The Mitzva to Eat of the Fruit of Eden

Approximately two years before his death, the Ḥafetz Ḥayyim published his final work, Sefer haMitzvot haKatzar, a listing of the 271 mitzvot that are applicable today. In the preface to the English - Hebrew edition [the Concise Book of Mitzvot, (Feldheim, 1990)], Rabbi Ben Zion Sobel quotes the Ḥafetz Ḥayyim [Mishna Berura 60:10]:

Unless one performs a Torah-ordained mitzva with conscious intent, he has not fulfilled his duty, and must perform it a second time with the proper intent.

Without the intention of doing God's will, the act performed may not be considered a mitzva.

Meshech Ḥochma understands the verse in our parasha:

And the Lord God commanded Adam saying: of all the trees of the garden you may eat freely [Genesis 2:16]

to be an imperative (this understanding is not conveyed by the English translation). God did not allow man to eat of the fruits of the Garden of Eden (except for the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge), rather He commanded him to benefit from them. Indeed, Meshech Ḥochma notes, the Talmud Yerushalmi [end of Kiddushin] states that man will have to give a reckoning to God for having abstained from benefiting from the good things which He provided in this world.

Preceding her sin, Ḥava refuted the serpent’s claim that God had forbidden eating the fruit of all trees of the Garden of Eden by stating: “Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat.” Genesis 3:2

Ḥava failed to state that she and Adam ate of the fruit in fulfillment of God’s mitzva. Therefore, says Meshech Ḥochma, Ḥava was not rewarded for having done God’s will. Meshech Ḥochma suggests that had Ḥava eaten of the fruit as a mitzva, it may have protected her against violating God’s prohibition of eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge!

Returning to the Ḥafetz Ḥayyim, he commented:

How pitiful it is that one who may have exerted himself to do all that the Torah requires of him will nevertheless find himself unrewarded for it in the World to Come because his motivation was not the proper one.

           

The Results of Cain's Sin

... and it shall come to pass that everyone who finds me shall kill me.                                    Genesis 4:14

            Rashi, based upon Midrash Tanḥuma, comments that Cain’s fear was that he would be killed by an animal. Until Cain killed his brother, he felt that the animals were in awe of him. Now Cain feared that he had lost his dominion over the animals.

            This comment follows the approach of the Torah and our Sages, that essentially God created a tranquil and harmonious world, but man’s sins disturb this tranquility and harmony. Were man to live in peace and harmony with his fellow man, the animal world would be peaceful and harmonious as well.

            We find expression of this approach in next week’s parasha as well:

... for all flesh had corrupted its way upon earth [Genesis 6:12]

            It seems strange to attribute corruption to creatures who do not possess free will. The explanation is that man had so debased himself that he adversely affected the animal kingdom as well.

            Perhaps the ultimate expression of this approach is Isaiah’s vision of the end of days:

And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb and the leopard shall lie down with the kid and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together.                                  [11:6]

            In the world of tranquility, there will be no beasts of prey. In the end of days, when Mankind achieves its tranquility, there will be a return to the primeval world of tranquility, and animals will cease being beasts of prey.

            Seemingly, logic should dictate the opposite of Cain’s fear. If animals held him in awe before Cain killed Abel, they should be even more fearful now. If Cain is willing to take his own brother’ life, he certainly would not hesitate to kill animals. Apparently, the animals should fear Cain rather than the other way around. The lesson of Rashi’s comment is that man’s dominion over animals results from maintaining a high moral level. When Cain brought himself down from his moral heights, he lost dominion over the animals.

            Cain’s sin was not the first sin in history. His parents had sinned by eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. Yet Adam and Eve did not fear losing their dominance over the animals following their sin. Perhaps the reason is that Adam and Eve’s sin was bein adam laMakom, between man and his Creator, while Cain sinned bein adam l'ḥavero, against his fellow man. This suggestion is consistent with our Sages’ approach that in many ways, sins between man and fellow man are worse than those between man and his Creator.

The Nakedness of Sin

God called to the man, and He said, “Where are you?” “I heard Your voice in the garden,' replied (the man), 'and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid.”                         Genesis 3:9-10

            As a result of his sin, man experienced fear for the first time. Having eaten of the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge, not only did man not improve his lot, he worsened it by the introduction of fear into his life. Adam’s fear came not from his guilt over having transgressed the Almighty’s command, nor from his shame. “I was afraid because I was naked”: it was nakedness, the realization that he did not gain by his sin, which brought fear to man.

The Names of Mankind's Parents

This Dvar Torah is dedicated to the memory of my mother, whose yahrtzeit is always during the week of Parashat Breishit.

