Sforno. If the purpose of the kélim discussed in parashath Tëruma is the profound symbolism and emulation of the features of both cosmos and microcosmos to bring about the infusion and retention of the Divine Presence, the symbolism of the mizbah ha-zahav, I believe, reveals its purpose in the grand scheme of things. Our verse tells us that it is a mizbah miqtar qëtoreth, and the Talmud explains this phrase: מתקטר בקטורת אין כתיב כאן אלא מזבח מקטר קטרת מלמד שהמזבח הזה מקטיר את הקטורת (“‘smoking with incense’ [mithqattér bi-qtoreth] is not written here, but miqtar qëtoreth, teaching that this altar causes the incense to smoke [maqtir eth ha-qëtoreth]”; ירושלמי חגיגה פ"ג ה"ח), which the Torah Tëmima explains: שהי' נקטר באש של מעלה בלי סיוע אש של מטה (“that it would be made to smoke by a supernal fire, without support from a lowly [earthly] fire”; וע"ע קרבן העדה ופני משה שם בירושלמי).

The nature of qëtoreth is that the smoke spirals upward, and so, it seems to me, it is the perfect symbol for the ever-higher level of qëdusha being generated by the feedback loop, as the tzaddiqim first provide their input through (as the Alsheich, quoted by the ‘Arvei Nahal, observed on last week’s parasha) their performance of mitzvoth with exemplary love, awe, and wholehearted willingness, bringing about the gilluy ha-Shë-china and redistributing this enhanced level of qëdusha, induced by the supernal fire brought down with the gilluy ha-Shëchina throughout the nation, creating a wave of qëdusha spiraling ever upward.

In short, the mizbah ha-zahav serves to represent the ideal functioning of the perpetual qëdusha machine which the holy nation and the Miqdash together are meant to constitute.

Parashath Tëruma (Exodus XXV,1-XXVII,19) 2/24/12

A.

וידבר ד' אל משה לאמר: דבר אל בני ישראל ויקחו לי תרומה מאת כל איש אשר ידבנו לבו תקחו את תרומתי: וזאת התרומה אשר תקחו מאתם וגו' (“And Ha-Shem spoke to Moshe, to say: Speak to the bënei Yisra’él, and they will take for Me a donation [tëruma]; from each man as his heart moves him shall you take My tëruma. And this is the tëruma which you will take from them....”). So begins our parasha.

After enumerating the various materials of which the tëruma was to consist, G-d goes on to say, ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם: (“And they will make for Me a sanctuary [miqdash] and I shall dwell [vë-shachanti] in their midst”; XXV, 8). He then proceeds to detail the various accoutrements with which the Mishkan (from the same root as shachanti, the tent which would serve as the miqdash until the permanent structure was raised by King Shëlomo in Yërushalayim) was to be furnished: The aron qodesh which would house the tablets (10-22); the shulhan, on which the lehem ha-panim would be displayed (23-30); the mënora (31-40), and only thereafter the Mishkan itself.

Hazal record that Bëtzal’él ben Uri, who would be commissioned to supervise all this work, questioned this sequence: כלים שאני עושה להיכן אכניסם שמא כך אמר לך הקב"ה עשה משכן ארון וכלים אמר לו שמא בצל א-ל היית וידעת (“The items which I am making, where shall I put them? Perhaps the Holy One, Blessed is He, said to you, ‘Make a Mishkan, an aron, etc.?' [Moshe] told him, 'Perhaps you were in G-d’s shadow [the literal meaning of the name Bëtzal’él], and you know!'”; ברכות נ"ה.).

This peculiar passage raises several questions: First off, Moshe was the chief of the prophets and teacher of all Israel: How was it, then that he apparently reversed the order in which G-d told him that the work should be done? More than that: What precisely was the point of Bëtzal’él’s objection? What did it matter what the order in which things were to be made was? Surely Bëtzal’él could have made the various items and stored them in some other tent until the Mishkan was erected!

B.

What follows is based on a beautiful insight of the ‘Arvei Nahal.

