Lech L’cha 5769
Rabbi Ari Kahn
© 2008
It begins with a word, a command - or perhaps a test:
ספר בראשית פרק יב
(א) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל אַבְרָם לֶךְ לְךָ מֵאַרְצְךָ וּמִמּוֹלַדְתְּךָ וּמִבֵּית אָבִיךָ אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַרְאֶךָּ: (ב) וְאֶעֶשְׂךָ לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל וַאֲבָרֶכְךָ וַאֲגַדְּלָה שְׁמֶךָ וֶהְיֵה בְּרָכָה: (ג) וַאֲבָרְכָה מְבָרֲכֶיךָ וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ אָאֹר וְנִבְרְכוּ בְךָ כֹּל מִשְׁפְּחֹת הָאֲדָמָה:
(1) The LORD had said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you. (2) "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. (3) I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you." (Bereishit 12)
According to at least one rabbinic source, contained in this verse are two tests:[1]
אבות דרבי נתן פרק שלשה ושלשים
עשר נסיונות נתנסה אברהם אבינו לפני הקב"ה ובכולן נמצא שלם ואלו הן שנים בלך לך ב' בשתי בניו ב' בשתי נשיו אחד עם המלכים ואחד בין הבתרים אחד באור כשדים ואחד בברית מילה (בין הבתרים).
…two trials at the time he was bidden to leave Haran, two with his two sons, two with his two wives, one in the wars of the Kings, one at the covenant ‘between the pieces’ (Gen. XV). One in Ur of the Chaldees (where, according to a tradition, he had been thrown into a furnace from whence he emerged unharmed). (Avot Drebbi Natan chapter 33)
Upon contemplation, we might ask a simple question: Why was leaving his hometown a test? Avraham was not exactly the most popular character back home; in fact the opposite seems true. He was vilified, persecuted, attacked and almost killed – until he was miraculously saved from a fiery furnace. Why would leaving such a place be considered a “test”? When we continue our reading of the next two verses, the “test” seems mitigated by a bounty of blessings:
(2) "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. (3) I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you."
This certainly doesn’t sound like a challenge; in fact, it sounds as if Avraham has “hit the jackpot”! The promises are of incredible proportions. Where is the test?
A more careful reading of these verses reveals an almost untenable tension, which may be the key to understanding the angst which Avraham experiences in fulfilling the Divine imperative. Verse 2 is a blessing which introduces a new entity, a new concept which from this point on becomes the focus of the biblical narrative: the nation, specifically “the Nation of Israel”.
The joyous, nearly incredible news that a nation will emerge from the loins of Avraham, is tempered by the knowledge that a certain tension will always surround this nation. As this nation emerges, we learn that others will never be indifferent. The nation of Avraham’s children will never be “pareve” in the eyes of the world. They will always elicit some sort of reaction from others, always will serve as a source of blessing or a curse for others.
Furthermore, this blessing may be limiting: it is particular in nature, it is directed exclusively to the people who will become known as the Jewish People. In Avraham’s eyes, universal dreams may be challenged by particular nationalistic aspirations. Whereas Avraham has seen himself as a citizen of the world on a mission to help elevate all of mankind, his mission now becomes linked exclusively with this new entity, “the Children of Avraham.”
At this juncture, what are Avraham’s aspirations? Is his dream to start his own nation, or does he wish to impact the people of his hometown? Has his initial failure dissuaded him from continuing his original mission, or does he still dream of local success?
Avraham makes his journey to Israel but he doesn’t come alone. His partner Sarah (Sarai) accompanies him, as does Lot, his heir apparent. In addition, we are told of another group who follow their leader:
ספר בראשית פרק יב
(ה) וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָם אֶת שָׂרַי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת לוֹט בֶּן אָחִיו וְאֶת כָּל רְכוּשָׁם אֲשֶׁר רָכָשׁוּ וְאֶת הַנֶּפֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ בְחָרָן וַיֵּצְאוּ לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן וַיָּבֹאוּ אַרְצָה כְּנָעַן:
(5) He took his wife Sarai, his nephew Lot, all the possessions they had accumulated and the people they had made[2] (acquired) in Haran, and they set out for the land of Canaan[3], and they arrived there.
Avraham has an entourage, which is not all that unusual. What is interesting is that these are not people from Ur Kasdim (Aram Naharaim), they are people collected in Haran. They are not from his hometown, but from his latest temporary abode. In his hometown he seems to have had made no impact.
They arrive in Israel at a specific place, an intentional destination: Their first stop in the Land is at a place called Shechem[4]. The Ramban[5] points out that the “acts of the Father’s are a sign for the children”, for it is in Shechem that nationhood will emerge. This is where Dina is abused, and where the local residents offer the family of Israel to join destinies, to join them and form one nation. This offer is rejected, and a process is set in motion: A nation with its own unique history begins to chart its path, undertaking the long march to fulfill its particular, unique destiny. A nation, indeed; but at this point a small, vulnerable nation that rejects the benefits of assimilation into a strong, well-established local clan. This is a defining moment, a decision that crystallizes and forms the Nation of Israel.
Let us take a step back: Avraham’s great work in Haran, the monumental educational challenge he has undertaken, has been described by the Talmud as no less than the end of the dark ages:
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עבודה זרה דף ט/א
תנא דבי אליהו ששת אלפים שנה הוי העולם שני אלפים תוהו שני אלפים תורה שני אלפים ימות המשיח בעונותינו שרבו יצאו מהן מה שיצאו מהן שני אלפים תורה מאימת אי נימא ממתן תורה עד השתא ליכא כולי האי דכי מעיינת בהו תרי אלפי פרטי דהאי אלפא הוא דהואי אלא מואת הנפש אשר עשו בחרן וגמירי דאברהם בההיא שעתא בר חמשין ותרתי הוה כמה בצרן מדתני תנא ארבע מאה וארבעים ותמניא שנין הויין כי מעיינת ביה מהנפש אשר עשו בחרן עד מתן תורה
The Tanna debe Eliyahu taught: The world is to exist six thousand years; the first two thousand years are to be void; the next two thousand years are the period of the Torah, and the following two thousand years are the period of the Messiah. Through our many sins a number of these have already passed [and the Messiah is not yet here]. From when are the two thousand years of the Torah to be reckoned? Shall we say from the Giving of the Torah at Sinai? In that case, you will find that there are not quite two thousand years from then till now [i.e., the year four thousand after the Creation], for if you compute the years [from the Creation to the Giving of the Torah] you will find that they comprise two thousand and a part of the third thousand; the period is therefore to be reckoned from the time when Abraham and Sarah had gotten souls in Haran for we have it as a tradition that Abraham was at that time fifty-two years old. (Talmud Bavli Avoda Zara 9a)
Biblical chronology is an important key to understanding this gemara: Avraham was born in the year 1948 (from creation of the world). Therefore, when he was 52 years old the world was precisely 2000 year old, and at this point Avraham began teaching and attempting to influence the entire world. But what was the nature of the “Torah” that Avraham taught and practiced? There is a Talmudic discussion which examines the implications of tradition that Avraham “kept the Torah”:
תלמוד בבלי מסכת יומא דף כח/ב
אָמַר רַב, קִיֵּם אַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ אֶת כָּל הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, (בראשית כו) "עֵקֶב אֲשֶׁר שָׁמַע אַבְרָהָם בְּקֹלִי" [וְגוֹ']. אָמַר לֵיהּ, רַב שִׁימִי בַר חִיָּא לְרַב, וְאֵימָא שֶׁבַע מִצְוֹת? (ותו לא?) הָא הֲוַאִי נַמִי מִילָה. (אלא) וְאֵימָא שֶׁבַע מִצְוֹת וּמִילָה? אָמַר לֵיהּ, אִם כֵּן - "מִצְוֹתַי וְתוֹרֹתַי" לָמָּה לִי?. אָמַר (רב) [רָבָא], וְאִיתֵימָא רַב (אסי) [אַשִׁי], קִיֵּם אַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ אֲפִלּוּ עֵירוּבֵי תַבְשִׁילִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, "וְתוֹרֹתָי", אֶחָד דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה וְאֶחָד דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים:
Rab said: Our father Abraham kept the whole Torah[6], as it is said: Because that Abraham hearkened to My voice [kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws]. R. Shimi b. Hiyya said to Rab: Say, perhaps, that this refers to the seven laws? — Surely there was also that of circumcision! Then say that it refers to the seven laws and circumcision [and not to the whole Torah]? — If that were so, why does Scripture say: ‘My commandments and My laws’? Raba or R. Ashi said: Abraham, our father, kept even the law concerning the ‘eruv of the dishes,’ as it is said: ‘My Torahs’: one being the written Torah, the other the oral Torah. (Talmud Bavli Yoma 28b)
There are certain sources that would seem to maintain that Avraham and Sarah’s spiritual lifestyle was no different from our own. On the other hand, many authorities[7] prefer to read these sources for the symbolic[8] or deeper[9] understanding,[10] rather than in a literal way. The latter approach maintains that only after Sinai did people begin to observe the 613 commandments, but the forefathers’ acute spiritual perception and close relationship with God enabled them to fulfill the spirit of the entire Torah while not necessarily obeying the letter of the laws of the Torah as they became formulated at Sinai and thereafter. Thus, the Meshech Chochma explains that when the Talmud says Avraham kept Eruv Tavshilin, it doesn’t mean that he observed even the minutiae of halachic observance. Rather, what the Talmud means is that Avraham comprehended and fulfilled the philosophical concept that is the underpinning of this law. An Eruv Tavshilin enables us to cook for unexpected guests on a holiday which falls on the eve of Shabbat. This approach encapsulates the open personality of Avraham, always waiting for the unexpected guest,[11] who would be fed and bidden to make a blessing. To Avraham, the spirit of the law was as natural, clear and possessed of internal “spiritual logic” as our present practice and the accompanying text recited before the onset of a festival was to the rabbis who formulated it.
An alternative opinion resolves the question of Avraham’s observance with a much less complicated approach: Avraham was the first monotheist. He taught monotheism and the seven Noachide laws, [12] and that was the content of his spiritual world.[13]
All this being said, we know of one particular commandment which Avraham received and fulfilled, namely circumcision.
ספר תפארת שלמה על מועדים - לחג הסוכות
איתא בגמרא (יומא כח, ב) קיים אברהם אבינו כל התורה כולה עד שלא ניתנה. והקשו הראשונים למה לא קיים ג"כ מצות מילה תחלה. אך הנה ידוע כי אברהם אבינו ע"ה הי' מדת החסד וזה הי' מדתו להמשיך השפעות וחסדים לכל באי עולם בלי שום גבול. והנה כל זמן שלא מל את עצמו הי' לו איזה השתתפות עם בני דורו והי' יכול להוריק עליהם ברכה וחסד והאכילם והשקם וקרבם תחת כפני השכינה. אכן כאשר בא בברית המילה אח"כ נתעלה ונסתלק לו למעלה מהם ויראו מגשת אליו ע"כ א"א ע"ה בגודל טובו כי חפץ חסד הוא הנה ידע זאת מתחלה כי ענין קדושת המילה הוא כדי שעי"ז יעלה במדריגה גבוה ויבוא מדת החסד בבחי' גבול וצמצום אשר לא כן הי' דרכו מאז רק שיהי' החסד לכל בלי שום צמצום לכן נתעכב עם מצות מילה עד שיצטווה עלי' מהש"י. וזה שאמרו במד"ר אמר אברהם עד שלא מלתי היו עוברים ושבים באים אלי פי' גם העוברים עבירות ושבו בתשובה באו אלי לקרב אותם תחת כנפי השכינה ע"י ועכשיו אין לי עוד מדור והתקרבות עמהם. ולזה נסמך מיד אחר המילה ענין הפיכת סדום ולא יקומו רשעים במשפט הצדיקים כי חלץ לו מהם ואין מגין עליהם ומש"ה כולם נאבדו ולא קודם לכן כי מאז נתקדש מדת היסוד להריק ברכה רק על זרע קודש יחי"ס והן הנה האבות אברהם בחי' החסדים להשפיע רב טוב.
If Avraham fulfilled all the commandments of the Torah, there are many who have asked why Avraham didn’t perform circumcision prior to his being commanded. Prior to being circumcised Avraham had something in common with the people of his generation. He was able to reach out to them and shower them with blessings and kindness, to feed them and give them drink and to bring them close to the shekhina. However once he was circumcised he was elevated to a different level, and now people were afraid to come near him… and in place of kindness (chesed) now there were boundaries and strictness… (Tiferet Shlomo Moadim Sukkot)
Avraham’s basic approach was inclusive. His tent was open on all sides; he placed no limits, erected no boundaries[14]. In fact, The Meshech Chochma[15] sees this universalism as Avraham’s motivation to travel to Egypt. He went to Egypt at a time of drought, choosing Egypt not despite its reputation for corruption but precisely because of its reputation as a morally corrupt society. In Avraham’s worldview, if Egypt can be redeemed, the entire world will be elevated, and by a quantum leap. Avraham saw Egypt as a boundary, a spiritual and ethical border to be crossed and dismantled. This, like so much else in his biography, reflects a deep humanism: Avraham did not want to push away his wayward son Yishmael. He interceded on behalf of the inhabitants of Sodom, despite the knowledge that their beliefs and behavior contradicted everything he himself believed and practiced. A lesser man would have accepted God’s judgment and anticipated the annihilation of Sodom with satisfaction, a sense of moral superiority, perhaps a sense of validation. These people, after all, were the living antithesis to Avraham’s weltanschauung and to the message of morality and kindness he was working to spread. The destruction of Sodom would have made his job so much easier. But for Avraham, these were not evil, corrupt enemies of his faith. They were misguided people who simply had not yet found truth.
With the command to perform the Brit Milah Avraham’s life will change. There will now be a boundary between him and everyone else[16]. He will now be viewed even more suspiciously by his neighbors. In fact, the rabbis express their sensitivity to Avraham’s conflict between universalism and nationhood as a “hesitation” on Avraham’s part when he was commanded to perform circumcision.
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה מו פסקה ב,ג
אמר אם חביבה היא המילה מפני מה לא נתנה לאדם הראשון: אמר לו הקדוש ב"ה לאברהם דייך אני ואתה בעולם ואם אין את מקבל עליך לימול דיי לעולמי עד כאן ודייה לערלה עד כאן ודייה למילה שתהא עגומה עד כאן אמר עד שלא מלתי היו באים ומזדווגים לי תאמר משמלתי הן באין ומזדווגים לי אמר לו הקב"ה אברהם דייך שאני אלוהך דייך שאני פטרונך:
[Abraham] asked: ' If circumcision is so precious, why was it not given to Adam? ' Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to him: ‘Let it suffice thee that I and thou are in the world.’ If thou wilt not undergo circumcision, it is enough for My world to have existed until now, and it is enough for the uncircumcised state to have existed until now, and it is enough for circumcision to have been forlorn until now.’’ Said he: ' Before I circumcised myself, men came and joined me [in my new faith]. Will they come and join me when I am circumcised?’" ‘Abraham,’ said God to him, ' let it suffice thee that I am thy God; let it suffice thee that I am thy Patron, and not only for thee alone, but it is sufficient for My world that I am its God and its Patron.’ (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis 46:2,3)
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה מז פסקה י
אמר אברהם עד שלא מלתי היו העוברים והשבים באים אצלי תאמר משמלתי אינן באים אצלי אמר לו הקב"ה עד שלא מלת היו בני אדם באים אצלך עכשיו אני בכבודי בא ונגלה עליך הה"ד וירא אליו ה' באלוני ממרא:
Abraham said: ' Before I became circumcised, travellers used to visit me; now that I am circumcised, perhaps they will no longer visit me? ' Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to him: ' Before thou wast circumcised, uncircumcised mortals visited thee; now I in My glory will appear to thee.’ Hence it is written, And the Lord appeared unto him (Gen. XVIII, 1) (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis 47:10)
Amazingly enough, here Avraham hesitates.[17] When commanded to offer up his long-awaited son, his heir, the key to the fulfillment of all that God has promised him, Avraham marches forward like a knight of faith. But here, in this test, Avraham questions: If circumcision is so precious, why was it not given to Adam? Why isn’t this a universal command? Why is this command only being given to Avraham and his descendants? He worries that this new status will jeopardize his mission, setting him apart from those he has hoped to impact. He fears this will put an end to his stream of visitors. God’s response is telling: “I will visit you, and that is truly enough. Your relationship with Me is more important, and your mission is less universal and more particular than you know.”
Clearly, then, the Brit Milah is a test. The challenge may be heightened by the paradoxical nature of the command which he receives:
ספר בראשית פרק יז
(א) וַיְהִי אַבְרָם בֶּן תִּשְׁעִים שָׁנָה וְתֵשַׁע שָׁנִים וַיֵּרָא ה’ אֶל אַבְרָם וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אֲנִי אֵל שַׁדַּי הִתְהַלֵּךְ לְפָנַי וֶהְיֵה תָמִים: (ב) וְאֶתְּנָה בְרִיתִי בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ וְאַרְבֶּה אוֹתְךָ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד: (ג) וַיִּפֹּל אַבְרָם עַל פָּנָיו וַיְדַבֵּר אִתּוֹ אֱלֹהִים לֵאמֹר: (ד) אֲנִי הִנֵּה בְרִיתִי אִתָּךְ וְהָיִיתָ לְאַב הֲמוֹן גּוֹיִם: (ה) וְלֹא יִקָּרֵא עוֹד אֶת שִׁמְךָ אַבְרָם וְהָיָה שִׁמְךָ אַבְרָהָם כִּי אַב הֲמוֹן גּוֹיִם נְתַתִּיךָ: (ו) וְהִפְרֵתִי אֹתְךָ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד וּנְתַתִּיךָ לְגוֹיִם וּמְלָכִים מִמְּךָ יֵצֵאוּ: (ז) וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת בְּרִיתִי בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ לְדֹרֹתָם לִבְרִית עוֹלָם לִהְיוֹת לְךָ לֵאלֹהִים וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ: (ח) וְנָתַתִּי לְךָ וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ אֵת אֶרֶץ מְגֻרֶיךָ אֵת כָּל אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן לַאֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם וְהָיִיתִי לָהֶם לֵאלֹהִים: (ט) וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל אַבְרָהָם וְאַתָּה אֶת בְּרִיתִי תִשְׁמֹר אַתָּה וְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ לְדֹרֹתָם: (י) זֹאת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁמְרוּ בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ הִמּוֹל לָכֶם כָּל זָכָר: (יא) וּנְמַלְתֶּם אֵת בְּשַׂר עָרְלַתְכֶם וְהָיָה לְאוֹת בְּרִית בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם: (יב) וּבֶן שְׁמֹנַת יָמִים יִמּוֹל לָכֶם כָּל זָכָר לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם יְלִיד בָּיִת וּמִקְנַת כֶּסֶף מִכֹּל בֶּן נֵכָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִזַּרְעֲךָ הוּא: (יג) הִמּוֹל יִמּוֹל יְלִיד בֵּיתְךָ וּמִקְנַת כַּסְפֶּךָ וְהָיְתָה בְרִיתִי בִּבְשַׂרְכֶם לִבְרִית עוֹלָם: (יד) וְעָרֵל זָכָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִמּוֹל אֶת בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתוֹ וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מֵעַמֶּיהָ אֶת בְּרִיתִי הֵפַר:
(1) When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said, "I am God Almighty; walk before me and be blameless. (2) I will confirm my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers." (3) Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, (4) "As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. (5) No longer will you be called Avram ; your name will be Avraham, for I have made you a father of many nations. (6) I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. (7) I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. (8) The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God."
(9) Then God said to Avraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. (10) This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. (11) You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. (12) For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. (13) Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. (14) Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant." Bereishit 17:1-14
Avram is told that from now on his name will be Avraham, signifying that he will be a father of many nations -Av Hamon Goyim. This would seem to be the ultimate universal message: Not only will Avraham be a part of the larger universal existence, he will bring nations toward God. And in the next breath he is told to perform circumcision which creates boundaries and will forever separate Avraham and his descendents from all others. In one fell swoop, the universal vision and the narrow, parochial, particular approach. Apparently, Avraham is confused. How can he impact the entire world when he must first perform an act of self - mutilation that people will view as grotesque? Hachnasat Orchim, and Eruv Tavshilin (welcoming guests and making accommodations to feed them on holidays and Shabbat) were much easier.
Apparently, what Avraham still lacks is “holiness” – kedusha - which is literally rendered as “set apart”. This separateness is a new phase for Avraham, and not one to which he would have come without God’s command. This separateness may be seen as that which contradicts Avraham’s innate attribute of hesed, the attribute through which he has served God up to this point in his life.
How is he to reconcile hesed with kedusha? How is he to be a part of the world - involved, engaged, interested, even responsible for the world - and live a life of kedusha, set apart, indelibly marked by “differentness”? How will he and his descendents reconcile living in a mundane world with their unique destiny and closeness to God?
