The Talmud(1) states: למה תוקעין ומריעין כשהן יושבין, ותוקעין ומריעין כשהן עומדין? כדי  לערבב השטן. Why (do the Jews) blow the shofar while sitting and (again) blow it standing? In order to confuse Satan. The imagery invoked here is that of Satan in his role as prosecutor in the heavenly court. He is tasked with detailing the sins of mankind in order to bring G-d’s wrath upon them. Three questions on this citation: What is so confusing about the shofar blowing? If it is so tough on Satan, why doesn’t he just take a coffee break from prosecuting before continuing? By the time the court reconvenes, the offensive blasts would be long finished! What is the connection between the sitting and standing and Satan’s internal turmoil? First, we must understand the significance of the ram’s horn as the means used to confound Satan in the first place. Our Sages(2) explain as follows: אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא: תקעו לפני בשופר של איל, כדי שאזכור לכם עקידת יצחק. The Holy One, Blessed be He stated: Blow the horn of a ram before me, that I might recall the Binding of Isaac. Thus, the reason for choosing the shofar of a ram is to “remind” Hashem of .עקידת יצחק What exactly happened at עקידת יצחק? In  בראשית כבwe find Avraham preparing to sacrifice his son Yitzchak. Suddenly an angel stopped him, and Avraham noticed a ram caught in the bushes, which was then substituted for Isaac. But Rashi(3) adds a few details missing from the text: בקרניו – שהיה רץ אצל אברהם והשטן סובכו  ומערבבו באילנות כדי לעכבו. “(Caught by) it’s horns”:  for (the ram) had been running towards Abraham, and Satan entangled and confused it in the brush in order to hold it back. Here we have Satan attempting to “confuse and confound” the ram from accomplishing its mission of offering itself as a sacrifice in Isaac’s stead. Satan’s strategy apparently includes attempting to entrap and confuse do-gooders, in an attempt to halt their mission. Rashi’s source is the following Pirkei D’Rebbe Eliezer(4), but notice the continuation of the story omitted in Rashi’s account: ר’ זכריה אומר, אותו האיל כשנברא בין השמשות היה ובא להתקרב תחת יצחק והיה סמאל עומד ומסטינו כדי לבטל קרבנו של אברהם אבינו; ונאחז בשני קרנותיו בין האילנות. שנאמר וישא אברהם את עיניו וירא והנה איל אחר נאחז בסבך בקרניו. מה עשה אותו האיל? פשט את ידו ואחז בטלתו של אברהם. Rabbi Zechariah says, this ram was created during the twilight hour (on the eve of the first Sabbath), and it was approaching (Abraham) as a substitute for Isaac. Samael (Satan) then stood and distracted (the ram) in order to inhibit its plans, and it was then caught by its horns in the brush, as is stated, “and Abraham lifted his eyes and behold he saw a ram caught behind the thistles by its Horns.” What did the ram do? It extended its hoof and grabbed onto Abraham’s garment. A particularly resolute ram indeed… even from its helpless entrapment in the thistles, it manages to reach out to Avraham signal its existence.  The animal literally extended itself, albeit ever so slightly, going beyond the call of duty to insure the success of its mission to save Isaac. Thus, we see Satan attempting to block and distract the ram from its mission of offering itself as a sacrifice, but ironically, it is not the ram that is confounded by Satan, but on the contrary, the Adversary himself who is stymied by no more than a hapless sheep’s paw-extension. In the following Zohar(5), we find   הקב”ה כביכול turning the tables and using a very similar tactic against Satan himself; where Hashem’s instrument of “distraction” is the shofar, blown on Rosh Hashana: (משל) לבר נש דהוה רגיז וחגר וזיין גרמיה, ונפק ברוגזיה לקטלא לבני נשא, חד חכימא קם על פתחא ואחיד ביה; אמר אלמלא לא אחיד בי ואתתקף בי הא קטולא בבני נשא. אשתכח, בעוד דאתתקפו דא בדא ואחיד דא בדא אצטנן רוגזיה על דנפק לקטלא, נפק לאוכחא. מאן סביל רוגזא ותוקפא דדינא דההוא בר נש הוי אימא דא דקאים אפתחא. כך אמר קודשא בריך הוא לישראל בני, לא תדחלון הא נא קאים על פתחא  אבל אזדרזו בהאי יומא והבו לי חילא. ובמה? בשופר. This is comparable to a person who became angered and… prepares himself to kill someone. A wise man stood in the way and stalled him. The (would-be murderer) turned to the wise man and said, “had you not stalled me, I would have murdered a person”… thus does Hashem say, to Israel, “my sons, fear not, for I shall stand in the threshold (to thwart the Accuser). However, hasten on this day and give me power; with what? With the shofar. G-d is offering to thwart the destructive designs of Satan, using the latter’s own MO. But Hashem’s trump card is the shofar, a reminder to the Accuser of his own impotence in the face of the self-sacrifice of the primordial ram. But what is it about the seated and standing shofar blasts that throw Satan for a loop? Maharal(6) has a very simple explanation: עצם המאמץ לעמד בתקיעות שניות הוא מערבב את השטן. The very (simple) effort to stand for the second shofar blasts confuses Satan. A deceptively simple explanation. The slight effort it takes to stand up for a few minutes causes Satan such confusion? Apparently, any extra effort that’s לשם שמים throws Satan into a state of bewilderment from which he can’t always recover – just as the ram’s stretching its hoof to alert Avraham of its existence saved Yitzchak’s life. We tend to think of Satan as a sophisticated charlatan, armed with a bag full of tried and tested tricks nearly impossible for mere mortals to overcome. But truth be told, Satan has but one solitary destructive tactic, albeit with numerous variations: ערבוב illusion/confusion, another example of which is demonstrated in the following Midrash(7) about Avraham on the way to the Akeida. א”ל (שטן לאברהם אבינו): זקן, לא שם הייתי כשאמר לך הקב”ה קח את בנך וזקן כמותך ילך ויאבד בן שנתן לו למאה שנה… כיון שראה שלא קבלו  (אברהם ובנו) ממנו (טענותיו) הלך  ונעשה לפניהם נהר גדול… כיון שהגיע עד חצי הנהר הגיע המים עד צוארו באותה שעה תלה אברהם עיניו לשמים אמר לפניו רבש”ע… עכשיו באו מים עד נפש; אם אני או יצחק בני טובע מי יקיים מאמרך, על מי יתייחד שמך?… מיד גער הקב”ה את המעין ויבש הנהר ועמדו ביבשה. (Satan said to Avraham on the way to the Akeida): Old man, was I not there when G-d told you, “take thy son” – will an old man like you go and destroy a son given to him in his hundredth year?! When Satan saw that (Avraham and his son) did not heed him, (Satan) transformed himself into a great river. When (Avraham) had traversed half the river, the water was up to his neck. At that moment Avraham raised his eyes to Heaven and said, “Master of the Universe… now the water is threatening my life! If Isaac or I drown, who will fulfill Your word; who will unify Your Name”? Immediately, Hashem blocked the spring, and the river dried up, and they stood on dry land. Again in the following source (8) depicting how the tragedy of the sin of the Golden Calf came about, Rashi again makes reference to the MO of Satan, עירבוב. כשעלה משה להר (סיני), אמר להם: לסוף ארבעים יום אני בא בתוך שש שעות, הם סבורים שאותו יום שעלה בו מן המנין הוה, והוא אמר להם ארבעים יום שלימים, יום ולילו עמו, ויום עלייתו אין לילו עמו, שהרי בשבעה בסיון עלה, נמצא יום ארבעים בשבעה עשר בתמוז היה, בששה עשר בא שטן ועירבב את העולם, והראה דמות חשך ואפילה, דמות ענן וערפל  וערבוביא, לומר: ודאי מת משה, שהרי באו כבר שש ולא בא. When Moshe ascended (to Sinai), he told (Israel): at the end of forty days I shall arrive by the sixth hour. They believed that that very day was part of the count, whilst (Moshe) had intended (the count) to include forty full days (starting on the morrow)… (the fortieth day according to Moshe’s reckoning was therefore) the seventeenth of Tammuz. On the sixteenth, Satan came and brought chaos to the world, projecting an illusion of darkness and obscurity, of dark clouds, fog and confusion, as if to say: of certainty Moshe is dead, for the sixth hour is upon us and he has not come. But the Demon’s belief in the weakness of spirit of his victims, of their utter susceptibility to confusion and loss of purpose, is in reality nothing but a projection of Satan’s own feebleness. Satan again and again tries the same confusion and obfuscation tactics, but when given a taste of his own medicine he verily collapses. A few toots of a shofar horn and he utterly loses his bearings. Furthermore, not only does Satan disappear like a shrinking violet at the first sign of resistance, but Israel’s Ally lends a hand as well(9). בשעה שהקב”ה עולה ויושב על כסא דין, בדין הוא עולה… ובשעה שישראל נוטלין שופר ותוקעין, הקב”ה עומד מכסא דין ויושב על כסא רחמים… ומרחם עליהם והופך להם מדת הדין למדת רחמים. When Hashem ascends to sit on the Seat of Judgment, he ascends with judicial (strictness)… but when Israel take the shofar and blow it, the Holy One Blessed be He arises from the Seat of Judgment and sits on the Seat of Mercy… and shows mercy to them, transforming judgment into mercy. Thus, Hashem actually follows Israel’s lead; when we get up from our comfortable seats to hear the shofar, Hashem כביכול rises from His Seat of Judgment as well, and moves to the Seat of Mercy. Satan, instead of facing the anticipated judgmental ear, now must make his case in front of Israel’s loving and protective Father, quite uninterested in the Accuser’s rantings. But this only after Israel takes the first step and blows the shofar. This is a sound explanation of Satan’s confusion, but still in all, Satan remains tasked with prosecuting on the Day of Judgment, and it is this task that we directly undermine by our shofar blowing. What is it about the ram’s horn blasts specifically that leads to the downfall of the Old Serpent’s well-rehearsed accusations? The following beautiful Rambam(10) tells us of a subtle hint contained in the sudden sounding of the shofar: אע”פ שתקיעת שופר בראש השנה גזירת הכתוב רמז יש בו כלומר  עורו ישינים משנתכם … וחפשו במעשיכם וחזרו בתשובה וזכרו בוראכם. Although the shofar blowing on Rosh Hashana is a Biblical decree, it contains the following hint: awaken O you slumberers from your sleep! …search your deeds, repent, and recall your Creator… That is, the shofar is the quintessential alarm clock, meant to waken us spiritually at the eleventh hour, before it’s too late. Because it ain’t over till it’s over, as Rebbe poignantly reminds us(11): בכה רבי ואמר: יש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת. Rebbi cried out and said: a person can acquire the World to Come in the span of a single moment! Indeed, if a person responds correctly to the shofar blasts, he is literally a new person at the end of those five minutes(12). אמר ריש לקיש: גדולה תשובה  שזדונות נעשות לו כזכיות… Resh Lakish says: great is repentance, for even malicious sins are transformed into merits! If so, the Satan’s entire PowerPoint presentation of Israel’s misdeeds disappears without any backup… on the contrary, every accusation has been transformed into a merit! No wonder why poor Satan’s so confused – an entire year’s work is lost beyond recovery… ironically in the span of that very same moment. We think of Satan as if he were some sort of a Loch Ness monster ready to chew us up and spit us out when he’s done. But in truth, he’s hardly a match even for the Cookie Monster. The good news for us is that we know all his tricks, and we therefore are potrntially immune to his ubiquitous obfuscation tactics. Indeed, even a hapless sheep has enough fortitude to defeat him with aught but an outstretched hoof. Furthermore, Satan believes in dividing and conquering, in this case by diverting Avraham’s attention from the ram, which itself was acting as a duty-bound ערב (guarantor) for, and united with, Yitzchak. Hence, there is no more appropriate term for Satan’s confusion –measure for measure– than ערבוב. What’s asked of us in our own lives is nothing approaching the sacrifice of that ram, let alone that of Avraham or Yitzchak. All that Hashem wants of us is that we take a stand, and determine to sacrifice, once and for all, our own superfluous misdeeds. And just as the innocent ram acquired life eternal through its indefatigability(13), so will we merit redemption through our emulating its determination and blowing the ram’s horn, as the Midrash(14) reminds us: וישא אברהם את עיניו וירא והנה איל אחר. מהו אחר… א”ר חנינא ב”ר יצחק, כל ימות השנה ישראל נאחזים בעבירות ומסתבכין בצרות. ובראש השנה הן נוטלין שופר ותוקעין בו ונזכרים לפני הקב”ה, והוא מוחל להם – וסופן ליגאל בקרנו של איל. And Avraham lifted his eyes and behold, he saw a ram ‘achar’ – What is ‘achar’? Chanania b. Yitzchak says, all year long the Israelites are caught up in sin, and are entrapped in adversity, but on Rosh Hashana they take the shofar and blow Hashem then recalls them and forgives their sins. So too their ultimate Redemption will come about through the horn of the ram. May we be at least as resolute about our New Year’s resolutions as the ram of yore, and thus merit this promised redemption –from iniquity and from oppression- this very Rosh Hashana. All that’s asked of us is not to hit the snooze button when the shofar alarm goes off. Footnotes: ר”ה טז,א. שם, שם. רש”י בראשית כב:יג, ד”ה בקרניו. פרקי דרבי אליעזר, פרק ל  ד”ה הנס העשירי ויהי. זוהר ג:יח,ב. 6. מהר”ל חדושי אגדות ברכות טז,ב. תנחומא (ורשא) פ’ וירא כב, ד”ה ויאמר אליו. רש”י שבת פט. ד”ה בא השטן. ילקוט שמעוני פינחס תשפב:כט ד”ה ובחדש השביעי. רמב”ם תשובה ג:ד. ע”ז י,ב. יומא פו,ב. פרקי דרבי אליעזר פרק לא: אוֹתוֹ הָאַיִל לֹא יָצָא מִמֶּנּוּ דָבָר לְבַטָּלָה. 14. בראשית רבה פ’ נו. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Geula: emancipation or Expulsion? I. You Can Take Slaves out of the country, but… The Zohar Chadash tells of two types of salvation in Egypt: זוהר חדש (פ’ יתרו, דף נב.): אני ה’ אלהיכם אשר הוצאתי אתכם וכו’ – בהאי פסוקא שאל רבי ייסא זעירא דמן חברייא מרשב”י וא”ל, אית [לי] למשאל שאילתא חדא מינך ומשבשא לי בלבאי, ואנא דחיל מלמשאל מינך, ואמינא אי נשאל דחילנא דילמא איתענש; אי לא נשאל משבשא לי בלבאי. א”ל ר”ש אימא. א”ל האי דקב”ה מדכר להון לישראל בכל אתר ואתר אני ה’ אלהיכם אשר הוצאתי אתכם מארץ מצרים. מאי רבותא אוליף הכא? תנאה שלים הוא הדא דאמר לאברהם: כי גר יהיה זרעך בארץ לא להם וגו’ ואחרי כן יצאו ברכוש גדול (בר’ טו:יג-יד), א”כ למה לאדכרא להון מילתא דא בכל אתר ואתר? א”ל תא חזי ברי, קב”ה לא אתני עם אברהם אלא דיפיק ית ישראל מן גלותא דמצרים – ולא מתחות שעבודא דדחלא אחרא, דודאי ישראל כד הוו במצרים אסתאבו ואתטנפו גרמיהון בכל זיני מסאבו, [עד דהוו] שראן תחות ארבעים ותשע חילי דמסאבותא. וקב”ה אפיק יתהון מתחות פולחן כל שאר חילין. Zohar Chadash (Yisro, 52a): “I am the Lord, your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt” (Lev. 19:36) – R. Yeisa the Small of the Colleagues posed a question on this verse to R. Shimon bar Yochai. He said: I would like to ask a question of you which pounds in my heart, but I am afraid to ask it. On the one hand, if I ask it I fear I may deserve punishment; but if I don’t, I shall remain confused. Rabbi Shimon told him to ask. So he asked: “I am the Lord, your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt” – what is the novelty being taught us [in the fulfillment of this promise], did not Hashem fully stipulate in his covenant with Abraham: “You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years… and afterwards they will go forth with great possessions.” (Gen. 15:13, 14) – If so, why is the verse repeated so often? Rabbi Shimon answered him: come and see my son, the Holy One Blessed be He stipulated only that he would remove Israel from the Egyptian exile – but not from the influence of foreign deities; for the Israelites in Egypt had surely defiled and contaminated themselves with all manner of abominations, until they lived under the influence of the forty-nine powers of impurity – and the Holy One, blessed be He separated them from the service of all these forces. What is Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai’s source to distinguish between these two paradigms? II. Inharmonious Homonyms גאל – Terms of redemption: גאולה is one of the four expressions the Torah uses to foretell the emancipation from Egypt: שמות ו:ו – לכן אמר לבני ישראל אני ה’ והוצאתי אתכם מתחת סבלת מצרים והצלתי אתכם מעבדתם וגאלתי אתכם בזרוע נטויה ובשפטים גדלים. פסוק ז: …ולקחתי אתכם לי לעם. Ex. 6:6 – Therefore, say to the children of Israel, ‘I am the Lord, and I will take you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will save you from their labor, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. 7. And I will take you to Me as a people. גאולה is used in other contexts to denote redemption as well: בר’ מח:טז – המלאך הגאל אתי מכל רע יברך את הנערים. Gen. 48:16 – may the angel who redeemed me from all harm שמות טו:יג – נחית בחסדך עם זו גאלת נהלת בעזך אל נוה קדשך. Ex. 15:13 – With Your loving kindness You led the people You redeemed ויקרא כה:כד – ובכל ארץ אחזתכם גאלה תתנו לארץ. Lev. 25:24 – Therefore, throughout the land of your possession, you shall give redemption for the land. _____________ On the other hand, the term is used many times in the Tanach with a very different meaning: גאל – Terms of defilement: ישע’ נט:ג – כי כפיכם נגֹאֲלו בדם. Isa. 1:3 – For your hands were defiled with blood. מלאכי א:ז – מגישים על מזבחי לחם מגֻאל. Mal. 1:7 – You offer on My altar defiled food. מלאכי א:יב – שלחן אדני מגֹאָל הוא. Mal. 1:12 – The Lord’s table is defiled. _____________ A similar term to גאל in this sense is געל: געל – Terms of rejection: ויק’ כו:יא – ולא תגעל נפשי. Lev. 26:11 – and My Spirit will not reject you ויק’ כו:ל – וגעלה נפשי אתכם. Lev. 26:30 – And My Spirit will reject you. ש“ב א:כא – כי שם נגְעַל מגן גבורים. II Sam. 1:21 – For there the shield of the mighty was rejected יר‘ יד:יט – אם בציון געלה נפשך. Jer. 14:19 – Has Your soul despised Zion? _____________ The commentators equate the two: When גאל  meets געל: עזרא ב:סב – ויגֹאֲלו מן הכהנה. Ezra. 2:62 – they were disqualified from the priesthood רש”י (שם): ויגאלו – שהיו מגואלים ומגועלים. Rashi: ויגאלו – for they were defiled and purged איוב ג:ה – יגְאָלֻהו חשך וצלמות. Job 3:5 – May darkness and the shadow of death defile it מצ”צ (שם): יגאלהו – כמו יגעלהו ב’ע’, ועניינו טנוף ולכלוך. וכן: לחם מגואל (מלאכי א:ז). Metudas Zion: Defile it – יגאלנו here is like יגאלנו with an ע’. The meaning is soiling and filth. Comp. “polluted bread” (Mal. 1:7). _____________ III. Opposites Attract? Rabbi S. R.Hirsch comparesגאל to other seemingly self-contradictory verbs: רשר”ה שמות ו:ו – וגאלתי אתכם בזרוע נטויה – מעניין דל”גאל” בבואו בבנין פיעל משמעות הפוכה (בדומה ל’שרש’, ‘סקל’ ועוד). ההוראה בבנין קל היא: למשוך אל עצמו דבר כדי למלטו מהשפלה. ובפיעל: לדחות מעל עצמו דבר, כדי להימלט מההשפלה שבחזקתו. כן קרוב לזה ‘געל’: להשליך מעל עצמו, וכן בלשון חכמים: הגעלה. Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Ex. 6:6 – It is interesting that (like e.g. שרש and סקל) when גאל appears in the פיעל form, it has the opposite meaning[1]. In the קל it means: to draw something towards oneself in order to spare it from disgrace. In the פיעל it means: to repel something from oneself in order to spare oneself the disgrace of holding it. Related to this sense of גאל is געל, “to cast off oneself,” and the Rabbinic term הגעלה, “the purging of an absorbed substance.” _____________ Examples of words with opposite meanings: שרש – Terms of planting/implanting: תה’ פ:י – ותַּשְרֵש שרשיה ותמלא הארץ. Ps. 80:10 – It took root and filled the land איוב ה:ג – אני ראיתי אויל משריש. Job 5:3 – I have seen a fool taking root. _____________ שרש – Terms of uprooting: איוב לא:יב – ובכל תבואתי תְשָרֵש. Job 31:12 – and it uproots all my grain To plant a shrub or sapling with its roots, it has to have been uprooted from its previous locale. _____________ סקל – Terms of stoning: מ”א כא:יג – ויסקלוהו באבנים. I Kings 21:13 – And they stoned him with stones, and he died. _____________ סקל – Terms of removing stones[2]: ישע’ ה:ב – ויעזקהו ויְסַקְּלֵהו. Isa. 5:2 – And he fenced it in, and he cleared it of stones. ישע’ סב:י – סַקּלוּ מֵאֶבֶן. Isa. 62:10 – clear it of stones. In order to accomplish the act of stoning, the stones must be removed from another location. _____________ גדד – Terms of slashing/splitting: דב‘ יד:א – לא תתגדדו. Deut. 14:1 – You shall not cut yourselves. יר‘ מח:לז – ידים גדדת. Jer. 48:37 – on all hands are lacerations. _____________ גדד – Terms of assemblage: מיכה ד:יד – עתה תתגֹדְדי. Micah 4:14 – Now you shall gather yourself in troops. תה‘ צד:כא – יגודו על נפש צדיק. Ps. 94:21 – They gather upon the soul of the righteous. An action that appears to unify and mend can actually divide and rend. The Sages teach: יבמות יג: – לא תתגודדו (דב’ יד:א) – לא תעשו אגודות אגודות. Yevamos 13b – לא תתגודדו (Deut. 14:1) – you shall not form separate sects. The reverse is true as well: the act of rending one’s garment in mourning can serve to unify the family during the week of mourning, and unifies the entire Jewish people who observe the laws of mourning! Likewise, an act of dismantling organizations which cause strife is actually an act of unity. _____________ גרר – Terms of streaming/dispersing: מיכה א:ד – כמים מֻגָרים במורד. Micah 1:4 – as water poured down a steep place. יר‘ יח:כא – וְהַגִרֵם על ידי חרב. Jer. 18:21 – and spill their blood by the sword. _____________ גרר – Terms of gathering: משלי ו:ח – אָגְרָה בקציר מאכלה. Prov. 6:8 – she gathers her food in the harvest. יואל א:יז – נשמו אֹצרות נהרסו מַמְגֻרות. Joel 1:17 – the storehouses are laid desolate, garners are demolished. From the individual’s perspective, the waters cascading away seem irretrievably gone. But from a larger perspective, the waters all flow in a predictable direction and can be harnessed or gathered for future use. _____________ כרת – Terms of excision: בר’ יז:יד – ונכרתה הנפש ההוא מעמיה. Gen. 17:14 – that soul will be cut off from its people. ויק’ יז:י – ונתתי פני בנפש האכלת את הדם והכרתי אתה מקרב עמה. Lev. 17:10 – and I will cut him off from among his people. _____________ כרת – Terms of covenant: שמ‘ לד:י – הנה אנכי כרת ברית. Ex. 34:10 – And He said: “Behold! I will form a covenant.” בר‘ כא:כז – ויכרתו שניהם ברית. Gen. 21:27 – and they both formed a covenant. בר’ כו:כח – ונכרתה ברית עמך. Gen. 26:28 – and let us form a covenant with you. The act of entering into a covenant is itself an act of “excision” from previous contrary commitments. _____________ IV. The Still, Small Monster… We have seen to this point several examples of the Divine Tongue’s unique quality of integrating apparently opposite meanings in a single word. גאל is no exception, meaning sublime redemption on the one hand and revilement on the other hand. But what can we learn from this about our forebears in Egypt, indeed about ourselves? We asked earlier about Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai’s source differentiating between two kinds of redemption. We preface the answer with another passage from the Zohar questioning the order of the verse describing the four stages of salvation: זוהר ב:כד:-כה. – לכן אמר לבני ישראל אני ה’ והוצאתי אתכם, רבי יהודה אמר, האי קרא אפכא הוא, דכתיב והוצאתי אתכם מתחת סבלות מצרים בקדמיתא, ולבתר והצלתי אתכם מעבודתם, ולבתר וגאלתי אתכם, הוה ליה למימר מעיקרא וגאלתי אתכם, ולבתר והוצאתי אתכם – אלא עקרא דכלא בקדמיתא דבעא קודשא בריך הוא לבשרא לון בשבחא דכלא בקדמיתא, אמר רבי יוסי והא שבחא דכלא ולקחתי אתכם לי לעם והייתי לכם לאלהים ואמר ליה לבתר, א”ל בההוא זמנא לית להו שבחא אלא יציאה, דחשיבי דלא יפקון מעבדותהון לעלמין בגין דהוו חמאן תמן דכל אסירי דהוו בינייהו מקשרו לון בקשרא דחרשי ולא יכלין לנפקא מבינייהו לעלמין, ובגין כך מה דחביב עלייהו מכלא אתבשרו ביה, ואי תימא אף על גב דנפקו הא דילמא יזלון (חיליהון) בתרייהו לאבאשא לון כתיב והצלתי אתכם מעבודתם, ואי תימא הא יפקון וישתזבון ולא יהא לון פריקא ת”ל וגאלתי אתכם. Zohar 2:24b-25a – THEREFORE SAY UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, I AM THE LORD, AND I WILL BRING YOU OUT FROM UNDER THE BURDENS OF THE EGYPTIANS, ETC. Said R. Judah: These words are in the wrong order, and should read, firstly, “I will redeem you”, and then “I will bring you out”. The reason, however, why bringing out is put first is that God desired to announce to them first the best promise of all. To which R. Jose remarked: But does not the greatest promise of all come last, namely, I will take you to me for a people and I will be to you a God (v. 7)? R. Judah replied: Deliverance from Egypt was the chief concern of the people then, because they despaired of escaping on account of the magical arts with which the Egyptians held fast their prisoners; hence it came first in order in the proclamation, followed by the promise of deliverance from bondage once and for all, as they might have been afraid that the Egyptians would enslave them again. Then came the promise of redemption, namely, that He would not merely free them from Egypt and then leave them to themselves! The Israelites wished to end their suffering as slaves, but on the other hand, many had become enamored of the decadent trappings of the pagan Egyptian culture – had come to believe in the magical power of the strange deities. The true redemption was twofold. Hashem opened their eyes to their own defilement – their own גיאול – upon which they finally purged themselves of their abominations once and for all. Having purified themselves, Hashem’s גאולה came instantaneously. The lessons for our own times should not be lost on us. Let us do our part of the גאולה, and Hashem will do His. We purge, and Hashem will cause us to surge! !במהרה בימינו אמן. [1] See Rashi on Ex. 27:3 for other examples of roots with derivatives of opposite meanings. [2] ‘סקל’ = ‘סלק’ בחילוף מיקום האותיות (כמו כבש-כשב). לשון ‘סלק’ מציינת הוצאה בארמית (ע’ עזרא ד:יב).