We begin by citing a comment of the Alsheich on Song of Songs III, 9: אפריון עשה לו המלך שלמה מעצי הלבנון (“A pavilion did King Shëlomo make for Him of the trees of Lebanon”). As Rashi ad loc. makes clear, the reference is to the miqdash of which Ha-Shem spoke in the passage from our parasha, and this prompts the Alsheich to ask: Why, precisely, does the Al-Mighty require any sort of building li-shkon sham Shëchinatho, so that His Presence might dwell there? Is it not that case, as we read, that השמים ושמי השמים לא יכלכלהו (“The heavens and heavens of the heavens do not contain Him”; II Chronicles II, 5 )?

He answers by noting that every single member of Israel responded to the call for dona-tions with great love, reverence, and heartfelt willingness. These, he goes on to say, are the choicest and noblest of human qualities, and are what underlie the essential sanctity of the Jewish soul, וידוע כי בהיות אדם מקדש עצמו במדות אלה ממשיך בזה על עצמו השראת שכינה כי השי"ת אוהב מדות אלה (“and it is known that when a person sanctifies himself by [developing] these qualities, he draws down in this manner on himself an infusion of the Divine Presence [Shëchina], for Ha-Shem loves these qualities”).

However, the sacred capacity of a single individual cannot be compared to the collective capacity of a large number of people to draw down an infusion of the Shëchina, and in this lies the basic purpose of the tërumoth for the Mishkan and. later, the Béyth ha-Miq-dash: To serve as the focal point for the enthusiastic devotion of each and every individual member of Israel, a great capacitor or (to use an older term) condenser, concentrating the individual inputs so as to maximise the potential for gilluy Shëchina, the revelation of G-d’s Presence in this world.

C.

‘Ad kan the Alsheich. The ‘Arvei Nahal continues: והנה נודע כי בה"מ הוא ציור כל העולמות וידוע גם כן כי האדם גופו עולם קטן וכן נפשו כלול מכל העולמות כו' ואומר אני כי מבואר בזה"ק כי בה"מ הוא לבו של עולם ואמצעותו כו' והוא החיות של כל העולם כלב שהוא חיות כל הגוף (“and it is known that the Béyth ha-Miqdash is a representation of all the realms of the cosmos, and it is also known that a human being is himself a microcosmos, and that his soul is comprised of all the worlds... and I say that the holy Zohar explains that the Béyth ha-Miqdash is the heart of the universe and its center... and is the [source of] the entire universe’s vitality, as the heart is the [source of] the vitality of the entire body....”).

The heart circulates blood through all of the constituent limbs and organs of the body, bringing sustenance and necessary nutrients to those various limbs and organs, which blood then returns to the heart, bringing fresh materials. such as oxygen from the lungs, nutrients from the digestive system, and so on, through the heart to be redistributed throughout the body, making it stronger. There is, in short, a feed-back loop in operation between the heart and the rest of the body through the blood.

Like the physical feed-back loop, there is a parallel metaphysical one. Hazal note that there is a one-to-one correspondence between each of the 613 mitzvoth and the limbs and organs of the human body as they count and describe them, a fact to which, e.g., King David alludes as well כל עצמתי תאמרנה ד' מי כמוך וגו' (“All my bones say, Ha-Shem who is like You....”; Psalms XXXV, 10). As each limb performs its mitzva, the metaphysical energy flows back to the heart, whence it is recirculated back to the limbs, invigorating them and making them stronger and more able to do yet more mitzvoth. This is what Hazal mean when they declare, שמצוה גוררת מצוה, “that a mitzva draws [in its wake another] mitzva”;אבות פ"ד מ"ב).

The very same analogy applies to the relationship between Israel and the Béyth ha-Miq-dash at our national center: It serves to gather and concentrate the collective qëdusha of all of the individual mitzvoth being performed, which is then redistributed amongst the nation as a whole, strengthening each individual, raising him to a higher and more capable level than where he started.