The answer presents itself later on in the text, as Avraham finds himself enmeshed in his next paradoxical challenge: the Akeida, the Binding of Isaac. Here, too, logic is defeated. If Yitzchak is to be offered, how can he effectively be the living progeny destined to carry on the family line? Avraham and Yitzchak nonetheless set out to fulfill God’s command, and they bring two other people along. Our Sages[18] identify them as Yishmael and Eliezer - Avraham’s first son, and man who was like a son. Rashi, citing the Midrash, tells us that as they approach the appointed place Avraham sees something that appears to him to be ethereal, but he is unsure if it is real or surreal, physical or spiritual. He sees a cloud, he sees the shechina; he turns to question Yishamel and Eliezer, but they see only the mountain. He turns to Yitzchak, who sees the cloud, tied as if by rope to the mountain. Avraham then turns to the other two and says, “Wait here with the chamor (donkey).” My teacher Rabbi Soloveitchik pointed out that at times we neglect the rest of the verse:
ספר בראשית פרק כב
(ד) בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי וַיִּשָּׂא אַבְרָהָם אֶת עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא אֶת הַמָּקוֹם מֵרָחֹק:(ה) וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָהָם אֶל נְעָרָיו שְׁבוּ לָכֶם פֹּה עִם הַחֲמוֹר וַאֲנִי וְהַנַּעַר נֵלְכָה עַד כֹּה וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם:
(4) Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place far away. (5) And Abraham said to his young men, ‘Stay here with the donkey; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come back to you.’ Bereishit 22:4,5
Those last words, “and come back to you”, cannot be ignored. Avraham encapsulates a unique religious experience in this short statement, and we should take note of every element: This awesome religious experience would not be complete until Avraham came down the mountain and shared with others his epiphany, his feelings and his enlightenment. Avraham would have the greatest impact on the two men he left behind only after parting ways, dedicating himself to the more particular religious experience at the summit, and then returning to their company. Similarly, for the Jewish People to have an impact on the world, we must first disengage, separate ourselves, and fully explore our unique relationship with God. There will be times when we must wrest ourselves away from our deep involvement, even our responsibility for the world. We must climb lofty mountains, even engage in divinely-mandated, though seemingly paradoxical, behavior. But we must always remember that eventually we must come down from the mountain, re-engage, return to the people that we left at the foot of the mountain. We must find the language and establish the relationship that will allow us to share with them what we learned at the summit.
Avraham learns to resolve the tension. Both the universal and the particular are important, but they are intertwined. The way we can accomplish our universal responsibility is by first becoming separate, different - as holy as we can possibly become. Only this will enable us to fulfill our mission of tikun olam, to enlighten, to educate, to heal and repair the world.
What is interesting is that the Nefesh asher asu b’Haran, the people “acquired” in Haran,[19], the people attracted by a spirituality devoid of holiness, all disappeared. In fact, the prototypical outreach that Avraham was famous for, his open tent and encouraging people to bless God, is recorded after the circumcision was performed.
ספר בראשית פרק כא
(לג) וַיִּטַּע אֵשֶׁל בִּבְאֵר שָׁבַע וַיִּקְרָא שָׁם בְּשֵׁם ה’ אֵל עוֹלָם:
33. And Abraham planted a grove in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God. (Bereishit 21:33)
רש"י על בראשית פרק כא פסוק לג
(לג) אשל - רב ושמואל חד אמר פרדס להביא ממנו פירות לאורחים בסעודה. וחד אמר פונדק לאכסניא ובו כל מיני פירות…
ויקרא שם וגו' - על ידי אותו אשל נקרא שמו של הקב"ה אלוה לכל העולם לאחר שאוכלים ושותים אמר להם ברכו למי שאכלתם משלו סבורים אתם שמשלי אכלתם משל מי שאמר והיה העולם אכלתם (סוטה י):
‘A grove’ - Rav and Shmuel, one said an orchard to bring fruits for guests’ meals, and one said an inn for guests and it had all kinds of produce.
‘And called there’ – he used the eshel to call God master of the universe: After people would eat and drink, Avraham would instruct them to bless the One who provides food. He would say, “You think the food came from me? It came from He who spoke and caused the world to exist. (Rashi Bereishit 21:33)
The house of Avraham and Sarah was both open to all, yet set apart; universal and separate at one and the same time. Only now were they able to impact others in a permanent way.
Our world, then, is not so different from that of Avraham and Sarah after all. The world still lacks holiness. By observing the commandments, both those we understand and those that seem to us paradoxical, we add holiness to our lives. We set ourselves on a higher rung, as it were. And as holiness accrues, we will find our spiritual, ethical and social abilities exponentially increased, and thus our ability to effect change and fix a broken world.
[1] Though there is a consensus in Rabbinic thought that Avraham was tested ten times, there is no consensus as to what the ten tests were.
[2] Rashi, in his first interpretation, tells us that these were the men and women whom Avraham and Sara (respectively) taught and “converted”. However, in a second explanation --which Rashi labels “p’shat” - the straightforward meaning of the text – Rashi explains that these were the people that were acquired; i.e., slaves and members of the household staff.
רש"י על בראשית פרק יב פסוק ה
אשר עשו בחרן - שהכניסן תחת כנפי השכינה אברהם מגייר את האנשים ושרה מגיירת הנשים ומעלה עליהם הכתוב כאלו עשאום (לכך כתיב אשר עשו) ופשוטו של מקרא עבדים ושפחות שקנו להם כמו (שם לא) עשה את כל הכבוד הזה (לשון קנין) (במדבר כד) וישראל עושה חיל לשון קונה וכונס:
[3] Previously Avraham’s father Terach started to make his way to Canaan. The Seforno (12:5), posits that both Avraham and Terach choose Canaan as their destination because it was known as a spiritual place.
ספורנו עה"ת ספר בראשית פרק יב פסוק ה
ויצאו ללכת ארצה כנען. שהיתה מפורסמת אצלם לארץ מוכנת להתבוננות ולעבודת האל ית':
[4] Bereishit 12:6
[5] Ramban Bereishit 12:6
[6] The Midrash, which takes the same basic approach, nonetheless states that Avraham did not keep Shabbat. See Midrash Rabbah Bereishit 11:7:
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה יא פסקה ז
ר' יוחנן בשם ר' יוסי בר חלפתא אמר אברהם שאין כתוב בו שמירת שבת ירש את העולם במדה שנאמר (בראשית יב) קום התהלך בארץ לארכה ולרחבה וגו' אבל יעקב שכתוב בו שמירת שבת שנאמר (שם לג) ויחן את פני העיר נכנס עם דמדומי חמה וקבע תחומין מבעוד יום ירש את העולם שלא במדה שנאמר (שם כח) והיה זרעך כעפר הארץ וגו':
R. Johanan said in R. Jose's name: Abraham, who is not reported to have kept the Sabbath, inherited the world in [limited] measure, as it is written, ‘Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it’ (Gen. XIII, 17). But Jacob, of whom the keeping of the Sabbath is mentioned, viz. And he rested [E.V. ’encamped’] before the city (ib. XXXIII, 18), Which means that he entered at twilight and set boundaries before sunset,6 inherited the world without measure, [as it is written], And thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, etc. (ib. XXVIII, 14).
[7] The Ohr Hachaim (Bereishit 49:3) maintains that the forefathers only kept laws that he found useful, or more precisely would not keep lows that they found an impediment to them.
אור החיים על בראשית פרק מט פסוק ג
והאבות לצד חביבותם בה' וחשקם באושר עליון קיימו הכל כאומרו (לעיל כו ה) עקב אשר שמע וגו', ואמרו ז"ל (יומא כח:) קיים אברהם אבינו אפילו עירוב תבשילין, ואת בניו הקים תחתיו להרויח תועלת המצות ועסק התורה, אבל במקום שהיו רואים תועלת דבר ההצלחה להם, כמו שתאמר יעקב כשהרגיש בהצלחתו בנשואי ב' האחיות העלים עין מרווח הנמשך מקיום המצוה ההיא, כיון שאין לו עונש אם לא יקיימנה, כל עוד שלא נתנה תורה, ומה גם אם נאמר שהיו עושים על פי הדיבור, כי האבות נביאים היו (מגילה יד) וה' אמר להם לעשות כן:
[8] The Shem MiShmuel understands that Yaakov fulfilled the commandments – even if he didn’t quite perform them. He explains that commandments have bodies and souls, and Avraham was attuned to the souls and therefore didn’t need the “body” of the physical performance.
ספר שם משמואל פרשת בהר - פסח שני
ובודאי גם אברהם קיים ענין תפילין אבל הי' בלבוש אחר כי באשר היו יחידים לא הוצרכה ההתאחדות ע"י המעשה, והי' לכל אחד מעשה וכלי מיוחד.
[9] The Noam Elimelech Parshat Dvarim, states that Avraham had certainly achieved the spiritual perfection of someone who had performed all the commandments.
ספר נועם אלימלך - פרשת הדברים
דאיתא בגמרא קיים אברהם אבינו עליו השלום כו' אפילו עירוב תבשילין והיינו שהיה מקדש ומטהר את כל רמ"ח אבריו ושס"ה גידיו כל אבר במצוה השייך לה דכל מצוה ומצוה יש לה עולם בפני עצמה ואברהם אבינו על ידי שהיה עובד השם יתברך מאהבה השיג את כל מצוה ומצוה בשורשה ואפילו מצוה דרבנן יש לה שורש ועיקר בדאורייתא בעולם המיוחד לה
[10] The Degel Machane Efraim (Aharaie Mot SV Vod, and in Ekev SV Vrak) understands that the ultimate objective of the commandments is the understanding that there is One God, and the rejection of all pagan entities, and that Avraham fulfilled with a vengeance, he was cognizant iof this truth all his days. A similar idea is found in Moar Vshemesh Rimzey first day of Sukkot.
ספר דגל מחנה אפרים - פרשת אחרי ד"ה עוד
וכל מצוה ומצוה שייך לשורש נשמות של ישראל והוא היודע ומבין זה והוא שורש השרשים ואין עוד מלבדו ולכך קיים אברהם אבינו כל התורה כולה עד שלא ניתנה (קידושין פ"ב.) כי הגיע לאמיתת אלוהות כי כל המצוות הם שער ומבוא לבא אל אמיתת אלוהות שהוא אנכי ולא יהיה לך כמו שכתבתי מזה כבר במקום אחר אך זעירין אינון שיוכלו לבא אל אמיתת אלוהות
ספר דגל מחנה אפרים - פרשת עקב ד"ה רק
ולהם לא היה צריך התורה להכתב כלל אך מה שנכתב כל התורה הוא לדידן שאין לנו מוחין כהם ולכך הוצרך להכתב כל התורה והמצוות שעל ידם השיגו בחינת אנכי אבל האבות ידעו הנקודה אמיתית שכל התורה והמצוות תלוין בה,
ספר מאור ושמש - רמזי יום א' של סוכות ד"ה או
אמנם הצדיק אשר כבר הגיע למעלת הדביקות באין סוף ב"ה והוא קשור במחשבתו בכל עת, עיקר עבודתו הוא במחשבה כמאמרם ז"ל קיים אברהם אבינו כל התורה כולה עד שלא ניתנה, הגם שלא מצאנו שעשה בפועל מעשה המצות כהנחת תפילין ועשית סוכה וכדומיהן, מכל מקום המשיך על עצמו פנימיות הקדושות שרומזת אליהם המעשים ההם על ידי מחשבתו הקדושה אשר היתה דבוקה באין סוף ב"ה.
[11] See Rashi’s comments to Berishet 21:33 where he explains that one of the reasons for Avraham’s magnanimous hosting of guests aside from imitatio dei is his desire to teach people to bless God and thank God.
רש"י על בראשית פרק כא פסוק לג
(לג) אשל - רב ושמואל חד אמר פרדס להביא ממנו פירות לאורחים בסעודה. וחד אמר פונדק לאכסניא ובו כל מיני פירות. ומצינו לשון נטיעה באהלים שנאמר (דניאל יא) ויטע אהלי אפדנו:
ויקרא שם וגו' - על ידי אותו אשל נקרא שמו של הקב"ה אלוה לכל העולם לאחר שאוכלים ושותים אמר להם ברכו למי שאכלתם משלו סבורים אתם שמשלי אכלתם משל מי שאמר והיה העולם אכלתם (סוטה י):
[12] The Arvei Nahal understands that all 613 commandments are subsumed within the seven Noachide laws.
ספר ערבי נחל - פרשת תולדות
דע, כי כל מצוה כלולה מכל התרי"ג, וא"כ בכל מצוה יש כלל ופרט כי בכח יש בה כל התרי"ג, ובפועל הוא פרטיותה לבד, ומיד שנברא האדם נצטווה בשבע מצות וקיימו אותם האבות ויתר צדיקי הדורות עד מתן תורה וכל התרי"ג כלולים בכל מצוה מהם. ואם תקשה א"כ האבות לא הוציאו הכללות מן הכח אל הפועל, דע שהוציאו והוציאו, בכח הכנתם ר"ל שהיו דבוקים בו ית"ש והיו ששים ושמחים לעשות רצון קונם בכל מה שיצוום והיו מוכנים לזה בתכלית ההכנה בשמחה רבה,
[13] See Rambam Laws of Idolatry chapter 1
[14] According to the Meshech Chochma, Yaakov personifies setting up boundaries, to prevent assimilation. Hence Yaakov keeps even Eruv Tehumin.
[15] Meshech Chochma Bereishit 33:18.
משך חכמה על בראשית פרק לג פסוק יח
והציור בזה. דבאמת כמו שלהחי די במזון מהצומח והמדבר ניזון מהחי כן נפש המשכלת מבני נכר די לו בשבע מצות אולם נפש הישראלי מקורו ממקום גבוה חלק ד' ממעל אם אין לו כל התורה בכללה ופרטה אז אינו בחיותו. כי עם הישראלי המה מעון ומכון לאלקות בעולם השפל ואין השכינה שורה אלא באלפי רבבות ישראל (יבמות סד). וזה סו"ד מה שאמרו ש"ס רבוא. (אולי צ"ל ס' רבוא אותיות. ע' זוהר חדש סוף שה"ש) המה כללות הפרצופים ולכן אברהם חפש להפיץ שיטתו ודיעותיו באלקות לכל באי עולם באשר חשב כי הוא יחידי ואח"כ ראה כי ישמעאל יצא ממנו ולכן נטע אשל להכניס כל באי עולם לברית ואמרו בריש עו"ג (דף ט) שני אלפים תורה מוהנפש אשר עשו בחרן דשעבידו לאורייתא. וגם היה זה בכוונה שהלך למצרים מקום החכמה והחרטומים לפלפל ולקרבם לשיטותיו באחדות ובתורה. לא כן יעקב ראה שמטתו שלמה (ויקרא רבה לו-ד) ובזרעו די שיהיו מעון ומרכבה לשכינה וכמו שהבטיחו וראה שה' נצב עליו ראה להיפוך כי בניו יהיו נפרדים מעמים אחרים מוגבלים בתחום ואף ללבן חותנו הניחו בטעותו וכעס על רחל שגנבה התרפים להבדילו מעו"ג כן במצרים היו יושבים בארץ גושן נפרדים מהעמים. וכן לדורות באומה אין מקבלין גרים בימי דוד ושלמה (יבמות כד:) שזה כהכרח או למקנא לגדולתם וזה מליצתם שאברהם קיים עירובי תבשילין (יומא כח:) להכניס אורחים ולקבל גרים תחת כנפי השכינה אבל לא קבע תחומין שמא ימנע אחד מלבוא לשמוע דיעותיו. לא כן יעקב קבע תחומין להגביל ולתחום בין עם ישראל לעמים.
[16] See the comments of the Beit Halevi Bereishit 17:1
בית הלוי על בראשית פרק יז פסוק א
והנה איתא במדרש פרשה זו (נ"ו תרג) שאמר אברהם עד שלא מלתי היו באים הכותים ומזדווגים לי תאמר משמלתי יהיו באים ומזדווגים לי א"ל הקב"ה די שאני פטרונך. הרי מבואר כמש"כ דהמילה נותנת הבדל גדול בין ישראל לכותים והיא גורמת שנאה ביניהם והשיב לו הקב"ה די לך שאני פטרונך ולא יועילו ולא יפסידו לך לא בקרבתם ולא בשנאתם אחרי שאני אוהבך,
[17] The Alshich Hakadosh notes that here because Avraham senses that others would be impacted Avraham hesitates, but with regards to the Binding if Yitzchak, where only he will suffer he doesn’t hesitate.
ספר תורת משה על בראשית - פרק יח פסוק ב-ג
והנה ראוי להעיר מה ראה על ככה אברהם לטעון נגד מאמרו יתברך, מי שלא פצה את פיו באמור אליו ה' קח נא את בנך את יחידך כו' לאמר לו הלא אתה אמרת כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע, איך בציווי זה בקש טענה ליפטר, וגם מה לו ולעוברים ושבים ערביים ערלים נגד צוויו יתברך. …
ונבא אל הענין והוא כי בעל המאמר הוקשה לו אומרו וירא אליו ולא אמר אל אברהם. על כן אמר כי עברו דברים בין אברהם ובינו יתברך, כי אברהם בענותנותו היה חש יותר על קיום העולם מהנוגע אל עצמו, על כן על אומרו יתברך קח נא את בנך כו' לא דבר מאומה. אך על ענין המילה להיותה דבר זר בעיני ההמון, באומרם היתכן ברא אלהים אדם שיחשוב לבעל מום עד החסיר מאשר ברא אלהים לשיהיה שלם.
[18] See Rashi ad loc.
[19] See Meshech Chochma Bereishit 21:33 and the sources he cites.
משך חכמה על בראשית פרק כא פסוק לג
(לג) ויקרא שם בשם ה' אל עולם - יתכן דהוי כמו דכתיב לעולם, דקודם שנולד יצחק ופרסם אברהם מציאות השם והשגחתו הפרטיות ואחדותו שהוא בלתי מושג אם מת הלא נשכח כל לימודיו ועיקריו וכמו שאמרו במדרש שהנפש אשר עשו בחרן חזרו לסורן, (ע' פרקי דר"א פ' כט) אולם כאשר נולד יצחק אשר הבטיח השי"ת והקימותי להיות לך לאלקים ולזרעך אחריך וכדאמרו יבמות ק: המיוחס אחריך וידע שהוא ינחיל הדיעות האמיתיות ויפרסם אלקותו לכן אמר שהוא עכשיו אל לעולם ולא יופסק ידיעתו יתברך לדור דור והבן.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
New Shiur Noach
Noach 5769
The Raven- Nevermore?
Rabbi Ari D. Kahn
© 2008
…"Prophet!" said I, "thing of evil! — prophet still, if bird or devil! —Whether Tempter sent, or whether tempest tossed thee here ashore,Desolate yet all undaunted, on this desert land enchanted —On this home by horror haunted — tell me truly, I implore —Is there — is there balm in Gilead— tell me — tell me, I implore!" Quoth the Raven, "Nevermore."
The Raven, by Edgar Allan Poe[1]
In the aftermath of the destruction, as Noach floats along on his Ark, the waters have become eerily still, and a strange silence has replaced the angry, deadly, destructive storm. Now the Torah reports that Noach and all of creation have been remembered:
ספר בראשית פרק ח
(א) וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹקים אֶת נֹחַ וְאֵת כָּל הַחַיָּה וְאֶת כָּל הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר אִתּוֹ בַּתֵּבָה וַיַּעֲבֵר אֱלֹקים רוּחַ עַל הָאָרֶץ וַיָּשֹׁכּוּ הַמָּיִם:
(1) But the Almighty remembered Noach and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark, and the Almighty sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded. (Bereishit 8)
The name of God utilized in this section is Elokim. The connotation of this name is “God of Judgment”,[2] as opposed to “God of Mercy”. We might have thought that a “harsh and angry God” punished humankind and then a kind (albeit perhaps fickle) God changed his mind, but the Torah informs us that now that judgment has been meted out, Elokim, the very same aspect of Judgment, remembers Noach. At the end of 40 days Noach opens the window and sends forth a raven:
ספר בראשית פרק ח
(ו) וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וַיִּפְתַּח נֹחַ אֶת חַלּוֹן הַתֵּבָה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה: (ז) וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הָעֹרֵב וַיֵּצֵא יָצוֹא וָשׁוֹב עַד יְבשֶׁת הַמַּיִם מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ:
(6) After forty days Noach opened the window he had made in the ark (7) and sent out a raven, and it kept flying back and forth until the water had dried up from the earth.
The raven suffers from a negative reputation, associated in both Rabbinic and general Western literature with demonic forces[3]. In the unforgettable words of Edgar Allan Poe, quoted above:
…"Prophet!" said I, "thing of evil! — prophet still, if bird or devil![4]
While we can leave it to scholars of American Poetry to reveal Poe’s sources of information and attitude, the negativity toward the raven apparently goes all the way back to chapter 8 of Bereishit. But why the antagonism? What dastardly deed did the raven commit to deserve this reputation? Compare the raven to the dove, which is regarded as a loving, faithful, loyal harbinger of peace. The contrast is stark – as stark as black verses white. While in fact the raven is dark and the dove is white, can the Torah actually ascribe such significance to pigmentation? Let us continue the story and see what happens with the dove.