The Mishnah teaches that on Rosh Hashana all the inhabitants of the world pass before G-d like the animals of a corral, and G-d passes judgement over the entirety of creation. In this way Rosh Hashana is considered the Day of Judgment (Yom ha’Din). However, Yom Kippur is also called the Day of Judgment. This begs the question: What is the difference between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur if they are both called the Day of Judgment? Nachmanides explains that Rosh Hashana is the day of din be’rachamim (judgment in mercy) and Yom Kippur is the day of rachamim be’din (mercy in judgment). This cryptic distinction must be further clarified before we can fully understand how Nachmanides resolves the issue. In this essay we will focus on explaining why Rosh Hashana is the day of din be’rachamim, leaving our discussion about Yom Kippur for a different time. As you probably know, Rosh Hashana (literally, “the Head of the Year”) marks the beginning of the New Year. However, besides serving as the first day of the New Year, Rosh Hashana has another role: It is the beginning of the month of Tishrei; it is like Rosh Chodesh. Rosh Hashana is both the beginning of a moon-related time (a month) and a sun-related time (a year). It is the first day of the year and the first day of the month. In this way Rosh Hashana represents the beginning of two cycles. Thus, it is the nexus of two opposing systems — of the sun and of the moon. The conflict between these two forces is highlighted by the concept of a solar eclipse, whereby the moon can block the light of the sun (a rare phenomenon which Americans experienced this year on Rosh Chodesh Elul). As is well-known, the Jewish calendar is neither solar nor lunar, but is rather a synthesis of both forms of keeping time. The months of the Jewish calendar are lunar-based because they are tied to the appearance of the New Moon, and the years of the Jewish calendar are comprised of twelve or thirteen such months. The year of the Jewish calendar roughly follows a sun-based system because the movement of the sun determines whether the year will have twelve or thirteen months. The purpose of adding a thirteenth month is to synchronize the seasons of the solar year with the lunar months. This intercalated month compensates for the discrepancies between the amount of days in twelve lunar months and the amount of days in one solar year. (Nowadays, we add a thirteenth month at set intervals: In a nineteen-year cycle, years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19 have thirteen months, while the rest have only twelve.) When we talk about the sun and the moon, there is an interesting dynamic which they represent. The sun and moon represent the concepts of “he who gives” and “he who receives”. The sun represents the idea of giving, as the sun gives off light, while the moon does not radiate from its own light. The moon inherently does not illuminate anything. Rather, the light that comes from the sun, reflects off the moon, and bounces into our eyes. It is really sunlight which appears to be the light of the moon. So the moon is not a giver: the moon is a receiver. Another difference between the sun and the moon is that the sun always appears the same — it always looks like the same circle up in the sky. This is also characteristic of the giver. The giver constantly and reliably gives; there is no fluctuation or instability. In contrast, the moon plays the role of the receiver. Depending on the time of the month, there may sometimes be more of the moon visible, and sometimes less. In the beginning of the new month the new moon is but a small, barely-discernible sliver of white, but as the month progresses the moon waxes and waxes until it reaches its apex at the fifteenth of the Jewish month. At that point, the moon is visible as a full circle. Afterwards, it wanes smaller and smaller until the end of the month, when it finally disappears and restarts its cycle with the advent of the next month. In short, there are two major differences between the sun and the moon. Firstly, while the moon’s image fluctuates throughout the month, the sun’s remains stagnant and consistent. Secondly, the moon epitomizes the concept of the receiver, while the sun represents the giver. In an esoteric way, the relationship between the sun and the moon can be looked at as a parable for understanding two seemingly conflicting methods by which G-dinteracts with the world. There are essentially two basic ways in which He manifests His presence in creation: There is din (justice or judgment) and rachamim (mercy). The Kabbalists may sometimes use other terms to express these ideas: duchra and nukva — male and female, respectively in Aramaic — whereby the male force personifies the giver and the female force, the receiver; mashpia and mekabel (influencer and influencee), and others. But the meaning is always the same. What are these concepts of din and rachamim that G-d uses in running the world? How does He use these two opposing methods to run the world? We can compare this to the case of two philanthropists: Two people donate tremendous amounts of money. The first man does not care to whom he gives money: he simply gives out an indiscriminate amount of cash to all and sundry. The second philanthropist also gives money — perhaps even the same amount or more — but he requires any recipient to undergo a thorough vetting process. They must submit an application, meet with him, and explain to him their cause. Then, depending on how much he believes in their cause and what he feels is appropriate, he will give them a donation. The amount, of course, is based on what he feels the individual coming to him deserves. What is the difference between these two philanthropists? The difference is in their focus: the first philanthropist focuses on the giver (i.e. himself) because it does not really matter to him who the receiver is and what he wants. He is simply giving away donations whether or not the receiver deserves it. With the second philanthropist, the focus is on the receiver: does he deserve a donation or not, exactly how much, et cetra. With this in mind we can understand the difference between din and rachamim: Certainly, every element of creation needs a constant flow of influence from G-d in order to continue to exist, but sometimes G-d might temporarily stop his influence or curtail it. Which way do we want G-d to act with us? Sometimes He acts with what we call rachamim, in which the focus is on the giver (i.e. Himself), and He gives an influx of His good to the world without any questions asked. But when He focuses on the receiver (i.e. us), that is called din, and under that rubric He also gives — but He also examines whether or not the receiver deserves His Divine influence, how much he deserves, when he deserves it, et cetra. As mentioned above, the sun, as the never-changing celestial body that emanates light, represents a focus on the consistent, reliable giver. Conversely, the moon suggests a focus is on the receiver, for when the focus is on him, the flow of goods can fluctuate depending on what the receiver truly deserves, just like the image of the moon fluctuates throughout the month. These two ideas of din and rachmim meet on Rosh Hashana. It is the meeting point of the solar year and the lunar month — the marriage of the sun and the moon, the rachamim and the din. It is truly the best of times and the worst of times. In different places in the Bible we use different words to denote Gd. Sometimes He is known by His four-letter ineffable name (referred to as the Tetragrammaton) — what we might colloquially call “Hashem”, literally “the Name”. And sometimes, we refer to Him as simply Elokim, “G-d”, or ha’Elokim “the G-d”. Tradition tells us that when encounter His four-letter name, it alludes to His mode of acting through rachamim, while the word Elokim refers to God as the Divine judge who metes out din. In fact, the word elohim sometimes appears in the Bible as a word that means a human judge. When we refer to Him as Elokim we mean to conjure His role as the ultimate Judge of creation. The contrast between these two characteristics is accentuated in Psalms 47 — the chapter of Psalms that we read seven times before blowing the shofar (ram’s horn) on Rosh Hashana. That passage discusses the universal recognition of G-d’s sovereignty, and one verse reads, “Elokim ascends with the teruah, Hashem, with the voice of the shofar”. There are two types of sounds that the shofar makes on Rosh Hashana: a tekiah is a simple straight sound, while a teruah, on the other hand, is comprised of multiple short blasts together (there is a halachic uncertainty regarding whether they are 3 longer sounds, 9 shorter sounds, or 3 longer sound followed by 9 shorter sounds). A tekiah is one straight, consistent sound, while a teruah is a composite of several broken-up, fragmented sounds. In this way, the tekiah represents the concept of rachamim, because when the focus is on the giver, there is a consistent stream of giving. The teruah is related to the Aramaic word rauah, which means broken (like the expression that appears in the Talmud sulam rauah, a ladder with broken rungs). It represents din because it is not a constant flow, but is separated and fragmented depending on whether the receiver deserves to receive or not. The teruah focuses on the receiver. We especially associate Elokim with the teruah because Elokimrepresents the din aspect of G-d’s administration of the world, while tekiah is associated with rachamim, so it is linked to the name Hashem. When we blow the shofar on Rosh Hashana every teruah sound has a tekiah sound before and after. The teruah is always sandwiched by a tekiah. The idea behind this is because even though Rosh Hashana has the properties of din and rachamim (for it begins the solar year and lunar month), we strive to “hide” the din of Rosh Hashana. We say in Psalms 81, “Blow the shofar on (the first of) the month, on the hidden part of the holiday.” This alludes to the notion that the Rosh Chodesh aspect of Rosh Hashana is hidden, because we are trying to hide the fact that there is a dinon Rosh Hashana. It is the concealed facet of the holiday. The teruah, which represents din, is something that we want to suppress, so we hide it in between two instances of rachamim — the tekiah before and after. All that is visible from the outside of the sandwich is rachamim, not din. This idea is known in Kabbalah as mesikas ha’din, “sweetening the din”. This is also the underlying principle at work when we dip the apple in honey on Rosh Hashana. Because honey is sweet it too represents rachamim, so we dip the apple in the honey to make the rachamim component of Rosh Hashana its dominant aspect. But how does all of this work? Can we just close our eyes to the din of Rosh Hashana and then it won’t affect us? What are we doing by hiding from the din? Whom do we think we are fooling? The answer, of course, is that we are trying to change ourselves for the better by changing the object of focus. If there is a judgment on us, then we are the object of focus, because G-d looks at us and judges whether or not we deserve His good. We do not want to be the object in focus because then we will almost inevitably be in trouble due to our sins. To resolve this, we do not talk about sins on Rosh Hashana. Instead we focus on G-d and His kingship. Throughout the prayers of Rosh Hashana we continually speak about His greatness, His universal kingship, and how He is so powerful. In doing so we switched the focus from being on the receiver to being on the giver; from being on ourselves to being on G-d. When the focus is on the giver, then the rachamim paradigm is in play, and God will give even without our deserving it. In this way Rosh Hashana is essentially the day of din, but is immersed in rachmim and sweetened on the outside. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Throughout the Yom Kippur services we repeatedly confess our sins and beg for forgiveness. In doing so, we mimic the confessionals of the Kohen Gadol in the Holy Temple. The Mishnah (Yoma 4:2) relates that when the Kohen Gadolwould confess his sins and the sins of his household, he would specifically admit to three types of sins: chet, avon, and pesha. These three words are not synonymous, but rather refer to different degrees of sin. The Talmud (Yoma36b) explains that chet refers to an inadvertent sin (the state of mind known as shogeg), avon refers to wanton/intentional sins (meizid), and pesha refers to sins of rebellion. Nevertheless, there are other ways of explaining the differences between these three types of sins. When King David was nearing the end of his life, his oldest surviving son, Adonijah, began to proclaim himself as king. Batsheba, the mother of Solomon, came before her husband, King David, and demanded that he fulfill his promise that Solomon would succeed him. She said to him that if Adonijah succeeds in securing the throne, “…then I and my son Solomon will be chataim” (I Kings 1:21). What does the word chataim meanin this context? Rashi explains that chet means “lacking”, and in this case it means that Batsheba and Solomon would be lacking the royal titles due to them. Probably based on Rashi’s comment, the Vilna Gaon (in his commentary to Prov. 1:10; 13:6) writes that chet means a sin through a lacking. In other words, he writes, a chet refers to thefailure to perform a positive commandment. Rabbi Yechezkel Landau (1713-1793) also understands that chet refers to the lack of fulfilling a positive commandment, but synthesizes this with the Talmud’s contention that chet refers to an inadvertent sin by explaining that it refers specifically to the failure to fulfill the commandment of repenting after one has committed an inadvertent sin. Rabbi Moshe Shapiro (1935-2017) defends the classic rabbinic definition of chet as an inadvertent sin, but still draws an important lesson from Rashi associating chet with a “lack”. He explains that a chet is not simply the lack of something, but represents the failure to achieve a goal. A sin is therefore called a chet because the sinner deviates from the goal of mankind, and misses his intended objective. His lack of achievement in that area is called a chet. Similarly, Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim of Breslau (1740-1814) writes that chetdenotes the sinner’s lack of intentions/mindfulness when committing his sin. By contrast, an avon denotes the sin of one who “thinks too much”. He wrongly concludes that sinning is the proper way to go, and acts accordingly. A pesha refers to the sin of somebody who knows that his forbidden actions are completely wrong and should not be done, but carries them out anyways in order to rebel against G-d. Malbim takes a slightly different approach. He understands that all three wordscouldrefer to an offense committed purposely, but reflect varying motives. A chet refers to a sin committed because a person was swayed by his physical temptations, and purposely indulged in what he knew to be wrong. An avon refers to a sin that a person commits because his intellect had been negatively persuaded, causing him to stray. Finally, a pesha refers to the iniquities of one who shamelessly sins as a way of rebelling against G-d. Peirush HaRokeach also slightly disagrees with the Talmud’s way of differentiating between chet, avon, and pesha. He explains that chet refers to an inadvertent sin, pesha refers to a willful sin, and avon refers specifically to a sin from which one derived physical pleasure or gained some other benefit. The truth is, it’s not so simple. Rabbi Netanel Weil (1687-1769) writes that the differences between the terms chet and avon are only apparent when those terms are juxtaposed to each other. In such contexts, chet means whatever chet means, and avon means whatever avon means. However, when the terms appear on their own, without the other, then each of these terms includes all types of sins, not just the specific type of sin that it otherwise means. Moreover, classifying sins is not so black-and-white. In his Laws of Teshuvah(Repentance), Maimonides codifies the requirement for a penitent to confess his sins by saying, “Chatati (I committed a chet), Aviti (I committed an avon), Pashati (I committed a pesha)” — the same formula that the Kohen Gadol said in the Temple. Rabbi Yosef Babad (1801-1874), in his seminal work Minchat Chinuch, writes that one need not necessarily make all three declarations. Rather, one should confess whatever sins are relevant in each situation. However, Rabbi Elazar Menachem Mann Shach (1899-2001) disagrees with this position, and maintains that Maimonides’ wording implies that in all situations a person should always recite all three declarations. He argues that not only is this because the formula instituted for the confessional includes all three types of sins, but also for another reason: Even though these three words represent three different degrees of sin, Rabbi Shach argues that no sin is so clear-cut that it fully fits into one of these three categories. Rather, every sin has different elements of chet, avon, and pesha. For example, someone may have sinned inadvertently, but that sin also contains elements of wantonness and rebelliousness. Or, conversely, somebody may have sinned rebelliously, but his sin may also have some traces of inadvertency and/or pure wantonness. A fourth term for a “sin” appears in rabbinic sources, but not in the Bible: aveira. Aveira literally means “transgression” or “violation”, and although it once specifically referred to crimes of indecency, it now colloquially serves as a general term for all types of wrongdoings. Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785-1865) writes that aveira comes from the root AYIN-BET-REISH, which means “passes” in a physical sense. He explains that the concept of an aveira is that somebody morally “passes over” his thoughts in order to not focus on the nefariousness of his deeds. We might also suggest that he who commits an aveira has crossed a rabbinic red line, and, indeed, the Talmud (Shabbat 40a) maintains that even a person who violates a rabbinic prohibition can be called an avaryan. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

The eighth of ten plagues which G-d brought upon the Egyptians in the lead-up to the Exodus was the Plague of Arbeh — locust. Locust is the word for a Borg-like collective of grasshoppers that swarm about and destroy produce. These flying grasshoppers devastated the Land of Egypt by devouring its remaining crops. About this plague the Torah testifies, “Before it there was never a locust-swarm like it, and after it there will never be so.” (Exodus 10:14) Nonetheless, a similar story appears elsewhere in the Bible and that opens up our discussion about the grasshopper-related synonyms in the Hebrew language. The prophet Yoel foretells a calamitous famine and grasshopper infestation. He actually uses four different words to describe the invading grasshoppers in his time: first, the gazam will come and eat from the produce, then the arbeh will come and eat what the gazam left over, then the yelek will arrive and eat what the arbeh allowed to remain, and finally the chasil will come and eat what the yelek passed over. (Yoel 1:4) Nonetheless, Yoel prophesizes that if the Jewish People will subsequently repent their sins and pray to G-d: “I (G-d) will distance the tzfoni from you.” (Yoel 2:20) Rashi and Radak explain that tzfoni is also a term that refers to grasshoppers, because those pests usually migrate from north (tzafon) of the Holy Land. With this background information in mind we can now discuss the different terms used in the Bible for grasshoppers. So far we have encountered five different words for grasshoppers: arbeh, gazam, yelek, chasil, and tzfoni. When the Torah discusses the types of insects that are considered ritually clean and therefore fit for consumption, the Torah lists four species of grasshoppers which fall into that category: arbeh, sal’am, chargol, and chagav. (Leviticus 11:22) This adds another three words for grasshoppers to our list. Moreover, in Psalms’ retelling of the Ten Plagues, it mentions the word chanamal,which Rashi (to Ps. 78:47) explains refers to grasshoppers (although other commentaries explain that it refers to a type of hail). If you haven’t been keeping track, we have now a total of nine different words that are used as references to grasshoppers. It seems that these different words for grasshoppers are not just synonyms, but are actually names of different types of grasshoppers. We don’t know for sure, but they are probably different forms of grasshoppers, crickets, katydids (also known as bush crickets), and other orthoptera. The word arbeh cannot only be used to denote a certain type of grasshopper, but it is also an umbrella term that includes all types of grasshoppers. Similarly, Rabbi Menachem Meiri (1249-1315) in Beit HaBechirah, and Rabbi Shmuel ben Meshullam of Gerona (circa. 1335) in Ohel Mo’ed write that the word chagav cannot only denote a specific type of grasshopper, but is also a general term for all kosher grasshoppers. (For more about this, see Rav Chaim Kanievsky’s Karnei Chagavim §2). Midrash HaGadol (to Ex. 10:14) records that seven of nine types of grasshoppers comprised the Plague of Arbeh in Egypt: arbeh, sal’am, chargol, chagav, gazam, yelek, and chasil. Rabbi Menachem Tzioni (a 14th century German Kabbalist) adds that chanamal was also one of the species of grasshoppers in Egypt, making the total number eight. He explains that each of these eight types of grasshoppers included one hundred different sub-species, so there were really eight-hundred different types of locust which swarmed over Egypt. (Midrash Sechel Tov records the same tradition, but instead of chanamal, it mentions tzlatzel (see below).) This mirrors the Talmud’s assertion (Chullin 63b) that there are eight-hundred types of chagav! Radak gives us some insight into the meanings of the Hebrew words for grasshoppers mentioned by Yoel. He writes that gazam are called so because they cut (gozez) the grain. Arbeh bear that name because of their multitudes (related to the word harbeh, “a lot”). The name yelek is related to the word melakek (“lick”) and focuses on this grasshoppers’ habit of licking and chewing grass. The prophet Nachum described yelek as a type of grasshopper that “spreads out and then flies away.” (Nachum 3:15) Based on this description, Malbim explains the yelek as a type of grasshopper that is originally born as a sort of worm, but then enters a cocoon from which it emerges as winged grasshopper. (After consulting with Ohr Somayach’s resident zoologist, Rabbi Richard Jacobs, I have been unable to confirm the existence of such a grasshopper.) The word chasil is given to another type of locust because those grasshoppers were said to “finish off” the remaining produce in Yoel’s time. (The word chasal means to “finish” or “conclude”, like we say at the end of the Passover Seder, “Chasal siddur Pesach…” or at the end of a Tractate). The Targum to Yoel gives us the Aramaic words for the four species of grasshoppers mentioned by Yoel. Gazam is translated as zachala (which literally means “crawling thing”, see Deut. 32:24 where it means snake), arbeh is govai, yelek is parcha (“flying thing”), and chasil is shmota. The Talmud (Chullin 65a) also offers Aramaic translations, specifically of the four types of kosher grasshoppers: arbeh is govai, sal’am is rishon, chargol is nipol, and chagav is gadyan. (See also Radak to Amos 7:1.) I forgot to tell you about another possible word for grasshopper: Rashi (to Deut. 28:42 and Bava Kama 116b) writes that tzlatzel is also another type of grasshopper. Rabbeinu Bachaya (to Deut. 28:42) and in the commentary to Chronicles printed under Rashi’s name (I Chron. 