And Adam named his wife Ḥava, for she was the mother of all life.                           Genesis 3:20

             It is interesting to note that Adam's name reflects his past, since he was created from the soil (adama), while Ḥava's name relates to her future.

          One might argue that it is more appropriate for Adam to be named for the future, since it is a father's role to prepare his children for the future, as our Sages taught:

A man is obligated to teach his son Torah ... and a

Livelihood…       Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 39b

          Conversely, it is perhaps more fitting for Ḥava to have been named for the past, since it is the mother who connects her children to their roots throughout infancy by conveying understanding and appreciation of the past. 

         In the mitzva of honoring ones parents, the father is given precedence:

Honor your father and mother…   Exodus 20:12

      While in the mitzva of fearing ones parents, the mother is given primacy:

You shall fear every man his mother and his father ...                                                      Leviticus 19:3

            Our Sages [Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin ibid.] explain that it is more natural for a person to fear his father and to respect his mother. The Torah reverses the natural order as a way of expressing the full equality of both parents.

            We can apply our Sages' teaching to the names of the parents of all mankind, and understand that the counterintuitive choice of names is intended to stress their equality. While mother and father may have different roles in child rearing, each is equally important in their children's development. Ideally, mother and father constitute a unit, with each part complementing the other, creating a whole which is much greater than its constituent parts.

Ensuring that We Are Not Thieves

In opening his commentary on the Torah, Rashi notes:

Rabbi Yitzḥak says: the Torah (whose primary purpose is presentation of the 613 mitzvot) should have begun with the verse “This month shall be for you the first of the months” [Exodus 12:1], which is the first mitzva commanded to Israel. What is the reason that it begins with the account of creation? Because “He declared to His people the strength of His works, in order that He may give them the heritage of the nations,” [Psalms 111:6] for should the nations of the world say to Israel “You are thieves and have stolen the lands of the seven nations (of Canaan),” Israel will reply to them: “The entire earth belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He, He created it and He gave it to whom He pleased; when He willed He gave it to them, and when He willed, He took it from them and gave it to us.”

      Rashi Genesis 1:1 [based upon Yalkut, Exodus 12:2]

It is remarkable that Rashi sees the primary purpose of the Torah’s description of creation as being confirmation of Israel’s right to its Land. We can note with sadness that this lesson seems lost on many Jews, let alone on the nations of the world. (My rabbi, Rav Yaakov Warhaftig, noted that it is the failure of Jews to appreciate the lesson which allows the nations to ignore it.)         Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe notes that it is clear and obvious that Torah was given primarily to and for the Children of Israel, thus Rabbi Yitzḥak’s comment is directed at the Jews: it is incumbent upon us to appreciate that the Land was given to us by God.

          Rabbi Wolbe comments further:

Immediately with the first verse of the Torah, the focus is on the Land of Israel. The entire Book of Genesis is intended to teach that God gave the Land to His people and thereby to confirm Israel’s right to its Land (as are first eleven chapters of Exodus). The focal point and the purpose of the first sixty-one chapters of Torah is the Land. The entire purpose of physical creation is to allow the Shechina to have a place within this world, the tangible world. The end is to have Klal Yisrael in the Land of Israel, where the Shechina will rest. Rabbi Yitzḥak comes to teach us that the purpose of Torah is the Land of Israel, since all mitzvot are related to the Land of Israel, and fulfillment of the mitzvot outside the Land is only as a matter of being familiar with them upon return to Israel [based upon Sifrei Parashat Ekev 43:17].

Finally, Rabbi Wolbe adds an insight which addresses an additional lesson of Rabbi Yitzḥak’s comment for the Children of Israel: the Torah teaches that one who is unworthy will lose his place. Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden as a result of their sin. The generation of the flood was removed entirely from the world. The generation of the Tower of Babel was spread throughout the world. Similarly, the Canaanites were unworthy of the Land and were replaced by the Children of Israel. The implied message is that Israel’s status in the Land too is a function of their fulfillment of mitzvot.

Israel’s holding its Land is both a great privilege and a deep responsibility. We must be worthy of the Land.

Creation's Junior Partner

Then the Lord God formed (vaYitzer) man …

                                                   Genesis 2:7

Ba’al haTurim notes that the Torah also uses the word vaYitzer in regard to the creation of the animals, but with a different spelling. (2:19) Whereas, in our verse, concerning man, vaYitzer is spelled fully, with two yods, in connection with the animals, the word is spelled incompletely, with a single yod.

My father explained that the additional yod indicates that man too, is a partner in God’s creation, in His formation. Animals, in essence, are created complete. The animal itself does have to do anything to complete its creation. Not so with man. Man must “form” and develop himself in order to become Man. In doing his part, by forming himself, and adding, as it were, to what God Himself had formed, man indeed becomes God’s partner in creation.

The concept of man’s actions making him a partner with God can be seen four verses earlier as well: “And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy for with it He ceased all His work which God in creating had made (2:3)

The Hebrew can also be understood “which God had created for the purpose of doing.” It is man’s duty to continue God’s work of creation by “doing,” through fulfilling God’s will.

This brings us to an additional hint of the extra yod. The numerical equivalent of yod is ten, a reminder of the Ten Commandments, which, according to Rabbinic tradition encapsulate all 613 mitzvot. It is specifically through fulfilling mitzvot that we are able to realize our role as God’s junior partner.

Completing Creation

Then God completed with the seventh day His work that He had made, and with the seventh day He ceased from all the work He had made.   Genesis 2:2

Ba’al haTurim notes that our verse does not say “and it was evening and it was morning, the seventh day,” as the verses state concerning the six days of creation. The reason, explains Ba’al haTurim is that time is added from Friday to Shabbat to prevent desecrating Shabbat.

My father offered an alternative explanation. Each of the six days of creation stands independently. One day does not influence the next. Not so with Shabbat, which ideally influences the remaining days of the week. The sanctity of Shabbat should permeate the week days as well. Thus, the formula “and it was evening and it was morning” does not apply to the seventh day. The sanctity of Shabbat must not end on the seventh day.

On a symbolic level, there is another explanation. “There was evening, there was morning” implies as well the darkness of night, which is driven out by the light of day. Shabbat ideally (and symbolically) is a day entirely of light. Hence the standard phrase which is appropriate for the six days of creation is not fitting for Shabbat.

Where to Put the "Hei"

So God created man (ha’adam) in His own image …

                                                           Genesis 1:27

“ha’adam” is an anagram for “adama” (soil), since Adam was created from the soil.            Ba’al haTurim

My father noted that the difference between “ha’adam” and “adama” is the position of the letter “hei.” Coming at the beginning of the word, “hei” is definitive, literally “the man,” while at the end of a word it is directive (“toward”). The letter “hei,” serving as an abbreviation for God’s name, symbolically teaches that man, the epitome of creation, must know that God precedes him, if he is to realize himself. If man puts God last, it is a reminder that his end is to return to the soil from which he was created.

For My Sake Was the World Created

One is obligated to say: “for my sake was the world created”.               Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 37a

            At first glance, this statement of our Sages makes Man a braggart. However, the Sages’ intention was that Man should make this comment as a statement of responsibility, rather than as one of privilege.

            The Creator, in announcing His intention to create Man said:

We will make man ... and they shall have dominion (v’yirdu) over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heaven, and over the beasts, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing upon the earth. [Genesis 1:26]

            Rashi notes the play on words made by Midrash Breishit Rabba: if man is worthy, he will have dominion,  if not, he will sink lower (yarad) than the beasts and they will rule over him.

            Mankind’s status in relation to the rest of creation is a function of his behavior.

“And to every animal of the earth and to every fowl of the heaven, and to every thing that creeps upon the earth, wherein there is a living soul, I have given every green herb for food; and it was so.”

                                                         [Genesis 1:30]

            Our classical commentators (Rashi, Radak) understand this verse to mean that at creation there were no carnivorous animals. The change came as the result of mankind’s degradation of itself, as we read in Parashat Noaḥ: “... for all flesh had corrupted its way on the earth”. The corruption of man corrupted the rest of creation. Such is the power of man’s behavior!

            Isaiah [11: 6] prophesied that in the end of days:

The wolf shall dwell with the lamb and the leopard shall lie down with the kid and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together and a little child shall lead them

            It has been pointed out that Isaiah’s vision is simply a return to the pristine situation. In the end of days, when mankind achieves harmony, this will be reflected in the rest of creation, and there will no longer be beasts of prey.

            It is mankind’s obligation to achieve this level. Then, and only then, can Man boast “for my sake was the world created.”

Asking Adam to Become Man

As God reached the epitome of His creation, He “announced” His intention to create man by saying “Let us make man ....” [Genesis 1:26].

 The Sages of the Talmud noted the use of the plural form and wondered with whom God consulted before creating man. The classical commentators as well dealt with this question, offering various explanations.

 Rashi, for example, suggests that God consulted the angels, teaching us the moral lesson that even great leaders must display humility and consult with their underlings.

 Naḥmanides explains that God consulted the earth, since man was to be made from it.

 Ibn Ezra says simply the term is the “plural of majesty.”

 My father suggested that God consulted man himself, asking him to become His partner in creation. Man is unique among God’s creatures in having free will, and hence he can choose to complete or to destroy God’s creation. God, as it were, turned to man, asking him to become Man.

 Our tradition stresses that Man was created last as an obligation, more than as a privilege. Accepting God’s challenge to become Man gives us responsibilities not only to fellow men, but to all of God’s creatures and to ourselves as well.

The Aleph Bet of Creation

Our Sages note that the creation began with “bet,” the second letter of the alphabet, and tell us that the first letter, “aleph,” complained that it should have been used to begin creation. The Creator responded that the letter “bet,” being the first letter of the word “bracha” (blessing) is appropriate for beginning the Torah while creation cannot start with “aleph,” since that is the first letter of the word “arur” (cursed). By way of compensation, God told “aleph” that He will begin the Decalogue with it.

It seems strange that it is inappropriate to begin creation with the letter “aleph” yet it is appropriate for commencing the Ten Commandments.

My father suggested that our Sages wish to teach us that man must go forward, to change and make progress. “Aleph,” being the beginning, implies no change, no progress, while “bet” indicates that progress has already been made, we have moved from “aleph” to “bet.” In material matters, remaining with the “aleph,” not changing or progressing, is a curse for mankind. Without change, we would have remained in the Stone Age. Advancement is necessary in the material world. Not so in the spiritual realm, where our values come from the Almighty Himself, and as He does not change, neither do His values. If we were to change our moral – ethical values, it would not be progress, but the opposite, regression.

Additionally, “bet” symbolizes partnership, since it is preceded by “aleph,” and thus represents the partnership in creation between man and God. Indeed, it is when man fulfills his partnership with God, that there is true blessing in the world.

Where Am I

And God called unto man and said to him “where are you (ayeka).”                                      Genesis 3:9

            Thus God began His final (reported) conversation with His supreme creation.

            Rashi, based upon a midrash, comments that God (obviously) knew where Adam was, but asked ayeka  to open a conversation with him.

            Malbim understands ayeka very differently. It is not a conversation opener. In fact, according to Malbim, ayeka is not a question at all. Rather it is a powerful rebuke. God said to Adam “look where you are now that you have sinned versus where you were the moment before the sin.” 

            The power of the single word used by God is awesome. Adam is challenged to realize what he has done to himself by having sinned. The echo of God’s rebuke, ayeka, continues to ring out from Adam’s days to ours.

            If we ask ourselves ayeh ani (where am I), especially before sinning, there is no question that it will help us immensely on the road to teshuva.

The Land: Beginning and End

… and underneath are the everlasting arms and He thrust out the  enemy before you

                                                 Deuteronomy 33:27

          Meshech Ḥochma quotes Targum Onkelos (the first century translation of the Torah into Aramaic):

Through His word was the world brought into being and He chased your enemy from before you.

          Meshech Ḥochma notes that, in terms of content, our verse conveys the same message as the comment of Rabbi Yitzḥak, brought by Rashi on the opening verse of the Torah:

Rabbi Yitzḥak said: the Torah should have begun with “This month shall be for you the beginning of months” [Exodus 12:2] (the first mitzva given to the People of Israel). The reason for beginning with Creation is to justify giving the Holy Land to Israel. Since God is the Creator of the world, He can assign any part of it to whomever He chooses.

          Meshech Ḥochma’s insight shows us that the Torah both begins and ends with pointing out the God given right of the Children of Israel to the Land of Israel.

          Given that the Torah is the source of our right to the Land, it should not be surprising that this point is made both in opening and in closing the Torah.

Israel's Only Constitution

And there was a king in Yeshurun, when the heads of the people were gathered, all the tribes of Israel together.   Deuteronomy 33:5

          The late Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg, in the introduction to his work “Hilchot Medina”, quotes the comment of Dr. A. H. Freiman (professor of Jewish Jurisprudence at the Hebrew University Law School, murdered in the Arab ambush of a convoy to Mount Scopus on April 13, 1948):

Each of the three phrases of our verse presents a different form of administration of state: the first phrase “And there was a king in Yeshurun“, refers to monarchy; the second “when the heads of the people were gathered” refers to aristocracy, and the final phrase “all the tribes of Israel together” to democracy. The preceding verse “Moses commanded us Torah, an inheritance of the congregation of Jacob”, teaches that no matter what the form of government Israel has, the Torah remains its one and only constitution.

          Many of our classical commentators note than often a portion of Torah ends with the same theme with which it began. Rashi, in his initial comment on the Torah, explains that the Torah commences with Genesis, as opposed to the first mitzva given to the People of Israel [Exodus 12:1-2], in order to demonstrate that the Land of Israel was divinely given to the Children of Israel. Many Biblical verses stress that Israel’s possession of its Land is dependent upon fulfilling the mitzvot. Thus, Parashat Zot haBracha, the final portion of the Torah, indeed ends with the theme with which the Torah began.

Double Heritage

Moses prescribed the Torah to us, an eternal heritage (morasha) for the congregation of Jacob.                                 Deuteronomy 33:4

          It is significant that the Land of Israel is also referred to as “morasha” [Exodus 6:8]:

I will bring you to the land regarding which I raised my hand, (swearing) that I would give it to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I will give it to you as a heritage. I am God.

          Since the Torah explicitly states the connection between observing mitzvot and inheriting the Land [Deuteronomy 4:1]:

And now Israel, listen to the statutes and the social regulations which I teach you to fulfill, so you may live and go into and take possession of the Land which God, the God of your fathers gives you.

it is not at all surprising that the word “morasha” is used in connection with both.

          Malbim comments “Though (the) mitzvot (mentioned in the verse) are not dependent upon the Land, the Land is dependent upon the mitzvot.  

          Ba’al haTurim comments that it is through the merit of Torah that the People inherited the Land, and similarly Rabbeinu Behayye (1255 – c.1340) suggests the connection between the common use of “morasha” in the two verses teaches that it is through our fulfillment of Torah that we merit inheriting the Land.

          Mabit (Rabbi Moshe Mitrani, born in Salonika 1600, died in Zfat 1680) adds that the use of the word “morasha” in connection with the Land and the Torah hints that the two are similar in purpose. When Torah is our heritage, then the Land will also be our heritage.  As well, one cannot fully understand the true secrets of the Torah outside the Land, as our Sages teach “the air of Eretz Yisrael makes one wise” [Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra 158b].

          Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch distinguishes between the two heritages: Torah and the Land, and writes: “Israel has been offered two heritages: the one spiritual – the Torah – is unconditional and eternal. Not so the other heritage, the Land of Promise. Its possession depends upon Israel’s appreciation of, and obedience to, its God given law.”  

          Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein writes that the Land, as a national heritage, requires the Israelites to preserve it for themselves and for future generations as well, which is the same obligation a Jew has to Torah. “Morasha,” Rabbi Lichtenstein concludes, simultaneously implies an affinity (to Torah and to the Land) as well as an obligation (to each).

          Several commentators suggest distinctions between the Hebrew words “morasha” and “yerusha” (inheritance), both of which are derived from the same root word.

          The Gaon of Vilna comments that unlike an inheritance, which is acquired automatically, a “morasha” requires toil to be achieved.

          The late chief rabbi of Great Britain, Rabbi Dr. J. H. Hertz suggests an additional difference between “morasha” and inheritance: “The latter may be spent by the heir at his discretion. A “morasha”, however, is an entitled estate, inalienable, and must remain in the family to be handed on from father to son undiminished.”

          Both of the above comments suggest that the core distinction is that “yerusha” implies privilege, while “morasha” implies responsibility.

Spiritual Myriads

He said: God came from Sinai, shone forth, to them from Seir, and made an appearance from Mount Paran.. And He came from the holy myriads (rivvot), he brought the fire of a religion to them from His right Hand.                 Deuteronomy 33:2

          Ba'al haTurim connects our verse's use of the word "rivvot" with that in Psalms [3:7]: “I am not afraid of myriads (rivvot) of people, who have set themselves against me round about.”

          The people of Israel are few in number, compared to the nations of the world, however, its '"myriads" are based in holiness, while those of the nations are merely temporal. The common use of "rivvot" in the two verses teaches that it the spiritual level attained by Israel which allows it to face the myriads of the nations without fear.

Blessings Within the Land

This is the blessing that Moses, man of God, bestowed on the Israelites just before his death.         Deuteronomy 33:1

                 Thus begins the final parasha of the Torah.

           Ba'al haTurim notes the juxtaposition of the opening verse of our parasha and the last words of the final verse of the previous one [32:52]: "which I give the children of Israel," and comments that this teaches that God agreed with Moses' blessings to the Tribes of Israel.

               My father added that the context of the verse from Parashat vaYelech is giving the Land to the Children of Israel, and therefore, the juxtaposition can also be understood to imply that the blessings will take effect specifically when the people of Israel are within their Land.

A Uniquely Jewish Holiday

The following Dvar  Torah  is  based  upon a

sermon my father delivered in his synagogue.

          Sukkot is a uniquely Jewish holiday. Although we are commanded to leave the comfort and security of our homes and spend the week in a temporary dwelling, this time is called zman simchateinu, the time of our rejoicing!

          The laws of the sukka convey invaluable lessons. A sukka which cannot withstand the prevailing winds of its area is not a sukka. Just as the sukka must be strong enough to withstand and overcome the prevailing winds, so too the Jew must be able to overcome the prevailing negative influences of his surroundings, wherever he finds himself. In a region of storms and tornadoes, the sukka must be built very strong. In places of relative calm winds, it does not have to be so strong. So too, the greater the forces of assimilation, the stronger the Jew must be.

          The essence of the sukka is the s’chach, the covering. To remind us of our obligation to realize that our strength lies in God’s protection, the Halacha requires that a person sitting inside the sukka must be able to see the stars in heaven through the s’chach. Indeed, our Sages tell us that the sukka is a reminder of the ananei kavod, the clouds of glory, with which God protected the Children of Israel during our years of wandering in the desert.  We depend upon heavenly guidance and the moral and spiritual values conveyed through that guidance.

          What makes Sukkot zman simchateinu is the realization that through God’s providence and our adherence to His word as expressed in the Torah, we have been able to overcome all difficulties, dangers and crises and to survive as a people.

Return of the Clouds of Glory

The Gaon of Vilna notes the question of why Sukkot, which commemorates the anenei kavod (clouds of glory, which protected the Children of Israel in the desert), is celebrated in Tishrei, as opposed to Nissan, when the anenei kavod first appeared.

The Gaon explains that the holiday of Sukkot actually symbolizes the return of the anenei kavod. Following the sin of the golden calf, the anenei kavod left the Children of Israel and returned only when the Israelites began the construction of the Tabernacle, which was on the fifteenth of Tishrei. The Gaon’s chronology is as follows: Moshe Rabbeinu descended from Mount Sinai on Yom Kippur with the Divine message “I have forgiven, in accordance with your words.” [Numbers 14:20] On the 11^th of Tishrei, Moshe assembled the congregation and instructed Israel to make offerings for the construction of the Tabernacle [Exodus 35: 4 ff.] On the 12^th and 13^th of Tishrei, the Israelites brought their offerings, as the verse states:

“.. and they brought to him free-will offerings every morning” (literally “in the morning, in the morning,” hence two days). Exodus 36:3  

On the 14^th, Moshe presented the gold, silver, etc. which had been brought by the Israelites to Betzalel, Ohaliav and “every wise-hearted man,” who actually made the Tabernacle. Thus, it follows that the 15^th of Tishrei was the day the word actually commenced, and the day on which the anenei kavod returned to encompass the Children of Israel.

Further, the Gaon notes that one of the Divine attributes is mida k’neged mida, measure for measure, both in reward and in punishment. In this case, because the Israelites made the Tent of the Tabernacle, God responded with “covering” His people with the anenei kavod.

Among the valuable lessons the Gaon’s insight provides, is the close conceptual connection between Yom Kippur and Sukkot.

As well, the implication of the Gaon’s approach is that, on some level, sitting in the Sukka evokes the experience of visiting the Tabernacle.

May we be privileged to celebrate next Sukkot in the rebuilt Temple and in the Sukka of the hide of the leviathan. [Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra 75a]

To Be Only Happy

You shall celebrate the festival of Sukkot for seven days, when you bring in the products of your threshing floor and wine vat. You shall rejoice on your festival along with your son and daughter, your male and female slave, and the Levite, proselyte, orphan and widow that are within your gates. Seven days shall you celebrate to the Lord your God in the place that God will choose since God will then bless you in all your agricultural and other endeavors, and you will be only (ach) happy.                           Deuteronomy 16:13-15

           My saintly teacher, Rabbi Mordechai Rogov, noted that Sukkot involves three mitzvot: sitting in a Sukka, taking the four species and rejoicing, with the latter being the most difficult. Indeed, the Gaon of Vilna is quoted as saying that the mitzva of being “only happy” during the entire seven days of Sukkot is the most difficult mitzva to fulfill.

           Rabbi Rogov notes that the word generally our Sages understand the word “ach” to be limiting, and questions what our verse intends to limit.

           Within the agricultural cycle of the Land of Israel, Sukkot is the harvest festival, so that in addition to the religious celebration of the holiday, the farmer in Israel celebrates the joy of his tangible accomplishment with the harvest.

           Rabbi Rogov applies the comment of Rabbi Yisrael Salanter, that since eating involves an obvious physical benefit, the mitzva of eating on the ninth of Tishrei (the day before Yom Kippur) is more difficult than the mitzva of fasting on Yom Kippur, since fasting can more easily be done “for the sake of heaven.”

           Thus, Rabbi Rogov suggests, “ach” is intended to focus the Israelites’ rejoicing on the spiritual aspect of Sukkot, to the exclusion of the joy of the harvest.

God's Command: Pat Yourselves on Your Backs

            Two of the giants of the Mishna, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva differ in their understanding of what the sukka commemorates. Rabbi Eliezer states that the sukka is the reminder that during the forty years of wandering in the desert, the Children of Israel were protected by “clouds of glory”. Rabbi Akiva’s opinion is that the sukka memorializes the huts the Israelites built in the desert.

            According to Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, the sukka commemorates God’s protection of His people, and we can easily understand the mitzva. But, according to Rabbi Akiva, Aruch haShulḥan asks why the Torah instructed us to sit in sukkot for seven days. After all, what is being commemorated is what the Israelites themselves did, not God’s intervention.

            The answer, says the Aruch haShulḥan, is that the mitzva commemorates the fact that the People of Israel had the faith to follow God into the desert, a place not suited for human habitation.  As Jeremiah (2:2) said in God’s name:

Go and cry in the ears of Jerusalem saying: thus says the Lord: I remember for you the affection of your youth, the love of your espousal; how you went after Me in the wilderness, in a land that was not sown.

            In essence, according to Rabbi Akiva, God commanded us to pat ourselves on the shoulder for having followed Him.

Two Messages of Sukkot

Our Sages differ on the meaning of the sukka, with some seeing it as representing the huts made by the Children of Israel as their dwelling places during the forty years of wandering in the desert, while others understand the sukka to symbolize the Clouds of Glory which protected Israel during the desert years.

Netziv suggests that both approaches are true and valid. For the individual, the message of Sukkot is strengthening trust and belief in God as provider of one’s needs. Thus, the mitzva of sukka requires one to move from his/her permanent dwelling into a temporary dwelling for the seven days of Sukkot, reminding us of the dwellings used by our ancestors, the generation of the desert. For the collective (Klal Yisrael), Sukkot is a reminder of the clouds of glory, of God’s protection of all Israel and of His granting the nation victories in its wars. The sukka, as it were, represents the tents of a military camp, Netziv suggests. Thus, there is a double message in the mitzva of sukka, one for the individual, the other for Klal Yisrael. 

Meta-solar Time

My father explained that the ushpizin, the  special guests, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, King David and Joseph whom we invite into our Sukka each on his own night of Sukkot, are an expression of continuity, a statement of our belief that though times may change, the word of God does not. In that sense, the holiday looks to the past. Yet, Sukkot is forward looking as well, as we pray: “May the merciful One re-establish the fallen Sukka of David.” It is the continuity achieved by connecting to Israel’s glorious past which will lead us to an even more glorious future when the anointed (Mashiach) descendant of King David arrives.

Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel ben Shilat said, quoting Rav: The Sages wished to hide the Book of Ecclesiastes (which we read on the intermediate Shabbat of Sukkot), because its words are self-contradictory; yet why did they not hide it? Because its beginning is religious teaching and its end is religious teaching. Its beginning is religious teaching, as it is written [1:3], “What profit has man of all his labor wherein he labors under the sun?^”  And the School of Rav Yannai commented: “Under the sun he has none, but he has profit (with labor) before the sun.”  The end thereof is religious teaching, as it is written [12:13], “The conclusion of the matter, all having been heard: fear G-d, and keep His commandments; for this is the whole man.”                         Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 30b

Rabbi Aharon Soloveichik explained the curious phrase “before the sun.” Time is measured by the earth’s revolution around the sun. In “solar time” we have but the fleeting moment, as one of the great medieval Jewish poets wrote (some say the words were written by Rabbi Avraham ibn Ezra [1089 – 1164], others [including Rabbi J.B. Soloveichik] attribute it to Yedaya haPnini [1270 – 1340]): 

The past is gone

The future yet to be

The present a mere eye blink

(I regret my inability to render a poetic translation of the Hebrew.)

                However, in “meta-solar time” man uses the mere eye blink of the present to connect the past and future, and thus indeed profits from his labor “before the sun.”

Rosh haShana to Sukkot - From Individual to Collective

Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe asserts that personal development requires than one first be an individual and then become part of the collective (klal), a new entity, not merely the sum of its constituent members, which is, thus, greater than the sum of its parts. Indeed, one whose entire essence is the collective and has no individuality not only will not be able to contribute to the collective, but has nothing to contribute.

Our Sages teach that the essence of Rosh haShana is Israel’s coronation of God as King of the Universe, and as such the holiday focuses on the collective, not the individual.  

Looking ahead toward Sukkot, Rabbi Wolbe notes that our tradition sees the seventy sacrifices offered during the festival [Numbers 29:12-34] as being offered on behalf of the seventy nations of the world. The concept of concern for all other nations is uniquely Jewish.

In essence, there is a progression: only when one is an individual can he/she become part of Klal Yisrael (the Collective Israel), and only when one is part of Klal Yisrael can he become part of the World Collective.

Joy and the Land; Awe and the Diaspora

            Zohar reconciles the apparent contradiction between the verses “serve God in joy” [Psalm 100:2] and “serve God in awe” [Psalm 2:11] by explaining that the first refers to the Land of Israel, the second to the Diaspora.

Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe notes that despite the tendency to approach the Temple in fear and trepidation, the Torah [Deuteronomy 12:7; 12 ff] connects joy with coming to the Temple because true joy consists of spiritual enlightenment. Just as the Temple was conducive to experiencing this lofty level of spiritual enlightenment, so too are the air and the atmosphere of the Land, for, unlike the Temple, they were not destroyed. Thus, the Land is especially suited for serving God in joy.

The Gaon of Vilna commented that there are two mitzvot which one fulfils with his entire body: sitting in a sukka and dwelling in the Land of Israel.

In the liturgy, the holiday of Sukkot is referred to as “the time of our joy.” The above comments clearly show that complete realization of the “time of joy” is possible only within the Land.

It Takes All Kinds

Of the four species, two produce fruit and two do not; those which produce fruit require those which do not, and those which do not require those which do. One cannot fulfill his obligation unless they are all held together.          Babylonian Talmud, Menaḥot, 27a

            The four species represent the entire spectrum of the Jewish People, from the best to the worst, those who fulfill their obligations to God and to man and those who do not.

            The etrog both produces fruit and has aroma, it is an edible fruit and also has a pleasant aroma, symbolizing those who fulfill the mitzvot between man and fellow-man as well as between man and God.

            My father explained that the four species symbolize four groups within the nation of Israel. Some people are selective in their observance. Some are charitable and fulfill their duties to their fellow man, but not to God, while others fulfill their duties to God, but not to their fellow men. These groups are represented by the lulav, which bears fruit, but has not aroma, and by the hadass, which has an aroma but not fruit.

            Others fulfill neither the mitzvot between man and fellow-man nor between man and God, and are represented by the aravot, which have neither fruit nor aroma.

            Fulfilling the mitzva requires all four species, if any of the four is missing, even the lowly arava, the mitzva cannot be fulfilled. Further, in performing the mitzva of the four species, all four must be held together, symbolizing the unity of the Jewish People.

            Our Sages chose their words carefully when they stated that “those which produce fruit require those which do not, and those which do not require those which do,” Klal Yisrael is composed even of the sinners, without whom the collective Israel is incomplete. This point is stressed again by the halacha that the species must be taken “derech gidulo,” each in the way it grows (not upside-down). The less righteous must be included even before they repent their sins.

            Our Sages taught that the four species symbolize Israel’s “victory” in being inscribed in the Book of Life on Yom Kippur. Just as the victorious army marches with its weapons, so Israel marches with lulav and etrog. Israel’s greatest weapon is its unity and that is the source of its victory.

Exile From Torah

God will then take up the cause  of His people, and comfort  His servants. He will have seen that their power is gone  (ki azlat yad), with nothing left to keep or abandon.                  Deuteronomy 32:36

Ba’al haTurim notes that the gematriya of the words “azlat yad” equals “zu galut” (this is exile), while that of the full phrase “ki azlat yad” equals the gematriya of “ein bam Torah” (they do not have Torah within them). My father commented that on some level, Israel’s exile inherently involves a diminution of Torah, as our Sages taught “there is no Torah comparable to that of the Land of Israel,” [Breishit Rabba 16:7] hence, "there is no greater dereliction of Torah than exile." [Babylonian Talmud, Ḥagiga 5b]
 As well, the lesson is that it is possible for Israel to be in exile in its own Land, should they forsake Torah.

The greatest exile is Israel being “exiled” from Torah, for without the merit of fulfilling Torah, Israel cannot be saved. Ultimately, the lesson is that Israel’s sole source of power is its commitment to Torah.

It is Torah which unites Israel as a nation. As important as the Land of Israel is, it is secondary to Torah. Israel’s national existence does not depend upon the Land, as evidenced by the fact that we survived close to two millennia without the Land. However, our national existence is intimately related to Torah.