(ח) וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הַיּוֹנָה מֵאִתּוֹ לִרְאוֹת הֲקַלּוּ הַמַּיִם מֵעַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה: (ט) וְלֹא מָצְאָה הַיּוֹנָה מָנוֹחַ לְכַף רַגְלָהּ וַתָּשָׁב אֵלָיו אֶל הַתֵּבָה כִּי מַיִם עַל פְּנֵי כָל הָאָרֶץ וַיִּשְׁלַח יָדוֹ וַיִּקָּחֶהָ וַיָּבֵא אֹתָהּ אֵלָיו אֶל הַתֵּבָה: (י) וַיָּחֶל עוֹד שִׁבְעַת יָמִים אֲחֵרִים וַיֹּסֶף שַׁלַּח אֶת הַיּוֹנָה מִן הַתֵּבָה: (יא) וַתָּבֹא אֵלָיו הַיּוֹנָה לְעֵת עֶרֶב וְהִנֵּה עֲלֵה זַיִת טָרָף בְּפִיהָ וַיֵּדַע נֹחַ כִּי קַלּוּ הַמַּיִם מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ: (יב) וַיִּיָּחֶל עוֹד שִׁבְעַת יָמִים אֲחֵרִים וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הַיּוֹנָה וְלֹא יָסְפָה שׁוּב אֵלָיו עוֹד:
(8) Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground. (9) But the dove could find no place to set its feet because there was water over all the surface of the earth; so it returned to Noach in the ark. He reached out his hand and took the dove and brought it back to himself in the ark. (10) He waited seven more days and again sent out the dove from the ark. (11) When the dove returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf! Then Noach knew that the water had receded from the earth. (12) He waited seven more days and sent the dove out again, but this time it did not return to him. (Bereishit 8)
A careful reading of the verses brings several problems to light: While the objective of the dove’s mission is clearly stated, “to see if the water had receded”, the text does not reveal the motivation for sending the raven. While the juxtaposition of the two birds might suggest a common mission, the lack of explanation for the raven’s mission is nonetheless striking. This leads to additional questions about the raven: We don’t know why specifically the raven was chosen or if the mission was successful or aborted. Was this Noach’s idea, or was he commanded to send the raven out? Did Noach perhaps seek permission or approval for his initiative? The text is silent.
When we compare the two verses which describe the sending of the raven and dove respectively, we notice a second difference: When Noach sends the dove, the word used is מֵאִתּוֹ me’ito: literally rendered, he sent the dove “from himself” (an idiom that is difficult to translate). The reader is left with the impression that Noach had a close relationship with this dove – perhaps it was his personal pet. This sort of modifier is totally absent in the case of the raven.
The dove’s mission was successfully completed when it returned with the olive branch in its beak, creating the enduring image of peace. But what of the raven? Why was it sent and how did it fare? The Chizzkuni suggests an ominous mandate for the raven:
חזקוני על בראשית פרק ח פסוק ז
(ז) וישלח את הערב - לפי שדרכו לאכול נבלות ואם קלו המים ימצא מתי מבול מושלכים על פני שפת המים.
The raven was sent because its nature is to eat carcasses, and if the water subsided, it would find corpses strewn on the shore. (Chizzkuni Bereishit 8:7)
In contrast to the olive branch in the mouth of the dove, eternal symbol of peace, we have a vivid image of the predatory, carnivorous raven descending upon corpses, perhaps even mutilating one to bring something back to Noach. The image persists even though the raven apparently fails to even leave the immediate vicinity of the Ark – and doesn’t bring back any flesh. While the Chizzkuni’s may be the correct reading of the text and of Noach’s motivation for sending the raven, we are still baffled as to why this is not stated explicitly – namely that the raven was also sent to see if the water had subsided. This, coupled with the other outstanding textual oddity – the dove described as having been sent “from him” - leaves us searching for the deeper meaning of the narrative. Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehudah Berlin (“The Netziv”) in his Torah commentary Ha’amek Davar[5] raises some important questions: Why were the raven and dove singled out? There are many birds that fly farther and better then these two. Furthermore, who gave Noach permission to release these birds prior to the time when all the other inhabitants of the Ark would be released? The Netziv theorizes that these two birds were not of the “two by two” brought to the Ark, rather they were Noach’s pets. With this suggestion, the Netziv solves one problem, but exchanges it for another: While we may now know why Noach was permitted to send these birds, we don’t know how he brought them to the Ark in the first place.
The Ohr Hachaim (Hakadosh) also questions why the raven was sent, but rejects the suggestion that it was in order to check the water level: The Torah surely would have stated this, as it does subsequently regarding the dove’s mission. Rather, in keeping with a Talmudic tradition,[6] the Ohr Hachaim reveals why the raven was sent: because Noach didn’t want it around. The Talmud suggests that the raven was cast out because it broke protocol and had relations on the Ark. While the dove was sent on a reconnaissance mission, the raven was simply expelled. The raven, for his part, refused to leave.
The Talmud recounts that the raven lodges a complaint: He accuses Noach of acting with cruelty and prejudice, for his expulsion would result in the extinction of the species[7]. In fact, that is just one of many accusations the raven puts forth:
עין יעקב על מסכת סנהדרין קח ב
"וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הָעֹרֵב" - אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ, תְּשׁוּבָה נִצַּחַת הֱשִׁיבוֹ עוֹרֵב לְנֹחַ. אָמַר לוֹ, רַבְּךָ שׂוֹנְאֵנִי, וְאַתָּה שְׂנֵאתַנִי, רַבְּךָ שׂוֹנְאֵנִי - "מִן הַטְּהוֹרִים שִׁבְעָה, מִן הַטְּמֵאִים שְׁנַיִם". וְאַתָּה שְׂנֵאתַנִי - שֶׁאַתָּה מֵנִיחַ מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה, וְשׁוֹלֵחַ מִמִּין שְׁנַיִם, אִם פָּגַע בִּי שַׂר חַמָּה אוֹ שַׂר צִנָּה, (ומת) לֹא נִמְצָא עוֹלָם חָסֵר בְּרִיָּה אַחַת?!
“And he sent forth a raven.” Resh Lakish said: The raven gave Noach a triumphant retort. It said to him, ‘Thy Master hateth me, and thou hatest me. Thy Master hateth me — [since He commanded] seven [pairs to be taken] of the clean [creatures], but only two of the unclean. Thou hatest me — seeing that thou leavest the species of which there are seven, and sendest one of which there are only two. Should the angel of heat or of cold smite me, would not the world be short of one kind? (Talmud Sanhedrin 108b)
The Talmud describes the raven as having a winning argument. He accuses both Noach and God of hating him: God had shown an obvious preference for other species, commanding Noach to preserve seven of each. And surely it would have been more prudent for Noach to send a bird from one of the species of which more than two of a kind had been on board the Ark.
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה לג פסקה ה
(ה) ויהי מקץ ארבעים יום ויפתח נח הדא מסייעא לההוא דא"ר אבא בר כהנא חלון וישלח את העורב הה"ד (תהלים קה) שלח חשך ויחשיך ויצא יצא ושוב ר' יודן בשם ר' יודה ב"ר סימון התחיל משיבו תשובות א"ל מכל בהמה חיה ועוף שיש כאן אין אתה משלח אלא לי א"ל מה צורך לעולם בך לא לאכילה לא לקרבן
“And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noach opened the halon [e.v. ‘window’] of the Ark.” This supports the view that it was a window [trapdoor]. “and he sent forth a raven”: thus it is written, He sent darkness, and it was dark” (Ps. CV, 28). “And it went forth to and fro (yatzo va’shov). R. Judan said in the name of R. Judah b. R. Simon: It began arguing with him: 'Of all the birds that thou hast here thou sendest none but me!’ ‘What need then has the world of thee?' he retorted; 'For food? For a sacrifice[8]?’ (Midrash Rabbah 33:5)
Perhaps Noach sees the world through utilitarian eyes: Either something can be used or it has no value. If a raven can’t be eaten and can’t be used as an offering, the world simply doesn’t need it.
Then the raven goes even further and hurls a bizarre accusation:
וְעוֹד אָמַר לוֹ, שֶׁמָּא לְאִשְׁתִּי אַתָּה צָרִיךְ? אָמַר לוֹ, רָשָׁע, בַּמֻּתָּר לִי, נֶאֱסַר לִי, בַּנֶּאֱסַר לִי - לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן?! וּמְנָא לָן דְּנֶאֶסְרוּ, (עליו)? דִּכְתִיב, (בראשית ו) "וּבָאתָ אֶל הַתֵּבָה אַתָּה וּבָנֶיךָ וְאִשְׁתְּךָ וּנְשֵׁי בָנֶיךָ אִתָּךְ". וּכְתִיב, (שם ח) "צֵא מִן הַתֵּבָה אַתָּה וְאִשְׁתְּךָ וּבָנֶיךָ וּנְשֵׁי בָנֶיךָ אִתָּךְ". וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, מִכָּאן [אָמְרוּ], שֶׁנֶּאֶסְרוּ בְּתַשְׁמִישׁ הַמִּטָּה.
Or perhaps thou desirest my mate!’ — ‘Thou evil one!’ he exclaimed; ‘even that which is [usually] permitted me has [now] been forbidden: how much more so that which is [always] forbidden me!’ And whence do we know that they were forbidden? — From the verse, And thou shalt enter into the Ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and the wives of thy sons with thee; whilst further on it is written, Go forth from the Ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons’ wives with thee. Whereon R. Johanan observed: From this we deduce that cohabitation had been forbidden. (Talmud Sanhedrin 108b)
The raven accuses Noach of fancying his spouse; Noach honors the accusation with a response, proving the raven’s charge outrageous: If, while on the Ark, he has maintained abstinence from his own wife, how much more so would he avoid intimacy with the raven’s spouse, who is always off limits! What could have made the raven construe the situation in this manner? The Talmud portrays this as a case of projection. The raven was one of three who broke boundaries on the ark and engaged in illicit sexual behavior:
תָּנוּ רַבָּנָן, שְׁלֹשָׁה שִׁמְּשׁוּ בַּתֵּבָה, וְכֻלָּם לָקוּ; כֶּלֶב, וְעוֹרֵב, וְחָם. כֶּלֶב - נִקְשָׁר. עוֹרֵב - רוֹקֵק. חָם - לָקָה בְּעוֹרוֹ.
Our Rabbis taught: Three copulated in the ark, and they were all punished — the dog, the raven, and Ham. The dog was doomed to be tied, the raven expectorates [his seed into his mate's mouth]. And Ham was smitten in his skin. (Talmud Sanhedrin 108b)
Noach’s perspective of the raven is negative, but of the three transgressors, surely the one who bore the most responsibility was Ham, though some commentaries suggest that only after seeing the raven engaging in this behavior did Ham “heat up[9]” and follow suit. While Noach doesn’t have much use for the raven, seeing him as dark and devoid of utility, he also may not have much use for his son Ham, whose outrageous and immoral behavior in the following verses leads Noach to cast a dire curse upon one of Ham’s sons. [10] In citing Ham’s punishment by affliction of the skin, the analogy between Ham and the raven is drawn on more than one level, and we return to the theme of pigment. Later in the narrative we are also told that one of Ham’s children is Kush – which means black.
Noach sees the raven as a symbol of the darkness and cruelty that surround him and that have led to the massive, nearly total destruction of the world and its inhabitants[11]. Noach believes that God has abandoned the world[12]. God’s kindness has disappeared and the attribute of Elokim[13] reigns. For his first overture in the ante-deluvian world Noach sends forth a symbol of cruelty and darkness. Only later does he explore the possibility of kindness, loyalty and peace, sending the white dove which represents God’s merciful and kind attributes, even with it’s name (the Hebrew word yona is composed of three of the four letters of the Divine Name denoting omnipresence). Noach rejects the raven, casts it away, and identifies with the dove that he sends “me’ito” – of or from himself.
There is, however, someone who does not concur with Noach’s judgment and attitude toward the raven: God, the Creator of this dark, maligned creature.
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה לג פסקה ה
רבי ברכיה בשם רבי אבא בר כהנא אמר אמר לו הקב"ה קבלו שעתיד העולם להצטרך לו אמר לו אימתי אמר לו עד יבשת המים מעל הארץ עתיד צדיק אחד לעמוד ולייבש את העולם ואני מצריכו לו הה"ד (מלכים א יז) והעורבים מביאים לו לחם ובשר בבקר ולחם ובשר בערב
R. Berekiah said in R. Abba's name: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him [Noach]: ‘Take it back, because the world will need it in the future.’ ' When? ' he asked. ’ When the waters dry off from on the earth ' (ib.). He replied: ‘A righteous man will arise and dry up the world, and will cause him to have need of them [the ravens],’ as it is written, And the ravens (‘orvim) brought him bread and flesh, etc. (I Kings XVII, 6). (Midrash Rabbah 33:5)
This Midrash refers to an episode that we may consider an inverse of the flood – a time of drought. The raven comes into its’ own, as it were, and rises to the occasion.
מלכים א פרק יז
(א) וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלִיָּהוּ הַתִּשְׁבִּי מִתֹּשָׁבֵי גִלְעָד אֶל אַחְאָב חַי יְקֹוָק אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר עָמַדְתִּי לְפָנָיו אִם יִהְיֶה הַשָּׁנִים הָאֵלֶּה טַל וּמָטָר כִּי אִם לְפִי דְבָרִי: ס
(ב) וַיְהִי דְבַר יְקֹוָק אֵלָיו לֵאמֹר: (ג) לֵךְ מִזֶּה וּפָנִיתָ לְּךָ קֵדְמָה וְנִסְתַּרְתָּ בְּנַחַל כְּרִית אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן: (ד) וְהָיָה מֵהַנַּחַל תִּשְׁתֶּה וְאֶת הָעֹרְבִים צִוִּיתִי לְכַלְכֶּלְךָ שָׁם: (ה) וַיֵּלֶךְ וַיַּעַשׂ כִּדְבַר יְקֹוָק וַיֵּלֶךְ וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּנַחַל כְּרִית אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן: (ו) וְהָעֹרְבִים מְבִיאִים לוֹ לֶחֶם וּבָשָׂר בַּבֹּקֶר וְלֶחֶם וּבָשָׂר בָּעָרֶב
(1) Now Elijah the Tishbite, from Tishbe in Gilead, said to Ahab, "By the God of Israel (YHVH) whom I serve, there will be neither dew nor rain in the next few years except at my word." (2) Then the word of God came to Elijah: (3) "Leave here, turn eastward and hide in the Kerith Ravine, east of the Jordan. (4) You will drink from the brook, and I have ordered the ravens to feed you there." (5) So he did what God had told him. He went to the Kerith Ravine, east of the Jordan, and stayed there. (6) The ravens brought him bread and meat in the morning and bread and meat in the evening, and he drank from the brook.
God’s answer to Noach is, “I have a plan for the raven. He will be needed in the future.” The name of the raven in Hebrew, orev, does not mean “black”; it comes from the root word meaning “mixture”[14]. While Noach may treat the raven as black[15], especially when compared to the fair dove, whose name and nature possess a hint of the Divine, the raven is apparently far more complex – reflecting the mixture of good and bad, a representation of post- Eden reality. Noach chooses to reject and expel the raven. He does not accept the merger of good and evil. He sees his own survival as testimony to the eradication of evil and the triumph of good. God sees things differently.
There is another book that grapples with this same tension: Should an imperfect society be saved or eradicated? The prophet who chooses to see the world in black and white is none other than the prophet named Yona, the Hebrew word for dove.
יונה פרק א
(א) וַיְהִי דְּבַר יְקֹוָק אֶל יוֹנָה בֶן אֲמִתַּי לֵאמֹר: (ב) קוּם לֵךְ אֶל נִינְוֵה הָעִיר הַגְּדוֹלָה וּקְרָא עָלֶיהָ כִּי עָלְתָה רָעָתָם לְפָנָי: (ג) וַיָּקָם יוֹנָה לִבְרֹחַ תַּרְשִׁישָׁה מִלִּפְנֵי יְקֹוָק וַיֵּרֶד יָפוֹ וַיִּמְצָא אֲנִיָּה בָּאָה תַרְשִׁישׁ וַיִּתֵּן שְׂכָרָהּ וַיֵּרֶד בָּהּ לָבוֹא עִמָּהֶם תַּרְשִׁישָׁה מִלִּפְנֵי יְקֹוָק: (ד) וַיקֹוָק הֵטִיל רוּחַ גְּדוֹלָה אֶל הַיָּם וַיְהִי סַעַר גָּדוֹל בַּיָּם וְהָאֳנִיָּה חִשְּׁבָה לְהִשָּׁבֵר:
(1) The word of the God came to Yona son of Amittai: (2) "Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me." (3)But Yona ran away from God and headed for Tarshish. He went down to Jaffa, where he found a ship bound for that port. After paying the fare, he went aboard and sailed for Tarshish to flee from God. (4)Then God sent a great wind on the sea, and such a violent storm arose that the ship threatened to break up.
The name of God used here indicates compassion. Yona runs away from God’s compassion; he thinks that he would prefer pure justice.
יונה פרק ד
(א) וַיֵּרַע אֶל יוֹנָה רָעָה גְדוֹלָה וַיִּחַר לוֹ: (ב) וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל אֶל יְקֹוָק וַיֹּאמַר אָנָּה יְקֹוָק הֲלוֹא זֶה דְבָרִי עַד הֱיוֹתִי עַל אַדְמָתִי עַל כֵּן קִדַּמְתִּי לִבְרֹחַ תַּרְשִׁישָׁה כִּי יָדַעְתִּי כִּי אַתָּה אֵל חַנּוּן וְרַחוּם אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וְרַב חֶסֶד וְנִחָם עַל הָרָעָה: (ג) וְעַתָּה יְקֹוָק קַח נָא אֶת נַפְשִׁי מִמֶּנִּי כִּי טוֹב מוֹתִי מֵחַיָּי: ס
(1) But Yona was greatly displeased and became angry. (2) He prayed to God, "O God, is this not what I said when I was still at home? That is why I was so quick to flee to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity. (3 )Now, O God, take away my life, for it is better for me to die than to live." (Yona chapter 4)
In order to appreciate the irony, and to fully understand the connection, we must take a closer look at the other main protagonists in the Book of Yona, namely the inhabitants of the city of Ninveh. What is their lineage – from which dark place did they emerge?
בראשית פרק י
(ח) וְכוּשׁ יָלַד אֶת נִמְרֹד הוּא הֵחֵל לִהְיוֹת גִּבֹּר בָּאָרֶץ: (ט) הוּא הָיָה גִבֹּר צַיִד לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק עַל כֵּן יֵאָמַר כְּנִמְרֹד גִּבּוֹר צַיִד לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק: (י) וַתְּהִי רֵאשִׁית מַמְלַכְתּוֹ בָּבֶל וְאֶרֶךְ וְאַכַּד וְכַלְנֵה בְּאֶרֶץ שִׁנְעָר: (יא) מִן הָאָרֶץ הַהִוא יָצָא אַשּׁוּר וַיִּבֶן אֶת נִינְוֵה וְאֶת רְחֹבֹת עִיר וְאֶת כָּלַח: (יב) וְאֶת רֶסֶן בֵּין נִינְוֵה וּבֵין כָּלַח הִוא הָעִיר הַגְּדֹלָה:
(8) Kush (the son of Ham) was the father of Nimrod, who grew to be a mighty warrior on the earth. (9) He was a mighty hunter before God; that is why it is said, "Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before God." (10) The first centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in Shinar. (11) From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah (12) and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city. (Bereishit 10)
The city of Ninveh is built and populated by descendants of Ham, his son Kush and his grandson Nimrod[16]-- quite an unholy trinity of forebears. Such a city should certainly be destroyed; what justification could possibly exist for its salvation? This seems to be Yona’s perspective. The rebellious prophet tries to escape God’s call to judgment on a boat, just as Noach did all those years before. Now Ninveh, which is thematically connected with the raven, has as its adversary Yona – the thematic continuation of Noach and the dove. Yona, like Noach, sees the world as black and white, while the city of Ninveh represents the raven - the orev - the combination of good and evil. When Yona looks at Ninveh - its past, present and future - he sees evil. God sees the more complex reality, the confusion of good and evil represented in the figure and personality of the raven.
How appropriate that the symbol of God’s covenant with Noach, and through him with all of humanity, is the many-colored rainbow: The world is not black and white, it is multi-colored, and each color melts into the next. Good is merged with Evil, and Evil with Good. The very existence of the world in the aftermath of the deluge is a testament to the Merciful God, and the symbol of His covenant is a spectacular mosaic of color. Even when the world seems foreboding, dark and evil, we must learn from God and not from Noach or Yona: We must look more carefully and learn to distinguish between the elements of the mixture. Good may be found amongst the evil, and things that don’t look completely good are not necessarily completely bad. That is the lesson taught by the raven.