13:8) explain that the word tzlatzel is related to mitzaltayim (“cymbals”) in reference to the clamorous noises associated with this type of grasshopper. Pirush HaRokeach adds that grasshoppers are related to the word tzel (“shade”) because when these invading pests swarm across the sky they cast a shadow over the earth below them. Nonetheless, other commentators disagree with Rashi and explain tzlatzel differently: Rav Saadia Gaon writes that they are butterflies; Gersonides, that they are worms; and Nachmanides, that tzlatzel refer to the clamoring sound of enemy armies. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Sukkot: Gog’s Impervious Roof Versus Israel’s Flimsy Thatched Sukkah (The following is in the main an adaptation of Rabbi S. R. Hirsch’s commentary on the Pentateuch). Lev. 23:34 – Speak to the people of Israel, saying, the fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the Feast of Booths for seven days to the Lord. Rabbi S.R. Hirsch (Num. 29:13) notes that the prophetic portions of foretelling apocalyptic wars of Gog and Magog (Ezekiel Ch. 38, 39) are read on the festival of Sukkot. He suggests a connection between the name “Gog” and the root גג –roof. In contrast, the name “Sukkah” signifying a booth is closely linked to the word סכך, the flimsy branch coverings required by Halacha to rest on the Sukkah. Gog would therefore symbolize the utter antithesis of the Sukkah, as follows: whereas the “walls” of the Sukkah are halachically required to be somewhat substantial and steady, the סכך is frail and helpful for little else than protection against direct sunlight; it scarcely avails in the face of heat, much less rain, wind and other weather. Symbolically, the walls teach us that although we must engage in efforts to protect ourselves against the earthly dangers and enemies which surround us, the feeble סכך covering instructs us that vis-à-vis our Heavenly Father above we recognize that all such attempts are futile in view of His Omnipotence. In contrast to the סכך canopy, the גג-roof announces haughtily that we humans absolute masters of our destiny, even to the extent that it can protect us against G-d’s wrath. This is demonstrated in the early history of Mankind (Gen. 11:2-4), when Man decided to build the Tower of Babel, which was nothing short of a frontal war on G-d (see Alshich to Dan. 3:1). Man at his arrogant worst is intoxicated with his technology and creative genius, and cannot abide a Force greater than he – even the Lord Himself. This on-going Kulturkampf is at the root of anti-Semitism as well, the Jews’ סכך loudly proclaiming the Uber-power of G-d over humans, vs. the גג’s defiance against that self-same Lord. The Talmud (Avodah Zara 3a) tells us that the idolaters complain to G-d, as it were, that their lack of Heavenly reward is unfair, since they were never given a chance to fulfill the Divine precepts. G-d agrees to give them the “easy” Mitzvah of Sukkah. Each one then enthusiastically built a Sukkah on his roof – until the weather turned hot, upon which they all contemptuously kicked down their Sukkahs. Apparently, leaving their fate and comfort in the hands of G-d is insufferable – even for a week. That said, a total of seventy sacrifices were offered in the Temple on this holiday – one for each of the emblematic seventy gentile nations. Our tradition has it that following the calamitous wars of Gog and Magog, the entire world will repent and recognize the One G-d of the universe – all on the holiday of Sukkot. Those surviving the cataclysmic carnage will finally grasp that no roof, not of shingles, not of titanium, not even a futuristic electronic force-field can stand up to G-d’s wrath. Those remaining finally realize that “not by military force and not by physical strength, but by My spirit” (Zech. 4:6) does the world exist. Those who embrace and are embraced by the rickety סכך ironically outlive those protected by Man’ most sophisticated defenses. May we merit the blessings of the Redemption of Israel and all of Mankind during this joyous holiday – sans the need for Gog or his גג. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr #Etymology #Hebrew #Roots #Bible #Chumash #BiblicalHebrewEtymology

The root ‘ארש’ (betrothing) appears many times in Scripture, for example: And if a man ארש a wife and has not taken her, let him go and return to his house (Deut. 20:7). The word appears as well in the Haftara of Bamidbar (Hosea 2:1-22), where the Prophet offers a powerful metaphor for Hashem’s love for His people, namely that of a man’s love for his betrothed prior to the actual wedding (the period of אירוסין, a derivative of ארש, as the ס’ and  ש’ often interchange between Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew): And I will ארש you to me forever; I will ארש you to me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in grace, and in mercies. I will ארש you to me in faithfulness; and you shall know the Lord (Hosea 2:21-22). This beautiful, consoling passage however stands in stark contrast to the beginning of the chapter, replete as it is with rebuke and warnings of retribution: Strive with your mother, strive, for she is not My wife, and I am not her Husband… I make her like a desert, and I set her like an arid land, and cause her to die of thirst… And I will lay waste her vine and her fig tree (Ibid. 4-14). One is left to wondering; is the Haftara’s message is one of retribution of one of comfort? If the latter, the reading could have begun with the following verses (16-20): Therefore, behold I will allure her and lead her into the desert, and I will speak comfortingly to her heart… And I will give her her vineyards… and the bow, the sword, and war I will break off the earth… …and then going on to end with the beautiful metaphoric verses about betrothal. To this question we will return below. The word “אירוס” (as in “אירוסין” above) is found with disparate denotations in Rabbinic literature. For example, in Sota 9:14 its import is “tambourine.” But the Aruch Hashalem (entry ‘ארוס’) suggests the tambourine is so called because it was often used at betrothal ceremonies. Another Rabbinic meaning for “אירוס” is found in Oholos 8:1, where it denotes a vegetable of some sort. Although no one seeks to connect this meaning to “אירוסין” at all, the commentators do explain a unique characteristic of this group of vegetables: the “אירוס” is robust enough to survive the scathing, dry summers without withering and the water-logged, cold winters without rotting. Perhaps this attribute is the key to understanding both why this vegetable is called “אירוס”, and to the stark contrast between the harsh beginning of Haftara in Hosea Chap. 2 and its end referring to Hashem’s love as betrothal, as follows: a vegetable capable of emerging unscathed from the extreme weather conditions described is unquestionably a hearty one… comparable to the love of an engaged couple which survives severe trials and tribulations. The Haftara is on the one hand is teaching of Hashem’s abiding love, His unswerving love for His people, a love that remains unshakeable despite a myriad of reasons for to G-d forbid react otherwise. The characteristic euphoria and anticipation of the betrothal is due in great measure to newness; they experience love and emotions often never felt before. However, this period, these feelings, by default are wont to diminish over time. But the Torah prepares remedies for every ailment, and this is no exception. The Torah is often compared to a bride (e.g. Num. Rabba 12:8), and the Revelation at Sinai as a wedding (e.g. Tanchuma Acharei Mos 8). The Torah states regarding the great and awesome Revelation: Take heed, and listen, O Israel; this day you have become the people of the Lord your G-d (Deut. 27:9). The Talmud asks on this verse: Was this then the day of the Revelation at Sinai – this was forty years afterwards! Rather this teaches that the Torah is as beloved to her students each and every day – as the very first day she was given at Sinai. The Torah never withers, never rots, never ever becomes irrelevant or old. On the contrary, the love of those who study her ad keep her precepts just strengthens with each passing day, thanks to her holiness and endless insights and revelations. Therefore, one who founds his home on the Torah, who welcomes her and sanctifies his home with her holiness, will merit a vibrant, pulsating, marriage, a lifelong betrothal. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

You Can Take Slaves out of the country, but… The Zohar Chadash tells of two types of salvation in Egypt: זוהר חדש (פ’ יתרו, דף נב.): אני ה’ אלהיכם אשר הוצאתי אתכם וכו’ – בהאי פסוקא שאל רבי ייסא זעירא דמן חברייא מרשב”י וא”ל, אית [לי] למשאל שאילתא חדא מינך ומשבשא לי בלבאי, ואנא דחיל מלמשאל מינך, ואמינא אי נשאל דחילנא דילמא איתענש; אי לא נשאל משבשא לי בלבאי. א”ל ר”ש אימא. א”ל האי דקב”ה מדכר להון לישראל בכל אתר ואתר אני ה’ אלהיכם אשר הוצאתי אתכם מארץ מצרים. מאי רבותא אוליף הכא? תנאה שלים הוא הדא דאמר לאברהם: כי גר יהיה זרעך בארץ לא להם וגו’ ואחרי כן יצאו ברכוש גדול (בר’ טו:יג-יד), א”כ למה לאדכרא להון מילתא דא בכל אתר ואתר? א”ל תא חזי ברי, קב”ה לא אתני עם אברהם אלא דיפיק ית ישראל מן גלותא דמצרים – ולא מתחות שעבודא דדחלא אחרא, דודאי ישראל כד הוו במצרים אסתאבו ואתטנפו גרמיהון בכל זיני מסאבו, [עד דהוו] שראן תחות ארבעים ותשע חילי דמסאבותא. וקב”ה אפיק יתהון מתחות פולחן כל שאר חילין. Zohar Chadash (Yisro, 52a): “I am the Lord, your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt” (Lev. 19:36) – R. Yeisa the Small of the Colleagues posed a question on this verse to R. Shimon bar Yochai. He said: I would like to ask a question of you which pounds in my heart, but I am afraid to ask it. On the one hand, if I ask it I fear I may deserve punishment; but if I don’t, I shall remain confused. Rabbi Shimon told him to ask. So he asked: “I am the Lord, your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt” – what is the novelty being taught us [in the fulfillment of this promise], did not Hashem fully stipulate in his covenant with Abraham: “You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years… and afterwards they will go forth with great possessions.” (Gen. 15:13, 14) – If so, why is the verse repeated so often? Rabbi Shimon answered him: come and see my son, the Holy One Blessed be He stipulated only that he would remove Israel from the Egyptian exile – but not from the influence of foreign deities; for the Israelites in Egypt had surely defiled and contaminated themselves with all manner of abominations, until they lived under the influence of the forty-nine powers of impurity – and the Holy One, blessed be He separated them from the service of all these forces. What is Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai’s source to distinguish between these two paradigms? Inharmonious Homonyms גאל – Terms of redemption: גאולה is one of the four expressions the Torah uses to foretell the emancipation from Egypt: שמות ו:ו – לכן אמר לבני ישראל אני ה’ והוצאתי אתכם מתחת סבלת מצרים והצלתי אתכם מעבדתם וגאלתי אתכם בזרוע נטויה ובשפטים גדלים. פסוק ז: …ולקחתי אתכם לי לעם. Ex. 6:6 – Therefore, say to the children of Israel, ‘I am the Lord, and I will take you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will save you from their labor, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. 