But this gives rise to a “chicken and egg” sort of question: How does the feed-back loop get started? Does it begin with the individual inputs which are sent to the heart, or does it begin with the hith‘orëruth, the initial stimulus of the heart to the constituent members?

Hazal address this question in several places (עיי' למשל סוטה מ"ה: ויומא נ"ד: בין השאר), in which they discuss, e.g., whether a fetus starts its development from an external limb or from its center, or whether the universe was created from it centre outward or from the periphery inward; in all cases, there are Tanna’im on both sides of the question.

The ‘Arvei Nahal says in the name of the Arizal that both answers are correct, and explains himself in this way: There are great tzaddiqim, yëhidei sëgula, precious, treasured individuals, who possess love and reverence and heartfelt willingness to such a vast degree that they are, as it were, self-starters; they perform mitzvoth with such a degree of dedication that they influence events. Hazal say of such giants, צדיקים לבם ברשותם (“the hearts of tzaddiqim are in their control”; בראשית רבה פל"ד סי' י"א). And then there are the rest of us, who also basically wish to be ‘avdei Ha-Shem, but who require some impetus, some inspiration and initiative to get us going. We need the hith‘orëruth ha-lév, that initial stimulus of the heart to get our “limbs” into action.

D.

If we now re-examine our parasha’s initial passage, we shall find that it quite clearly reflects this dichotomy: “Speak to the bënei Yisra’él and they will take for Me tëruma...” As Rashi explains, הפרשה יפרישו לי מממונם נדבה (“A separation will they make for Me from their wealth [as a] gift”); this is the “general” or “collective” tëruma. It then goes on to say: “...from each man as his heart moves him...,” the sacred “donation” of Israel’s collective sanctity is gathered at its “heart,” at the Béyth ha-Miqdash to which it is directed, and is then redistributed, to move and inspire yet more sanctity. “And this is the tëruma which you will take from them....” – these individual efforts are again gathered, condensed, and redistributed in the feed-back loop to generate yet more sanctity, and so it goes on.

This, then, is the difference between Moshe’s vision and Bëtzal’él’s; precisely because he stood at the pinnacle of human potential, Moshe viewed reality from the standpoint of those relatively rare tzaddiqim whose “hearts are in their grasp”; he saw the individual objects, the mitzvoth which those unique individuals would provide which would then be gathered into the Mishkan.

Bëtzal’él, surely also a tzaddiq, was nonetheless not on Moshe’s level. A bit closer to the rest of the people, he saw the need for the “heart,” the collected, concentrated qëdusha of the Mishkan to inspire and motivate all of the furniture with which it would ten be filled.

And Moshe readily saw his point, and readily admitted that he was right, concerning all the rest of us.

Parashath Mishpatim (Exodus XXI,1-XXIV,18) 2/17/12

A.

In last week’s parasha, G-d told Moshe that His express purpose in freeing the bënei Yisra’él from Egyptian bondage and bringing them before Sinai had been to create a new nation: ועתה אם שמע תשמעו בקלי ושמרתם את בריתי והייתם לי סגלה מכל העמים כי לי כל הארץ: ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש וגו' (“And now, if you will diligently listen to My voice and keep My covenant, you will be more precious to Me than all the nations, for Mine is the entire Earth. And you will be a kingdom of kohanim [mamlecheth kohanim] and a holy nation [goy qadosh]....”; XIX, 5-6)

That what was coming into being was in fact a new nation is borne out by the wording just a few verses earlier: בחדש השלישי לצאת בני ישראל מארץ מצרים ביום הזה באו מדבר סיני: ויסעו מרפידים ויבאו מדבר סיני ויחנו במדבר ויחן ישראל שם נגד ההר: (“In the third month of the exodus of the bënei Yisra’él from the land of Egypt, on this day, they came [to] the Sinai desert. And they traveled from Rëfidim, and they came [to] the Sinai desert, and they camped in the desert; and Israel camped there opposite the mountain”; XIX, 1-2). It is less obvious in English, but every one of the verbs in the passage is plural, referring to the bënei Yisra’él, save the last one, referring to the unified nation of Israel. The contrast is very striking, and prompted Rashi to note that, on the eve of Mattan Torah, a group of disparate individuals united only by a common ancestry had become כאיש אחד בלב אחד, “like one man with one heart,” unified with a singularity of national purpose and resolve.