[1] First published on January 29, 1845, in the New York Evening Mirror.
[2] See Shmot 20:1 and Rashi’s comments, as well as Rashi ‘s comments to Psalms 58:12. Occasionally the word elohim refers to a human judge. See Exodus 22:28. This name denotes “possessing power”, hence my use in translation of the name “Almighty”.
[3] The Be’er Mayim Chaim points out that the word raven in Hebrew is spelled ayin resh bet, the same letters which spell b’rah in reverse, which means “in evil”:
ספר באר מים חיים פרשת נח - פרק ח
ואולם הנה כבר כתבנו אשר העורב לא נשלח כלל בשליחות כי אם שלחו מן התיבה שלא יהיה עמו עבור שראה אותו ברע, אותיות ערב.
[4] See note 1, above.
[5] Haemek Davar Bereishit 8:7
העמק דבר על בראשית פרק ח פסוק ז
(ז) את העורב: יש להתבונן למה שלח שני עופות הללו, דוקא עורב ויונה. והלא יש הרבה עופות שפורחים טוב יותר מהם. והתו מאין הי' רשות לנח להוציאם מן התבה לפני זמן היציאה לכולם. ע"כ היה נראה לפי הפשט דעורב ויונה הללו לא היו מן הזוגות שנכנסו להחיות זרע בדבר ה'. אלא בשביל שהי' נח לפני מי המבול כאחד מן השרים שמנהגם הי' גם אז לגדל עורבים ויונים.
[6] Sanhedrin 108b.
[7] In his commentary to Sanhedrin 108, The Ben Y’hoyada points out that once the raven had relations, a new generation of raven was now on the way, and there was no danger of extinction.
[8] Apparently Noach is not troubled by the potential extinction of the raven.
[9] The name Ham means hot. See comments of Rav Shimshon ben Rafael Hirsch to this section.
[10] See 9:24-26
[11] See Rav Zadok Hakohen, Kometz Mincha part 2 section 24, where sources are cited that the raven hates it own offspring.
ספר קומץ המנחה חלק ב - אות כד
והעורב שונא בנו כמו שאמרו בכתובות (מ"ט ע"ב) ובשאר דוכתי הוא כמו שאמרו ז"ל (בבא בתרא ט"ז.) הוא שטן הוא יצר הרע הוא מלאך המות ורשעים תרדף רעה. ולכך הקדים נח שליחות העורב לעולם מן היונה כמו שקדם עשו ליעקב כי לעולם הקליפה קדמה לפרי.
[12] See Zohar Chadash, Bereishit 38b.
זוהר חדש כרך א (תורה) פרשת נח דף לח עמוד ב
אלא א"ר חייא למה שלח את העורב דא"ר חייא מצטער הוה נח טפי על אובדא דעלמא אמר רבש"ע ידעתי כי אתה רחום ואתה לא רחמת על עולמך ונהפך רחמנותך לאכזרות אתה לא רחמת על בניך יצא זה שאינו מרחם על בניו ונהפך להם לאכזרי ולפיכך שלח את העורב רמז הוא דקא רמז.
[13] The issue of the use of the different names of God, used as an intellectual battering ram by certain students of Biblical criticism, sheds much light on Bibilical study when properly understood, particularly when studying Bereishit and Noach. If one keeps in mind that the Torah always uses YHVH in connection with offerings, some insight may be achieved. The commandment to bring certain animals to the Ark “two by two”, simply to insure survival of the species, is ordered by Elokim – a name associated with nature. The command to bring ritually pure animals on to the Ark seven by seven, to facilitate the bringing of offerings after the flood, is commanded by YHVH. The two names are merged in 9:26, 27
[14] The raven represents the mixture or confusion of good and evil that is the result of eating from the Tree of Knowledge. See comments of Noam Elimelech to Parshat Ki Tavo.
ספר נועם אלימלך - פרשת כי תבא
וזהו דמצינו באליהו הנביא ז"ל וישב בנחל כרית והעורבים מביאים לו לחם. ולכאורה למה בחר ה' בעורבים שהם אכזרים על בניהם שהם יביאו לו לחם ועל פי דברינו הנ"ל כך פירושו וישב בנחל שהיה ממשיך השפעות מנחל העליון. ודרכי העורבים הם הקליפות לטרוף טרף ההשפעות אלא העובד ד' מאהבה גם הם ישלימו ויסכימו עמו לבלתי יגעו בהשפעה וזהו רמז שהעורבים הביאו לו לחם רוצה לומר שגם הקליפות הסכימו עמו …
...או יאמר בדרך הרמז וישלח את העורב ויצא יצוא ושוב. על דרך שפירש הרב הגלאנטי ז"ל (והבאתיו למעלה בפסוק קץ כל בשר) את מאמר חז"ל (ברכות נ"ט.) הקב"ה מוריד שתי דמעות לים הגדול על דרך משל שבא אחד ומרד כנגדו והמלך מתכעס על ידי זה ועל ידי זה יכאב ח"ו לב המלך בעת כעסו, מה עושה לוקח איש הלזה ושולח אותו למקום המשפט שיגמרו דינו שם והם עושים המשפט להשיב גמולו בראשו, ועל ידי זה נדחה מלב המלך כל בחינת הכעס וכאיבת לב כיון ששולחו לקבל משפטו. וכן הרשע המורד נגד מלך מלכי המלכים הקב"ה הוא מערב רע בטוב וטוב ברע והוא נקרא דמע מלשון עירוב כמו שאמרו (גיטין נ"ב ע"ב) המטמא והמדמע וכו', וכדי שלא יהיה פגם במדות העליונות מוריד אותן הדמעות לים הגדול מקום הצדק והמשפט שיוחרץ שם משפטו וישולם לו שכרו משלם, וכסא המלוכה נקי, עד כאן דבריו. והנה כשזכה נח לפתוח פתח המ"ם להאיר באורה על יושבי הארץ, ירא לנפשו פן אולי יחטאו עוד בני האדם ויערבו רע בטוב וטוב ברע ויהיה פגם במדות העליונות חלילה, אשר על כן ביקש רחמים על זה, ופעל זאת. וישלח את העורב כלומר זה הדמע והעירוב רע בטוב ויצא יצוא ושוב כלומר לצאת ממדות העליונות אל מדות התחתונות אשר הם בבחינת יצוא ושוב…
[15] It is important to note that black is not a primary color – but rather a lack of color.
[16] According to tradition it was Nimrod who threw Avraham into the fiery furnace. See Bereishit Rabbah 38:13.
The Raven- Nevermore?
Rabbi Ari D. Kahn
© 2008
…"Prophet!" said I, "thing of evil! — prophet still, if bird or devil! —Whether Tempter sent, or whether tempest tossed thee here ashore,Desolate yet all undaunted, on this desert land enchanted —On this home by horror haunted — tell me truly, I implore —Is there — is there balm in Gilead— tell me — tell me, I implore!" Quoth the Raven, "Nevermore."
The Raven, by Edgar Allan Poe[1]
In the aftermath of the destruction, as Noach floats along on his Ark, the waters have become eerily still, and a strange silence has replaced the angry, deadly, destructive storm. Now the Torah reports that Noach and all of creation have been remembered:
ספר בראשית פרק ח
(א) וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹקים אֶת נֹחַ וְאֵת כָּל הַחַיָּה וְאֶת כָּל הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר אִתּוֹ בַּתֵּבָה וַיַּעֲבֵר אֱלֹקים רוּחַ עַל הָאָרֶץ וַיָּשֹׁכּוּ הַמָּיִם:
(1) But the Almighty remembered Noach and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark, and the Almighty sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded. (Bereishit 8)
The name of God utilized in this section is Elokim. The connotation of this name is “God of Judgment”,[2] as opposed to “God of Mercy”. We might have thought that a “harsh and angry God” punished humankind and then a kind (albeit perhaps fickle) God changed his mind, but the Torah informs us that now that judgment has been meted out, Elokim, the very same aspect of Judgment, remembers Noach. At the end of 40 days Noach opens the window and sends forth a raven:
ספר בראשית פרק ח
(ו) וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וַיִּפְתַּח נֹחַ אֶת חַלּוֹן הַתֵּבָה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה: (ז) וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הָעֹרֵב וַיֵּצֵא יָצוֹא וָשׁוֹב עַד יְבשֶׁת הַמַּיִם מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ:
(6) After forty days Noach opened the window he had made in the ark (7) and sent out a raven, and it kept flying back and forth until the water had dried up from the earth.
The raven suffers from a negative reputation, associated in both Rabbinic and general Western literature with demonic forces[3]. In the unforgettable words of Edgar Allan Poe, quoted above:
…"Prophet!" said I, "thing of evil! — prophet still, if bird or devil![4]
While we can leave it to scholars of American Poetry to reveal Poe’s sources of information and attitude, the negativity toward the raven apparently goes all the way back to chapter 8 of Bereishit. But why the antagonism? What dastardly deed did the raven commit to deserve this reputation? Compare the raven to the dove, which is regarded as a loving, faithful, loyal harbinger of peace. The contrast is stark – as stark as black verses white. While in fact the raven is dark and the dove is white, can the Torah actually ascribe such significance to pigmentation? Let us continue the story and see what happens with the dove.
(ח) וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הַיּוֹנָה מֵאִתּוֹ לִרְאוֹת הֲקַלּוּ הַמַּיִם מֵעַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה: (ט) וְלֹא מָצְאָה הַיּוֹנָה מָנוֹחַ לְכַף רַגְלָהּ וַתָּשָׁב אֵלָיו אֶל הַתֵּבָה כִּי מַיִם עַל פְּנֵי כָל הָאָרֶץ וַיִּשְׁלַח יָדוֹ וַיִּקָּחֶהָ וַיָּבֵא אֹתָהּ אֵלָיו אֶל הַתֵּבָה: (י) וַיָּחֶל עוֹד שִׁבְעַת יָמִים אֲחֵרִים וַיֹּסֶף שַׁלַּח אֶת הַיּוֹנָה מִן הַתֵּבָה: (יא) וַתָּבֹא אֵלָיו הַיּוֹנָה לְעֵת עֶרֶב וְהִנֵּה עֲלֵה זַיִת טָרָף בְּפִיהָ וַיֵּדַע נֹחַ כִּי קַלּוּ הַמַּיִם מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ: (יב) וַיִּיָּחֶל עוֹד שִׁבְעַת יָמִים אֲחֵרִים וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הַיּוֹנָה וְלֹא יָסְפָה שׁוּב אֵלָיו עוֹד:
(8) Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground. (9) But the dove could find no place to set its feet because there was water over all the surface of the earth; so it returned to Noach in the ark. He reached out his hand and took the dove and brought it back to himself in the ark. (10) He waited seven more days and again sent out the dove from the ark. (11) When the dove returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf! Then Noach knew that the water had receded from the earth. (12) He waited seven more days and sent the dove out again, but this time it did not return to him. (Bereishit 8)
A careful reading of the verses brings several problems to light: While the objective of the dove’s mission is clearly stated, “to see if the water had receded”, the text does not reveal the motivation for sending the raven. While the juxtaposition of the two birds might suggest a common mission, the lack of explanation for the raven’s mission is nonetheless striking. This leads to additional questions about the raven: We don’t know why specifically the raven was chosen or if the mission was successful or aborted. Was this Noach’s idea, or was he commanded to send the raven out? Did Noach perhaps seek permission or approval for his initiative? The text is silent.
When we compare the two verses which describe the sending of the raven and dove respectively, we notice a second difference: When Noach sends the dove, the word used is מֵאִתּוֹ me’ito: literally rendered, he sent the dove “from himself” (an idiom that is difficult to translate). The reader is left with the impression that Noach had a close relationship with this dove – perhaps it was his personal pet. This sort of modifier is totally absent in the case of the raven.
The dove’s mission was successfully completed when it returned with the olive branch in its beak, creating the enduring image of peace. But what of the raven? Why was it sent and how did it fare? The Chizzkuni suggests an ominous mandate for the raven:
חזקוני על בראשית פרק ח פסוק ז
(ז) וישלח את הערב - לפי שדרכו לאכול נבלות ואם קלו המים ימצא מתי מבול מושלכים על פני שפת המים.
The raven was sent because its nature is to eat carcasses, and if the water subsided, it would find corpses strewn on the shore. (Chizzkuni Bereishit 8:7)
In contrast to the olive branch in the mouth of the dove, eternal symbol of peace, we have a vivid image of the predatory, carnivorous raven descending upon corpses, perhaps even mutilating one to bring something back to Noach. The image persists even though the raven apparently fails to even leave the immediate vicinity of the Ark – and doesn’t bring back any flesh. While the Chizzkuni’s may be the correct reading of the text and of Noach’s motivation for sending the raven, we are still baffled as to why this is not stated explicitly – namely that the raven was also sent to see if the water had subsided. This, coupled with the other outstanding textual oddity – the dove described as having been sent “from him” - leaves us searching for the deeper meaning of the narrative. Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehudah Berlin (“The Netziv”) in his Torah commentary Ha’amek Davar[5] raises some important questions: Why were the raven and dove singled out? There are many birds that fly farther and better then these two. Furthermore, who gave Noach permission to release these birds prior to the time when all the other inhabitants of the Ark would be released? The Netziv theorizes that these two birds were not of the “two by two” brought to the Ark, rather they were Noach’s pets. With this suggestion, the Netziv solves one problem, but exchanges it for another: While we may now know why Noach was permitted to send these birds, we don’t know how he brought them to the Ark in the first place.
The Ohr Hachaim (Hakadosh) also questions why the raven was sent, but rejects the suggestion that it was in order to check the water level: The Torah surely would have stated this, as it does subsequently regarding the dove’s mission. Rather, in keeping with a Talmudic tradition,[6] the Ohr Hachaim reveals why the raven was sent: because Noach didn’t want it around. The Talmud suggests that the raven was cast out because it broke protocol and had relations on the Ark. While the dove was sent on a reconnaissance mission, the raven was simply expelled. The raven, for his part, refused to leave.
The Talmud recounts that the raven lodges a complaint: He accuses Noach of acting with cruelty and prejudice, for his expulsion would result in the extinction of the species[7]. In fact, that is just one of many accusations the raven puts forth:
עין יעקב על מסכת סנהדרין קח ב
"וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הָעֹרֵב" - אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ, תְּשׁוּבָה נִצַּחַת הֱשִׁיבוֹ עוֹרֵב לְנֹחַ. אָמַר לוֹ, רַבְּךָ שׂוֹנְאֵנִי, וְאַתָּה שְׂנֵאתַנִי, רַבְּךָ שׂוֹנְאֵנִי - "מִן הַטְּהוֹרִים שִׁבְעָה, מִן הַטְּמֵאִים שְׁנַיִם". וְאַתָּה שְׂנֵאתַנִי - שֶׁאַתָּה מֵנִיחַ מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה, וְשׁוֹלֵחַ מִמִּין שְׁנַיִם, אִם פָּגַע בִּי שַׂר חַמָּה אוֹ שַׂר צִנָּה, (ומת) לֹא נִמְצָא עוֹלָם חָסֵר בְּרִיָּה אַחַת?!
“And he sent forth a raven.” Resh Lakish said: The raven gave Noach a triumphant retort. It said to him, ‘Thy Master hateth me, and thou hatest me. Thy Master hateth me — [since He commanded] seven [pairs to be taken] of the clean [creatures], but only two of the unclean. Thou hatest me — seeing that thou leavest the species of which there are seven, and sendest one of which there are only two. Should the angel of heat or of cold smite me, would not the world be short of one kind? (Talmud Sanhedrin 108b)
The Talmud describes the raven as having a winning argument. He accuses both Noach and God of hating him: God had shown an obvious preference for other species, commanding Noach to preserve seven of each. And surely it would have been more prudent for Noach to send a bird from one of the species of which more than two of a kind had been on board the Ark.
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה לג פסקה ה
(ה) ויהי מקץ ארבעים יום ויפתח נח הדא מסייעא לההוא דא"ר אבא בר כהנא חלון וישלח את העורב הה"ד (תהלים קה) שלח חשך ויחשיך ויצא יצא ושוב ר' יודן בשם ר' יודה ב"ר סימון התחיל משיבו תשובות א"ל מכל בהמה חיה ועוף שיש כאן אין אתה משלח אלא לי א"ל מה צורך לעולם בך לא לאכילה לא לקרבן
“And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noach opened the halon [e.v. ‘window’] of the Ark.” This supports the view that it was a window [trapdoor]. “and he sent forth a raven”: thus it is written, He sent darkness, and it was dark” (Ps. CV, 28). “And it went forth to and fro (yatzo va’shov). R. Judan said in the name of R. Judah b. R. Simon: It began arguing with him: 'Of all the birds that thou hast here thou sendest none but me!’ ‘What need then has the world of thee?' he retorted; 'For food? For a sacrifice[8]?’ (Midrash Rabbah 33:5)
Perhaps Noach sees the world through utilitarian eyes: Either something can be used or it has no value. If a raven can’t be eaten and can’t be used as an offering, the world simply doesn’t need it.
Then the raven goes even further and hurls a bizarre accusation:
וְעוֹד אָמַר לוֹ, שֶׁמָּא לְאִשְׁתִּי אַתָּה צָרִיךְ? אָמַר לוֹ, רָשָׁע, בַּמֻּתָּר לִי, נֶאֱסַר לִי, בַּנֶּאֱסַר לִי - לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן?! וּמְנָא לָן דְּנֶאֶסְרוּ, (עליו)? דִּכְתִיב, (בראשית ו) "וּבָאתָ אֶל הַתֵּבָה אַתָּה וּבָנֶיךָ וְאִשְׁתְּךָ וּנְשֵׁי בָנֶיךָ אִתָּךְ". וּכְתִיב, (שם ח) "צֵא מִן הַתֵּבָה אַתָּה וְאִשְׁתְּךָ וּבָנֶיךָ וּנְשֵׁי בָנֶיךָ אִתָּךְ". וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, מִכָּאן [אָמְרוּ], שֶׁנֶּאֶסְרוּ בְּתַשְׁמִישׁ הַמִּטָּה.
Or perhaps thou desirest my mate!’ — ‘Thou evil one!’ he exclaimed; ‘even that which is [usually] permitted me has [now] been forbidden: how much more so that which is [always] forbidden me!’ And whence do we know that they were forbidden? — From the verse, And thou shalt enter into the Ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and the wives of thy sons with thee; whilst further on it is written, Go forth from the Ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons’ wives with thee. Whereon R. Johanan observed: From this we deduce that cohabitation had been forbidden. (Talmud Sanhedrin 108b)
The raven accuses Noach of fancying his spouse; Noach honors the accusation with a response, proving the raven’s charge outrageous: If, while on the Ark, he has maintained abstinence from his own wife, how much more so would he avoid intimacy with the raven’s spouse, who is always off limits! What could have made the raven construe the situation in this manner? The Talmud portrays this as a case of projection. The raven was one of three who broke boundaries on the ark and engaged in illicit sexual behavior:
תָּנוּ רַבָּנָן, שְׁלֹשָׁה שִׁמְּשׁוּ בַּתֵּבָה, וְכֻלָּם לָקוּ; כֶּלֶב, וְעוֹרֵב, וְחָם. כֶּלֶב - נִקְשָׁר. עוֹרֵב - רוֹקֵק. חָם - לָקָה בְּעוֹרוֹ.
Our Rabbis taught: Three copulated in the ark, and they were all punished — the dog, the raven, and Ham. The dog was doomed to be tied, the raven expectorates [his seed into his mate's mouth]. And Ham was smitten in his skin. (Talmud Sanhedrin 108b)
Noach’s perspective of the raven is negative, but of the three transgressors, surely the one who bore the most responsibility was Ham, though some commentaries suggest that only after seeing the raven engaging in this behavior did Ham “heat up[9]” and follow suit. While Noach doesn’t have much use for the raven, seeing him as dark and devoid of utility, he also may not have much use for his son Ham, whose outrageous and immoral behavior in the following verses leads Noach to cast a dire curse upon one of Ham’s sons. [10] In citing Ham’s punishment by affliction of the skin, the analogy between Ham and the raven is drawn on more than one level, and we return to the theme of pigment. Later in the narrative we are also told that one of Ham’s children is Kush – which means black.
Noach sees the raven as a symbol of the darkness and cruelty that surround him and that have led to the massive, nearly total destruction of the world and its inhabitants[11]. Noach believes that God has abandoned the world[12]. God’s kindness has disappeared and the attribute of Elokim[13] reigns. For his first overture in the ante-deluvian world Noach sends forth a symbol of cruelty and darkness. Only later does he explore the possibility of kindness, loyalty and peace, sending the white dove which represents God’s merciful and kind attributes, even with it’s name (the Hebrew word yona is composed of three of the four letters of the Divine Name denoting omnipresence). Noach rejects the raven, casts it away, and identifies with the dove that he sends “me’ito” – of or from himself.