7. And I will take you to Me as a people. גאולה is used in other contexts to denote redemption as well: בר’ מח:טז – המלאך הגאל אתי מכל רע יברך את הנערים. Gen. 48:16 – may the angel who redeemed me from all harm שמות טו:יג – נחית בחסדך עם זו גאלת נהלת בעזך אל נוה קדשך. Ex. 15:13 – With Your loving kindness You led the people You redeemed ויקרא כה:כד – ובכל ארץ אחזתכם גאלה תתנו לארץ. Lev. 25:24 – Therefore, throughout the land of your possession, you shall give redemption for the land. _____________ On the other hand, the term is used many times in the Tanach with a very different meaning: גאל – Terms of defilement: ישע’ נט:ג – כי כפיכם נגֹאֲלו בדם. Isa. 1:3 – For your hands were defiled with blood. מלאכי א:ז – מגישים על מזבחי לחם מגֻאל. Mal. 1:7 – You offer on My altar defiled food. מלאכי א:יב – שלחן אדני מגֹאָל הוא. Mal. 1:12 – The Lord’s table is defiled. _____________ A similar term to גאל in this sense is געל: געל – Terms of rejection: וי‘ כו:יא – ולא תגעל נפשי. Lev. 26:11 –  and My Spirit will not reject you וי‘ כו:ל – וגעלה נפשי אתכם. Lev. 26:30 – And My Spirit will reject you. ש“ב א:כא – כי שם נגְעַל מגן גבורים. II Sam. 1:21 – For there the shield of the mighty was rejected יר‘ יד:יט – אם בציון געלה נפשך. Jer. 14:19 – Has Your soul despised Zion? _____________ The commentators equate the two: When גאל meets געל: עזרא ב:סב – ויגֹאֲלו מן הכהנה. Ez. 2:62 – they were disqualified from the priesthood רש”י (שם): ויגאלו – שהיו מגואלים ומגועלים. Rashi: Heb. Uk©t»d‰h©u, for they were defiled and purged איוב ג:ה – יגְאָלֻהו חשך וצלמות. Job 3:5 – May darkness and the shadow of death defile it מצ”צ (שם): יגאלהו – כמו יגעלהו ב’ע’, ועניינו טנוף ולכלוך. וכן: לחם מגואל (מלאכי א:ז). Metudas Zion: Defile it – יגאלנו here is like יגאלנו with an ‘ע’. The meaning is soiling and filth. Comp. “polluted bread” (Mal. 1:7). _____________ III. Opposites Attract? Rabbi S. R.Hirsch compares גאל  to other seemingly self-contradictory verbs: רשר”ה שמות ו:ו – וגאלתי אתכם בזרוע נטויה – מעניין דל”גאל” בבואו בבנין פיעל משמעות הפוכה (בדומה ל’שרש’, ‘סקל’ ועוד). ההוראה בבנין קל היא: למשוך אל עצמו דבר כדי למלטו מהשפלה. ובפיעל: לדחות מעל עצמו דבר, כדי להימלט מההשפלה שבחזקתו. כן קרוב לזה ‘געל’: להשליך מעל עצמו, וכן בלשון חכמים ‘הגעלה’. Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Ex. 6:6 – It is interesting that (like e.g. שרש and סקל) when גאל appears in the פיעל form, it has the opposite meaning[1]. In the קל it means: to draw something towards oneself in order to spare it from disgrace. In the פיעל it means: to repel something from oneself in order to spare oneself the disgrace of holding it. Related to this sense of  גאל is געל, “to cast off oneself,” and the Rabbinic term הגעלה, “the purging of an absorbed substance.” _____________ Examples of words with opposite meanings: שרש – Terms of planting/implanting: תה’ פ:י – ותַּשְרֵש שרשיה ותמלא הארץ. Ps. 80:10 – It took root and filled the land איוב ה:ג – אני ראיתי אויל משריש. Job 5:3 –  I have seen a fool taking root. _____________ שרש – Terms of uprooting: איוב לא:יב – ובכל תבואתי תְשָרֵש. Job 31:12 – and it uproots all my grain To plant a shrub or sapling with its roots, it has to have been uprooted from its previous locale. _____________ סקל – Terms of stoning: מ”א כא:יג – ויסקלוהו באבנים. I Kings 21:13 – And they stoned him with stones, and he died. _____________ סקל – Terms of removing stones[2]: ישע’ ה:ב – ויעזקהו ויְסַקְּלֵהו. Isa. 5:2 – And he fenced it in, and he cleared it of stones. ישע’ סב:י – סַקּלוּ מֵאֶבֶן. Isa. 62:10 – clear it of stones. In order to accomplish the act of stoning, the stones must be removed from another location. _____________ גדד – Terms of slashing/splitting: דב‘ יד:א – לא תתגדדו. Deut. 14:1 – You shall not cut yourselves. יר‘ מח:לז – ידים גדדת. Jer. 48:37 – on all hands are lacerations. _____________ גדד – Terms of assemblage: מיכה ד:יד – עתה תתגֹדְדי. Micah 4:14 – Now you shall gather yourself in troops. תה‘ צד:כא –  יגודו על נפש צדיק. Ps. 94:21 – They gather upon the soul of the righteous. An action that appears to unify and mend can actually divide and rend. The Sages teach: יבמות יג: – לא תתגודדו (דב’ יד:א) – לא תעשו אגודות אגודות. Yevamos 13b – Lo tithgodedu (Deut. 14:1) –  you shall not form separate sects. The reverse is true as well: the act of rending one’s garment in mourning can serve to unify the family during the week of mourning, and unifies the entire Jewish people who observe the laws of mourning! Likewise, an act of dismantling organizations which cause strife is actually an act of unity. _____________ גרר – Terms of streaming/dispersing: מיכה א:ד – כמים מֻגָרים במורד. Micah 1:4 – as water poured down a steep place. יר‘ יח:כא – וְהַגִרֵם על ידי חרב. Jer. 18:21 – and spill their blood by the sword. _____________ גרר – Terms of gathering: משלי ו:ח – אָגְרָה בקציר מאכלה. Prov. 6:8 – she gathers her food in the harvest. יואל א:יז – נשמו אֹצרות נהרסו מַמְגֻרות. Joel 1:17 –  the storehouses are laid desolate, garners are demolished. From the individual’s perspective, the waters cascading away seem irretrievably gone. But from a larger perspective, the waters all flow in a predictable direction and can be harnessed or gathered for future use. _____________ כרת – Terms of excision: בר’ יז:יד – ונכרתה הנפש ההוא מעמיה. Gen. 17:14 – that soul will be cut off from its people. ויק’ יז:י – ונתתי פני בנפש האכלת את הדם והכרתי אתה מקרב עמה. Lev. 17:10 – and I will cut him off from among his people. _____________ כרת – Terms of covenant: שמ‘ לד:י – הנה אנכי כרת ברית. Ex. 34:10 – And He said: “Behold! I will form a covenant.” בר‘ כא:כז – ויכרתו שניהם ברית. Gen. 21:27 – and they both formed a covenant. בר’ כו:כח – ונכרתה ברית עמך. Gen. 26:28 – and let us form a covenant with you. The act of  entering into a covenant is itself an act of “excision” from previous contrary commitments. _____________ The Still, Small Monster… We have seen to this point several examples of the Divine Tongue’s unique quality of integrating apparently opposite meanings in a single word. גאל is no exception, meaning sublime redemption on the one hand and revilement on the other hand. But what can we learn from this about our forebears in Egypt, indeed about ourselves? We asked earlier about Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai’s source differentiating between two kinds of redemption. We preface the answer with another passage from the Zohar questioning the order of the verse describing the four stages of salvation: זוהר ב:כד:-כה. – לכן אמר לבני ישראל אני ה’ והוצאתי אתכם, רבי יהודה אמר, האי קרא אפכא הוא, דכתיב והוצאתי אתכם מתחת סבלות מצרים בקדמיתא, ולבתר והצלתי אתכם מעבודתם, ולבתר וגאלתי אתכם, הוה ליה למימר מעיקרא וגאלתי אתכם, ולבתר והוצאתי אתכם – אלא עקרא דכלא בקדמיתא דבעא קודשא בריך הוא לבשרא לון בשבחא דכלא בקדמיתא, אמר רבי יוסי והא שבחא דכלא ולקחתי אתכם לי לעם והייתי לכם לאלהים ואמר ליה לבתר, א”ל בההוא זמנא לית להו שבחא אלא יציאה, דחשיבי דלא יפקון מעבדותהון לעלמין בגין דהוו חמאן תמן דכל אסירי דהוו בינייהו מקשרו לון בקשרא דחרשי ולא יכלין לנפקא מבינייהו לעלמין, ובגין כך מה דחביב עלייהו מכלא אתבשרו ביה, ואי תימא אף על גב דנפקו הא דילמא יזלון (חיליהון) בתרייהו לאבאשא לון כתיב והצלתי אתכם מעבודתם, ואי תימא הא יפקון וישתזבון ולא יהא לון פריקא ת”ל וגאלתי אתכם. Zohar 2:24b-25a – THEREFORE SAY UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, I AM THE LORD, AND I WILL BRING YOU OUT FROM UNDER THE BURDENS OF THE EGYPTIANS, ETC. Said R. Judah: These words are in the wrong order, and should read, firstly, “I will redeem you”, and then “I will bring you out”. The reason, however, why bringing out is put first is that God desired to announce to them first the best promise of all. To which R. Jose remarked: But does not the greatest promise of all come last, namely, I will take you to me for a people and I will be to you a God (v. 7)? R. Judah replied: Deliverance from Egypt was the chief concern of the people then, because they despaired of escaping on account of the magical arts with which the Egyptians held fast their prisoners; hence it came first in order in the proclamation, followed by the promise of deliverance from bondage once and for all, as they might have been afraid that the Egyptians would enslave them again. Then came the promise of redemption, namely, that He would not merely free them from Egypt and then leave them to themselves! The Israelites wished to end their suffering as slaves, but on the other hand, many had become enamored of the decadent trappings of the pagan Egyptian culture – had come to believe in the magical power of the strage deities. The true redemption was twofold. Hashem opened their eyes to their own defilement – their own גיאול –  upon which they finally purged themselves of their abominations once and for all. Having purified themselves, Hashem’s גאולה came instantaneously. The lessons for our own times should not be lost on us. Let us do our part of the גאולה, and Hashem will do His. We purge, and Hashem will cause us to surge! !במהרה בימינו אמן. [1] See Rashi on Ex. 27:3 for other examples of  roots with derivatives of opposite meanings. [2]  ‘סקל’ = ‘סלק’ בחילוף מיקום האותיות (כמו כבש-כשב). לשון ‘סלק’ מציינת הוצאה בארמית (ע’ עזרא ד:יב). Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Merciful Skipping שמ’ יב:יג – וראיתי את הדם ופסחתי עלכם. Ex. 12:13 – I will see the blood and pass over you. מכילתא (בא פרשה ז): וראיתי את הדם. היה ר’ ישמעאל אומר והלא הכל גלוי לפניו, שנאמר: ידע מה בחשוכא ונהורא עמיה שרא (דנ’ ב:כב), ואומר: גם חשך לא יחשיך ממך (תה’ קלט:יב), ומה ת”ל וראיתי את הדם. אלא בשכר מצוה שאתם עושים אני נגלה וחס עליכם, שנאמר: ופסחתי עליכם, אין פסיחה אלא חייס, שנאמר: כצפרים עפות כן יגן ה’ צבאות על ירושלם גנון והציל פסוח והמליט (ישע’ לא:ה). ופסחתי עליכם. ר’ יאשיה אומר אל תקרי ופסחתי אלא ופסעתי שהב”ה מדלג על בתי בני ישראל במצרים. שנאמר: קול דודי הנה זה בא מדלג על ההרים (שה”ש ב:ח). Mechilta (Bo, Parsha 7): And I shall see the blood – Rabbi Ishmael said, is not everything revealed to Him, as it is written: in the merit of the Mitzva which you perform I will reveal Myself and spare you, as it is written: He knows what is in the dark, and light dwells with Him (Dan. 2:22), and furthermore: Even darkness will not obscure [anything] from You (Ps. 139:12); Wherefore then, “And I shall see the blood”? Rather, in the merit of of the Mitzva that you have performed I reveal Myself and pity you, as it is written: and pass over you (ופסחתי). This term denotes mercy, as it is written: Like flying birds, so shall the Lord of Hosts protect Jerusalem, protecting and saving, passing over and rescuing (Is. 35:5). And pass over you – Rabbi Josiah said, read not ופסחתי (pass over) but ופסעתי (skip over), for the Holy One, blessed be He skipped over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt. As it is written: The sound of my beloved! Behold, he is coming, skipping over the mountains (Song 2:8). Rabbi Josiah employs the Rabbinic tool of אל תיקרי to support his exposition that פסחתי (passing over) is similar in meaning (and close linguistically) to פסעתי (skipping), and an אסמכתא (quasi-proof) from the verse in the Song of Songs, which refers to skipping, which his tradition taught him referred to the Israelite houses which were skipped over. This is, after all the common understanding of the word פסחתי. Rabbi Ishmael’s discourse on the other hand, is somewhat puzzling. What is the practical difference between “showing mercy” on the one hand and “skipping over” on the other – is the end result not the same… the Israelites’ houses will be skipped over, i.e. spared. And what is the purpose of quoting the verse in Isaiah; the word פסוח does not appear to add anything to our understanding of פסחתי – if both mean skipping, then why quote it? And if the point is to demonstrate that the word means “mercy” – how does this verse prove it? Rashi paraphrases the two views from the Mechilta: רש”י שמ’ יב:יג – ופסחתי – וחמלתי, ודומה לו: פסוח והמליט (ישע’ לא:ה). ואני אומר כל פסיחה לשון דלוג וקפיצה ופסחתי מדלג הי’ מבתי ישראל לבתי מצרים שהיו שרוים זה בתוך זה. Rashi Ex. 12:13 – hˆT‰j‹xŠpU [is rendered] and I will have pity, and similar to it: “sparing ‹jIxŠP and rescuing” (Isa. 31:5). I say, however, that every [expression of] vŠjhˆx‰P is an expression of skipping and jumping. [Hence,] hˆT‰j‹xŠpU [means that] He was skipping from the houses of the Israelites to the houses of the Egyptians, for they were living one in the midst of the other. By saying “and I say”, Rashi implies that he prefers the opinion of Rabbi Josiah over that of Rabbi Ishmael (and Onkelos, usually favored by Rashi). What is it that troubles Rashi about this opinion? It must first be said that we English speakers are automatically prejudiced to the view of Rabbi Josiah by the mere use of the term “Passover.” This name presumes that the