Va'etchanan 5768 – Gilayon #562
(link to original page)
Click here to
receive the weekly parsha by email each week.
Parshat Vaetchanan
AND DO NOT STEAL
Do not murder… and do
not commit adultery…and do not steal… and do not lust…
We have already remarked that
here, when Moses repeats the Decalogue, all the prohibitions of sinning against
the life, the marriage, the property, the happiness, and the honor of one's
fellow-men, as well as the mere lusting after what is forbidden, are all taken
collectively together as one thought by the copulative letter vav. And
we pointed out, how, the last one, hankering, coveting , was stressed, to tell
us that not only the actual criminal deed, but already the criminal thought,
yea simply the longing for that which is forbidden, the breeding place of all
sinful thoughts and acts, brought by God before His judgment-seat; and that
thereby the one real security for social lie against crime – not to be attained
by any human tribunal – is guaranteed by the loyalty of the feelings of its
citizens nurtured by the fear of God.
(Rabbi
S.R. Hirsch on Devarim 5:17-18, Levi translation)
The philosophers said
that even though the continent man performs virtuous actions, he does good
things while craving and strongly desiring to perform bad actions. He struggles
against his craving and opposes by his action what his [appetitive] power, his
desire, and the state of his soul arouse him to do; he does good things while
being troubled at doing them. The virtuous man, however, follows in his action
what his desire and the state of his soul arouse him to do, and he does good
things while craving and strongly desiring them. There is agreement among the
philosophers that the virtuous man is better and more perfect than the
continent man…
When we investigated
the speech of the Sages about this matter, we found that according to them,
someone who craves and strongly desires transgressions is more virtuous and
perfect than someone who does not crave them and suffers no pain in abstaining
from them. They even said that the more important and perfect a person is – the
greater will be his longing for sin, and the more acute his suffering at not
satisfying his desire. They cited sources: "Whoever is greater than his
friend has a greater [evil] impulse than he…" If the external meaning of
these two accounts [i.e., by the philosophers and the Jewish Sages] is
understood superficially, the two views contradict one another. However, that
is not the case; rather, both of them are true, and there is no conflict
between them at all. For the bad things to which the philosophers
referred…these are the things that are generally accepted by people as bad,
such as murder, theft, robbery, fraud, harming an innocent man, repaying a
benefactor with evil, degrading parents, and things like these… There is no
doubt that the soul which craves and strongly desires any of them is defective
and that the virtuous soul neither longs for any of these bad things at all nor
suffers pain from the prohibition against them.
When the Sages said
that the continent man is more virtuous and his reward is greater, they had in
mind the traditional laws. This is correct because if it were not for the Law,
they would not be bad at all. Therefore they said that a man needs to let his
soul remain attracted to them and not place any obstacle before them other than
the Law.
(RaMBaM: Eight Chapters, chapter 6 –
Butterworth/Weiss translation)
But
you who cleave to the Lord your God are alive, all of you, this day (Devarim 4:4)
Yair
Eldan
Both in their interpersonal relations and in their relations
with God, human beings operate in the space encompassed on the one side by the
desire to connect with the other, to draw near and take hold of him, and on the
other side by the desire to distance oneself from the other, to disconnect from
him and to leave him. On the one hand, there is the yearning for spiritual and
physical connection, while on the other hand there is the fear of being
swallowed up by the other and apprehension over the risk of losing oneself. Sometimes
intimacy and desire grow together, but at other times the fear of loss of self
causes desire for the other or for God to weaken with increasing intimacy. A
verse from our parasha explicitly states: But you who
cleave… are alive, all of you, this day. The nature of
the cleaving [Hebrew: hidabkut] remains unclear. Hidabkut can
refer to physical cleaving, but it can also refer to a more abstract
connection, such as that expressed by the expression, "to hold fast
to." It is then not surprising that Rabbi Elazar ben Padat asked in
connection to the amei ha'aretz [ignorant laypeople]: "But is it
possible to cleave to the Divine Presence? It is written, for the Lord your
God is a consuming fire! Rather, anyone who marries off his daughter to a Torah
scholar, or engages in business on the behalf of scholars, or benefits scholars
with his wealth, Scripture accounts it to him as if he had cleaved to the
Divine presence" (Ketuvot 111b). According to Rabbi Elazar, the amei ha'aretz connect to God by
way of connection with Torah scholars, who represent the Divine Presence on
earth. While the verse speaks literally of a natural connection with God in the
form of cleaving, for Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat (who was reputed to have
personally experienced several revelations of God) it is clear that the
ignorant laypeople cannot draw near to God, just as they cannot draw near to
fire. The story of the "Four who entered the orchard" offers a
Tannaitic treatment of the possibility of connection with the Divinity:
Four entered the orchard. Ben