There is, however, someone who does not concur with Noach’s judgment and attitude toward the raven: God, the Creator of this dark, maligned creature.
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה לג פסקה ה
רבי ברכיה בשם רבי אבא בר כהנא אמר אמר לו הקב"ה קבלו שעתיד העולם להצטרך לו אמר לו אימתי אמר לו עד יבשת המים מעל הארץ עתיד צדיק אחד לעמוד ולייבש את העולם ואני מצריכו לו הה"ד (מלכים א יז) והעורבים מביאים לו לחם ובשר בבקר ולחם ובשר בערב
R. Berekiah said in R. Abba's name: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him [Noach]: ‘Take it back, because the world will need it in the future.’ ' When? ' he asked. ’ When the waters dry off from on the earth ' (ib.). He replied: ‘A righteous man will arise and dry up the world, and will cause him to have need of them [the ravens],’ as it is written, And the ravens (‘orvim) brought him bread and flesh, etc. (I Kings XVII, 6). (Midrash Rabbah 33:5)
This Midrash refers to an episode that we may consider an inverse of the flood – a time of drought. The raven comes into its’ own, as it were, and rises to the occasion.
מלכים א פרק יז
(א) וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלִיָּהוּ הַתִּשְׁבִּי מִתֹּשָׁבֵי גִלְעָד אֶל אַחְאָב חַי יְקֹוָק אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר עָמַדְתִּי לְפָנָיו אִם יִהְיֶה הַשָּׁנִים הָאֵלֶּה טַל וּמָטָר כִּי אִם לְפִי דְבָרִי: ס
(ב) וַיְהִי דְבַר יְקֹוָק אֵלָיו לֵאמֹר: (ג) לֵךְ מִזֶּה וּפָנִיתָ לְּךָ קֵדְמָה וְנִסְתַּרְתָּ בְּנַחַל כְּרִית אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן: (ד) וְהָיָה מֵהַנַּחַל תִּשְׁתֶּה וְאֶת הָעֹרְבִים צִוִּיתִי לְכַלְכֶּלְךָ שָׁם: (ה) וַיֵּלֶךְ וַיַּעַשׂ כִּדְבַר יְקֹוָק וַיֵּלֶךְ וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּנַחַל כְּרִית אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן: (ו) וְהָעֹרְבִים מְבִיאִים לוֹ לֶחֶם וּבָשָׂר בַּבֹּקֶר וְלֶחֶם וּבָשָׂר בָּעָרֶב
(1) Now Elijah the Tishbite, from Tishbe in Gilead, said to Ahab, "By the God of Israel (YHVH) whom I serve, there will be neither dew nor rain in the next few years except at my word." (2) Then the word of God came to Elijah: (3) "Leave here, turn eastward and hide in the Kerith Ravine, east of the Jordan. (4) You will drink from the brook, and I have ordered the ravens to feed you there." (5) So he did what God had told him. He went to the Kerith Ravine, east of the Jordan, and stayed there. (6) The ravens brought him bread and meat in the morning and bread and meat in the evening, and he drank from the brook.
God’s answer to Noach is, “I have a plan for the raven. He will be needed in the future.” The name of the raven in Hebrew, orev, does not mean “black”; it comes from the root word meaning “mixture”[14]. While Noach may treat the raven as black[15], especially when compared to the fair dove, whose name and nature possess a hint of the Divine, the raven is apparently far more complex – reflecting the mixture of good and bad, a representation of post- Eden reality. Noach chooses to reject and expel the raven. He does not accept the merger of good and evil. He sees his own survival as testimony to the eradication of evil and the triumph of good. God sees things differently.
There is another book that grapples with this same tension: Should an imperfect society be saved or eradicated? The prophet who chooses to see the world in black and white is none other than the prophet named Yona, the Hebrew word for dove.
יונה פרק א
(א) וַיְהִי דְּבַר יְקֹוָק אֶל יוֹנָה בֶן אֲמִתַּי לֵאמֹר: (ב) קוּם לֵךְ אֶל נִינְוֵה הָעִיר הַגְּדוֹלָה וּקְרָא עָלֶיהָ כִּי עָלְתָה רָעָתָם לְפָנָי: (ג) וַיָּקָם יוֹנָה לִבְרֹחַ תַּרְשִׁישָׁה מִלִּפְנֵי יְקֹוָק וַיֵּרֶד יָפוֹ וַיִּמְצָא אֲנִיָּה בָּאָה תַרְשִׁישׁ וַיִּתֵּן שְׂכָרָהּ וַיֵּרֶד בָּהּ לָבוֹא עִמָּהֶם תַּרְשִׁישָׁה מִלִּפְנֵי יְקֹוָק: (ד) וַיקֹוָק הֵטִיל רוּחַ גְּדוֹלָה אֶל הַיָּם וַיְהִי סַעַר גָּדוֹל בַּיָּם וְהָאֳנִיָּה חִשְּׁבָה לְהִשָּׁבֵר:
(1) The word of the God came to Yona son of Amittai: (2) "Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me." (3)But Yona ran away from God and headed for Tarshish. He went down to Jaffa, where he found a ship bound for that port. After paying the fare, he went aboard and sailed for Tarshish to flee from God. (4)Then God sent a great wind on the sea, and such a violent storm arose that the ship threatened to break up.
The name of God used here indicates compassion. Yona runs away from God’s compassion; he thinks that he would prefer pure justice.
יונה פרק ד
(א) וַיֵּרַע אֶל יוֹנָה רָעָה גְדוֹלָה וַיִּחַר לוֹ: (ב) וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל אֶל יְקֹוָק וַיֹּאמַר אָנָּה יְקֹוָק הֲלוֹא זֶה דְבָרִי עַד הֱיוֹתִי עַל אַדְמָתִי עַל כֵּן קִדַּמְתִּי לִבְרֹחַ תַּרְשִׁישָׁה כִּי יָדַעְתִּי כִּי אַתָּה אֵל חַנּוּן וְרַחוּם אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וְרַב חֶסֶד וְנִחָם עַל הָרָעָה: (ג) וְעַתָּה יְקֹוָק קַח נָא אֶת נַפְשִׁי מִמֶּנִּי כִּי טוֹב מוֹתִי מֵחַיָּי: ס
(1) But Yona was greatly displeased and became angry. (2) He prayed to God, "O God, is this not what I said when I was still at home? That is why I was so quick to flee to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity. (3 )Now, O God, take away my life, for it is better for me to die than to live." (Yona chapter 4)
In order to appreciate the irony, and to fully understand the connection, we must take a closer look at the other main protagonists in the Book of Yona, namely the inhabitants of the city of Ninveh. What is their lineage – from which dark place did they emerge?
בראשית פרק י
(ח) וְכוּשׁ יָלַד אֶת נִמְרֹד הוּא הֵחֵל לִהְיוֹת גִּבֹּר בָּאָרֶץ: (ט) הוּא הָיָה גִבֹּר צַיִד לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק עַל כֵּן יֵאָמַר כְּנִמְרֹד גִּבּוֹר צַיִד לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק: (י) וַתְּהִי רֵאשִׁית מַמְלַכְתּוֹ בָּבֶל וְאֶרֶךְ וְאַכַּד וְכַלְנֵה בְּאֶרֶץ שִׁנְעָר: (יא) מִן הָאָרֶץ הַהִוא יָצָא אַשּׁוּר וַיִּבֶן אֶת נִינְוֵה וְאֶת רְחֹבֹת עִיר וְאֶת כָּלַח: (יב) וְאֶת רֶסֶן בֵּין נִינְוֵה וּבֵין כָּלַח הִוא הָעִיר הַגְּדֹלָה:
(8) Kush (the son of Ham) was the father of Nimrod, who grew to be a mighty warrior on the earth. (9) He was a mighty hunter before God; that is why it is said, "Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before God." (10) The first centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in Shinar. (11) From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah (12) and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city. (Bereishit 10)
The city of Ninveh is built and populated by descendants of Ham, his son Kush and his grandson Nimrod[16]-- quite an unholy trinity of forebears. Such a city should certainly be destroyed; what justification could possibly exist for its salvation? This seems to be Yona’s perspective. The rebellious prophet tries to escape God’s call to judgment on a boat, just as Noach did all those years before. Now Ninveh, which is thematically connected with the raven, has as its adversary Yona – the thematic continuation of Noach and the dove. Yona, like Noach, sees the world as black and white, while the city of Ninveh represents the raven - the orev - the combination of good and evil. When Yona looks at Ninveh - its past, present and future - he sees evil. God sees the more complex reality, the confusion of good and evil represented in the figure and personality of the raven.
How appropriate that the symbol of God’s covenant with Noach, and through him with all of humanity, is the many-colored rainbow: The world is not black and white, it is multi-colored, and each color melts into the next. Good is merged with Evil, and Evil with Good. The very existence of the world in the aftermath of the deluge is a testament to the Merciful God, and the symbol of His covenant is a spectacular mosaic of color. Even when the world seems foreboding, dark and evil, we must learn from God and not from Noach or Yona: We must look more carefully and learn to distinguish between the elements of the mixture. Good may be found amongst the evil, and things that don’t look completely good are not necessarily completely bad. That is the lesson taught by the raven.
[1] First published on January 29, 1845, in the New York Evening Mirror.
[2] See Shmot 20:1 and Rashi’s comments, as well as Rashi ‘s comments to Psalms 58:12. Occasionally the word elohim refers to a human judge. See Exodus 22:28. This name denotes “possessing power”, hence my use in translation of the name “Almighty”.
[3] The Be’er Mayim Chaim points out that the word raven in Hebrew is spelled ayin resh bet, the same letters which spell b’rah in reverse, which means “in evil”:
ספר באר מים חיים פרשת נח - פרק ח
ואולם הנה כבר כתבנו אשר העורב לא נשלח כלל בשליחות כי אם שלחו מן התיבה שלא יהיה עמו עבור שראה אותו ברע, אותיות ערב.
[4] See note 1, above.
[5] Haemek Davar Bereishit 8:7
העמק דבר על בראשית פרק ח פסוק ז
(ז) את העורב: יש להתבונן למה שלח שני עופות הללו, דוקא עורב ויונה. והלא יש הרבה עופות שפורחים טוב יותר מהם. והתו מאין הי' רשות לנח להוציאם מן התבה לפני זמן היציאה לכולם. ע"כ היה נראה לפי הפשט דעורב ויונה הללו לא היו מן הזוגות שנכנסו להחיות זרע בדבר ה'. אלא בשביל שהי' נח לפני מי המבול כאחד מן השרים שמנהגם הי' גם אז לגדל עורבים ויונים.
[6] Sanhedrin 108b.
[7] In his commentary to Sanhedrin 108, The Ben Y’hoyada points out that once the raven had relations, a new generation of raven was now on the way, and there was no danger of extinction.
[8] Apparently Noach is not troubled by the potential extinction of the raven.
[9] The name Ham means hot. See comments of Rav Shimshon ben Rafael Hirsch to this section.
[10] See 9:24-26
[11] See Rav Zadok Hakohen, Kometz Mincha part 2 section 24, where sources are cited that the raven hates it own offspring.
ספר קומץ המנחה חלק ב - אות כד
והעורב שונא בנו כמו שאמרו בכתובות (מ"ט ע"ב) ובשאר דוכתי הוא כמו שאמרו ז"ל (בבא בתרא ט"ז.) הוא שטן הוא יצר הרע הוא מלאך המות ורשעים תרדף רעה. ולכך הקדים נח שליחות העורב לעולם מן היונה כמו שקדם עשו ליעקב כי לעולם הקליפה קדמה לפרי.
[12] See Zohar Chadash, Bereishit 38b.
זוהר חדש כרך א (תורה) פרשת נח דף לח עמוד ב
אלא א"ר חייא למה שלח את העורב דא"ר חייא מצטער הוה נח טפי על אובדא דעלמא אמר רבש"ע ידעתי כי אתה רחום ואתה לא רחמת על עולמך ונהפך רחמנותך לאכזרות אתה לא רחמת על בניך יצא זה שאינו מרחם על בניו ונהפך להם לאכזרי ולפיכך שלח את העורב רמז הוא דקא רמז.
[13] The issue of the use of the different names of God, used as an intellectual battering ram by certain students of Biblical criticism, sheds much light on Bibilical study when properly understood, particularly when studying Bereishit and Noach. If one keeps in mind that the Torah always uses YHVH in connection with offerings, some insight may be achieved. The commandment to bring certain animals to the Ark “two by two”, simply to insure survival of the species, is ordered by Elokim – a name associated with nature. The command to bring ritually pure animals on to the Ark seven by seven, to facilitate the bringing of offerings after the flood, is commanded by YHVH. The two names are merged in 9:26, 27
[14] The raven represents the mixture or confusion of good and evil that is the result of eating from the Tree of Knowledge. See comments of Noam Elimelech to Parshat Ki Tavo.
ספר נועם אלימלך - פרשת כי תבא
וזהו דמצינו באליהו הנביא ז"ל וישב בנחל כרית והעורבים מביאים לו לחם. ולכאורה למה בחר ה' בעורבים שהם אכזרים על בניהם שהם יביאו לו לחם ועל פי דברינו הנ"ל כך פירושו וישב בנחל שהיה ממשיך השפעות מנחל העליון. ודרכי העורבים הם הקליפות לטרוף טרף ההשפעות אלא העובד ד' מאהבה גם הם ישלימו ויסכימו עמו לבלתי יגעו בהשפעה וזהו רמז שהעורבים הביאו לו לחם רוצה לומר שגם הקליפות הסכימו עמו …
...או יאמר בדרך הרמז וישלח את העורב ויצא יצוא ושוב. על דרך שפירש הרב הגלאנטי ז"ל (והבאתיו למעלה בפסוק קץ כל בשר) את מאמר חז"ל (ברכות נ"ט.) הקב"ה מוריד שתי דמעות לים הגדול על דרך משל שבא אחד ומרד כנגדו והמלך מתכעס על ידי זה ועל ידי זה יכאב ח"ו לב המלך בעת כעסו, מה עושה לוקח איש הלזה ושולח אותו למקום המשפט שיגמרו דינו שם והם עושים המשפט להשיב גמולו בראשו, ועל ידי זה נדחה מלב המלך כל בחינת הכעס וכאיבת לב כיון ששולחו לקבל משפטו. וכן הרשע המורד נגד מלך מלכי המלכים הקב"ה הוא מערב רע בטוב וטוב ברע והוא נקרא דמע מלשון עירוב כמו שאמרו (גיטין נ"ב ע"ב) המטמא והמדמע וכו', וכדי שלא יהיה פגם במדות העליונות מוריד אותן הדמעות לים הגדול מקום הצדק והמשפט שיוחרץ שם משפטו וישולם לו שכרו משלם, וכסא המלוכה נקי, עד כאן דבריו. והנה כשזכה נח לפתוח פתח המ"ם להאיר באורה על יושבי הארץ, ירא לנפשו פן אולי יחטאו עוד בני האדם ויערבו רע בטוב וטוב ברע ויהיה פגם במדות העליונות חלילה, אשר על כן ביקש רחמים על זה, ופעל זאת. וישלח את העורב כלומר זה הדמע והעירוב רע בטוב ויצא יצוא ושוב כלומר לצאת ממדות העליונות אל מדות התחתונות אשר הם בבחינת יצוא ושוב…
[15] It is important to note that black is not a primary color – but rather a lack of color.
[16] According to tradition it was Nimrod who threw Avraham into the fiery furnace. See Bereishit Rabbah 38:13.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
berishit new shiur
Bereishit 5769
Clothing of Light
© 2008 Rabbi Ari D. Kahn
In the aftermath of man’s sin in Eden, Adam and Eve find themselves exposed, vulnerable, humiliated – naked.
בראשית פרק ג
(ז) וַתִּפָּקַחְנָה עֵינֵי שְׁנֵיהֶם וַיֵּדְעוּ כִּי עֵירֻמִּם הֵם …
And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew[1] that they were naked[2].
In a feeble attempt to cover themselves they take fig leaves and fashion a primitive covering.
וַיִּתְפְּרוּ עֲלֵה תְאֵנָה וַיַּעֲשׂוּ לָהֶם חֲגֹרֹת:
and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons [loincloths?] (Genesis 3:7).
Their purpose was to cover up their nakedness. The choice of fig leaves has caused at least one rabbinic tradition to identify the Tree of Knowledge with the fig tree[3]: In a frantic attempt to cover up, they chose the closest material at hand.
Subsequently – after the investigation, trial, sentencing and punishment, we find the conclusion of the saga, and again it addresses their attire:
(כא) וַיַּעַשׂ ה’ אֱלֹהִים לְאָדָם וּלְאִשְׁתּוֹ כָּתְנוֹת עוֹר וַיַּלְבִּשֵׁם:
For Adam and for his wife the Lord God made coats of skins, and clothed them (Genesis 3:21).
The difference is striking: Adam and Eve found flimsy fig leaves and fashioned a loin cloth of sorts, whereas God provides fine leather coats to protect and provide shelter from the elements. While man only managed to cover up, God provided man with clothing “and clothed them”. While man simply didn’t want to be stark naked in public, God chose to act with kindness. Despite the sin and the resultant alienation, God performs an incredibly tender gesture: He clothes them, He cares for them; He takes care of wayward, sinful man.
We exist in a world of clothing and costumes, and it all began with a fig leaf. It was only by virtue of the bite taken from a mysterious, dangerous, deadly fruit that an awareness of nakedness appeared. But what was the nature of this nakedness? Was it physical or spiritual? Was the awareness of their nakedness the result of a spiritual shift, of a metamorphosis which occurred in the aftermath of sin? Or was man altered in a more physical fashion?
We would have expected that sin would cause a spiritual reaction – but we see that the response of Adam and Eve is to cover up their bodies which had become vulnerable; they became embarrassed, humiliated. Perhaps this is the result of their souls feeling alienated. But what of their souls? Did they seek spiritual cover? How does one cover up a tainted soul? Surely the soul was impacted, damaged and tainted with sin by their action. What was the reaction?
When discussing this point Rav Yosef Dov Solovietchik[4] introduced the following verse:
ישעיהו פרק סא
(י) שׂוֹשׂ אָשִׂישׂ בַּה’ תָּגֵל נַפְשִׁי בֵּאלֹהַי כִּי הִלְבִּישַׁנִי בִּגְדֵי יֶשַׁע מְעִיל צְדָקָה יְעָטָנִי כֶּחָתָן יְכַהֵן פְּאֵר וְכַכַּלָּה תַּעְדֶּה כֵלֶיהָ:
I greatly rejoice in the Lord my soul rejoices with God for he has clothed me in the clothing of salvation, He has wrapped me in a robe of victory, like a bridegroom adorned with a turban and a bride bedecked with her finery (Isaiah 61:10).
When Adam and Eve sin, they lose the clothing of salvation. The result is the loss of Divine protection, of the feeling of nearness and closeness with God, the feeling of a child wrapped in the embrace of a loving mother. It is then that they feel naked. Their response is to cover their bodies, apparently oblivious to the damage done to their souls. In place of this “clothing of salvation” which has dissipated, they cover themselves, but God provides them with new clothing.
In partaking of the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve succumbed to their animal instincts, acting with no regard for their spiritual identity and seeking only immediate gratification. The spiritual consequences follow immediately: God clothes them in animal skins or leather. A metamorphosis has taken place. Their new clothing reflects their diminished status.
What was the nature of this leather clothing? [5] Various traditions suggest different materials. Rashi[6] cites a tradition that it was warm, soft rabbit fur. The Targum (Pseudo) Yonatan[7] says the leather came from something near at hand, from something to be found at the scene of their crime. God gave them garments of snake skin, as if to say: They were seduced by the serpent, the result was their nakedness, and now they will be wrapped in a fitting symbol of their treachery[8].
The Midrash reports that the clothes of Adam were made of a completely different material:
בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשה כ ד"ה יב ויעש ה'
ויעש ה' אלהים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור וילבישם בתורתו של ר"מ מצאו כתוב כתנות אור אלו בגדי אדם הראשון שהן דומים לפיגם (לפנס( רחבים מלמטה וצרין מלמעלה
In R. Meir's Torah it was found written, ‘Garments of light (ohr): this refers to Adam's garments, which were like a torch [shedding radiance], broad at the bottom and narrow at the top.
This comment is curious. The Torah text reads ‘OR -- עור skin or leather. This Midrash relates a tradition or commentary Rabbi Meir recorded in the margin[9] that rendered the word OHR אור – light. Why would God make for them clothing of light?
Rabbenu Bachayeh admits that the p’shat – the straightforward level of understanding the Torah - is that God made for wayward man “dignified clothing”. However according to Rabenu Bachayeh’s understanding of the Midrash, this was clothing of light, referring specifically to primordial light. As any clothing reflects the designer, this clothing, provided by God, must therefore reflect something Divine.