meaning of the word פסיחה is “skipping,” as Rabbi Josiah says. However, Rashi’s comments remind us that this definition is not accepted universally, and the literal definition may be completely different. Rabbi Ishmael is troubled first and formost by the image of Hashem (Himself, and not through an angel or messenger, as the Haggadah reminds us) “skipping” from house to house to check for evidence of blood, since there is no need whatsoever for G-d in His Omniscence to do so. Therefore Rabbi Ishmael believes that the word פסיחה may mean something different entirely. But why “mercy” specifically and how does he derive this from the verse in Isaiah? Benignly Sheltering Let’s examine the word חס, here translated as mercy. This term is actually the source of the word מחסה (refuge), as in: תה‘ סא:ה – אחסה בסתר כנפיך. Ps. 61:5 – I will take shelter in the cover of Your wings forever. תה‘ ה:יב – וישמחו כל חוסי בך לעולם ירננו. Ps. 5:12 – And let all who take refuge in You rejoice. . According to this, Rabbi Ishmael would be saying that פסיחה means refuge and shelter, a definition that indeed provides a very different understanding of the mechanism of the salvation of the Israelites on that fateful night. The conventional image is that of death skipping from house to house and passing over those houses with the blood smeared on the doorposts; this leaves the impression that the blood is somehow itself imbued with a measure of power to ward off evil. But R. Ishmael asserts that since ועברתי denotes that Hashem Himself is carrying out the deeds, the word וראיתי cannot mean seeing the blood. Rather the word וראיתי here is like the הָפעל, i.e. like הראית בהר – I revealed myself to spare, to shelter your household. This, then is what is learned from the verse in Isaiah; the entire context there:גנן, הציל, המליט instills an iron-clad confidence that no harm could possibly come to the city – as if it is utterly surrounded by an impenetrable spiritual forcefield, a fortified and indestructible refuge – מחסה. III. How a Garden Grows This is also reinforced by the etymology of the terms of salvation used in in the verse in Isaiah. Rabbi S. R. Hirsch explains the interrelationship between the root גנן and its derivatives: רש”ר הירש בר’ ב:ח – גן בעדן – ‘גן’ משרש ‘גנן’, ומכאן: ‘הגן’. נמצא ‘גן’: מקום גדור ושמור לצורך אדם (מצינו יחס זה גם בלע”ז: “garden” מיסוד “guard”). Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Gen. 2:8 – A garden in Eden – גן (garden) is from the root גנן, from which derivesהגן (protecting) as well. Therefore גן means: an area enclosed and guarded for the enjoyment of people (this relationship exists in other languages as well: garden from guard). Shade me, O L-rd The next word used in the verse is הציל. According to the 10th-century grammarian Menachem Ibn Saruk, the root of הציל are the two letters צל, the same word as shade or shadow. The implication is that the type of salvation specified by הציל is not e.g. extrication or destruction of the enemy, but simple shelter from danger, in the comforting shadow of the savior[1]. From Rescuing to Cementing The final word used in the passage in Isaiah, המליט, is usually translated as rescuing or deliverance, as in: יר’ יח:לט – כי מלט אמלטך ובחרב לא תפל. Jer. 18:39 – For I will surely deliver you and you shall not fall by the sword. Many commentators point out the similarity between the two words מלט and פלט, also meaning rescuing: תה’ יח:ג – ה’ סלעי ומצודתי ומפלטי. Ps. 18:3 – The Lord is my rock and my fortress, and a rescuer to me. The early 20th-century linguist, Rabbi S. J. Shteiger, suggests a link to the word שלט as well, meaning shield[2] in the Tanach: ש”ב ח:ז – ויקח דוד את שלטי הזהב . II Sam. 8:7 – And David took the shields of gold. And I humbly suggest adding the following word meaning refuge to the list: במ’ לה:יא – ערי מקלט. Num. 35:11 – Cities of refuge. All of these words have two things in common: 1. the concept of protection and salvation.2. the letters לט.Indeed, we find the root לט in a similar sense as well: מ”א יט:יג – ויהי כשמע אליהו וילט פניו באדרתו. I Kings 19:13 And as Elijah heard, he wrapped his face in his mantle The underlying concept of protection and salvation are actally illustrated by the seemingly unrelated noun form of the root מלט: יר’ מג:ט – קח בידך אבנים גדלות וטמנתם במלט. Jer. 43:9 – Take in your hand large stones and hide them in the mortar. Mortar? Yes, mortar was used not only to hold bricks together, but to cover and protect them from the elements, or even to hide precious items when necessary to safekeeping, as here. In short, Rabbi Ishmael looked at the context of the verse in Isaiah, and examined the context in which the word פסוח was used. Since all the other terms point to salvation though shelter, so too must פסוח mean shelter, which he refers to as חייס, as in מחסה – refuge. Let us pray that the Hashem’s everlasting assurance to the Jewish People and His Eternal city continue to be fulfilled, that we be sheltered and protected even as evil is purged from the earth. במהרה בימינו אמן. [1] This is also the source of the Aramaic term for prayer: צלותא . [2] This is why a government is called a שלטון – its principle purpose is to shield the population from harm. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr #Passover #Pesach

פֶּלֶא: wonder נְפִילָה: falling פִּיל: elephant תְּפִילָה: prayer הִפְלָה: separate, distinctive פֶּלֶא: Wonder There are foolish people who have gone down to Egypt to find evidence that the miracles of the plagues really happened. They found evidence in hieroglyphics, and then they tried to explain away how all the phenomena could have happened naturally, by cause and effect. They explain that some disease affected the waters in the rivers, which caused the fish to die, the frogs to come out, the lice, etc. Fools! The real wonder פֶּלֶא/wonder, the peleof Pesach, was how Hashem separated us from the Egyptians; the blood, frogs, lice, wild animals, pestilence, boils, hail, locusts, darkness, and death of the firstborn born did not affect us. We were handpicked for life and they for punishment, to show the whole world the greatness of Hashem — וְהִבְדִילָנוּ מִין הַטוֹעִים/that He separated us from the ones that stray. פֶּלֶאis a wonder. When we are children, life is full of wonder; a baby can be mesmerized for hours by a plastic cup, seeing things for the first time, examining them, analyzing their textures, shapes, colors, and function. But slowly, as we get older, we get used to things and we lose the aspect of wonderment. נְפִילָה: Falling Rivkah, when she saw Yitzchak for the first time, fell off her camel:וַתִּפֹּל מֵעַל הַגָּמָל. The sages say this was because she saw him coming out of Gan Eden upside down. She was in wonderment, and the word used to describe this action is lashonנְפִילָה/falling. Why do we fall? Sometimes, when we are struck by wonder, it can be so powerful that it can knock us off our feet. We lose our balance and we fall from our ordinary state of seeing the world. Instead, we are in a state of amazement, literally “knock your socks off!” פִּיל: Elephant The Gemara in Brachossays: הַרוֹאֶה פִּיל בְּחַלוֹם פְּלִאוֹת נֶעֶשׂוּ לוֹ/if one sees an elephant in his dream, it is a sign that wonders will happen to him.1פִּילis called so because it is the biggest animal and in the times of the Greeks was used in warfare like a tank, causing the enemy to flee and fall. תְּפִילָה: Prayer תְּפִילָהis not only called so because we fall down and pray, but it is also related to wonderment. How can it be that when we open our hearts to heartfelt prayer we see transformations happen in our lives? It should leave us awestruck in wonder. הִפְלָה: Separate, Distinctive If you survived a plane crash where everyone on board died except you, your wife, and your children, or you were thrown into the lion’s den like Daniel, or thrown into a pit full of snakes like Yosef, or into a fiery furnace like Avraham, and survived, would you not be in wonder?! Coming back to our exodus from Egypt, in the plague of wild animals, thepasuksays: וְהִפְלֵיתִי בַיּוֹם הַהוּא אֶת אֶרֶץ גֹּשֶׁן אֲשֶׁר עַמִּי עֹמֵד עָלֶיהָ לְבִלְתִּי הֱיוֹת שָׁם עָרֹב לְמַעַן תֵּדַע כִּי אֲנִי ה’בְּקֶרֶב הָאָרֶץ/and I will separate on that day the land of Goshen where my people are, a place without wild animals, in order that you will know that I am Hashem in the midst of the land.2 וְהִפְלָה ה’בֵּין מִקְנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבֵין מִקְנֵה מִצְרָיִם/and Hashem separated between the cattle of the Bnei Yisrael and the Egyptians.3 וְנִפְלִינוּ אֲנִי וְעַמְּךָ/and I will niflinu, I and your people, from all the people that are on the face of the earth.4Rashi comments that the word niflinuhas a connotation of “and you will be separate in this matter from all the people,” just like Hashem separated the cattle herds of Israel and Egypt. נִפְלָאֹת/And behold I am cutting a brisopposite all your people, and I will make wonders that have not existed in all of the land and all of the goyim, and the people will see that you are within the deeds of Hashem, because awesome is my dealings with your people.5Rashi explains lashonnefilahas being separated from all the nations of star worshippers in that the Divine Presence will not rest upon them. In all the above pesukimwe see a common thread: that the real נִפְלָאֹת/wonders that Hashem performed in Egypt were how He separated us from thegoyim. They worship the stars and are influenced by them, whereas Hashem compares us to the stars. We are above mazal, we are above the stars in that we arethe stars. We are the chosen nation,אַתָּהבְחַרְתָּנוּ, who shine Hashem’s presence in the world, a light among the nations. שֶׁלֹּא עָשַׂנִי גּוֹי— We bless Hashem in the morning with the brachahthat He did not make us a goy. A friend of mine told me that when he was coming out of the mikvehone Shabbos afternoon, there were two Chassidim dancing and singing who appeared to be in an extreme state of joy. As he drew closer, he was able to make out the words they were singing and dancing to:שֶׁלֹּא עָשַׂנִי גּוֹי…שֶׁלֹּא עָשַׂנִי גּוֹי. In the prayerעָלֵינוּ לְשַׁבֵּחַ, wepraise Hashem that He did not make us like the goyim,who bow down to vanity and emptiness and to a god that doesn’t hear them. We bow and acknowledge before the King of Kings, HaKadosh Baruch Hu. This should be our kavanahwhen we make Havdalah. Just like Hashem has made a separation between holy and profane, between light and darkness, so too Hashem has separated us, the Jewish Nation, from the other nations. Just like the sunrise, which separates light and darkness, leaves us in a state of wonderment, so too Havdalah, the separation that Hashem made between us and the goyimin Egypt and continues to do throughout history, should leave us in no less a state of wonderment. The difference is literally light and darkness. Leaving Egypt is a state of mind. It is to know that we have been set aside by Hashem from all of the nations, using the lashonof pele/wonder. The fact that we are still here, a lone sheep among seventy wolves, is a wonder. The goyimhate us — yes, there might be a few righteous non-Jews here and there, but en masse they have proven many times over who they really are. If not the Egyptians, then it was the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Crusaders, the Spanish, the pogroms, the English in York, the Germans, and now the whole world in the guise of the United Nations. וְהִיא שֶׁעָמְדָה לַאֲבוֹתֵינוּ וְלָנוּ,שֶׁלֹּא אֶחָד בִּלְבָד עָמַד עָלֵינוּ לְכַלּוֹתֵנוּ,אֶלָּא שֶׁבְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר עוֹמְדִים עָלֵינוּ לְכַלוֹתֵנוּ,וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַצִּילֵנוּ מִיָּדָם And it has stood for our fathers and us that not only one has stood against us to annihilate us, but in every generation they stand against us to annihilate is, and HaKadosh Baruch Hu saves us from their hands.6 “And it makes me wonder.” 1Brachos 56b. 2Shemos 8:18. 3Ibid., 9:4. 4Ibid., 33:16. 5Ibid., 34:10. 6Pesach Haggadah. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr #Pesach #פל #פלא