Azzai, and Ben Zoma, Aher, and Rabbi Akiva. One of them peeked and died, one
peeked and was injured, one peeked and cut down the shoots [i.e., became a
heretic] and one ascended [in the Jerusalem Talmud: "entered"] safely
and descended [Jerusalem Talmud: "exited"] safely. Ben Azzai peeked
and died. Concerning him Scripture says: Precious in the eyes of the Lord is
the death of His loyal ones (Psalms 116:15). Ben Zoma peeked and was
smitten. Concerning him Scripture says: If you have found honey, eat only
your fill, etc. (Proverbs 25:16). Aher peeked and cut down the shoots. Concerning him Scripture says: Do
not let your mouth bring your flesh to sin, etc. (Kohelet 5:5). Rabbi Akiva
ascended safely and descended safely. Concerning him Scripture says: Draw me
after you, let us run, etc. (Song of Songs 1:4). (Tosefta Hagiga 2:3-4, Lieberman edition)
This passage is part of what researchers call
Hakovetz Hamisti ["The Mystical Collection"] which comprises the
first seven halakhot of the second chapter of Tosefta Hagigah,
which deal with ways of discussing Ma'asaeh Merkavah ["The Work of
the Chariot"]. The various interpretations of the "four who entered
the orchard" concentrate on determining the nature of the
"orchard" – is it a kind of mystical experience, or examination of
questions regarding justice, reward, and punishment in the world? I would like
to deal with two problems arising from the literary editing of the passage. First
of all, the passage tells a story of increasing danger facing each new scholar
who enters the orchard. True, the verb lehatzitz ["to peek"]
is used in connection to each of the three sages, but the formulation used in
the baraita implies that Ben Zoma's "peeking" was not of the
same kind as that of Ben Azzai. Elisha ben Avuya is described as having
"cut down the shoots" of the orchard, that is to say, he is
explicitly described as having physically entered the orchard and cutting its
shoots. Finally, the braita explicitly mentions R. Akiva's further physical
advance; he entered (or ascended) but also exited (or descended) the orchard. It
is very difficult to understand the braita's editing unless we accept that it
tells a story of increasing physical advances into the orchard (Ben Azzai's
peeking, Ben Zoma's deeper penetration, Elisha ben Avuyah's cutting down of
shoots, and R. Akiva's entrance and exit). Furthermore, according to the story,
the further one advances in entering the orchard, the greater danger one faces.
This danger is not physical, but rather spiritual. The physical danger
described by the story steadily decreases while the spiritual danger grows: Ben
Azzai peeked and died; Ben Zoma, who, according to the braita's development
penetrated further into the orchard than did his predecessor, was physically
injured but did not die. Elisha ben Avuyah actually entered into the orchard
and was not physically harmed, but it is clear that something destructive happened
to his character, while R. Akiva, who spent the most time being physically
present inside the orchard – having both entered and exited it – was not hurt
physically or spiritually. In other words, this braita treats the topic of hidabkut,
since its layout follows the logic of drawing near and its accompanying
dangers. The braita describes entrance into the consuming fire and
drawing near to a danger zone associated with Divinity. The braita also gives
an explicit answer to the question how R. Akiva managed to enter safely despite
the fact that his physical entrance (i.e., his drawing near) was of the highest
order. Each of the sages listed is, by way of a cited verse, associated with a
different book of the Jewish canon. Ben Azzai's book is Psalms. This suggests
that worshipping God with the attitude of a slave towards his master is the
least dangerous option and puts one at the greatest distance from the Divinity.
Ben Zoma is associated with Proverbs. According to the story's inner logic, his
"peeking" alludes to a deeper entry into the orchard. Proverbs is a
book of practical wisdom expressing a conservative world view that emphasizes
divine reward and punishment and teaches an optimistic view of the universe. The
braita is telling us that the very pursuit of practical wisdom increases danger
while it also constitutes a state of greater closeness to God. Elisha ben
Avuyah is connected with Kohelet. Kohelet has the structural features of a book
of practical wisdom (short verses, for instance) but it is really a book of
philosophical wisdom that casts deep doubts upon God's justice and His ways in
the world. The editor of the braita marks Kohelet as a dangerous book (that
leads to "cutting down the shoots"), but in the context of the braita
it also symbolizes very great closeness to God. R. Akiva offers the optimal
model. He ascended safely and descended safely, and he is associated with the
Song of Songs. According to the braita, the man-woman relationship is, then,
the correct formula for human-divine relations. The relationship described in
the Song of Songs is an especially worthy model. While it does have a physical
aspect (His left hand beneath my head, he embraces with his right),
cleaving and connection are not the leading motifs; the feelings of mystery, of
desire and missed opportunity are the book's signature themes. The braita
connects its lesson regarding the formation of one's relationship with God and
the correct distance to be maintained from Him with advice regarding which
texts should be studied from the Jewish canon. In terms of its literary format,
the orchard of the braita includes at once both mystical experience and
philosophical speculation.
The insight that the braita treats the issue
of the correct distance one should keep from God helps us to understand the
composition of the entire second chapter of Tosefta Hagigah. The remainder of
the chapter following Hakovetz Hamisti is chiefly devoted to one topic –
the origins of disagreements in Jewish law. In this context we find halakhah 9,
stating that "At first there were no disagreements in Israel," which
sees such disagreements as stemming from a break in the chain of the legal
tradition. In the same vein, the chapter deals with the first disagreement to
arise among the zugot [early pairs of rabbinic leaders] on the question
of whether one is allowed to lay one hands on the head of the animal offered as
a festival sacrifice [korban hagigah]. The immediate context is, of
course the laws of the festival sacrifices which are also connected to the korban
hagigah. There is, however, a deeper connection – if sages transmit God's
word from one generation to the next, the very development of disagreements is
symptomatic of their living at an increasing distance from God. The disagreement
regarding the laying of hands on the sacrifice is an embodiment of this matter
– Beit Shammai prohibits it because it constitutes using an animal on a
festival day (the prohibition of shevut) and therefore it should be
performed on the eve of the festival. Beit Shammai views the laying of hands as
involving a total transfer of identity from the one who places his hands on the
animal to the animal itself (and so to in regards to semicha – the symbolic transfer
of rabbinic authority from teacher to student via the laying of hands). Beit
Hillel permits the laying of hands on a festival day not only because of
systematic considerations (since the ordinary people like to lay their hands on
the animal immediately before its sacrifice, prohibition of the laying of hands
during festivals will deter them from offering sacrifices) but also because
Beit Hillel does not accept the notion that the laying on of hands effects a
complete transfer of identity. The gap which has a place in the relationship
modeled by the Song of Songs and personified in the braita's depiction of R.
Akiva is also championed by Beit Hillel. The gap, with all its shortcomings (it
lacks hidabkut) and advantages (it allows for entry and exit from the
orchard and leaves room for disagreement) is the central theme that informs the
composition of the second chapter of Tosefta Hagigah.
Unsurprisingly, the commandments of love for
God and cleaving to God weighed heavily in the controversial ruling of the High
Rabbinical Court (case # 5489-64-1) which invalidated Rabbi Druckman's court and the
conversion of "Plonit" [the "anonymous woman"]: "The
upshot of what has been stated is that the essence of the act of conversion
performed by a court constitutes the performance of a commandment because
through its authority the gentile cleaves [mitdabek] to God and His
commandments and attaches himself to Israel, the people of God (pg.14). Rabbi Sherman
states that when a court performs a conversion it acts "within the
framework of and as part of the commandment to love God" and the
commandment to convert becomes a positive commandment incumbent upon the court
only from the moment that the gentile agrees "honestly and from the depths
of his heart to cleave [lehidabek] to God and to His commandments,"
that being the essence of conversion. Thus, for example, there is no
commandment to convert a deaf and dumb woman (since even deaf and dumb Jews are
not obligated with the commandments) and the result of such a conversion would
be merely social and would not draw her in "under the wings of the Divine
Presence." The Hareidi Rabbinate's one dimensional understanding of
conversion as a religious act of cleaving to God without any gaps (which is
expressed chiefly, of course, through the performance of commandments) stands
in contradiction to the traditional Jewish approach to cleaving – the tradition
that enshrines Draw me after
you, let us run – which always left a gap making room for the Jewish culture of
disagreement and for Jewish life with all its complexities.
Dr. Yair Edlan is a research fellow in the
Institute for Advanced Studies of the Shalom Hartman Institute
I pleaded with the Lord at
that time, saying: "…let me, I pray, cross over and see the good land on
the other side of the Jordan, that good hill country, and the Lebanon."
(Devarim 3:23, 25)
For the same state is in store for all (Kohelet 9:2) – Moses said to God: Master of the Universe, all are equal before you;
you destroy the innocent and the wicked alike. The spies angered you by
speaking ill of the Land, as it is said, thus they spread calumnies about
the land (Bamidbar
13:32), while I served your
children before you in the wilderness for forty years, and we share the same
fate!?
What is this like? A king wished to marry a certain woman. He sent
messengers to see whether she was beautiful or not. They went and saw her, and
came to the king and said to him: "There is none as ugly and desolate as
her." His best man heard and told him, "Not so, my Lord, there is no
woman more beautiful than her in the world." He went to marry her, and the
girl's father told the king's messengers: "I swear on the king's life that
not one of you shall enter here, because you scorned her in the king's
presence." The best man arrived to enter, and he told him: "You, too,
will not enter." The best man said to him: "I did not see her, yet I
told the king that there is none more beautiful than her in the world, while they
said there is none uglier than her. Now let me be, and I will see which of us
spoke truthfully."
So Moses said to God: "My Master, the spies spread calumny about the
Land and said it is a country that devours its inhabitants (Bamidbar 13:32), but I did not see it, yet I praised it to
your sons, and I said, the Lord your God brings you to a goodly land (Devarim 8:7). Now I shall see it and know whether my
words or theirs were correct, as it is said, Let me, I pray, cross over and
see the good land on the other side of the Jordan (Devarim 3:25). He told him: you shall not go across
(3:27). Moses told Him: "If so, all are the
same to you – you destroy the innocent and the wicked alike."
(Tanhuma Va'et'hanan
1)
The Gates of Mercy are Not Locked
When Moses entered the lands of the Reubenites and the Gadites, he
rejoiced and said: "It seems to me that I have been released from my
vow," and he began pouring out words of supplication before the King. To
what parable can this be compared? To a king of flesh and blood who decreed
that his son could not enter the entrance of his palace. He entered the gates
and he came in behind him, [he entered] the entrance hall and he came after
him. When he arrived at the bed-chamber, he said to him: My son, you are not
allowed [to follow] from this point on. Similarly, when Moses entered the lands
of the Gadites and the Reubenites, he rejoiced and said: "It seems to me
that I have been released from my vow." This can be understood through an a
fortiori argument: Moses, who was a great sage, father of the wise and
father of the prophets, even though he was aware of the decree he did not keep
himself from [pleading for] mercy, all the more so in the case of other human
beings [that they should always seek God's mercy], for it is said: And I
pleaded to the Lord (Devarim 3).
(Sifri Balak 132)
Comfort Ye, Comfort Ye, My People
Zealousness is as harsh as Sheol – Elijah’s
zealousness against Israel was severe. As is written, I am moved by zeal for
the Lord, the God of Hosts, for the Israelites have forsaken Your covenant…
Elijah should have gone to the place where his fathers stood and pleaded
for mercy upon Israel, but he did not do so. The Holy One, Blessed Be He, said to
him: "You pleaded for your own needs, go and return to Damascus". And
so is written with regards to Hezkiah: For there will be peace and truth in
my days (Isaiah 39:8). The Holy One,
Blessed Be He, said to him: "You have pleaded for your own needs." Comfort,
oh comfort My people, says your God (Ibid
40:1), and
you [Israel] have no need for Elijah’s prayer."
(Midrash
Zuta, Shir Hashirim, Parasha 8)
Comfort, oh comfort My people – All
the tribulations and the suffering and the exile are proportionate to the lack
of da'at [knowledge, understanding]. When da'at will be complete,
then all deficiencies will be filled, in the sense of (Nedarim 41) "If you have acquired de'ah, then what
do you lack?" and as is written: Assuredly, My people will suffer exile
for lacking da'at, and the essential element of eternal life – to be in the
world to come – will be a result of da'at. For da'at will spread,
and all will know God, and through da'at all will be part of His unity,
and then all will live eternal life as He does, for through da'at all
are part of Him, as was said by the Sage, "If I knew Him, I would be Him."
The principle part of da'at will be in the future, as is written, For
the earth will be filled with de'ah, and because of da'at, nothing
good will be lacking – all will be good.
(Likutei MoHaRaN, Parasha 21)
Shabbat Shalom is
available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il
If you wish to
subscribe to the email English editions of Shabbat Shalom, to print copies of
it for distribution in your synagogue, to inquire regarding the dedication of
an edition in someone’s honor or memory, to find out about how to make
tax-exempt donations, or to suggest additional helpful ideas, please call
+972-52-3920206 or at ozshalom@netvision.net.il
If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards
its publication and distribution.
- Hebrew edition distributed in Israel
$700
- English edition distributed via email $
100
Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc.
Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in
advance to appear in the English email.
In Israel, checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz
VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli
tax-exemption for local donations.
US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made
through:
New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA
New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD,
Great Britain
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS
UNDER $100.
PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations
should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave.,
Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA
All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the
Shabbat Shalom project.
About us
Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of
a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of
tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to
Jewish tradition and law.
Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of
Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes
that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the
pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a
fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an
option but an imperative.
5,000
copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are
written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to
over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is
www.netivot-shalom.org.il.