Prior to eating from the tree man was meant to live forever, like the angels. Eating from the tree caused death, loss of immortality, but the new clothing was somehow angelic, possessing an element of what was lost.[10] By way of reference, Rabenu Bachayeh suggests that these garments are similar to what enveloped Moshe on the mountain[11]. When Moshe descends from the Mountain for the second time, the Torah describes:
שמות פרק לד
(כט) וַיְהִי בְּרֶדֶת מֹשֶׁה מֵהַר סִינַי וּשְׁנֵי לֻחֹת הָעֵדֻת בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה בְּרִדְתּוֹ מִן הָהָר וּמֹשֶׁה לֹא יָדַע כִּי [12]קָרַן עוֹר פָּנָיו בְּדַבְּרוֹ אִתּוֹ: (ל) וַיַּרְא אַהֲרֹן וְכָל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת מֹשֶׁה וְהִנֵּה קָרַן עוֹר פָּנָיו וַיִּירְאוּ מִגֶּשֶׁת אֵלָיו:
When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the Testimony in his hands, Moshe was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the LORD. 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him (Shmot 34, 29).
Here it clearly states that the skin on Moshe’s face glowed: ‘OR is spelled with an ayin.[13]
Rabenu Bachayeh is apparently suggesting that at times the words ‘OR -“skin” (with an ayin) and OHR- “light” (with an aleph) can be connected. This is the significance to the glow of the skin of Moshe[14].
According to Rabbinic tradition, when the Jews stood at Sinai and declared na’aseh ve’nishma, “We will do we will listen”, each received two crowns. However when they sinned with the Golden Calf, they lost those precious crowns. These hundreds of thousands of crowns all came to Moshe, creating for him an incredible glow.
מסכת שבת פח
דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי סִימָלאִי, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהִקְדִּימוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל "נַעֲשֶׂה" לְ"נִשְׁמַע", בָּאוּ שִׁשִּׁים רִבּוֹא שֶׁל מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת. לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִיִשְׁרָאֵל קָשְׁרוּ לוֹ שְׁתֵּי כְּתָרִים, אֶחָד כְּנֶגֶד "נַעֲשֶׂה", וְאֶחָד כְּנֶגֶד "נִשְׁמַע". וְכֵּיוָן שֶׁחָטְאוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל, יָרְדוּ מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים רִבּוֹא מַלְאֲכֵי חַבָּלָה וּפְרָקוּם... אָמַר רַב יוֹחָנָן, וְכוּלָּן - זָכָה מֹשֶׁה וּנְטָלָן.
R. Simlai lectured: When the Israelites gave precedence to ‘we will do’ over ‘we will listen,’ six hundred thousand ministering angels came and set two crowns upon each man of Israel, one as a reward for ‘we will do,’ and the other as a reward for ‘we will listen’. But as soon as Israel sinned, one million two hundred thousand destroying angels descended and removed them, ... R. Johanan observed: And Moses was privileged and received them all. (Talmud Bavli Shabbat 88a)
According to Rashi[15] this is the source of Moshe’s glow, the concentrated crowns of all of Israel. The Zohar[16] reports a tradition that Adam and Eve originally possessed Divine primordial light, and when they sinned this light disappeared. When the Jewish people stood at Sinai the light returned to each person in the shape of crowns. When the Jews subsequently sinned the crowns were forfeited, with all the light going to Moshe – which means now Moshe possessed primordial light.[17]
Rabbi Meir is therefore teaching that the clothing that God gave to Man was from this same primordial light. The Ari”zal[18], citing the Zohar, explains that Adam and Eve originally were covered with supernal light. Upon sinning they lost this luster and only then became naked. They were now naked, having lost their refulgent covering. This is the meaning of Rabbi Meir’s marginal note: God covered them with skin – but previously He had covered them with light.
The Midrash reports a second instance of a note in the margin of Rabbi Meir’s book:
בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשה ט ד"ה ה בתורתו של
בתורתו של רבי מאיר מצאו כתוב, והנה טוב מאד והנה טוב מות
In the copy of R. Meir's Torah was found written: AND, BEHOLD, IT WAS VERY (ME'OD) GOOD: and behold, death (mot) was good. (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis IX:5)
The “goodness” of death is difficult for man to comprehend, although it may be no more difficult than the association between light and skin. Both of these comments by Rabbi Meir, while at first inexplicable, must somehow stem from a unique perspective. Perhaps a passage in the Talmud providing some biographical information about Rabbi Meir can shed some light on these comments.
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף יג עמוד א
והאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל משום רבי מאיר: כשהייתי לומד אצל רבי עקיבא הייתי מטיל קנקנתום לתוך הדיו ולא אמר לי דבר. וכשבאתי אצל רבי ישמעאל אמר לי: בני, מה מלאכתך? אמרתי לו: לבלר אני. אמר לי: בני, הוי זהיר במלאכתך שמלאכתך מלאכת שמים היא, שמא אתה מחסר אות אחת או מייתר אות אחת - נמצאת מחריב את כל העולם כולו.
Did not Rav Judah in fact state in the name of Samuel who had it from R. Meir: When I was studying under R. Akiva I used to put vitriol into my ink and he told me nothing [against it], but when I subsequently came to R. Yishmael the latter said to me, ‘My son, what is your occupation?’ I told him, ‘I am a scribe’, and he said to me, ‘Be meticulous in your work, for your occupation is a sacred one; should you perchance omit or add one single letter, you would thereby destroy all the universe’.
Rabbi Meir made a living as a scribe. He understood the importance of every letter. He knew that leaving out a single letter could have dire consequences. The thought of changing a word probably never crossed his mind, yet he did write comments in the margins, indicating deeper levels of understanding and meaning. His colleagues, however, did not always understand him.
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף יג עמוד ב
אמר רבי אחא בר חנינא: גלוי וידוע לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם שאין בדורו של רבי מאיר כמותו, ומפני מה לא קבעו הלכה כמותו - שלא יכלו חביריו לעמוד על סוף דעתו. שהוא אומר על טמא טהור ומראה לו פנים, על טהור טמא ומראה לו פנים. תנא: לא רבי מאיר שמו אלא רבי נהוראי שמו, ולמה נקרא שמו רבי מאיר - שהוא מאיר עיני חכמים בהלכה. ולא נהוראי שמו אלא רבי נחמיה שמו, ואמרי לה רבי אלעזר בן ערך שמו, ולמה נקרא שמו נהוראי - שמנהיר עיני חכמים בהלכה. אמר רבי: האי דמחדדנא מחבראי - דחזיתיה לרבי מאיר מאחוריה, ואילו חזיתיה מקמיה - הוה מחדדנא טפי. דכתיב )ישעיהו ל'(: והיו עיניך ראות את מוריך.
R. Aha b. Hanina said: It is revealed and known before Him Who spoke and the world came into existence[19], that in the generation of R. Meir there was none equal to him; then why was not the halachah fixed in agreement with his views? Because his colleagues could not fathom the depths of his mind, for he would declare the ritually unclean to be clean and supply plausible proof, and the ritually clean to be unclean and also supply plausible proof.
One taught: His name was not R. Meir but R. Nehorai. Then why was he called ‘R. Meir’? Because he enlightened the Sages in the halachah. His name in fact was not even Nehorai but R. Nehemiah or, as others say: R. Eleazar b. Arak. Then why was he called ‘Nehorai’? Because he enlightened the Sages in the halachah.
Rebbi[20] declared: The only reason why I am keener than my colleagues is that I saw the back[21] of R. Meir, but had I had a front view of him I would have been keener still, for it is written in Scripture: “Thine eyes shall see thy teacher.”
We learn several things from this passage. Rabbi Meir was unparalleled in his generation. Despite this, the law was not established in his opinion, because his colleagues did not understand his dazzling brilliance. We also learn that his name “Meir” means light[22].
Meir, who was full of light, sees in our passage in Bereishit “light” instead of “skin”, and in the second instance, instead of “good”, sees “death”. His vocation may have been more than incidental in leading up to the brilliant but radical insights he had to the Torah and halachah.
The Ari”zal taught:
ספר הליקוטים - פרשת בראשית - פרק ג
ואחר שחטא אדה"ר, נהפכו הכותנות מאור לעור, והפנימיות שבהם שהוא האור לקחו חנוך ואליהו ז"ל, כנוד' מדרוש שרשי הנשמות וע"ש. והחיצוניות שהוא העור, לקחו נמרוד והדומים לו,
After Adam sinned his clothing turned from light to skin, and the inner aspect, which is the light, was taken by Chanoch and Eliyahu, as is known … the external aspect was inherited by Nimrod and those of his ilk.
The primordial light lost by Adam and Eve was inherited by Chanoch and Eliyahu. The common denominator between Chanoch and Eliyahu[23] is that although both were born of human stuff, each was elevated. They became angels[24], and live forever. The ascension of Eliyahu is better known, both his ascension in a fiery chariot[25], and his occasional visitations (at each Pesach seder and at circumcision ceremonies).
Regarding Chanoch, the Torah deviates from standard practice and does not tell of his death:
And Chanoch (Enoch) walked with God; and he was not; for God took him. (Bereishit 5:24)
The Targum (Pseudo) Yonatan explains:
יונתן בראשית פרק ה פסוק כד
(כד) וּפְלַח חֲנוֹךְ בְּקוּשְׁטָא קֳדָם יְיָ וְהָא לֵיתוֹהִי עִם דַיְירֵי אַרְעָא אֲרוּם אִתְנְגִיד וְסַלִיק לִרְקִיעָא בְּמֵימַר קָדָם יְיָ וּקְרָא שְׁמֵיהּ מִיטַטְרוֹן סַפְרָא רַבָּא:
כתר יונתן בראשית פרק ה פסוק כד
(כד) ויעבוד חנוך באמת לפני יי והנה איננו עם תושבי הארץ כי נלקח ועלה לרקיע במאמר לפני יי ויקרא שמו מיטטרון הסופר הגדול:
And Chanoch walked in righteousness before God, and he ceased to exist with the dwellers of Earth. He ascended to heaven in front of God and he was given the name Metatron the Great Scribe. (Targum (Pseudo) Yonatan Bereishit 5:24)
The one other person described as a great scribe, “Safra Rabbah”, was none other than Moshe.[26]
Adam and Eve were supposed to live forever and be angel-like. Due to their sin they lose this quality and the light that accompanies it. Chanoch and Eliyahu subsequently become angels and inherit this light. Chanoch becomes the Great Scribe and is now known as Metatron, the Heavely Scribe. We come across him in a crucial passage in the Gemara:
תלמוד בבלי מסכת חגיגה דף טו עמוד א
אחר קיצץ בנטיעות, עליו הכתוב אומר +קהלת ה'+ אל תתן את פיך לחטיא את בשרך. מאי היא? חזא מיטטרון דאתיהבא ליה רשותא למיתב למיכתב זכוותא דישראל, אמר: גמירא דלמעלה לא הוי לא ישיבה ולא תחרות ולא עורף ולא עיפוי, שמא חס ושלום שתי רשויות הן. אפקוהו למיטטרון ומחיוהו שיתין פולסי דנורא.
Aher mutilated the shoots. Of him Scripture says: Suffer not thy mouth to bring thy flesh into guilt. What does it refer to? — He saw that permission was granted to Metatron to sit and write down the merits of Israel. Said he: It is taught as a tradition that on high there is no sitting and no emulation, and no back, and no weariness. Perhaps, — God forfend! — there are two divinities! [Thereupon] they led Metatron forth, and punished him with sixty fiery lashes, saying to him: Why didst thou not rise before him when thou didst see him? Permission was [then] given to him to strike out the merits of Aher. (Talmud Bavli Chagiga 15a)
The context is a spiritual journey of four great scholars who enter an orchard – or perhaps The orchard: Pardes, no less than paradise itself – or the Garden of Eden. One of the four sees an angel sitting and writing. This is Metatron the Great Scribe, and his job is to record the good deeds of Israel. Aher (the erstwhile sage Elisha Ben Avuyah) sees him sitting at work and becomes confused: Preconceived notions of dualism[27] cause confusion between good and evil. This reminds us of the tree which caused confusion between good and evil. Aher cannot reconcile what he has seen, and becomes a heretic.
Despite his apostasy, Aher retains one famous student: Rabbi Meir continues to study with is fallen master. The Masters of the Talmud questioned how Rabbi Meir could continue his association with such a man, and state[28] that Rabbi Meir knew how to separate between the chaff and the wheat – he knew how to separate between good and evil. Rabbi Meir alone was not blinded by the knowledge of the tree. He did not suffer from it’s confusion of good and evil.
Rabbi Meir is a sofer, a scribe, as were Moshe and Chanoch. It is his notes on the teachings of Rabbi Akiva, transmitted to Rebbi, which will help establish the standard text of the Mishna. He is uniquely able to separate between proper and improper, true and false, good and evil. Fundamentally, as a sofer, he is an agent of God. He facilitates the transmission of the Torah of God to this world. In this sense, as a great sofer, he becomes angelic. He is a messenger and transmitter of the Word of God, for he knows how to separate good and evil[29]. Rabbi Meir sees light where others do not. A sofer writes on skin – parchment, but the primordial Torah was written with light.[30] A sofer somehow reaches into heaven and pulls down the words of God and puts them on parchment, and the parchment – skin becomes holy. We should not wonder that when the text of the Torah reads ‘OR (skin), Rabbi Meir reminds us with one word of the primordial light that was lost and will one day be regained through righteousness and acceptance of the Torah, by Chanoch and later by all of Israel.
Rabbi Meir had two teachers: one, as we have already seen, was Elisha ben Avuya. The other was Rabbi Akiva. Elisha ben Avuya became a paid informant for the Romans; he chose evil. Presumably, he lived out his days in the lap of luxury, wearing only the finest garments. Death surely came to him of natural causes, as he lay in a warm soft bed, covered in the finest of clothes. Conversely, his erstwhile colleague, Rabbi Meir’s other teacher, Rabbi Akiva was brutally tortured by the Romans, having the very skin peeled off his body. But what does Rabbi Meir see even in death? What he saw in Bereishit: “Tov mot/Tov meod” --very good. He sees the good in everything[31], because he can connect to the light[32] prior to the sin, before mankind was impacted by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Before the confusion, before the orlah, before the extra skin, he sees the good in everything.[33]
Even when witnessing the horrific torture and death of Rabbi Akiva[34], when his clothes and his skin are stripped from his body, Rabbi Meir still sees good -tov, he still sees light. For in truth Rabbi Akiva was not naked: He was clothed in the clothes of salvation. He was held tightly by the shechinah, spiritually protected like Adam and Eve before the sin, clothed in a garment of light and salvation. Elisha Ben Avuya may have had the finest of furs but he was naked – devoid of salvation, spiritually cold, dark and shivering.
Living as we do in a world after the sin, we must find clothing of light to care for our vulnerable souls. We need to see the good of God and be able to differentiate between good and evil. We are all, in our own way, messengers of God, and we must not succumb to confusion. When God sends us on a mission, He is always with us. We will succeed if we seek out and find the light, feel its warmth and we will then be adorned in the clothing of salvation.
[1] Presumably this “knowledge” was accrued by virtue of eating from the “tree of knowledge of good and evil.”
[2] While the verse seems unequivocal two possibilities exist: 1.only now they became aware of their nakedness, or alternatively (an admittedly more difficult reading) only now they became naked, therefore only now they became aware of the fact.
[3] Talmud Brachot 40a
תלמוד בבלי מסכת ברכות דף מ/א
רבי נחמיה אומר תאנה היתה שבדבר שנתקלקלו בו נתקנו שנאמר ויתפרו עלה תאנה
[4] "Yemei Zikaron", page 203 Translated from Yiddish by Moshe Krone. Aliner Library, World Zionist Organization, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora, Orot, Jerusalem, 1986.
[5] See the comments of the Ohr Hachaim Vayikra 19:26 regarding Orla – a law which teaches that a tree must be left for the first 3 years after planting. This law is a result of Adam eating from the tree too soon;, he should have waited until Friday night and drank the wine (assuming, as does the Zohar, that the Tree of Knowledge was grapes). This is the mystical explanation of the passage in the Talmud that says that Adam was moshech orlato: Adam was born physically and spiritually perfect and therefore was born circumcised – but he pulled the skin back as if to “undo” the circumcision. This is a physical expression symbolizing Adam’s breaking a covenant with God. After this breach, Adam receives “clothing of skin”. Likewise, Eve was cursed with painful loss of virginity – which is also related to being covered with skin.
[6] ויש אומרים דבר הבא מן העור, כגון צמר הארנבים שהוא רך וחם ועשה להם כתנות ממנו: רש"י בראשית פרק ג פסוק כא
[7] Perhaps by the snake shedding its skin. Also found in the Pirki Drebbi Eliezer chapter 20, see comments of Rekanati to Berishit 3:21
[8] The Hebrew word בגד begged has the connotation of rebellion.
[9] See Torah Temimah Berishit 3:31
תורה תמימה הערות בראשית פרק ג הערה לא ובמ"ר כאן איתא, בתורתו של ר' מאיר מצאו כתוב כתנות אור באל"ף, וכתבו המפרשים בתורתו של ר"מ - בחדושי תורה שלו, אבל לדעתי אין הלשון בתורתו מכוון לפי' זה, ויותר נראה לפרש שהי' מדרכו של ר"מ לעשות רמזים וחדושים קצרים בצדי הגליון מהספר שלמד בו…
[10] Rabenu Bachayeh Berishit 3:21
רבינו בחיי על בראשית פרק ג פסוק כא וע"ד המדרש כתנות עור בתורתו של רבי מאיר היה כתוב כתנות אור והכוונה שהלבישם הקב"ה מיני מעלות ומאורות מן האור העליון שהיו בגן עדן כעין משה שזכה להן בהר. וממעלת המלביש תוכל ללמוד מעלת הלבוש כי הכוונה בהם לחיות לעולמים ולהיותם כמלאכי השרת:
[11] Where of course Moshe doesn’t eat or drink – and achieves a demi-angelic status. See Avot Drebi Natan chapter 1.
אבות דרבי נתן פרק ראשון
א"ר נתן מפני מה נתעכב משה כל ששת ימים ולא שרה עליו דבור. בשביל שימרק מכל אכילה ושתיה שהיה במעיו עד שעה שנתקדש ויהא כמלאכי השרת.
[12] קָרַן is a verb; it means “glowed”, not that Moshe grew horns, certainly when the word is connected with the next two words קָרַן עוֹר פָּנָיו the skin on his face glowed, it is hard to understand how someone could make a mistake about this. As is well known certain works of art have spread this misinterpretation, which is most likely based on a mistranslation of the text by Jerome of the Vulgate.
However there is a comment of Rashi in his commentary to Habakuk which suggests that the light which emanated from Moshe’s skin looked like rays of sun:
ספר חבקוק פרק ג
(ד) וְנֹגַהּ כָּאוֹר תִּהְיֶה קַרְנַיִם מִיָּדוֹ לוֹ וְשָׁם חֶבְיוֹן עֻזֹּה \{עֻזּוֹ\}:
His splendor was like the sunrise; rays flashed from his hand, where his power was hidden.
רש"י חבקוק פרק ג פסוק ד
כאור תהיה - כאור המיוחד של שבעת ימי בראשית היה וכן ת"י:
קרנים - לשון מאור כשהוא נוקב וזורח דרך הנקב נראה כמין קרנים בולטין וכן (שמות לד) כי קרן עור פניו:
[13] Despite the unequivocal status of the Torah text being written with an ayin, a surprisingly large number of commentators cite the text with an aleph. I don’t think this is an indication of textual intrigue or doubt, I think this can be attributed to peoples’ minds playing tricks on them, and for some reason they remember – or think they remember - the text stating that Moshe’s face shone (like light).
[14] When Moshe descends from the mountain it is not the first time that his glow is hinted at. Commenting on the words “When she saw that he was a fine child” (Exodus 2:2) Rashi comments: He was fine: when he was born the house filled with light. רש"י (ב) כי טוב הוא - כשנולד נתמלא הבית כולו אורה: שמות פרק ב פסוק ב
Moshe’s glow is already there at infancy.
[15] See Rashi’s comments Talmud Shabbat 88a SV UMoshe Yikach
שני כתרים - מזיו שכינה:
ומשה יקח - אותו עדי, לשון אחר את האהל, לשון בהלו נרו (איוב כט) והוא היה קירון עור פניו:
[16] Zohar, Bereshith, Section 1, Page 36b Soncino edition
R. Hiya says, their eyes were opened to the evil of the world, which they had not known hitherto. Then they knew that they were naked, since they had lost the celestial lustre which had formerly enveloped them, and of which they were now divested. AND THEY SEWED FIG LEAVES. They strove to cover themselves with the (delusive) images from the tree of which they had eaten, the so-called “leaves of the tree”. AND THEY MADE THEMSELVES GIRDLES. R. Jose said: ‘When they obtained knowledge of this world and attached themselves to it, they observed that it was governed by those “leaves of the tree”. They therefore sought in them a stronghold in this world, and so made themselves acquainted with all kinds of magical arts, in order to gird themselves with weapons of those leaves of the tree, for the purpose of self-protection.’ R. Judah said: ‘In this way three came up for judgment and were found guilty, and the terrestrial world was cursed and dislodged from its estate on account of the defilement of the serpent, until Israel stood before Mount Sinai.’ Afterwards God clothed Adam and Eve in garments soothing to the skin, as it is written, HE MADE THEM COATS OF SKIN (‘or). At first they had had coats of light (‘or), which procured them the service of the highest of the high, for the celestial angels used to come to enjoy that light; so it is written, “For thou hast made him but little lower than the angels, and crownest him with glory and honor” (Ps. VIII, 6). Now after their sins they had only coats of skin (‘or), good for the body but not for the soul.
[17] Sefer Shnie Luchot Habrit Pesachim drush #4
ספר השל"ה הקדוש - מסכת פסחים - דרוש רביעי (ט)
וכמו אדם תכלית בריאותו היתה להיות כתנות אור ב'א' כאשר הארכתי בדרשות אחרות, כן משה רבינו ע"ה קרן אור פניו. ולא כתיב נקרן דהוה משמע עתה, רק קרן כתיב כבר. והענין כי בעת מתן תורה היה ראוי להיות תכלית הבריאה וכל האדם בכתנות אור, וזהו העדיים והעטרות וכתרים שנתנו להם בחורב, רק כאשר קילקלו בעגל ויתנצלו בני ישראל את עדיים, דהיינו קירון אור. ובמקום שהיו ראויין להיות כבני עליון, אכן כאדם סליק להו דהיינו אדם קדמאי. אכן משה רבינו ע"ה נשאר לו הקירון אור, כי מהיכי תיתי שינטל ממנו, כן מוכח בזוהר.
[18] Sefer Liquitim Berishit chapter 3
ספר הליקוטים - פרשת בראשית - פרק ג
ויעש ה' אלהים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור וילבישם:
כבר ידעת מ"ש חז"ל בתורתו של ר' מאיר מצאו כתוב כתנות אור. וסוד הענין הוא, כי אדה"ר קודם שחטא היה לו זיהרא עילאה, שהיה מלובש מלבוש רוחני שהוא אור, בסוד הזיהרא עילאה שהיתה לו, כמו שידעת מדרוש שורשי הנשמות, וכיון שחטא, אותה הזיהרא נסתלקה ממנו, כנודע מס"ה פ' בראשית דף ל"ו ריש ע"ב, וז"ל, ותפקחנה עיני שניהם וגו', וידעו כי ערומים הם, דאבדו זיהרא עילאה דהוה חפי עלייהו, ואסתלק מנייהו, ואשתארו ערומים מיניה. ואותה זיהרא היתה יושבת בין החומות של ג"ע שלש מאות שנה, ואח"כ ניתנה לחנוך, כמו שידעת מדרוש שרשי הנשמות, וע"ש. ואחר שחטא אדה"ר, נהפכו הכותנות מאור לעור, והפנימיות שבהם שהוא האור לקחו חנוך ואליהו ז"ל, כנוד' מדרוש שרשי הנשמות וע"ש
[19] I.E. God – by saying “let there be light”
[20] It is significant to note that the Mishna is compiled by Rebbi, he primarily used the notes of Rabbi Meir (the scribe or notetaker) of the lectures of Rabbi Akiva. See Sanhedrin 86a
[21] This is reminiscent if the description in Torah of Moshe seeing the Back as it were of God – which ironically is one of the sources offered for Moshe’s glow. Midrash Rabbah Exodus 47:6
[22] Sefer Beer Mayim Chayim Berishit chapter 3
ספר באר מים חיים פרשת בראשית - פרק ג
ונחזור לענין ר' מאיר אשר בתורתו נעשה עור פניו אורה ממש ועל כן אמרו (עירובין י"ג ע"ב) שהיה מאיר פני חכמים בהלכה. פירוש בשעה שהיה עוסק בהלכה והיה מבהיק זיו אור פניו על החכמים אשר היו אתו עד שגם הם קלטו האור על פניהם ומאורו היה מאיר גם פני חכמים, ועל כן א"ר (עירובין י"ג ע"ב) האי דמחדדנא מחבראי דחזיתיה לר' מאיר מאחוריה ואלמלי חזיתיה מקמאי הויא מחדדנא טפי וכו' עד כאן.
[23] The Midrash compares Chanoch and Eliyahu – specifically regarding their disappearance:
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה כה פסקה א
(א) ויתהלך חנוך את האלהים ואיננו כי לקח אותו אלהים …אפיקורסים שאלו לרבי אבהו אמרו לו אין אנו מוצאין מיתה לחנוך אמר להם למה אמרו לו נאמרה כאן לקיחה ונאמרה להלן (מלכים ב ב) כי היום ה' לוקח את אדונך מעל ראשך אמר להם אם ללקיחה אתם דורשים נאמר כאן לקיחה ונאמר להלן (יחזקאל כד) הנני לוקח ממך את מחמד עיניך א"ר תנחומא יפה השיבן רבי אבהו מטרונה שאלה את ר' יוסי אמרה לו אין אנו מוצאין מיתה בחנוך א"ל אלו נאמר (בראשית ה) ויתהלך חנוך את האלהים ושתק הייתי אומר כדבריך כשהוא אומר ואיננו כי לקח אותו אלהים ואיננו בעולם הזה כי לקח אותו אלהים:
Midrash Rabbah - Genesis XXV:1
AND ENOCH WALKED WITH GOD, AND HE WAS NOT; FOR GOD TOOK HIM (V, 24). …Some sectarians asked R. Abbahu: ‘We do not find that Enoch died?’ ‘How so?’ inquired he. ‘"Taking" is employed here, and also in connection with Elijah,’ said they. ‘If you stress the word "taking",’ he answered, ‘then "taking" is employed here, while in Ezekiel it is said, Behold, I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes,’ etc. (Ezek. XXlV, 16). R. Tanhuma observed: He answered them well. A matron asked R. Jose: ' We do not find death stated of Enoch?’ Said he to her: ‘If it said, AND ENOCH WALKED WITH GOD,
[24] See Malachai Elyon Reuven Margoliot Mossad Harav Kook Jerusalem 1978 (third Edition) page 154 note 26
[25] 2 Kings Chapter 2: 11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, which parted them both assunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
[26] See Talmud Bavli Sotah 13b
[27] See Chagigah 15a. I hope to return to this tortured soul at a later date
[28] Chagigah 15b
[29] Evil – ורע contains the same letters as skin (parchment) עור, this idea is found in Emek Hamelech gate 5 chapter 42 and subsequently in the writings of Rav Zadok Hakohen of Lublin, Liquitie Halachot, and the Leshem
[30] See Rashi Dvarim 33:2
רש"י על דברים פרק לג פסוק ב
אש דת שהיתה כתובה מאז לפניו באש שחורה על גבי אש לבנה
[31] As did his teacher Rabbi Akiva, Brachot 60b-61a and his teacher (see Brachot 22a) Nahum ish Gamzu Taanit 21a.
[32] Sefer Risisai Laila section 53
ספר רסיסי לילה - אות נג
ולעצמו לא האירה תורתו מפני ריבוי הקליפה הסובבתה. אבל רבי מאיר היה יכול להבדיל ולהפריד התוך מהקליפה כי הוא היה מלא אור כשמו שעל כן בתורתו כתוב כתנות אור באל"ף (בראשית רבה כ, יב) שגם הלבוש של עור מלא אור והוא כמו אור האבוקה שמושך אליו כל אור קטן שמתקרב לו כך היה יכול למשוך אור הפנימי שהיה באחר אליו:
[33] On a halachik level this may be challenging, and hence we are told that the law was not established according to Rabbi Meir.
[34] Rabbi Soloveitchik makes this point. See "Yemei Zikaron" page 205.
Clothing of Light
© 2008 Rabbi Ari D. Kahn
In the aftermath of man’s sin in Eden, Adam and Eve find themselves exposed, vulnerable, humiliated – naked.
בראשית פרק ג
(ז) וַתִּפָּקַחְנָה עֵינֵי שְׁנֵיהֶם וַיֵּדְעוּ כִּי עֵירֻמִּם הֵם …
And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew[1] that they were naked[2].
In a feeble attempt to cover themselves they take fig leaves and fashion a primitive covering.
וַיִּתְפְּרוּ עֲלֵה תְאֵנָה וַיַּעֲשׂוּ לָהֶם חֲגֹרֹת:
and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons [loincloths?] (Genesis 3:7).
Their purpose was to cover up their nakedness. The choice of fig leaves has caused at least one rabbinic tradition to identify the Tree of Knowledge with the fig tree[3]: In a frantic attempt to cover up, they chose the closest material at hand.
Subsequently – after the investigation, trial, sentencing and punishment, we find the conclusion of the saga, and again it addresses their attire:
(כא) וַיַּעַשׂ ה’ אֱלֹהִים לְאָדָם וּלְאִשְׁתּוֹ כָּתְנוֹת עוֹר וַיַּלְבִּשֵׁם:
For Adam and for his wife the Lord God made coats of skins, and clothed them (Genesis 3:21).
The difference is striking: Adam and Eve found flimsy fig leaves and fashioned a loin cloth of sorts, whereas God provides fine leather coats to protect and provide shelter from the elements. While man only managed to cover up, God provided man with clothing “and clothed them”. While man simply didn’t want to be stark naked in public, God chose to act with kindness. Despite the sin and the resultant alienation, God performs an incredibly tender gesture: He clothes them, He cares for them; He takes care of wayward, sinful man.
We exist in a world of clothing and costumes, and it all began with a fig leaf. It was only by virtue of the bite taken from a mysterious, dangerous, deadly fruit that an awareness of nakedness appeared. But what was the nature of this nakedness? Was it physical or spiritual? Was the awareness of their nakedness the result of a spiritual shift, of a metamorphosis which occurred in the aftermath of sin? Or was man altered in a more physical fashion?
We would have expected that sin would cause a spiritual reaction – but we see that the response of Adam and Eve is to cover up their bodies which had become vulnerable; they became embarrassed, humiliated. Perhaps this is the result of their souls feeling alienated. But what of their souls? Did they seek spiritual cover? How does one cover up a tainted soul? Surely the soul was impacted, damaged and tainted with sin by their action. What was the reaction?
When discussing this point Rav Yosef Dov Solovietchik[4] introduced the following verse:
ישעיהו פרק סא
(י) שׂוֹשׂ אָשִׂישׂ בַּה’ תָּגֵל נַפְשִׁי בֵּאלֹהַי כִּי הִלְבִּישַׁנִי בִּגְדֵי יֶשַׁע מְעִיל צְדָקָה יְעָטָנִי כֶּחָתָן יְכַהֵן פְּאֵר וְכַכַּלָּה תַּעְדֶּה כֵלֶיהָ:
I greatly rejoice in the Lord my soul rejoices with God for he has clothed me in the clothing of salvation, He has wrapped me in a robe of victory, like a bridegroom adorned with a turban and a bride bedecked with her finery (Isaiah 61:10).
When Adam and Eve sin, they lose the clothing of salvation. The result is the loss of Divine protection, of the feeling of nearness and closeness with God, the feeling of a child wrapped in the embrace of a loving mother. It is then that they feel naked. Their response is to cover their bodies, apparently oblivious to the damage done to their souls. In place of this “clothing of salvation” which has dissipated, they cover themselves, but God provides them with new clothing.
In partaking of the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve succumbed to their animal instincts, acting with no regard for their spiritual identity and seeking only immediate gratification. The spiritual consequences follow immediately: God clothes them in animal skins or leather. A metamorphosis has taken place. Their new clothing reflects their diminished status.
What was the nature of this leather clothing? [5] Various traditions suggest different materials. Rashi[6] cites a tradition that it was warm, soft rabbit fur. The Targum (Pseudo) Yonatan[7] says the leather came from something near at hand, from something to be found at the scene of their crime. God gave them garments of snake skin, as if to say: They were seduced by the serpent, the result was their nakedness, and now they will be wrapped in a fitting symbol of their treachery[8].
The Midrash reports that the clothes of Adam were made of a completely different material:
בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשה כ ד"ה יב ויעש ה'
ויעש ה' אלהים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור וילבישם בתורתו של ר"מ מצאו כתוב כתנות אור אלו בגדי אדם הראשון שהן דומים לפיגם (לפנס( רחבים מלמטה וצרין מלמעלה
In R. Meir's Torah it was found written, ‘Garments of light (ohr): this refers to Adam's garments, which were like a torch [shedding radiance], broad at the bottom and narrow at the top.
This comment is curious. The Torah text reads ‘OR -- עור skin or leather. This Midrash relates a tradition or commentary Rabbi Meir recorded in the margin[9] that rendered the word OHR אור – light. Why would God make for them clothing of light?
Rabbenu Bachayeh admits that the p’shat – the straightforward level of understanding the Torah - is that God made for wayward man “dignified clothing”. However according to Rabenu Bachayeh’s understanding of the Midrash, this was clothing of light, referring specifically to primordial light. As any clothing reflects the designer, this clothing, provided by God, must therefore reflect something Divine.
Prior to eating from the tree man was meant to live forever, like the angels. Eating from the tree caused death, loss of immortality, but the new clothing was somehow angelic, possessing an element of what was lost.[10] By way of reference, Rabenu Bachayeh suggests that these garments are similar to what enveloped Moshe on the mountain[11]. When Moshe descends from the Mountain for the second time, the Torah describes:
שמות פרק לד
(כט) וַיְהִי בְּרֶדֶת מֹשֶׁה מֵהַר סִינַי וּשְׁנֵי לֻחֹת הָעֵדֻת בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה בְּרִדְתּוֹ מִן הָהָר וּמֹשֶׁה לֹא יָדַע כִּי [12]קָרַן עוֹר פָּנָיו בְּדַבְּרוֹ אִתּוֹ: (ל) וַיַּרְא אַהֲרֹן וְכָל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת מֹשֶׁה וְהִנֵּה קָרַן עוֹר פָּנָיו וַיִּירְאוּ מִגֶּשֶׁת אֵלָיו:
When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the Testimony in his hands, Moshe was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the LORD. 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him (Shmot 34, 29).
Here it clearly states that the skin on Moshe’s face glowed: ‘OR is spelled with an ayin.[13]
Rabenu Bachayeh is apparently suggesting that at times the words ‘OR -“skin” (with an ayin) and OHR- “light” (with an aleph) can be connected. This is the significance to the glow of the skin of Moshe[14].
According to Rabbinic tradition, when the Jews stood at Sinai and declared na’aseh ve’nishma, “We will do we will listen”, each received two crowns. However when they sinned with the Golden Calf, they lost those precious crowns. These hundreds of thousands of crowns all came to Moshe, creating for him an incredible glow.
מסכת שבת פח
דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי סִימָלאִי, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהִקְדִּימוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל "נַעֲשֶׂה" לְ"נִשְׁמַע", בָּאוּ שִׁשִּׁים רִבּוֹא שֶׁל מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת. לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִיִשְׁרָאֵל קָשְׁרוּ לוֹ שְׁתֵּי כְּתָרִים, אֶחָד כְּנֶגֶד "נַעֲשֶׂה", וְאֶחָד כְּנֶגֶד "נִשְׁמַע". וְכֵּיוָן שֶׁחָטְאוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל, יָרְדוּ מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים רִבּוֹא מַלְאֲכֵי חַבָּלָה וּפְרָקוּם... אָמַר רַב יוֹחָנָן, וְכוּלָּן - זָכָה מֹשֶׁה וּנְטָלָן.
R. Simlai lectured: When the Israelites gave precedence to ‘we will do’ over ‘we will listen,’ six hundred thousand ministering angels came and set two crowns upon each man of Israel, one as a reward for ‘we will do,’ and the other as a reward for ‘we will listen’. But as soon as Israel sinned, one million two hundred thousand destroying angels descended and removed them, ... R. Johanan observed: And Moses was privileged and received them all. (Talmud Bavli Shabbat 88a)
According to Rashi[15] this is the source of Moshe’s glow, the concentrated crowns of all of Israel. The Zohar[16] reports a tradition that Adam and Eve originally possessed Divine primordial light, and when they sinned this light disappeared. When the Jewish people stood at Sinai the light returned to each person in the shape of crowns. When the Jews subsequently sinned the crowns were forfeited, with all the light going to Moshe – which means now Moshe possessed primordial light.[17]
Rabbi Meir is therefore teaching that the clothing that God gave to Man was from this same primordial light. The Ari”zal[18], citing the Zohar, explains that Adam and Eve originally were covered with supernal light. Upon sinning they lost this luster and only then became naked. They were now naked, having lost their refulgent covering. This is the meaning of Rabbi Meir’s marginal note: God covered them with skin – but previously He had covered them with light.
The Midrash reports a second instance of a note in the margin of Rabbi Meir’s book:
בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשה ט ד"ה ה בתורתו של
בתורתו של רבי מאיר מצאו כתוב, והנה טוב מאד והנה טוב מות
In the copy of R. Meir's Torah was found written: AND, BEHOLD, IT WAS VERY (ME'OD) GOOD: and behold, death (mot) was good. (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis IX:5)
The “goodness” of death is difficult for man to comprehend, although it may be no more difficult than the association between light and skin. Both of these comments by Rabbi Meir, while at first inexplicable, must somehow stem from a unique perspective. Perhaps a passage in the Talmud providing some biographical information about Rabbi Meir can shed some light on these comments.
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף יג עמוד א
והאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל משום רבי מאיר: כשהייתי לומד אצל רבי עקיבא הייתי מטיל קנקנתום לתוך הדיו ולא אמר לי דבר. וכשבאתי אצל רבי ישמעאל אמר לי: בני, מה מלאכתך? אמרתי לו: לבלר אני. אמר לי: בני, הוי זהיר במלאכתך שמלאכתך מלאכת שמים היא, שמא אתה מחסר אות אחת או מייתר אות אחת - נמצאת מחריב את כל העולם כולו.
Did not Rav Judah in fact state in the name of Samuel who had it from R. Meir: When I was studying under R. Akiva I used to put vitriol into my ink and he told me nothing [against it], but when I subsequently came to R. Yishmael the latter said to me, ‘My son, what is your occupation?’ I told him, ‘I am a scribe’, and he said to me, ‘Be meticulous in your work, for your occupation is a sacred one; should you perchance omit or add one single letter, you would thereby destroy all the universe’.
Rabbi Meir made a living as a scribe. He understood the importance of every letter. He knew that leaving out a single letter could have dire consequences. The thought of changing a word probably never crossed his mind, yet he did write comments in the margins, indicating deeper levels of understanding and meaning. His colleagues, however, did not always understand him.
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף יג עמוד ב
אמר רבי אחא בר חנינא: גלוי וידוע לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם שאין בדורו של רבי מאיר כמותו, ומפני מה לא קבעו הלכה כמותו - שלא יכלו חביריו לעמוד על סוף דעתו. שהוא אומר על טמא טהור ומראה לו פנים, על טהור טמא ומראה לו פנים. תנא: לא רבי מאיר שמו אלא רבי נהוראי שמו, ולמה נקרא שמו רבי מאיר - שהוא מאיר עיני חכמים בהלכה. ולא נהוראי שמו אלא רבי נחמיה שמו, ואמרי לה רבי אלעזר בן ערך שמו, ולמה נקרא שמו נהוראי - שמנהיר עיני חכמים בהלכה. אמר רבי: האי דמחדדנא מחבראי - דחזיתיה לרבי מאיר מאחוריה, ואילו חזיתיה מקמיה - הוה מחדדנא טפי. דכתיב )ישעיהו ל'(: והיו עיניך ראות את מוריך.
R. Aha b. Hanina said: It is revealed and known before Him Who spoke and the world came into existence[19], that in the generation of R. Meir there was none equal to him; then why was not the halachah fixed in agreement with his views? Because his colleagues could not fathom the depths of his mind, for he would declare the ritually unclean to be clean and supply plausible proof, and the ritually clean to be unclean and also supply plausible proof.
One taught: His name was not R. Meir but R. Nehorai. Then why was he called ‘R. Meir’? Because he enlightened the Sages in the halachah. His name in fact was not even Nehorai but R. Nehemiah or, as others say: R. Eleazar b. Arak. Then why was he called ‘Nehorai’? Because he enlightened the Sages in the halachah.
Rebbi[20] declared: The only reason why I am keener than my colleagues is that I saw the back[21] of R. Meir, but had I had a front view of him I would have been keener still, for it is written in Scripture: “Thine eyes shall see thy teacher.”
We learn several things from this passage. Rabbi Meir was unparalleled in his generation. Despite this, the law was not established in his opinion, because his colleagues did not understand his dazzling brilliance. We also learn that his name “Meir” means light[22].
Meir, who was full of light, sees in our passage in Bereishit “light” instead of “skin”, and in the second instance, instead of “good”, sees “death”. His vocation may have been more than incidental in leading up to the brilliant but radical insights he had to the Torah and halachah.
The Ari”zal taught:
ספר הליקוטים - פרשת בראשית - פרק ג
ואחר שחטא אדה"ר, נהפכו הכותנות מאור לעור, והפנימיות שבהם שהוא האור לקחו חנוך ואליהו ז"ל, כנוד' מדרוש שרשי הנשמות וע"ש. והחיצוניות שהוא העור, לקחו נמרוד והדומים לו,
After Adam sinned his clothing turned from light to skin, and the inner aspect, which is the light, was taken by Chanoch and Eliyahu, as is known … the external aspect was inherited by Nimrod and those of his ilk.
The primordial light lost by Adam and Eve was inherited by Chanoch and Eliyahu. The common denominator between Chanoch and Eliyahu[23] is that although both were born of human stuff, each was elevated. They became angels[24], and live forever. The ascension of Eliyahu is better known, both his ascension in a fiery chariot[25], and his occasional visitations (at each Pesach seder and at circumcision ceremonies).
Regarding Chanoch, the Torah deviates from standard practice and does not tell of his death:
And Chanoch (Enoch) walked with God; and he was not; for God took him. (Bereishit 5:24)
The Targum (Pseudo) Yonatan explains:
יונתן בראשית פרק ה פסוק כד
(כד) וּפְלַח חֲנוֹךְ בְּקוּשְׁטָא קֳדָם יְיָ וְהָא לֵיתוֹהִי עִם דַיְירֵי אַרְעָא אֲרוּם אִתְנְגִיד וְסַלִיק לִרְקִיעָא בְּמֵימַר קָדָם יְיָ וּקְרָא שְׁמֵיהּ מִיטַטְרוֹן סַפְרָא רַבָּא:
כתר יונתן בראשית פרק ה פסוק כד
(כד) ויעבוד חנוך באמת לפני יי והנה איננו עם תושבי הארץ כי נלקח ועלה לרקיע במאמר לפני יי ויקרא שמו מיטטרון הסופר הגדול:
And Chanoch walked in righteousness before God, and he ceased to exist with the dwellers of Earth. He ascended to heaven in front of God and he was given the name Metatron the Great Scribe. (Targum (Pseudo) Yonatan Bereishit 5:24)
The one other person described as a great scribe, “Safra Rabbah”, was none other than Moshe.[26]
Adam and Eve were supposed to live forever and be angel-like. Due to their sin they lose this quality and the light that accompanies it. Chanoch and Eliyahu subsequently become angels and inherit this light. Chanoch becomes the Great Scribe and is now known as Metatron, the Heavely Scribe. We come across him in a crucial passage in the Gemara:
תלמוד בבלי מסכת חגיגה דף טו עמוד א
אחר קיצץ בנטיעות, עליו הכתוב אומר +קהלת ה'+ אל תתן את פיך לחטיא את בשרך. מאי היא? חזא מיטטרון דאתיהבא ליה רשותא למיתב למיכתב זכוותא דישראל, אמר: גמירא דלמעלה לא הוי לא ישיבה ולא תחרות ולא עורף ולא עיפוי, שמא חס ושלום שתי רשויות הן. אפקוהו למיטטרון ומחיוהו שיתין פולסי דנורא.
Aher mutilated the shoots. Of him Scripture says: Suffer not thy mouth to bring thy flesh into guilt. What does it refer to? — He saw that permission was granted to Metatron to sit and write down the merits of Israel. Said he: It is taught as a tradition that on high there is no sitting and no emulation, and no back, and no weariness. Perhaps, — God forfend! — there are two divinities! [Thereupon] they led Metatron forth, and punished him with sixty fiery lashes, saying to him: Why didst thou not rise before him when thou didst see him? Permission was [then] given to him to strike out the merits of Aher. (Talmud Bavli Chagiga 15a)
The context is a spiritual journey of four great scholars who enter an orchard – or perhaps The orchard: Pardes, no less than paradise itself – or the Garden of Eden. One of the four sees an angel sitting and writing. This is Metatron the Great Scribe, and his job is to record the good deeds of Israel. Aher (the erstwhile sage Elisha Ben Avuyah) sees him sitting at work and becomes confused: Preconceived notions of dualism[27] cause confusion between good and evil. This reminds us of the tree which caused confusion between good and evil. Aher cannot reconcile what he has seen, and becomes a heretic.
Despite his apostasy, Aher retains one famous student: Rabbi Meir continues to study with is fallen master. The Masters of the Talmud questioned how Rabbi Meir could continue his association with such a man, and state[28] that Rabbi Meir knew how to separate between the chaff and the wheat – he knew how to separate between good and evil. Rabbi Meir alone was not blinded by the knowledge of the tree. He did not suffer from it’s confusion of good and evil.
Rabbi Meir is a sofer, a scribe, as were Moshe and Chanoch. It is his notes on the teachings of Rabbi Akiva, transmitted to Rebbi, which will help establish the standard text of the Mishna. He is uniquely able to separate between proper and improper, true and false, good and evil. Fundamentally, as a sofer, he is an agent of God. He facilitates the transmission of the Torah of God to this world. In this sense, as a great sofer, he becomes angelic. He is a messenger and transmitter of the Word of God, for he knows how to separate good and evil[29]. Rabbi Meir sees light where others do not. A sofer writes on skin – parchment, but the primordial Torah was written with light.[30] A sofer somehow reaches into heaven and pulls down the words of God and puts them on parchment, and the parchment – skin becomes holy. We should not wonder that when the text of the Torah reads ‘OR (skin), Rabbi Meir reminds us with one word of the primordial light that was lost and will one day be regained through righteousness and acceptance of the Torah, by Chanoch and later by all of Israel.
Rabbi Meir had two teachers: one, as we have already seen, was Elisha ben Avuya. The other was Rabbi Akiva. Elisha ben Avuya became a paid informant for the Romans; he chose evil. Presumably, he lived out his days in the lap of luxury, wearing only the finest garments. Death surely came to him of natural causes, as he lay in a warm soft bed, covered in the finest of clothes. Conversely, his erstwhile colleague, Rabbi Meir’s other teacher, Rabbi Akiva was brutally tortured by the Romans, having the very skin peeled off his body. But what does Rabbi Meir see even in death? What he saw in Bereishit: “Tov mot/Tov meod” --very good. He sees the good in everything[31], because he can connect to the light[32] prior to the sin, before mankind was impacted by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Before the confusion, before the orlah, before the extra skin, he sees the good in everything.[33]
Even when witnessing the horrific torture and death of Rabbi Akiva[34], when his clothes and his skin are stripped from his body, Rabbi Meir still sees good -tov, he still sees light. For in truth Rabbi Akiva was not naked: He was clothed in the clothes of salvation. He was held tightly by the shechinah, spiritually protected like Adam and Eve before the sin, clothed in a garment of light and salvation. Elisha Ben Avuya may have had the finest of furs but he was naked – devoid of salvation, spiritually cold, dark and shivering.
Living as we do in a world after the sin, we must find clothing of light to care for our vulnerable souls. We need to see the good of God and be able to differentiate between good and evil. We are all, in our own way, messengers of God, and we must not succumb to confusion. When God sends us on a mission, He is always with us. We will succeed if we seek out and find the light, feel its warmth and we will then be adorned in the clothing of salvation.
[1] Presumably this “knowledge” was accrued by virtue of eating from the “tree of knowledge of good and evil.”
[2] While the verse seems unequivocal two possibilities exist: 1.only now they became aware of their nakedness, or alternatively (an admittedly more difficult reading) only now they became naked, therefore only now they became aware of the fact.
[3] Talmud Brachot 40a
תלמוד בבלי מסכת ברכות דף מ/א
רבי נחמיה אומר תאנה היתה שבדבר שנתקלקלו בו נתקנו שנאמר ויתפרו עלה תאנה
[4] "Yemei Zikaron", page 203 Translated from Yiddish by Moshe Krone. Aliner Library, World Zionist Organization, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora, Orot, Jerusalem, 1986.
[5] See the comments of the Ohr Hachaim Vayikra 19:26 regarding Orla – a law which teaches that a tree must be left for the first 3 years after planting. This law is a result of Adam eating from the tree too soon;, he should have waited until Friday night and drank the wine (assuming, as does the Zohar, that the Tree of Knowledge was grapes). This is the mystical explanation of the passage in the Talmud that says that Adam was moshech orlato: Adam was born physically and spiritually perfect and therefore was born circumcised – but he pulled the skin back as if to “undo” the circumcision. This is a physical expression symbolizing Adam’s breaking a covenant with God. After this breach, Adam receives “clothing of skin”. Likewise, Eve was cursed with painful loss of virginity – which is also related to being covered with skin.
[6] ויש אומרים דבר הבא מן העור, כגון צמר הארנבים שהוא רך וחם ועשה להם כתנות ממנו: רש"י בראשית פרק ג פסוק כא
[7] Perhaps by the snake shedding its skin. Also found in the Pirki Drebbi Eliezer chapter 20, see comments of Rekanati to Berishit 3:21
[8] The Hebrew word בגד begged has the connotation of rebellion.
[9] See Torah Temimah Berishit 3:31
תורה תמימה הערות בראשית פרק ג הערה לא ובמ"ר כאן איתא, בתורתו של ר' מאיר מצאו כתוב כתנות אור באל"ף, וכתבו המפרשים בתורתו של ר"מ - בחדושי תורה שלו, אבל לדעתי אין הלשון בתורתו מכוון לפי' זה, ויותר נראה לפרש שהי' מדרכו של ר"מ לעשות רמזים וחדושים קצרים בצדי הגליון מהספר שלמד בו…
[10] Rabenu Bachayeh Berishit 3:21
רבינו בחיי על בראשית פרק ג פסוק כא וע"ד המדרש כתנות עור בתורתו של רבי מאיר היה כתוב כתנות אור והכוונה שהלבישם הקב"ה מיני מעלות ומאורות מן האור העליון שהיו בגן עדן כעין משה שזכה להן בהר. וממעלת המלביש תוכל ללמוד מעלת הלבוש כי הכוונה בהם לחיות לעולמים ולהיותם כמלאכי השרת:
[11] Where of course Moshe doesn’t eat or drink – and achieves a demi-angelic status. See Avot Drebi Natan chapter 1.
אבות דרבי נתן פרק ראשון
א"ר נתן מפני מה נתעכב משה כל ששת ימים ולא שרה עליו דבור. בשביל שימרק מכל אכילה ושתיה שהיה במעיו עד שעה שנתקדש ויהא כמלאכי השרת.
[12] קָרַן is a verb; it means “glowed”, not that Moshe grew horns, certainly when the word is connected with the next two words קָרַן עוֹר פָּנָיו the skin on his face glowed, it is hard to understand how someone could make a mistake about this. As is well known certain works of art have spread this misinterpretation, which is most likely based on a mistranslation of the text by Jerome of the Vulgate.
However there is a comment of Rashi in his commentary to Habakuk which suggests that the light which emanated from Moshe’s skin looked like rays of sun:
ספר חבקוק פרק ג
(ד) וְנֹגַהּ כָּאוֹר תִּהְיֶה קַרְנַיִם מִיָּדוֹ לוֹ וְשָׁם חֶבְיוֹן עֻזֹּה \{עֻזּוֹ\}:
His splendor was like the sunrise; rays flashed from his hand, where his power was hidden.
רש"י חבקוק פרק ג פסוק ד
כאור תהיה - כאור המיוחד של שבעת ימי בראשית היה וכן ת"י:
קרנים - לשון מאור כשהוא נוקב וזורח דרך הנקב נראה כמין קרנים בולטין וכן (שמות לד) כי קרן עור פניו:
[13] Despite the unequivocal status of the Torah text being written with an ayin, a surprisingly large number of commentators cite the text with an aleph. I don’t think this is an indication of textual intrigue or doubt, I think this can be attributed to peoples’ minds playing tricks on them, and for some reason they remember – or think they remember - the text stating that Moshe’s face shone (like light).
[14] When Moshe descends from the mountain it is not the first time that his glow is hinted at. Commenting on the words “When she saw that he was a fine child” (Exodus 2:2) Rashi comments: He was fine: when he was born the house filled with light. רש"י (ב) כי טוב הוא - כשנולד נתמלא הבית כולו אורה: שמות פרק ב פסוק ב
Moshe’s glow is already there at infancy.
[15] See Rashi’s comments Talmud Shabbat 88a SV UMoshe Yikach
שני כתרים - מזיו שכינה:
ומשה יקח - אותו עדי, לשון אחר את האהל, לשון בהלו נרו (איוב כט) והוא היה קירון עור פניו:
[16] Zohar, Bereshith, Section 1, Page 36b Soncino edition
R. Hiya says, their eyes were opened to the evil of the world, which they had not known hitherto. Then they knew that they were naked, since they had lost the celestial lustre which had formerly enveloped them, and of which they were now divested. AND THEY SEWED FIG LEAVES. They strove to cover themselves with the (delusive) images from the tree of which they had eaten, the so-called “leaves of the tree”. AND THEY MADE THEMSELVES GIRDLES. R. Jose said: ‘When they obtained knowledge of this world and attached themselves to it, they observed that it was governed by those “leaves of the tree”. They therefore sought in them a stronghold in this world, and so made themselves acquainted with all kinds of magical arts, in order to gird themselves with weapons of those leaves of the tree, for the purpose of self-protection.’ R. Judah said: ‘In this way three came up for judgment and were found guilty, and the terrestrial world was cursed and dislodged from its estate on account of the defilement of the serpent, until Israel stood before Mount Sinai.’ Afterwards God clothed Adam and Eve in garments soothing to the skin, as it is written, HE MADE THEM COATS OF SKIN (‘or). At first they had had coats of light (‘or), which procured them the service of the highest of the high, for the celestial angels used to come to enjoy that light; so it is written, “For thou hast made him but little lower than the angels, and crownest him with glory and honor” (Ps. VIII, 6). Now after their sins they had only coats of skin (‘or), good for the body but not for the soul.
[17] Sefer Shnie Luchot Habrit Pesachim drush #4
ספר השל"ה הקדוש - מסכת פסחים - דרוש רביעי (ט)
וכמו אדם תכלית בריאותו היתה להיות כתנות אור ב'א' כאשר הארכתי בדרשות אחרות, כן משה רבינו ע"ה קרן אור פניו. ולא כתיב נקרן דהוה משמע עתה, רק קרן כתיב כבר. והענין כי בעת מתן תורה היה ראוי להיות תכלית הבריאה וכל האדם בכתנות אור, וזהו העדיים והעטרות וכתרים שנתנו להם בחורב, רק כאשר קילקלו בעגל ויתנצלו בני ישראל את עדיים, דהיינו קירון אור. ובמקום שהיו ראויין להיות כבני עליון, אכן כאדם סליק להו דהיינו אדם קדמאי. אכן משה רבינו ע"ה נשאר לו הקירון אור, כי מהיכי תיתי שינטל ממנו, כן מוכח בזוהר.
[18] Sefer Liquitim Berishit chapter 3
ספר הליקוטים - פרשת בראשית - פרק ג
ויעש ה' אלהים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור וילבישם:
כבר ידעת מ"ש חז"ל בתורתו של ר' מאיר מצאו כתוב כתנות אור. וסוד הענין הוא, כי אדה"ר קודם שחטא היה לו זיהרא עילאה, שהיה מלובש מלבוש רוחני שהוא אור, בסוד הזיהרא עילאה שהיתה לו, כמו שידעת מדרוש שורשי הנשמות, וכיון שחטא, אותה הזיהרא נסתלקה ממנו, כנודע מס"ה פ' בראשית דף ל"ו ריש ע"ב, וז"ל, ותפקחנה עיני שניהם וגו', וידעו כי ערומים הם, דאבדו זיהרא עילאה דהוה חפי עלייהו, ואסתלק מנייהו, ואשתארו ערומים מיניה. ואותה זיהרא היתה יושבת בין החומות של ג"ע שלש מאות שנה, ואח"כ ניתנה לחנוך, כמו שידעת מדרוש שרשי הנשמות, וע"ש. ואחר שחטא אדה"ר, נהפכו הכותנות מאור לעור, והפנימיות שבהם שהוא האור לקחו חנוך ואליהו ז"ל, כנוד' מדרוש שרשי הנשמות וע"ש
[19] I.E. God – by saying “let there be light”
[20] It is significant to note that the Mishna is compiled by Rebbi, he primarily used the notes of Rabbi Meir (the scribe or notetaker) of the lectures of Rabbi Akiva. See Sanhedrin 86a
[21] This is reminiscent if the description in Torah of Moshe seeing the Back as it were of God – which ironically is one of the sources offered for Moshe’s glow. Midrash Rabbah Exodus 47:6
[22] Sefer Beer Mayim Chayim Berishit chapter 3
ספר באר מים חיים פרשת בראשית - פרק ג
ונחזור לענין ר' מאיר אשר בתורתו נעשה עור פניו אורה ממש ועל כן אמרו (עירובין י"ג ע"ב) שהיה מאיר פני חכמים בהלכה. פירוש בשעה שהיה עוסק בהלכה והיה מבהיק זיו אור פניו על החכמים אשר היו אתו עד שגם הם קלטו האור על פניהם ומאורו היה מאיר גם פני חכמים, ועל כן א"ר (עירובין י"ג ע"ב) האי דמחדדנא מחבראי דחזיתיה לר' מאיר מאחוריה ואלמלי חזיתיה מקמאי הויא מחדדנא טפי וכו' עד כאן.
[23] The Midrash compares Chanoch and Eliyahu – specifically regarding their disappearance:
מדרש רבה בראשית פרשה כה פסקה א
(א) ויתהלך חנוך את האלהים ואיננו כי לקח אותו אלהים …אפיקורסים שאלו לרבי אבהו אמרו לו אין אנו מוצאין מיתה לחנוך אמר להם למה אמרו לו נאמרה כאן לקיחה ונאמרה להלן (מלכים ב ב) כי היום ה' לוקח את אדונך מעל ראשך אמר להם אם ללקיחה אתם דורשים נאמר כאן לקיחה ונאמר להלן (יחזקאל כד) הנני לוקח ממך את מחמד עיניך א"ר תנחומא יפה השיבן רבי אבהו מטרונה שאלה את ר' יוסי אמרה לו אין אנו מוצאין מיתה בחנוך א"ל אלו נאמר (בראשית ה) ויתהלך חנוך את האלהים ושתק הייתי אומר כדבריך כשהוא אומר ואיננו כי לקח אותו אלהים ואיננו בעולם הזה כי לקח אותו אלהים:
Midrash Rabbah - Genesis XXV:1
AND ENOCH WALKED WITH GOD, AND HE WAS NOT; FOR GOD TOOK HIM (V, 24). …Some sectarians asked R. Abbahu: ‘We do not find that Enoch died?’ ‘How so?’ inquired he. ‘"Taking" is employed here, and also in connection with Elijah,’ said they. ‘If you stress the word "taking",’ he answered, ‘then "taking" is employed here, while in Ezekiel it is said, Behold, I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes,’ etc. (Ezek. XXlV, 16). R. Tanhuma observed: He answered them well. A matron asked R. Jose: ' We do not find death stated of Enoch?’ Said he to her: ‘If it said, AND ENOCH WALKED WITH GOD,
[24] See Malachai Elyon Reuven Margoliot Mossad Harav Kook Jerusalem 1978 (third Edition) page 154 note 26
[25] 2 Kings Chapter 2: 11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, which parted them both assunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
[26] See Talmud Bavli Sotah 13b
[27] See Chagigah 15a. I hope to return to this tortured soul at a later date
[28] Chagigah 15b
[29] Evil – ורע contains the same letters as skin (parchment) עור, this idea is found in Emek Hamelech gate 5 chapter 42 and subsequently in the writings of Rav Zadok Hakohen of Lublin, Liquitie Halachot, and the Leshem
[30] See Rashi Dvarim 33:2
רש"י על דברים פרק לג פסוק ב
אש דת שהיתה כתובה מאז לפניו באש שחורה על גבי אש לבנה
[31] As did his teacher Rabbi Akiva, Brachot 60b-61a and his teacher (see Brachot 22a) Nahum ish Gamzu Taanit 21a.
[32] Sefer Risisai Laila section 53
ספר רסיסי לילה - אות נג
ולעצמו לא האירה תורתו מפני ריבוי הקליפה הסובבתה. אבל רבי מאיר היה יכול להבדיל ולהפריד התוך מהקליפה כי הוא היה מלא אור כשמו שעל כן בתורתו כתוב כתנות אור באל"ף (בראשית רבה כ, יב) שגם הלבוש של עור מלא אור והוא כמו אור האבוקה שמושך אליו כל אור קטן שמתקרב לו כך היה יכול למשוך אור הפנימי שהיה באחר אליו:
[33] On a halachik level this may be challenging, and hence we are told that the law was not established according to Rabbi Meir.
[34] Rabbi Soloveitchik makes this point. See "Yemei Zikaron" page 205.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)