The Holiday of Passover, when the Jewish People were emancipated from slavery in Egypt, is described in our liturgy as Zman Cheiruteinu, “the Time of our Freedom.” However, as we shall see in the coming lines, the word cheirut is not the only Hebrew word for “freedom”. When the Bible refers to freeing slaves it uses two other words for “freedom”: chofesh and dror. An additional, conceptually-related word is hefker (“ownerless”), which is also related to freedom. We will seek to understand the differences between these four words and what lies at the roots of these words. We begin with the words dror and chofesh. The word dror first appears in the Bible when discussing the freeing of slaves in the Juiblee Year (Lev. 25:10). Rashi, based on Rosh Hashana 9b, explains that the word dror is related to the word dar (“dwells”), and refers to one who dwells within his own domain, and does not fall under others’ control. Dror is also a type of bird whose very essence expresses this notion. Ibn Ezra explains that the Dror Bird happily sings when free to its own devices, but if captured and stuck in man’s domain, it refuses to eat until it dies. Sefer HaAruch also tells that the Dror Bird is suicidal when it loses its freedom. Radak in Sefer HaShorashim explains that a Dror Bird is called so because it builds nests inside people’s homes without fear of being captured, as if it was completely free from the possibility of capture (see also Beitzah 24a). In this way, dror denotes being “free as a bird.” When the Torah calls for “pure myrrh” to be used in the anointing oil (Exodus 30:23), the word dror is used for “pure”. Rabbi Yonah Ibn Janach and Nachmanides explain that this is because the Torah requires they use myrrh that is free from outside impurities and forgeries. Interestingly, the word dror can sometimes be abbreviated as dar,like in Esther 1:6 when it refers to Achashverosh granting merchants a special tax exemption (see Megillah 12a). The word chofesh also appears in the Bible in the context of freeing slaves (most notably in Ex. 21, Deut. 15, and Jer. 34), although it means “vacation” in Modern Hebrew. In terms of their mutual association with the concept of “freedom”, Rabbi Shlomo Aharon Wertheimer (1866-1935) explains that dror and chofesh do not refer to the exact same phenomenon. Chofshi refers to freedom from an obligation to work, while dror refers to the freedom from subjugation to a specific person who lords over him. The word cheirut does not appear in the Bible in the context of freedom. Nonetheless, it is the standard word for freeing a slave in Rabbinical parlance. In the Birkat HaChodesh prayer, which we say on the Sabbath before Rosh Chodesh, we beseech G-d to redeem us from avdut (“servitude”) to cheirut (“freedom”). Moreover, the Mishnaic term shichrur is a cognate of cheirut that refers to the formal act of freeing a slave, and the Mishnaic phrase eved she’nishtachrar refers to a freed slave. On Passover Night we strive to act like Bnei Chorin — “free men.” Although the Bible itself never uses the word cheirut in the context of freedom, Rabbinical tradition (Avot 6:2) finds a Scriptural allusion to such a meaning. The Bible describes the Tablets that Moshe brought from Mount Sinai as “the work of G-d, and the writing was the writing of G-d, engraved (charut) on the tablets” (Ex. 32:16). The root for the Hebrew word which means “engraved” is generally spelled CHET-REISH-TET. However, in this context a variant spelling is used, replacing the ultimate TET with a TAV. Because of this slight deviance from the norm, the Rabbis found something deeper alluded to in this verse: “Do not read it as not charut (‘engraved’), but as cheirut (‘freedom’), for the only person who is truly free is one who occupies himself with Torah study.” It seems fairly clear that if the ultimate purpose of the Exodus was to give the Jewish People the Torah at Mount Sinai, then the word for freedom resulting from the Exodus should appropriately be cheirut — and the holiday which celebrates that freedom should be termed Zman Cheiruteinu. Nevertheless, our understanding of cheirut does not address its meaning vis-à-vis the other words for “freedom.” Why did the Rabbis decide to use the word cheirut for “freedom” instead of the words found in the Bible? The British philosopher Isaiah Berlin (1909-1997) famously differentiated between two distinct types of freedom: “negative liberty” and “positive liberty.” Based on this philosophical distinction, Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks (Chief Rabbi Emeritus of the United Kingdom), offers a deeper understanding as to the difference between chofesh and cheirut. He explains that the adjective chofshi denotes what a slave becomes when he goes free. It means that he can do whatever his heart desires. The word chofesh is related to chafetz (desire) and chapess (search out). Rabbi Sacks, philosopher, identifies this type of freedom with “negative liberty” because it simply denotes the lack of coercion. Negative liberty may be worthwhile on an individual level, but on a society level there must be some form of rules — one cannot simply do whatever one pleases. On the other hand, law and order must not be imposed in a coercive manner, because then the masses will resent and resist said law. Instead, the law must be presented and taught in a way in which everyone willingly accepts it of their own volition. When this happens, the law becomes a part of them — engrained in their very essence — for the greater good. To that effect, the Rabbis coined a new term cheirut,which denotes a sort of freedom that comes to society where people not only know the law, but study it constantly until it is engraved on their hearts (so charut and cheirut become one). On the surface, this “positive liberty” seems restrictive, but actually it proves quite liberating. Truth be told, the cheirut-cognate chorim does actually appear in the Bible, just not in the context of freedom, per se. Chorim appears thirteen times in the Bible in reference to noblemen and other dignitaries (see Rashi to Jer. 27:20). Rashi (to Sotah 49a) explains that chorin are people of lineage. The illustrious Wurzberger Rav, Rabbi Yitzchok Dov Bamberger (1807-1878), explains that chorim is related to the Aramaic words whose root is CHET-VAV-REISH, which means “white.” He explains that dignitaries are called “white” because their reputation must be untarnished, and because only important people were allowed to wear white clothes in the ancient world. (Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785-1865) associates cheirut with the Hebrew root chor, which means“hole” and uses those exact letters, but we will not delve into his approach here.) That said, it seems to me that the Rabbis chose to use the word cheirut and various conjugations thereof in order to convey the idea of freedom on Passover for a very important reason. They wished to stress that newly-freed slaves begin their new lives with a clean slate, and they have the potential to become important people in their own right. On Passover we recognize and celebrate this potential for greatness. This optimistic, yet challenging, look at a freedman’s bright future warranted the Rabbis’ adoption of a new word for “freedom,” even though the Bible already has two words for that concept. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

We mentioned in Part 1 that the Hebrew name for the holiday of Passover is Pesach and the sacrifice associated with that holiday is likewise known as the Korban Pesach (Pesach Sacrifice). We cited Rashi’s explanation (to Exodus 12:11; 12:13; and Isaiah 31:5) that the word pesach is an expression of dilugand kefitzah, both of which are words for jumping. Indeed, the Paschal Sacrifice is called the Korban Pesach because it commemorates G-d “passing over” or “jumping over” the houses of the Jews when He struck the Egyptians with the Plague of the Firstborn. The holiday is accordingly named after the sacrifice associated with it. In the following paragraphs we will demonstrate exactly how the word pesach means “jumping”, but is not fully synonymous with the words dilug and kefitzah. In Part 1 we explained the major difference between the two words for “jumping” by noting that the word dilug focuses on one who “jumps” as a means of skipping over something, and the word kefitzah focuses on one who “jumps” as a means of travelling faster. Rashi’s comment that the word Pesach is an expression of both dilug and kefitzah means that the word Pesach has both of these elements, especially in regard to G-d passing over the houses of the Jews in anticipation of the Exodus from Egypt. Rabbi Avigdor Neventzhal (Chief Rabbi Emeritus of the Old City of Jerusalem) points out the obvious: when we speak of G-d “jumping” over the Jews in order to afflict the Egyptians with the Plague of the Firstborn, this cannot mean that He literally “jumped” over them, because He does not possess any physical body with which to perform such an action. Rather, the Torah speaks from the post facto perspective in which the Egyptian firstborns died, and the Jewish ones did not. In hindsight, it seemed as if G-d “jumped” over the Jews and smote only the Egyptians. In what way can this be called a dilug? Rabbi Neventzhal explains that just as the idea of dilug is to “skip over” something which has been deemed unnecessary, so too did G-d “skip over” His general requirement that one perform some act of commitment to seal his connection to G-d before G-d will allow that person to come close to Him. However, at that the Exodus, though the Jews had not yet exhibited that desire to connect to G-d, He nonetheless performed miracles on their behalf and took them out of Egypt. In a similar vein, Rabbi Nachshon Schiller focuses on the haste with which the Exodus from Egypt occurred. Kabbalistic sources assert that during their stay in Egypt, the Jews had alarmingly fallen to the forty-ninth level of impurity and seriously required the Divine intervention of the Exodus. The urgency of the matter is highlighted by the Jews’ descent to the depths of impurity. Had the Jews remained in that land for an extra moment they would have plunged to the fiftieth level of impurity, from whence it would be impossible to recover. Therefore, G-dhastily redeemed the Jews before it was too late. Rabbi Schiller explains that for this reason G-d commanded that the Paschal Offering be eaten “in haste” (Exodus 12:11); eating from that sacrifice should be done quickly in imitation of G-d’s fast-acting miracles that brought the Exodus. In this way, the word Pesach is related to the word kefitzah, which denotes the speed of the jumper. To summarize, the Exodus from Egypt has both an element of “skipping” and an element of “speed”, concepts which shed light on Rashi’s comment that Pesach is related to dilug and kefitzah. In redeeming the Jews, G-d waived the usual requirement that the recipient of Divine assistance actively show his commitment to Above. In essence, the Exodus basically “skipped over” (dilug) that general prerequisite for a miracle, a favor celebrated in the name Pesach. At the same time, the urgency and gravity of the dire situation demanded that G-d redeem the Jews immediately, and the speed (kefitzah) with which He did so is also immortalized in the very name of the Holiday of the Exodus — Pesach. Before concluding I would like to point out another insight related to the Hebrew word pesach — and its verb form poseach. Those wordsshare their etymological root with the Hebrew word piseach (lame or immobile). The root of both words is the letter combination peh–samech–chet. This occurrence is a poignant example of a common phenomenon in the Hebrew language whereby words whose meanings are conceptually diametric opposite are sometimes phonetically/orthographically similar (i.e. they are spelled or pronounced the same). This phenomenon illustrates the notion that words in the Hebrew language are not mere happenstance based on human whims, but possess inherent meanings and follow a Divine intuition not found in other languages. Therefore, a paralyzed person or an amputee who has been rendered immobile is known as a piseach, a word which resembles the very mobile act of “jumping” (poseach). Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr