Twitter

Monday, February 8, 2010

Parshat Mishpatim 5770 -Soul Matters


Parshat Mishpatim 5770
Rabbi Ari Kahn

Soul Matters

As the Parsha begins, the awe of Sinai can still be felt; the words, the sights and the sounds are still fresh in the peoples' memory. Aside from receiving the Torah, the experience at Sinai was transformative on several levels: the Nation of Israel was formed through the shared experiences of the Exodus and the Revelation, and the unity of purpose and destiny was brought into focus at the foot of the mountain. This unity was, in fact, a prerequisite for receiving the Torah and for the covenant they forged, as a nation, with God, succinctly expressed in their declaration, “We will do and we will listen”[1].

And yet, in Parshat Mishpatim (which immediately follows Yitro, the Parsha in which this covenant is formed), a shift occurs. The statutes in this week's Parsha seem to express a far less lofty and idealistic reality. In a clear concession to the frailty of human character, the laws in Parshat Mishpatim deal with slavery, verbal abuse of parents, altercations, and interpersonal discord - even to the point of hatred. The contrast with Parshat Yitro is striking, even when we take the larger view of the Ten Commandments as "macro categories" of law, and Mishpatim as a detailed discussion of "micro laws". We cannot help but sense devolution from the lofty strata of interpersonal and religious sensibility the people experienced at Sinai.

A case in point is the contrast between the Commandment against jealousy in Parshat Yitro, versus the laws in Parshat Mishpatim that speak of enemies and hatred:

שמות פרק כג, ד-ה
כִּי תִפְגַּע שׁוֹר אֹיִבְךָ אוֹ חֲמֹרוֹ תֹּעֶה הָשֵׁב תְּשִׁיבֶנּוּ לוֹ:
כִּי תִרְאֶה חֲמוֹר שֹׂנַאֲךָ רֹבֵץ תַּחַת מַשָּׂאוֹ וְחָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ:
If you chance upon your enemy’s ox or his donkey going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him. If you see the donkey of one whom you hate lying under its burden, you shall refrain from leaving him [to bear the burden]; you shall help him to lift it up. Shmot 23:4,5

Who would have thought that after the elevated and elevating communal and religious experience at Sinai we would need laws to regulate behavior between people who hate one another? Who would have thought that members of the community that was forged at Sinai could consider themselves enemies? Unfortunately, this seems to reflect a realistic appraisal of human nature, and the Torah contains guidelines for human interaction even in such an undesirable eventuality.

Close examination of this law may give us insight into much larger questions of Torah law and philosophy. The verses speak rather amorphously of "the one you hate", "your enemy." There is no explanation of these negative feelings, no backdrop to the animosity. This leads us to two possible conclusions: First, the object of  these negative feelings is a sinner, who is undeserving of our love.[2] His own shortcomings cause others to distance themselves and reject him. The other possibility is that we hate because of our own shortcomings; we  lash out at the innocent, projecting our self-hatred elsewhere. If the latter is the case, and our hatred is due to our own shortcomings, we can readily understand why the Torah would instruct us to transcend our own pettiness.[3] Yet the Talmud  states that the Torah is, in fact, addressing a case where the object of hatred is in fact a sinner, and treating such a sinner as a hated enemy might then be justified:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת פסחים דף קיג עמוד ב
אמר רבי שמואל בר רב יצחק אמר רב: מותר לשנאתו. שנאמר )שמות כג) 'כי תראה חמור שנאך רבץ תחת משאו' מאי שונא? אילימא שונא נכרי - והא תניא: שונא שאמרו - שונא ישראל, ולא שונא נכרי. אלא פשיטא - שונא ישראל. ומי שריא למסניה? והכתיב )ויקרא יט( 'לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך' - אלא: דאיכא סהדי דעביד איסורא - כולי עלמא נמי מיסני סני ליה, מאי שנא האי? אלא לאו כי האי גוונא, דחזיא ביה איהו דבר ערוה. רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר: מצוה לשנאתו, שנאמר (משלי ח) 'יראת ה'  שנאת  רע'
R. Shmuel son of R. Yitzhak said in Rav's name: It is permissible to hate him, as it is said (Shmot 23), 'If you see the donkey of your enemy lying under its burden.' Now which enemy is meant? Shall we say, a gentile enemy? It was taught: The enemy of whom they spoke is an Israelite enemy, not a gentile enemy. Hence it obviously means an Israelite enemy. But is it permitted to hate him? Surely it is written (Vayikra 19), 'You shall not hate your brother in your heart'! Again, if there are witnesses that any Jew transgressed, all agree that he should be hated! Why is this particular person singled out? Hence it must surely apply to such a case where he had seen something indecent in him. R. Nahman b. Yitzhak said: It is a duty to hate him, as it is written (Mishlei 8),  "God's commandment is to hate wickedness." Talmud Bavli Pesachim 113b

What About The Donkey?
Even when hatred is justified, when the owner of the donkey is a sinner, the Torah obligates us to lend a helping hand. The Talmud explores the rationale of this commandment, but in order to fully understand the sages' conclusion, an introduction is necessary: The context is a larger discussion regarding a person's responsibility to assist the owners of beasts of burden. If two people need help at the same time, one to load a donkey, and the other to unload a donkey, unloading takes precedence. The reasoning is straightforward: the donkey that has completed its work should be unburdened immediately; every additional second that it stands with the load on its back will constitute unnecessary pain. The Talmud's reasoning in this matter establishes a Torah mandate against tza'ar ba'alei haim – causing pain to animals. According to Torah law, man is permitted to ride on an animal or use it to carry a weight, but only if there is a justifiable human need. Once the animal has completed its task, it would be a mitzvah to help the owner unload the animal's burden. On the other hand, loading the burden on the donkey's back would also be a good deed; this helps the owner start his task. The principle that is established is that unloading takes precedence over loading, because the pain of the animal tips the scales in favor of unloading the donkey. Our verse, which commands us to help even an enemy unload his donkey, is thus taken to mean that even when there is a justified reason to dislike a fellow Jew, there is no reason for an innocent animal to suffer due to its owner's indiscretions.

Yetzer Hara – the Real Enemy
Up to this point, the Talmudic discussion is relatively straightforward, but the discussion does not end there. The Talmud goes on to teach a law which is completely counterintuitive.[4] The case involves two animals, one in need of loading and the other unloading; as we have seen, unloading takes precedence. This is so even if the one who needs help loading is a friend and the one who needs unloading is an enemy: unloading takes precedence, out of consideration for the suffering of the animal. If, however, the donkey in need of unloading is owned by a friend and the donkey that needs loading is an enemy, the Talmud rules against this principle:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת בבא מציעא דף לב עמוד ב
תא שמע: אוהב לפרוק ושונא לטעון - מצוה בשונא
Come and hear: If a friend requires unloading, and an enemy loading, one’s [first] obligation is towards his enemy… Talmud Bavli Bava Metziah 32b

If in fact tza'ar ba'alei haim – causing animals pain - is a Torah prohibition, how can we justify giving precedence to loading the enemy's donkey? The Talmudic discussion does not leave this seemingly strange ruling open-ended:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת בבא מציעא דף לב עמוד ב
תא שמע: אוהב לפרוק ושונא לטעון - מצוה בשונא כדי לכוף את יצרו. ואי סלקא דעתך צער בעלי חיים דאורייתא, הא עדיף ליה! - אפילו הכי, כדי לכוף את יצרו עדיף. -
Come and hear: If a friend requires unloading, and an enemy loading, one’s [first] obligation is towards his enemy in order to subdue his evil inclination. Now if you should think that relieving the suffering of an animal is Biblically enjoined, surely the opposite is preferable! Even so, the motive, ‘in order to subdue the evil inclination’, is more compelling. Talmud Bavli Bava Metziah 32b

The rationale offered for this ruling is not immediately understood; how does the evil inclination come into the picture? If there is a mitzvah to help unload an animal's burden, why would the evil inclination need to be suppressed?[5]

Let us consider the psychological or emotional state of the protagonist of these hypothetical cases: A man sees two people who need his help; one is his friend, who needs help unloading a heavy burden from his donkey, and the other, his enemy, needs help loading a burden onto his donkey. This should be a very simple decision: help the friend (and the suffering animal). But the Talmud goes deeper, examining the emotions behind the action: How does our "hero" feel when he is  not helping his enemy? Would he feel that he has missed out on something he would very much have wanted to do because the Torah has commanded him to unload another's burden, or would he feel justified in his feelings of hatred? Would he get satisfaction from the thought that the Torah has enabled him to turn a cold shoulder to his enemy? Would his yetzer tov, his 'good inclination', be at work helping his friend, or would his yetzer hara, his 'evil inclination', be satisfied that his enemy is left to fend for himself? Would helping his friend and fulfilling the letter of the law, while reveling in his enemy's distress, help create a more refined human being?

It is not hard to imagine this man's amusement and satisfaction with the “beauty of Torah” as he helps his friend unload the donkey and watches (or is at least aware of) his enemy laboriously loading a heavy burden unassisted. Which of the two opposing poles of human nature would be satisfied - the yetzer tov (good inclination) or the yetzer hara (evil inclination)? Would his seemingly-righteous act bring him closer to God, or would it reinforce the selfish and self-righteous tendencies that all men possess, distancing him from God?

The Talmud's answer is clear. Even when serving God, even when fulfilling  a Torah commandment, we must always strive to perfect ourselves and thus become closer to God. If the evil inclination is strengthened by a mitzvah, something has gone fundamentally wrong. Thus, in this case, although there is a commandment to help unload the donkey, there is a higher consideration[6]: The purpose of all of Torah is to perfect man and society.[7] 

Return to Sinai
The Talmudic ruling which seemed so strange is an antidote to what may be called "losing sight of the forest by fixating on each and every tree". Parshat Mishpatim teaches us many mitzvot, and there is a risk of getting lost in the commandments, losing sight of the overall purpose of Torah observance. The hero of our hypothetical case might easily be lulled into a false sense of righteousness, blinded by the belief that as long as he is involved in the performance of a mitzvah, a state of perfection is assured. He might naturally feel that he need not think twice, for he is surely fulfilling the will of God. From the Talmudic discussion, we learn that even the performance of the mitzvah is not sufficient. The process of achieving moral and spiritual perfection is two-sided: We must actively nurture our good inclination while at the same time identify and overcome our evil inclination. Only a society that lives by both of these standards can recreate the rapture, and the unity, achieved at Sinai.[8] Perhaps this is meant by the famous statement found in the Pesach Haggada:

הגדה של פסח
אלו קרבנו לפני הר סיני ולא נתן לנו את התורה דיינו
If we had come close before Mount Sinai and not received the Torah it would have sufficed. Pesach Hagaddah

When we arrived at Mount Sinai we were unified:

רש"י על שמות פרק יט פסוק ב
ויחן שם ישראל - כאיש אחד בלב אחד אבל שאר כל החניות בתרעומות ובמחלוקת (מכילתא)
Israel encamped there – as one man with one heart; but all the other encampments were with grudges and divisiveness.  Rashi Shmot 19:2

At Mount Sinai each and every person saw and felt the holiness in all the others. Had we been able to retain that feeling, to maintain that unity without receiving the Torah, it would certainly have been “sufficient”. Unfortunately, we were not capable of creating a just society or achieving spiritual perfection on our own; God gave us Torah and mitzvot as tools to pursue these goals, to bring about personal perfection and national unity. Having received the Torah, we must focus on the goal: through the performance of mitzvot and observance of the commandments, we can rekindle the spiritual and interpersonal experience of holiness and unity of Sinai.





[1] Shmot 24:7
[2] According to the understanding of Rambam, Laws of Murder and Preservation of Life Chapter 13, laws 13,14; Tosafot Pesachim 113b, She'era bo davar erva, and perhaps the Mechaber, Shulchan Oruch Hoshen Mishpat, section 272.
רמב"ם יד החזקה - הלכות רוצח ושמירת נפש פרק יג
(יג) הפוגע בשנים אחד רובץ תחת משאו ואחד פרק מעליו ולא מצא מי שיטעון עמו מצוה לפרוק בתחילה משום צער בעלי חיים ואחר כך טוען במה דברים אמורים בשהיו שניהם שונאים או אוהבים אבל אם היה אחד שונא ואחד אוהב מצוה לטעון עם השונא תחילה כדי לכוף את יצרו הרע:
(יד) השונא שנאמר בתורה הוא מישראל לא מאומות העולם והיאך יהיה לישראל שונא מישראל והכתוב אומר (ויקרא י"ט י"ז) לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך אמרו חכמים כגון שראהו לבדו שעבר עבירה והתרה בו ולא חזר הרי זה מצוה לשנאו עד שיעשה תשובה ויחזור מרשעו תשובה אם מצאו נבהל במשאו מצוה לפרוק ולטעון עמו ולא יניחנו נוטה למות שמא תשובה אם מצאו נבהל במשאו מצוה לפרוק ולטעון עמו ולא יניחנו נוטה למות שמא ישתהה בשביל ממונו ויבא לידי סכנה והתורה הקפידה על נפשות ישראל בין רשעים בין צדיקים מאחר שהם נלוים אל ה' ומאמינים בעיקר הדת שנאמר (יחזקאל ל"ג י"א) אמור אליהם חי אני נאם ה' אלהים אם אחפוץ במות הרשע כי אם בשוב רשע מדרכו וחיה .
תוספות מסכת פסחים דף קיג עמוד ב
שראה בו דבר ערוה - ואם תאמר דבאלו מציאות (ב"מ דף לב: ושם) אמרינן אוהב לפרוק ושונא לטעון מצוה בשונא כדי לכוף את יצרו והשתא מה כפיית יצר שייך כיון דמצוה לשנאתו וי"ל כיון שהוא שונאו גם חבירו שונא אותו דכתיב (משלי כז) כמים הפנים לפנים כן לב האדם לאדם ובאין מתוך כך לידי שנאה גמורה ושייך כפיית יצר.
[3] This is the approach taken by the Ramban, Bava Metziah 32b and the Rema, Shulchan Oruch Hoshen Mishpat, section 272.
חדושי הרמב"ן על מסכת בבא מציעא דף לב/ב
הא דתניא מצוה בשונא כדי לכוף את יצרו. נראה לי דלאו בשונא דקרא משתעי, דקרא הא אוקימנא בפ' ערבי פסחים (קי"ג ב') דחזא ביה איהו לחודיה דבר ערוה ומצוה לשנאתו ולמה יכוף את יצרו, אלא בשונא דעלמא קאי דעביד ביה איסורא כי סני ליה ולפיכך חכמים מזהירין אותו שיכוף את יצרו, אבל בשונא שדבר בו הכתוב אדרבה מצוה להקדים אוהב שהוא אהוב לשמים ולבריות:
שו"ע חושן משפט - סימן ערב
הגה - ודוקא בשונא בעלמא דלא עביד איסורא, אבל אם עביד איסורא ושונאו משום שעבר עבירה, א"צ לטעון עמו כדי לכוף יצרו, דהא יפה עושה ששונאו (נ"י פ' אלו מציאות):

[4] See Akaidat Yitzchak Shaar 98 note 29.
ספר עקידת יצחק הערות - שער צז הערה כ
ובא בקבלה האמיתית וכו' רומז בזה על החז"ל (ב"ע דף ל"ב) "אוהב לפרוק ושונא לניעה מצוה בשונא כדי לכוף את יצרו", והכוונה אף שבהשקפה ראשונה היינו חושבים בהפך להקריב פריקת האוהב מפני ב' דברים הא' בעבור שהוא אוהבנו, והב' להקל עול הבהמה בעבור צער בע"ח בכל זאת נצטוינו להקדים טעינת השונא למען כבוש בזה יצרנו הרע ומחטמת לא אשר בקרבנו, וע"כ נארמ גם הפריקה בשונא (בפ' משפטים) והטעינה באוהב בפרשכר יען כי היישרת האדם המוסרית צריכה לעלות תמיד מהקל אל החמור, ויותר נקל לו לכבוש את יצרו ולמכות שנאתו ולפרוק משא הבהמה בעבור שיאלצוהו לזה גם צער בע"ח והדרש החמלה הטבעית עליה ממה שיוכל להסיר האיבה מלבו ולטעון חמור שונאו למען שחר בזה רק טובת בעליו השונא לו לבד, ורק ע"י עשותו תחילה הפריקה עפ"י מצות בורא ית', ויסיר עי"ז כמס ושנאת את לבו יטעון אח"כ גם את בהמתו יען כי לאט לאט ישכח שנאתו ויחשבהו לאוהב לו:

[5] Tosafot in Pesachim 113b She'era bo davar erva, suggest that if you hate him, he will come to hate you and this will lead to “real hatred”. It is unclear what Tosafot mean by “real hatred”. From a passage in the Tanya, chapter 32, it seems that the hatred which is permitted is to hate the evil within the person, but not the person himself. Therefore the Baal Hatanya teaches that while you may hate the evil, you are still obligated to love the person, and this is not a contradiction. If you display hatred and then in turn they display hatred, the possibility of escalation of hatred exists, and that is what the Talmud is trying to avoid.
תניא פרק לב
מה שכתוב בגמרא שמי שראה בחברו שחטא מצוה לשנאותו... היינו בחבירו בתורה ומצוות, וכבר קיים בו מצוות הוכח תוכיח ...אבל מי שאינו חברו ואינו מקורב אצלו הנה על זה אמר הלל הזקן 'אוהב את הבריות ומקרבן לתורה'  .. צריך למשכן בחבלי עבותות האהבה.... וגם המקורבים אליו והוכיחם ולא שבו מעונותיהם שמצוה לשנאם מצוה לאהבם גם כן, ושתיהן הן אמת, שנאה מצד הרע שבהם ואהבה מצד בחינת הטוב הגנוז שבהם, שהוא ניצוץ אלוקות שבתוכם...
"What about the statement in the Talmud that if you see your colleague sinning you must hate him, and also tell his teacher so that he should hate him as well? That refers to someone who is your peer, who learns Torah and does all the mitzvot. He did something that he should have realized is wrong and you rebuked him for it, as the Torah instructs you, …This love also applies to those who are close to you—the ones that you have rebuked and yet have not repented of their sins. Yes, it is a mitzvah to hate them, but it is also a mitzvah to love them—and both in all earnestness: Hatred due to the evil within them and love due to that aspect of good that is buried within them—meaning the spark of Godliness within them that vitalizes their Godly soul."
[6] The Pardes Yosef Vayikra 25:36 cites the Siftei Zadik, who states that the Talmud's ruling is based on the conclusion that your own spiritual growth takes precedence over the needs of your friend (or, presumably, the animal).
ספר פרדס יוסף על ספר ויקרא פרק כה פסוק לו
ובשפתי צדיק (בהר אות ל"ה) נסתפק אי יהיה אחד אוהב ואחד שונא אי שייך כי היכי דניכף ליצריה, כבבא מציעא (ל"ב.) אוהב לפרוק ושונא לטעון מצוה בשונא כדי לכוף את יצרו, אף שבפריקה מצוה יותר משום צער בעלי חיים דאורייתא מכל מקום משום כפיית היצר יקדים טעינה, כן י"ל כאן שענין כפיית היצר צריך הוא בעצמו וממילא שייך חייך קודמין לחיי חבירך:

[7] See the Rambam, Laws of Temura Chapter 4:13.
רמב"ם יד החזקה - הלכות תמורה פרק ד
וכל אלו הדברים כדי לכוף את יצרו ולתקן דעותיו ורוב דיני התורה אינן אלא עצות מרחוק מגדול העצה לתקן הדעות וליישר כל המעשים

[8] See Shem Mishmuel Parshat Shmini 5671.
ספר שם משמואל פרשת שמיני - שנת תרע"א
 אך הענין משום שהכל נמשך מפאת התכללות ישראל יחד, וע"י כן אז האיר עליהם אור גדול כנ"ל, וזה בשבועותיכם מחמת שבועות שלכם. וכאשר ישים האדם אל לבו איך שזה יתד שהכל תלוי בו, נקל יהי' לו לכוף את יצרו להתאחד עם זולתו, כי לעומת ההתאחדות וההתכללות זוכין להארת זמן מ"ת וזוכין לעתיד לקניגין של צדיקים. וכעין זה שבת אחר ששת ימי המעשה, שששת ימי המעשה הם נגד שש המדות שבכל יום מאירה מדה אחת, יום א' חסד כו', ובשבת נעשה מכולם כלל אחד ומאיר אור גדול שהוא כולל את כולם והולך ואור עד סעודה שלישית שהיא רעוא דרעוין שכולל כל הרצונות למעלה מהמדות, והוא כעין קניגין כנ"ל:

Sunday, January 31, 2010

Parshat Yitro 5770 - Reliving Revelation


Parshat Yitro 5770
Rabbi Ari Kahn

Reliving Revelation

The goal of the Exodus never was merely geographical relocation, the physical removal of the Jewish slaves from the boundaries of Egypt. From the outset, the liberation of the descendents of Avraham had a far more specific goal: The Jews would be liberated, redeemed from exile, and taken to the Promised Land. In order to achieve this, there was one important stop to be made on the way, a rendezvous with God at a very specific spot:

שמות פרק ג: ח, יב
וָאֵרֵד לְהַצִּילוֹ מִיַּד מִצְרַיִם וּלְהַעֲלֹתוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ הַהִוא אֶל אֶרֶץ טוֹבָה וּרְחָבָה אֶל אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ אֶל מְקוֹם הַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַחִתִּי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי:
וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי אֶהְיֶה עִמָּךְ וְזֶה לְּךָ הָאוֹת כִּי אָנֹכִי שְׁלַחְתִּיךָ בְּהוֹצִיאֲךָ אֶת הָעָם מִמִּצְרַיִם תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה:
And I am coming down to save them from the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land to a good and broad land, to a land flowing with milk and honey; to the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Yevusites.
And he said [to Moshe], "For I will be with you; and this shall be a sign to you, that I have sent you; when you have brought forth the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God upon this mountain." Shmot 3:8,12

The liberation of the Israelites from Egypt could have been effectuated in many different ways. Surely, the Almighty could have removed them immediately, making the Exodus effortless and sudden. Yet God's plan, from the outset, was for a slow, deliberate process. We have noted elsewhere that one of the objectives of this process was to reveal the power of God, both to the Jews and to their oppressors, and to unmask the deities of the Egyptian pantheon as nothing more than worthless idols. The Egyptians, as representatives of the non-Jewish world, were only one of the intended audiences for this lesson; in fact, the Jews themselves were no less in need of this display of God's singular dominion over all of creation. Just as the plagues punished the Egyptians for their pagan practices and inhuman cruelty, they prepared the Jews for that preordained rendezvous at the mountain, and the revelation they would experience there.

שמות פרק ו, ז
וְלָקַחְתִּי אֶתְכֶם לִי לְעָם וְהָיִיתִי לָכֶם לֵאלֹקִים וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי אֲנִי  ה’ אֱלֹקֵיכֶם הַמּוֹצִיא אֶתְכֶם מִתַּחַת סִבְלוֹת מִצְרָיִם:
And I will take you to Me for a People, and I will be to you a God; and you shall know that I am the Almighty your God, who brings you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. Shmot 6:7

Knowledge of God was the goal. Each plague revealed more of God’s power, and of the impotence of the gods of Egypt. These escalating displays of God's might, and of His intimate and ongoing involvement in the world which He created, were a type of revelation in and of themselves. Later, as the Jews safely crossed through the sea and witnessed the cruel Egyptians receiving their just reward, they experienced a higher level of revelation of God's power and omnipotence, of His might and justice. Finally, at Sinai, they experienced a unique, full-scale revelation.

Each of these experiences of revelation was accompanied by a very particular content: In each case, the Jewish People were given laws alongside the sights, sounds and experiences. In each case, the sensory lesson was paralleled by an intellectual or cognitive lesson: In Egypt the Jews were instructed in great detail how to keep the Pesach, both as a vehicle for their immediate, personal, physical redemption and as a commemorative holiday to maintain that experience for all time. Similarly, immediately after crossing the sea, at Marah the Jew received more laws[1]. And finally, at Sinai, ten statements were uttered which would impact the entire world and transform the Jewish People forever: The Ten Commandments.

What was the primary importance of the Revelation at Sinai? Was it the laws which were imparted or the sensory experience of an infinite God communicating with man? If we could separate these two elements, the Revelation and the content of the Revelation, we would be left with rather surprising results: It may be presumed that if left to stand alone, the content of the Revelation at Sinai, namely the Ten Commandments, presents a radical departure from accepted social norms and embodies a stunning[2] and potentially transformative social and theological system. Yet, devoid of divine provenance, the message would be relatively unimportant. Had these been a set of laws set down by a community to guide their interpersonal and religious behavior, their impact would have been no greater than any other set of laws that held sway in the ancient world; indeed, the mores of a miniscule band of liberated slaves would have merited no attention whatsoever beyond the bounds of that minute community. Had these words not been the Word of God, delivered in a unique and earth-shattering moment of mass revelation, even had these same words been delivered in a more commonplace fashion to the adherents of the faith, they would not have held the same place in our collective conscience or consciousness, nor would their impact have been so widespread. In other words, the fact that God spoke is more important than what He said; only after one acknowledges that God indeed spoke does the message, the content, the words of that speech attain supreme significance.

In choosing the Haftarah to be read in conjunction with this Parsha, the Rabbis emphasize this idea. The Haftarah reading is utilized as a means to encapsulate and reinforce the major theme of the Parsha, and in this case, the theme has nothing to do with law and everything to do with revelation:

ישעיהו פרק ו, א-ד
בִּשְׁנַת מוֹת הַמֶּלֶךְ עֻזִּיָּהוּ וָאֶרְאֶה אֶת ה' יֹשֵׁב עַל כִּסֵּא רָם וְנִשָּׂא וְשׁוּלָיו מְלֵאִים אֶת הַהֵיכָל:שְׂרָפִים עֹמְדִים מִמַּעַל לוֹ שֵׁשׁ כְּנָפַיִם שֵׁשׁ כְּנָפַיִם לְאֶחָד בִּשְׁתַּיִם יְכַסֶּה פָנָיו וּבִשְׁתַּיִם יְכַסֶּה רַגְלָיו וּבִשְׁתַּיִם יְעוֹפֵף:וְקָרָא זֶה אֶל זֶה וְאָמַר קָדוֹשׁ קָדוֹשׁ קָדוֹשׁ ה' צְבָאוֹת מְלֹא כָל הָאָרֶץ כְּבוֹדוֹ: וַיָּנֻעוּ אַמּוֹת הַסִּפִּים מִקּוֹל הַקּוֹרֵא וְהַבַּיִת יִמָּלֵא עָשָׁן:
In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also God sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the Sanctuary. Above it stood the seraphim; each one had six wings; with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he did fly. And one cried to another, and said, 'Holy, holy, holy, is the God of hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory.' And the posts of the door moved at the voice of he who cried, and the [Temple] house was filled with smoke. Yishayahu 6:1-4

Yishayahu recounts a spectacular vision, a personal revelation of the majesty of God and His holy minions. And yet, the association of this prophecy with our Parsha is not necessarily the only possible choice; various other, perhaps more appropriate, sections of the Prophets could have been utilized. In fact, when the Ten Commandments are read during the holiday service on Shavuot, a different section is read as the Haftarah: the section which records the quintessential revelation of the Chariot of Yechezkel. This leads us to a simple, unavoidable question: why the different Haftarahs? Why was the portion from Yechezkel chosen as the Haftarah for Shavuot, while the same verses are paired with Yishayahu's vision for this week's reading?[3]

In fact, the Talmud records a certain tension regarding the choice of Haftarah for Shavuot: The association of the Revelation of the Chariot as the reading for Shavuot was not a foregone conclusion.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת מגילה דף לא עמוד א
בעצרת (דברים ט"ז), "שבעה שבועות". ומפטירין (חבקוק ג') בחבקוק. אחרים אומרים: (שמות י"ט), "בחדש השלישי", ומפטירין (יחזקאל א') במרכבה. והאידנא דאיכא תרי יומי - עבדינן כתרוייהו, ואיפכא.
On Shavuot (Pentecost), we read (Devarim 16), "Seven weeks," and for haftarah a chapter from Habakuk (chapter 3). According to others, we read “In the third month”(Shmot 19), and for haftarah the account of the Divine Chariot (Yechezkel 1). Nowadays that we observe two days, we follow both courses, but in the reverse order. Talmud Bavli Megila 31a

The Talmudic discussion expresses a tension that is part of a larger debate regarding the nature of Shavuot: Is the focus on the agricultural aspect of the holiday which is clearly stated in the Torah, or is it on the Revelation, which is traditionally associated with this same holiday?[4] The conclusion is that we commemorate both the Feast of weeks, which is agricultural, and the Sinaitic Revelation which took place on that date. This technical resolution is a convenient combination of these two aspects, reflected in the scriptural readings, appropriate for Jews in the Diaspora who celebrate Shavuot over two days.[5] By twinning the reading from Parshat Yitro with the Haftarah from Yechezkel and assigning them to the first day of the holiday, the Revelation is deemed the primary theme; the second day of the festival is of lesser stature, and the "leftover" readings are relegated to secondary status. In short, our question remains unanswered: why is the Haftarah of the Chariot read on Shavuot, but not for Parshat Yitro as well? If the main thrust of these verses is the Sinaitic Revelation, why did the Sages establish a different reading for this week's Parsha?

There is an important distinction between the reading for this Shabbat and the reading for Shavuot which may help clarify the issue: This week's Torah reading is the entire Parshat Yitro, whereas on Shavuot only certain sections are read. The sections deemed germane to the holiday focus on the preparations for the Revelation and the Revelation itself. While in both instances, the Revelation is the central theme – on Shavuot it is the only theme. Thus, while the same words are read on two different occasions, they are framed by different contexts. We may say, then, that although the same words are read on both occasions, they do not ultimately deliver the same message.

The public reading of the Torah on each of these two occasions is a complex interplay between the written word and the traditions regarding the cantillation of these words. Although the description of the content of the Sinaitic revelation is universally known as the Ten Utterances or Ten Commandments, the written Torah, dictated to Moshe by God, actually groups four of the Commandments in one verse, ostensibly in one statement or utterance:

שמות פרק כ, יג
לֹא תִּרְצָח (ס) לֹא תִּנְאָף (ס) לֹא תִּגְנֹב (ס) לֹא תַעֲנֶה בְרֵעֲךָ עֵד שָׁקֶר: (ס)
You shall not kill. (new line) You shall not commit adultery. (new line) You shall not steal. (new line) You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. (new line) Shmot 20:13

These four precepts, clearly separate commandments, are in fact contained within one verse – a verse which is visually broken by the beginning of four new lines of text, but one verse nonetheless. While there are those who would be tempted to consider the contents of this verse as a single utterance, we should also take into account the opposite phenomenon: Other Commandments, such as Shabbat observance, are stretched out over several verses:

שמות פרק כ, ז-י
(ז) זָכוֹר אֶת יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת לְקַדְּשׁוֹ:
(ח) שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים תַּעֲבֹד וְעָשִׂיתָ כָּל מְלַאכְתֶּךָ:
(ט) וְיוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי שַׁבָּת לַה’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה כָל מְלָאכָה אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ עַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתְךָ וּבְהֶמְתֶּךָ וְגֵרְךָ אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ:
(י) כִּי שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים עָשָׂה  ה’ אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֶת הָאָרֶץ אֶת הַיָּם וְאֶת כָּל אֲשֶׁר בָּם וַיָּנַח בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי עַל כֵּן בֵּרַךְ ה' אֶת יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת וַיְקַדְּשֵׁהוּ: ס
          7. Remember the Shabbat day, to keep it holy.
8. Six days shall you labor, and do all your work;
9. But the seventh day is the Shabbat of the Almighty your God; (on it) you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger that is within your gates;
10. For in six days God made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore God blessed the Shabbat day, and made it holy. Shmot 20:7-10

There are two traditions of how to read the verses of the Ten Commandments.[6] The first is called Taam Elyon, in which each of the Ten Commandments is read as a separate thought or statement, with ten distinct expressions or phrases representing each one of the Ten Commandments, regardless of the size or number of verses it contains. The other method of reading this section is known as Taam Tachton, which adheres to the form as we know it from the written text (and most printed, published texts), with up to four commandments in one verse and other commandments divided up across several phrases.

When is each of these methods used? Although there are different customs, the Chizkuni offers the most compelling explanation. On Shavuot, the objective is to "relive" the Revelation; therefore, we read Taam Elyon[7] – for that is how God said the commandments at Sinai: ten independent and distinct statements. When in the course of the weekly cycle we read Parshat Yitro, the Taam Tachton is employed, reflecting the way God dictated the Commandments to Moshe when it was time to write them down[8]. In other words, on Shavuot, as we relive the Revelation, we attempt to recreate the Sinai experience by mimicking the way the Commandments were spoken to the Children of Israel assembled at the foot of Mount Sinai, in ten distinct utterances[9]. The purpose of reading the Torah on a weekly basis over the course of the year is to study the content of that Revelation, to ingrain, internalize and understand what was said. Therefore, we learn the text as God told Moshe to write it, reading the Taam Tachton.[10]

Why, then, do the Haftarot fail to reflect this distinction? Both the reading from Yishayahu and the reading from Yechezkel focus on the experience of revelation; neither focuses on the content or message of revelation. By choosing sections which highlight the revelation for both Shavuot and the weekly portion, the sages seem to blur the distinction between the Revelation itself and the content of that Revelation. We would expect the Haftarah of Parshat Yitro to contain a legal section or a re-working of the principles of the Ten Commandments. We might have expected the Sages to assign one of the many exhortations of the prophets to adhere to the laws of the Torah or to abandon foreign forms of worship. Instead, we find a Haftarah that offers an alternative revelation experience. Apparently, the Sages had another consideration in mind when they assigned the Haftarah for Parshat Yitro.

On Shavuot, when we replicate the experiential aspects of the Revelation, the Haftarah is Yechezkel's vision of the Chariot. This, the Sages felt, was the vision closest to the actual experience of Revelation, of seeing the heavens open up. However, the assignment of the Haftarah from Yishayahu for Parshat Yitro requires further inquiry. While there is no argument that the overall message of this week's Haftarah selection is revelation, there is another 'oddity' about this week's Haftarah which may be relevant: The Haftarah reading is actually comprised of several disjointed sections from the Book of Yishayahu. Rather than a straightforward account of Yishayahu's vision, the (Ashkenazi) custom is to read through the sixth chapter and continue into the seventh chapter. This latter section recounts the story of the sinful King Ahaz who had given up all hope of repentance and return to God. The Haftarah then proceeds to the ninth chapter, in which a child is born, signifying rebirth and new hope. Clearly, the Sages carefully crafted this Haftarah reading, and 'revelation' is not the exclusive topic of this Haftarah. God's communication with man is one element of the Haftarah; another element is man's propensity for sin, and the final element is the possibility of repentance which leads to personal and national redemption. In this way, the latter part of the Haftarah is closely related to the process of redemption that began in Egypt and the various levels of revelation the people experienced as the Exodus unfolded.

As we saw at the outset the entire exodus was in of itself a series of revelations, and processes which led to freedom, even after the ten plagues an “eleventh plague” went even further both in terms of freedom and in terms of revelation. This eleventh plague was the splitting of the sea, there once and for all the Egyptians were rid of, plunged into the depth of the Sea.

God appeared at the Sea as a warrior, a warrior poised for battle wreaking vengeance and exacting justice from the cruel slave masters, therefore at the sea the people exclaimed:

שמות פרק טו
(ב) עָזִּי וְזִמְרָת יָהּ וַיְהִי לִי לִישׁוּעָה זֶה אֵלִי וְאַנְוֵהוּ אֱלֹהֵי אָבִי וַאֲרֹמְמֶנְהוּ: (ג)  ה’ אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה  ה’ שְׁמוֹ:
The Lord is my strength and song, and he has become my salvation; he is my God, and I will praise him; my father’s God, and I will exalt him. 3. The Lord is a man of war; the Lord is his name. Shmot 15:2,3

Here God appeared as a Man of war:

מכילתא פרשת השירה פרשה ד
ה' איש מלחמה. למה נאמר לפי שנגלה על הים כגבור עושה מלחמה שנא' ה' איש מלחמה
God is a Man of war: why does it say this for God appeared at the sea as a warrior whho makes war as it says God is a Man of war Mechilta Parshat Shira Parsha 4


According to the Mechilta, at Sinai God needed to introduce Himself for the people did not recognize Him, they had seen God as a man of war, and now saw a gentle scholar:[11]

מכילתא פרשת בחדש פרשה ה
אנכי ה' אלהיך. למה נאמר לפי שנגלה על הים כגבור עושה מלחמות שנאמר (שמות ט"ו) ה' איש מלחמה נגלה על הר סיני כזקן מלא רחמים

Despite the power and majesty of the visions of Yishayahu and Yechezkel, the revelations they were granted lacked one major element: A crucial element of the revelation that was revealed to the generation that was liberated from Egypt was the clear and obvious implementation of divine justice. They saw, in the ten plagues in Egypt and the "eleventh plague" at the sea, that "there is justice and there is a judge." They were able to see the entire canvas of Jewish history as it reached its culmination. The people felt this in such a clear and profound manner that they were able to point their fingers as justice was meted out:

רש"י שמות פרק טו
זה אלי - בכבודו נגלה עליהם והיו מראין אותו באצבע, ראתה שפחה על הים מה שלא ראו נביאים:
In His glory he appeared to them and they pointed at Him with a finger. A maidservant saw that which eluded the prophets. Rashi Shmot 15:2

This is what eluded both Yishayahu and Yechezkel, the element that distinguished the revelation which the generation of the Exodus witnessed from any other.

מכילתא בשלח - מסכתא דשירה פרשה ג
'זה אלי', ר' אליעזר אומר "מנין אתה אומר שראתה שפחה על הים מה שלא ראו ישעיה ויחזקאל..."
'This is my God': Rabbi Eliezer said, 'How do you know that which the maid[12] saw was superior to Yishayahu and Yechezkel?…" Mechilta B'shalach Mesechta Shira Parsha 3

Leaving Egypt is a continuum, an ongoing revelation of different faces and facets of God: might, justice, compassion. Each plague revealed more, and finally, at the Sea the people saw the might of God. They witnessed the fulfillment of the covenant between God and Avraham - not only their own liberation and the judgment and punishment of the Egyptians, but the realization of the ultimate goal of their entire history. They saw the conquest of the Land of Israel:

שמות פרק טו, טו-יח
אָז נִבְהֲלוּ אַלּוּפֵי אֱדוֹם אֵילֵי מוֹאָב יֹאחֲזֵמוֹ רָעַד נָמֹגוּ כֹּל יֹשְׁבֵי כְנָעַן: תִּפֹּל עֲלֵיהֶם אֵימָתָה וָפַחַד בִּגְדֹל זְרוֹעֲךָ יִדְּמוּ כָּאָבֶן עַד יַעֲבֹר עַמְּךָ  ה’ עַד יַעֲבֹר עַם זוּ קָנִיתָ: תְּבִאֵמוֹ וְתִטָּעֵמוֹ בְּהַר נַחֲלָתְךָ מָכוֹן לְשִׁבְתְּךָ פָּעַלְתָּ  ה’ מִקְּדָשׁ אֲדֹנָי כּוֹנְנוּ יָדֶיךָ: ה’ יִמְלֹךְ לְעֹלָם וָעֶד:
Then the chiefs of Edom shall be amazed; the mighty men of Moav, trembling shall take hold upon them; all the inhabitants of Canaan shall melt away. Fear and dread shall fall upon them; by the greatness of your arm they shall be as still as a stone; 'til your people pass over, O God, 'til the people pass over, whom You have created. You shall bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of your inheritance, in the place, O God, which you have made for you to dwell in, in the Sanctuary, O God, which your hands have established. God shall reign for all eternity. Shmot 15:15-18

The vision they see as the sea splits open takes them to the future. They see themselves in the Land of Israel, free and independent; they see the Temple built in its glory. They see the dominion of God as absolute. Yet they lack one very important element: the Word of God, the vehicle through which the world would be transformed. They must travel to Sinai and receive the Torah, to encounter another aspect of God they have yet to experience: the intellectual challenge of Judaism, the content of the Revelation at Sinai. Once that is accomplished, once the Jews are fortified with Torah, even if they stray from the path, they have the ability to right their course by redoubling their efforts and rededicating themselves to the acceptance of Torah. This is the lesson of the Haftarah: The glorious vision of Yishayahu is tempered by the reality of a King of Israel who has strayed. But the final section of the Haftarah  contains a promise of rebirth,[13] a message of hope, a vision of the rejuvenation of the Davidic line and the final, glorious chapter of Jewish history, when God’s throne will be complete and all the prophesies fulfilled.

ישעיהו פרק ט, ה-ו
כִּי יֶלֶד יֻלַּד לָנוּ בֵּן נִתַּן לָנוּ וַתְּהִי הַמִּשְׂרָה עַל שִׁכְמוֹ וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ אֵל גִּבּוֹר אֲבִיעַד שַׂר שָׁלוֹם: לְמַרְבֵּה הַמִּשְׂרָה וּלְשָׁלוֹם אֵין קֵץ עַל כִּסֵּא דָוִד וְעַל מַמְלַכְתּוֹ לְהָכִין אֹתָהּ וּלְסַעֲדָהּ בְּמִשְׁפָּט וּבִצְדָקָה מֵעַתָּה וְעַד עוֹלָם קִנְאַת  ה’ צְבָאוֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה זֹּאת:
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called "Wonderful counselor of the mighty God, everlasting Father, prince of peace". For the increase of the realm and for peace there without end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice for all eternity; the zeal of the God of hosts performs this. Yishayahu 9:5,6

On Shavuot we commemorate the giving of the Torah; therefore, the Haftarah is Yechezkel's spectacular vision, mirroring the Revelation experienced at Sinai. However, when the same verses are read in Parshat Yitro, the focus is not on an isolated event. Rather, we are following the path which began one awesome night when Avraham was told that his children would be enslaved, but would one day return to their land. The fulfillment of God's covenant with Avraham took his descendents through Egypt and through the sea, and led them to the foot of Mount Sinai. Considering the Revelation as a part of this larger journey is very different than the view of the Revelation as a singular event.  This event, celebrated on Shavuot, requires our identification, while the much larger view of the events of Sinai requires a grasp, an understanding, an ongoing process of internalization of the content of the Revelation.

Our Sages took this process one step further when they assigned the Haftarah reading. Throughout the ages, when Parshat Yitro is read, with the visions experienced at the Splitting of the Sea still fresh in our minds and the song of praise sung by Moshe and all of Israel still ringing in our ears, the Sages broaden the canvas even further, including the point that the Davidic line is reestablished and God’s dominion complete. Only then will the journey be complete; only then will the covenant be fulfilled. Only then will God's dominion be fully revealed to all of mankind.




[1] See last week’s essay (Parshat B'shalach)
[2] The Talmud notes that the numerous commandments regarding interpersonal behavior was revolutionary.  See Talmud Bavli Kiddushin 31a.
תלמוד בבלי מסכת קידושין דף לא עמוד א
בשעה שאמר הקב"ה (שמות כ) 'אנכי' ו'לא יהיה לך', אמרו אומות העולם: 'לכבוד עצמו הוא דורש'. כיון שאמר (שמות כ) 'כבד את אביך ואת אמך', חזרו והודו למאמרות הראשונות. רבא אמר, מהכא: (תהלים קיט) 'ראש דברך אמת', ראש דברך ולא סוף דברך? אלא, מסוף דברך ניכר שראש דברך אמת.
Ulla Rabbah lectured at the entrance to the Nasi's house: What is meant by, 'All the kings of the earth shall make admission unto Thee, O God, for they have heard the words of Thy mouth?' Not the word of Thy mouth, but the words of Thy mouth is said. When the Holy One, blessed be He, proclaimed, 'I am [the Lord your God]' and 'You shall have none [other Gods before me]', the nations of the world said: He teaches merely for His own honor. As soon as He declared: 'Honor your father and your mother,' they recanted and admitted [the justice of] the first command [too]. Raba said, [This may be deduced] from the following: 'The beginning of Your word is true': ‘the beginning of Your word, but not the end!? But from the latter portion of Your declaration it may be seen that the first portion is true.
[3] There are numerous instances in which a particular Haftorah is used to accompany more than one Torah reading. The Sages were well aware of this option, but did not avail themselves of it.
[4] These seem to be two completely disparate themes. It is interesting that on Shavuot we have another reading, that of Megilat Ruth, which fuses together these two themes: The backdrop of the megilla is the agricultural life in Israel, and the  story is about accepting the Torah.
[5] For more on Shavuot and the giving of the Torah see my book Emanations (Targum Press 2002), pages 135 ff.
[6] We have not touched upon the version of the Ten Commandments in Devarim, Parshat VaEtchanan. In that version, Moshe recaps the events of the Revelation; this is not divine speech, per se, and is therefore only tangentially related to our present discussion.
[7] See Elya Rabbah Shulchan Oruch Orach Chayim sections 142, 494 who insists that Taam Elyon only be used on Shavuot and not Parshat Yitro.
אליה רבה סימן קמב
יש לקרות בחג השבועות בניגון עליון דעשרת הדברות, שמלמד מקום דעשרת הדברות ואין חושש על התחלות הפסוקים ומקום סיומן. הפסוק והדבור הראשון מתחיל אנכי ומסיים לשומרי מצותי וכו' הכל דבור אחד, ואנכי ולא יהיה לך מפי הגבורה. פסוק שני לא תשא, ולפי שהוא פסוק אחד אין בו אלא ניגון אחד. ויקרא פני בפתח תחת הנו"ן כי אינו סוף פסוק. ותיו דתרצח ותנאף ותגנוב דגושה. ובקמ"ץ תחת [תעשה] התוי"ן. ומתחת קדמאה בפסוק לא תשא בפתח תחת הנו"ן. אבל בשבת פ' יתרו ואתחנן קורין בניגון התחתון מלמד על התחלת הפסוקים וסיומן. ופני בקמ"ץ תחת הנו"ן. ותוי"ן הנ"ל רפה. ופתח תחת [תעשה] התוי"ן. ומתחת קדמאה בפסוק לא תשא בקמ"ץ תחת התי"ו. כן (הוצאות) [הוצאתי] מתמצית כוונת תשובות משאת בנימין סי' ו', והוא האריך מאוד. ועיין בחזקוני פ' יתרו [שמות כ] ואור תורה [שם], מג"א סי' תצ"ד [ריש הסימן].
אליה רבה סימן תצד
ובריש סי' קמ"ב נתבאר לקרות [בטעם] עליון בשבועות.
[8] See Chizkuni commentary to the Torah Shmot 20:14
חזקוני על שמות פרק כ פסוק יד
יש ברוב הדברות שתי נגינות ללמד שבעצרת שהיא דוגמא מתן תורה, ומתרגמינן הדברות קורין כל דברת לא יהיה לך וכל דברת זכור בנגינות הגדולות לעשות כל אחת מהן פסוק אחד שכל אחד מהן דברה אחת לעצמה. ודברות לא תרצח לא תנאף לא תגנוב לא תענה קורין בנגינות הקטנות לעשות ד' פסוקים שהם ד' דברות. אבל בחודש שבט כשקורין בפרשת יתרו כשאר שבתות השנה קורין לא יהיה לך וזכור בנגינות הקטנות לעשות מכל אחת מהן ד' פסוקים, ודברות לא תרצח לא תנאף לא תגנוב לא תענה קורין בנגינות הגדולות לעשותן פסוק אחד לפי שלא מצינו בכל המקרא פסוק משתי תיבות חוץ מאלו ובשבועות דוקא כמו שפי' למעלה. גם בדברות אנכי ולא יהיה לך יש נגינה גדולה לעשותן שתיהן פסוק אחד לזכרון שבדבור אחד נאמרו, כיצד בתיבת אנכי פשטא ובתיבת אלהיך זקף קטן ובתיבת הוצאתיך תלישא ובתיבת מארץ מצרים קדמא ואזלא ובתיבת עבדים רביעי.

[9] See Sefer Toda’a chapter 28.
ספר התודעה - פרק עשרים ושמונה (המשך):
ובשבועות נוהגים לקרוא בציבור לפי הטעם העליון, המפסיק בין כל דיבור ודיבור, לפי שבו ביום נתנו עשרת הדברות, ועל כן עושים מכל דיבור פסוק בפני עצמו. ודיבור שיש בו כמה פסוקים, מחברים אותם ועושים אותם פסוק אחד, כדי שיהא כל דיבור נשמע לעצמו, שכך שמענום מסיני:

[10] For more on this concept see Rabbi Yosef Soloveitchik Shiurim L’Zecher Aba Mari, page 211.
[11] The Megaleh Amukot Parshat Tazria, observes that this is the meaning of a line in the liturgy in the An'im Zemirot, Ziknah byom din ubacharut byom krav.
סדור תפלה - נוסח אשכנז - סדר תפילת שחרית שבת - מוסף
חזן - זִקְנָה בְּיוֹם דִּין וּבַחֲרוּת בְּיוֹם קְרָב. כְּאִישׁ מִלְחָמוֹת יָדָיו לוֹ רָב:
ספר מגלה עמוקות על התורה - פרשת תזריע
על הים הי' הקב"ה כגבור וכבחור ועל הר סיני כזקן יושב בישיבה זקנה ביום דין ובחרות ביום קרב וכדי שלא יטעו לכן לבש הקב"ה חלוק של תפארת על הים כ"ש (ברכות ח) והת"ת זה מתן תורה כליל תפארת בראשו נתת בעמדו לפניך על הר סיני ז"ש (תהלים צג) ה' מלך גאות לבש לבש שבאותו הפעם על הים כי גאה גאה עז התאז""ר בגי' תרי"ג לבוש של תורה ז"ש (שמות טו) ה' איש מלחמה ה' שמו מה לך הים כי תנוס שעל הים הי' מורא עבור מלחמות ועל הר סיני לא הי' מורא עליהם רק ההרים תרקדו כאלים בשמחה וע"ז השיב על הים הי' כגבור מלפני אדון חולי ארץ שהיא השכינה תמן דינא אבל הר סיני מלפני אלוה יעקב שהוא מדת תפארת. ההופכי מן דרך נחש עלי צור מהפכין ועושים אגם מים:

[12] The Talmud in a similar teaching says that even the fetus in utero and the babe suckling at the breast saw the divine revelation at the sea. See Talmud Bavli Sotah 30b.
 מסכת סוטה ל:
תָּנוּ רַבָּנָן, דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעָלוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן הַיָּם, נָתְנוּ עֵינֵיהֶם לוֹמַר שִׁירָה, וְכֵיצַד אָמְרוּ שִׁירָה? עוֹלָל מֻטָּל עַל בִּרְכֵּי אִמּוֹ, וְתִינוֹק יוֹנֵק מִשְּׁדֵי אִמּוֹ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁרָאוּ אֶת הַשְּׁכִינָה, עוֹלָל הִגְבִּיהַּ צַוָּארוֹ, וְתִינוֹק שָׁמַט דַּד (אמו) מִפִּיו, וְאָמְרוּ, (שמות טו) "זֶה אֵלִי וְאַנְוֵהוּ". שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, (תהלים ח) "מִפִּי עוֹלְלִים וְיוֹנְקִים יִסַּדְתָּ עֹז". (תַּנְיָא) הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, מִנַּיִן שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ עֻבָּרִין שֶׁבִּמְעֵי אִמָּן אָמְרוּ שִׁירָה? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, [דף לא ע"א] (שם סח) "בְּמַקְהֵלוֹת בָּרְכוּ אֱלֹהִים, אֲדֹנָי מִמְּקוֹר יִשְׂרָאֵל". [וְהָא לָא חָזוּ? אָמַר רַבִּי תַּנְחוּם, כֶּרֶס נַעֲשָׂה לָהֶם כְּאַסְפַּקְלַרְיָא הַמְּאִירָה וְרָאוּ]:
Our Rabbis taught: R. Jose the Galilean expounded: At the time the Israelites ascended from the Red Sea, they desired to utter a Song; and how did they render the song? The babe lay upon his mother's knees and the suckling sucked at his mother's breast; when they beheld the Shechinah, the babe raised his neck and the suckling released the nipple from his mouth, and they exclaimed: This is my God and I will Praise Him; as it is said: Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings hast thou established strength. R. Meir used to say: Whence is it that even the embryos in their mothers’ womb uttered a song? As it is said, Bless ye the Lord in the Congregations, even the Lord, from the fountain of Israel. But these could not behold [the Shechinah]! R. Tanhum said: The abdomen became for them a kind of transparent medium and they did behold it.

[13] Christian sources have attempted to co-opt this section as "proof" of their belief, and relied on a combination of violent mistranslation, together with total  disregard for historical context.