They had, in short, been transformed from mere bënei Yisra’él, descendants of a common ancestor, into the Torah-nation, which also bears the name Yisra’él, which must therefore be expressive of the nation’s nature and characteristics. What might they be?

B.

The addition of the name Yisra’él to our patriarch’s original name Ya‘aqov is mentioned twice. The first occasion is at the time of his struggle with the mal’ach. When Ya‘aqov bests his opponent and refuses to release him without receiving a blessing, the mal’ach proclaims: לא יעקב יאמר עוד שמך כי אם ישראל כי שרית עם אלקים ועם אנשים ותוכל (“Not Ya‘aqov will your name be said any more, but rather Yisra’él, for you were exalted [saritha] with G-d and with men and were able”; Genesis XXXII, 29).

Subsequently, G-d confirmed the additional name when Ya‘aqov returned to Har ha-Moriya, which he had named Béyth É-l (“G-d’s House”) because the Béyth ha-Miqdash would one day be built there: ויאמר לו אלקים שמך יעקב לא יקרא עוד שמך יעקב כי אם ישראל יהי' שמך ויקרא את שמו ישראל (“And G-d said to him, 'Your name [is] Ya‘aqov; your name will not longer be called Ya‘aqov, but rather Yisra’él will be your name'; and He called his name Yisra’él”; XXXV, 10).

Aside from the different venues, the two occurrences are distinguished by the fact that in the first, the mal’ach disclosed a reason for the name-change, whilst in the second, G-d mentions no reason.

Our parasha opens with the case of the ‘eved ‘Ivri, a formerly independent man who is sold by by the court, or who sells himself, into slavery. The maximum term for such a sentence is six years, after which he is to be restored to independence. Should such a person refuse liberty, and insist on remaining a slave, he is marked by having a hole bored in his earlobe (Exodus XXI, 6). The Talmud tells us why, in a statement which has two striking variations. First is that of the Bavli: אמר הקב"ה אוזן ששמעה על הר סיני בשעה שאמרתי "כי לי בני ישראל עבדים" ולא עבדים לעבדים והלך זה וקנה אדון לעצמו ירצע (“Said the Holy One, Blessed is He, 'An ear which heard on Mt Sinai at the time I said, "For to Me are the bënei Yisra’él servants" [‘avadim Leviticus XXV, 55], and not servants of servants, and this one has gone and acquired himself a lord!? He should be bored'” קדושין כ"ב:). The second occurs in the Yërushalmi: אוזן שמעה על הר סיני "לא יהי' לך אלהים אחרים" והלך זה ופרק עול מלכות שמים וקבל עליו עול בשר ודם ירצע (“An ear which heard on Mt Sinai, ‘You will have no other gods,’ and this one has thrown off the yoke of the kingdom of heaven and accepted on himself the yoke of flesh and blood; he should be bored”; ירושלמי קדושין פ"א ה"ב).

Israel’s national culture, then is he “yoke of the kingdom of heaven”; it is a culture of Divinely ordained ‘avoda, a word often translated “work” or “worship” but which is perhaps best translated “service,” derived as it is from the same root as the word ‘eved.

How does our twin characterization as a mamlecheth kohanim and goy qadosh relate to our ‘avoda? And what does the name Yisra’él add to the description?

C.

Focus first on the concept of the goy qadosh. What, precisely, is qëdusha? If we look at other uses of the root, we find, for instance, the word heqdésh, which describes anything dedicated to an exalted purpose, e.g., an animal designated as a sacrifice. As Rashi says in his famous comment on Leviticus XIX, 2: "קדושים תהיו" הוו פרושים מן העריות ומן העבירה (“‘You will be holy’ [means] be separated from sexual improprieties and from transgression”), blemishes of the soul to be avoided in much the same way as a sacrificial animal may not be blemished.

Hence, we find in our parasha, amidst its discussion of mishpatim, mitzvoth resulting from the application of the principles established in the ‘Asereth ha-Dibbëroth last week, ואנשי קדש תהיון לי וגו' (“And men of sanctity [qodesh] will you be for Me....”; XXII, 30), prompting Hazal to elaborate: כשהמקום מחדש מצוה על ישראל הוא מוסיף להם קדושה כו' כשאתם קדושים הרי אתם שלי (“When G-d originates a mitzva for Israel, He adds qëdusha to them... 'When you are holy, you are Mine'”; מכילתא, פרשתנו). Observing the Torah’s mitzvoth serves to induce this state of qëdusha.

If we now return to Ya‘aqov’s lonely fight with the mal’ach on that fateful night, we note (as Rashi, following the midrash, reminds us) that his opponent was none other than saro shel ‘Ésav, responsible for directing the fate of the nation which would arise from his evil twin, who, as we know, was completely sunk in the web of physical appetites and lusts (cf. e.g. Rashi on Genesis XXV, 29).

But Ya‘aqov was very different, as indeed he told his brother in the message he sent on his return to the Holy Land: "עם לבן גרתי" ותרי"ג מצות שמרתי ולא למדתי ממעשיו הרעים (“‘With Lavan I dwelt’ and I kept the 613 mitzvoth, and did not learn from his evil ways”; XXXI, 5, Rashi ad loc.). Hence, saro shel ‘Ésav was completely unable to prevail over him; this is what the mal’ach meant by the last word in his blessing, va-tuchal (“and you were able”): Ya‘aqov passed the test; his adherence to Ha-Shem’s will, to the culture of Divine service imbued him with such a level of qëdusha that he was able completely to resist the mal’ach’s efforts.

It was this, expressed in the perfective, which served as the basis for the exaltation to which the mal’ach refers, ki saritha, as implied by the first part of the new name Yisra’él. The verb sara implies dominion, dominance, high position, and from the same root is the word sar, a ruler, leader, prince (already encountered in the expression saro shel ‘Ésav). This is how Rashi understands the term mamlecheth kohanim: A kingdom of שרים כמה דאת אמר "ובני דוד כהנים היו" (“sarim, as you say, ‘And David’s sons were kohanim’ [II Samuel VIII, 18]”). Kohanim here are sarim, equivalent to sons of the royal family.

So Israel are supposed to be dominant in the world, leading the world to exaltation, to scale spiritual heights; that is our purpose. But that exaltation can only be accomplished on a firm basis of qëdusha; only when we are a goy qadosh, when the individual bënei Yisra’él are striving to be anshei qodesh, can we be the mamlecheth kohanim.

D.

The above goes far to explain certain otherwise inexplicable things which we see in the world.

The facts of Israel’s intended purpose are known instinctively and intuitively by every other nation in the world. It explains why it is that Israel, both the individual members of the Torah-nation and their communities throughout the world, as well as the component of the nation dwelling in the Holy Land, are held by those nations to far higher standards than any others. For with the subconscious knowledge comes a measure of resentment; as Hazal also tell us, Sinai is related to sin’a, “hatred.”

To the extent that we are striving to be the goy qadosh comprised of the anshei qodesh Ha-Shem intends us to be, to that extent does the world respect us, and look to us for moral leadership and guidance. They know instinctively, as indeed we should, what we are capable of doing. As saro shal ‘Ésav pronounced, va-tuchal; we are capable of the mission.

And to the extent that we are not moving in that direction, the world despises us, and seeks to fill the void which we are intended to fill. In such circumstances, they seek and find a cheap substitute for the mamlecheth kohanim, an Ersatz (to use the German term), such as the horrible caricature of the mamlecheth kohanim which the Nazi concept of the Herrenvolk, the “master race,” represented. Or, for that matter, the alternative, warped forms of religion which has set the world afire in our time.

Do we wish not to be supplanted in this way, and suffer as a result, we must step up to our purpose; after all, the mal’ach said tuchal – “you are able.”