Jacob's Ladder and Sinai

And he dreamed, and behold; a ladder set up on the earth, and its top reached heaven; and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it.                              Genesis 28:12

            Midrash Aggada elucidates Jacob’s dream of the ladder in connection with Mount Sinai and giving the Torah:

“Sulam” (ladder) – is the gematriya of Sinai; “Set up on the earth” – corresponds to “The foot of the mountain;” [Exodus 19:17] “Its top reached heaven” – as Scripture states “The mountain burned with fire up to the midst of the heavens;” [Deuteronomy 4:11] “And behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it” – these are Moses and Aaron.

            Da’at Zekeinim of the Tosafists applies the approach of Midrash Aggada to the following verse as well and understands it as well as dealing with the revelation at Sinai:

“And behold God stood above it” – this is what is stated “And God came down to Mount Sinai;” [Exodus 19:20] “And He said, "I am the Lord’” - this is what is stated “I am the Lord your God.” [Exodus 20:2]

            The simple meaning of the verses indicates that the vision of the ladder is related to the Land of Israel, as God declared to Jacob: “The land upon which you are lying I will give to you  and to your descendants.” [v.13] Thus, it seems surprising that the Midrash and the Tosafists elucidate the verses in connection with Mount Sinai.

            We may suggest that the Midrash hints at the connection between Mount Sinai and Mount Moriah, which Midrash Aggada sees as the venue for Jacob’s prophetic dream.

            Thus Midrash Tehilim elucidates the verse “His foundation is in the holy mountains.” [Psalms 87:1]:

The foundation of the world is Jerusalem, by virtue of two holy mountains: Sinai and Moriah.

Based upon this, the connection between the two mountains is in the fact that it is through their merit that the world was created.

            Yet, Midrash Tehilim [68:9] asks “From where did Sinai come?” and presents Rabbi Yose’s answer:

It was torn off from Mount Moriah, as ḥalla from dough, from the spot upon which our father Isaac was bound…

Our Sages expounded:

From Zion was the world created, as the verse says [Psalms 50:1-2]: “out of Zion the perfection of beauty, God has shone forth;” from there was the beauty of the world perfected.

                                 Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 54b

Combining the two comments of Midrash Tehilim teaches that not only was the world created from Mount Moriah but it was created because of Mount Moriah.

            Rabbi Yitzḥak Levi comments on Midrash Tehilim which we quoted:

The Midrash describes in picturesque language the internal relationship between the two mountains, Sinai and Moriah; giving the Torah, which commenced on Mount Sinai, was continued at Mount Moriah.

            The true significance of the greatest Divine revelation in history, giving Torah at Mount Sinai, is dependent upon the Land of Israel and Mount Moriah. Torah was given to Israel as its national constitution, to be applied in practice in sanctity and within its Land and the highest level of sanctity in the world is the site of the Holy of Holies on Mount Moriah

            Expounding Jacob’s vision of the ladder in the context of Mount Sinai hints as well that the Nation of Israel’s ability to hold its Land is dependent upon fulfilling the mitzvot given at Sinai.

The Unusual Gang of Suspects

 

Our Sages and traditional commentators were generous in assigning blame for the rape of Jacob’s daughter Dina.

Midrash Aggada states “Dina went out only to show herself and her beauty, and (thereby) brought sin upon herself and Shechem, son of Ḥamor desired her.” That is, Dina herself shares at least part of the blame.

The version presented in Midrash Sechel Tov is much sharper: “Dina decked herself out licentiously and as a prostitute (sic!).” However, part of the blame is apportioned to her mother Leah, “who did not restrain Dina,” and therefore, (Dina’s) fault is hung upon her mother.”

Midrash Tanḥuma [vaYishlaḥ, 19] adds Jacob to the list of culprits:

When our father Jacob and his sons approached (towards Esau), Dina too was with him, when his messengers returned and informed Jacob that they had come to his brother Esau [Genesis 32:7], Jacob hid Dina in a trunk, so Esau would not see her and take her as a wife. The Holy One, blessed be He said: “You withheld her from Esau, by your life, she is destined for an uncircumcised man.” This is what is written “A despairing man should receive loyalty from his friends.” [Job 6:14] Had Dina married Esau, she may have converted him, (since Jacob did not allow this) “Shechem son of Ḥamor saw her, etc.”

            In addition to Dina and her parents, a portion of blame can be assigned to her brothers, in accordance with Netziv’s enlightening comment. Jacob’s sons had two reactions to the news of their sister’s rape: “they were saddened and very angry.” [Genesis 34:7] Netziv explains that the first reaction was directed inwardly, the brothers felt guilt, for even in a totally lecherous place, where rapists are common, no one would dare attack a princess, out of awe of the monarch and fear of punishment. While Shechem need not fear punishment at the hands of Jacob, he should have felt awe because of Jacob’s lofty and sanctified level. Since this was not the case, Jacob’s sons felt that they deserved a share of the blame for their sister’s rape, since they failed to fulfill the words of the Torah: “And all the earth’s peoples will see that you are called by the Lord’s name, and they will be in awe of you.” [Deuteronomy 28:10] Dina’s brothers understood that they had failed to convey the nobility of their father’s family, and thereby created a situation which allowed their sister to be defiled,

            Thus, the list of those culpable in Dina’s rape includes her entire family: Dina herself, her parents and her brothers!

            There are two practical lessons to be derived from the list of culprits:

            1] Everyone bears responsibility for his/her actions and inactions;

            2] At times of distress, the first reaction should be introspection and an assessment of one’s personal responsibility for the events surrounding him.

The Sale of Joseph and the Second Exile

Jacob dwelt in the Land of his father's sojournings, in the land of Canaan. These are the generations of Jacob: when Joseph was seventeen years old, being a shepherd, he was with his brothers with the flocks, and he was a lad, [and was] with the sons of Bilhah and with the sons of Zilpah, his father's wives; and Joseph brought evil tales about them to their father.

                                                       Genesis 37:1-2

 

From the time Jacob left his father’s home, the events of his life paralleled the events of our fathers in the first (Babylonian) exile; once he returned to the Land of his father’s sojournings, the events of Jacob’s life paralleled the events of our fathers during the Second Temple period, its destruction, our exile and our redemption (which will come) at the end of days.

                                                            Sforno [v.2]

            Shem miShmuel notes that Sforno’s comment is based upon Midrash Rabba [Exodus 26:1]

            Indeed, our Sages taught that the Second Temple was destroyed because of unfounded hatred (sinat ḥinam) among the Jews, and it was unfounded hatred which brought about the sale of Joseph as a slave.

            Yet we must understand the concept of sinat ḥinam. After all, Joseph’s brothers had reasons for hating him, as Scripture informs us [Genesis 37:4,8] and they decreed a death sentence on him, having judged Joseph as “rodef” (pursuer – see Sforno and Rabbi Ḥayyim Paltiel, on Genesis 37:18) By the same token, the hatred among Jews at the end of the Second Temple period did not arise in a vacuum, but was based on divergent political outlooks, between those who were totally opposed to Roman rule over Judea and those who sought ways to survive under Rome’s domination. The conclusion to be reached is that apparently any hatred among Jews is to be defined as unfounded and is forbidden.

            Shem miShmuel adds that the parallel between the sale of Joseph as a slave and the Roman exile (of which we suffer until this day) teaches us the way to end the exile and achieve redemption. Just as “all the tribes returned and were reunited” when Joseph revealed himself to his brothers in Egypt and forgave them, so too the ultimate redemption will arise from the unity of Israel.

            Shem miShmuel’s comment is exactly Rabbi Kook’s comment: “Given that we were destroyed, and the world destroyed with us as the result of unfounded hatred, we shall be rebuilt and the world along with us through unbounded love.” When we rectify the evil of sinat ḥinam, we will bring about our redemption from the exile of Rome. It is within our power!

 

 

In Those Days, at This Time

            The Apocryphal book First Maccabees is considered both historically accurate and faithful to Jewish tradition.

            First Maccabees’ description of Judah Maccabee’s preparations for battle demonstrates his sincere faith in Divine assistance on behalf of Israel, as well as his conviction that his struggle is for Israel’s sake.

            Thus Judah responded to his men’s fears before the engagement at the Bet Ḥoron pass:

"It is easy for many to be hemmed in by few, for in the sight of Heaven there is no difference between saving by many or by few. It is not on the size of the army that victory in battle depends, but strength comes from Heaven. They come against us in great pride and lawlessness to destroy us and our wives and our children, and to despoil; but we fight for our lives and our laws. He himself will crush them before us; as for you, do not be afraid of them."                         I Maccabees 3:18-22

            Before leading his fighters into the Battle of Emmaus, his most brilliant victory, (which is taught until today in the United States War College) Judah encouraged them with these words:

"Do not fear their numbers or be afraid when they charge. Remember how our fathers were saved at the Red Sea, when Pharaoh with his forces pursued them. And now let us cry to Heaven, to see whether He will favor us and remember His covenant with our fathers and crush this army before us today. Then all the Gentiles will know that there is One Who redeems and saves Israel."                         Ibid.4:8-10

            Al haNissim, the special prayer added on Hanukka, speaks of “… the battles which You did for our fathers in those days, at this time..” This phrase carries special significance, since, in fact, some of Judah Maccabee’s battlegrounds were the scenes of engagements fought by the Israel Defense Forces, modern Israel’s army.

            Clearly the extent to which modern Israel’s military leaders possess the same fervor as Judah Maccabee exhibited more than twenty-one centuries ago is the extent to which the security of the State will be increased.   

 

 

The Limiting Letter “Nun”

Every commandment that I command you this day you shall keep (tishmerun) to do, that you may live (tiḥyun) and multiply, and come and possess the land that the Lord swore to your forefathers.                                                                          Deuteronomy 8:1

            Netziv’s systematic approach is that the addition of the letter “nun” at the end of a verb (tishmerun and tiḥyun in our verse) serves to limit that verb. Based upon his approach, Netziv explains that the form of the verb “tishmerun” teaches that even if not all mitzvot can be observed in practice, there is an obligation to study all mitzvot. There are mitzvot which will become obligatory only upon entering the Land, and others which will be apply only following the fourteen years of conquest and division of the Land, “yet Moses admonished Israel to study all the mitzvot in order to be able to practice them at the relevant times.”

            Netziv explicitly states the implied message:

From this we learn that the same is true in times of exile (which will follow Israel’s entry into its Land).

That is, it is incumbent upon us to study even those mitzvot which are not currently applicable, such as those connected to the Temple.

            Based upon Netziv’s approach, the word “tiḥyun” as well is delimiting, and indeed, he comments:

Spiritual vitality cannot be completely realized until Israel enters its Land.

Beauty

            Three of the four matriarchs are explicitly described as being beautiful women:

            Abraham, upon nearing Egypt, said to Sarah “I know that you are a beautiful woman.” [Genesis 12:11] Lest we think this was only Abraham’s subjective assessment, three verses later we read the Egyptians’ assessment: “When Abram reached Egypt, the Egyptians saw the woman, that she is exceedingly beautiful”.

            The Bible’s introduction of Rebecca includes the comment “the girl was of great beauty.” [Genesis 24:16] Netziv comments that Rebecca’s beauty was one of the reasons Eliezer, servant of Abraham chose to approach her as opposed to the other girls who had come to the well.  Malbim goes a step further and says it was Rebecca’s beauty which was the reason Eliezer approached her.

            Rachel is described as being “beautiful of form and beautiful in appearance” [Genesis 29:17].

            Leah is described (in the same verse which describes the beauty of Rachel) thus: “and Leah’s eyes were weak (rakot)”. Translation, by definition is also interpretation. Beginning with the first century Aramaic translation of Onkelos, many traditional commentaries understand the word rakot to mean tender or beautiful. Radak comments “Leah was beautiful, however her eyes were weak and teary.”

            Thus, it is possible that the Torah describes each of the matriarchs as being beautiful.

            Rabbi Kook comments that an appreciation of beauty and a sense of esthetics are spiritual strengths:

An appreciation of beauty is positive and expands the soul. One who is completely righteous and uses this appreciation positively acts well and pleasantly, for this great feeling towards beauty was not created for naught. Furthermore, an appreciation of beauty can develop one’s intellectual powers and as well expand one’s spiritual strength.

This Dvar Torah is dedicated to the memory of my wife Gloria, whose beauty was both spiritual and physical.

The Watchmen on Jerusalem's Walls

                The eighth verse of the haftara of Parashat Nitzavim, the final haftara of the “Seven of Consolation,” reads:

On your walls, O Jerusalem, I have appointed watchmen; all day and all night, they shall never be silent; those who call on the Lord, do not be silent.                                              Isaiah 62:6

                Iyyun Yaakov [Ein Yaakov, Berachot 3a] connects our verse to our Sages’ statement:

It has been taught: Rabbi Eliezer says: The night has three watches, and at each watch the Holy One, blessed be He, sits and roars like a lion. For it is written: “The Lord shall roar from above, and from His Holy Habitation He shall give forth His voice; roaring He does roar over His habitation." [Jeremiah 25:30]

As well, Iyyun Yaakov brings our attention to our Sages’ comment concerning the content of the statements of the watchmen, who are not to be silent:

“On your walls, O Jerusalem, I have appointed watchmen; all day and all night, they shall never be silent; those who call on the Lord, do not be silent.” What do they say? — Raba son of Rabbi Shila said (They say,) “You will rise, You will have mercy on Zion;” [Psalms 102:14 Rabbi Naḥman son of Yitzḥak said, (They say,) “The Lord is the builder of Jerusalem;” [ibid. 147:2] And what did they say before this? (prior to Jerusalem’s destruction) Raba son of Rabbi Shila said, (They used to say) “For the Lord has chosen Zion; He desired it for His habitation.” [ibid. 132:13]

                There are differing opinions among the classical commentators as to the identification of the watchmen. Radak presents three possibilities;

1) The watchmen are God’s angels, “Who pray to God that He return Jerusalem its settled state;”

2) They are the mourners of Zion, “Who pray day and night for Jerusalem;”

3) They are “All of Israel in their exile, for they keep watch and constantly look forward to Jerusalem’s rebuilding and mention ‘Who rebuilds Jerusalem’ in their prayers (the fourteenth blessing of the thrice-daily amida) and in their blessings (the third blessing of the Grace After Meals).

                If the watchmen are angels, the intention is that it is God’s will that Jerusalem be rebuilt, since angels are  not independent entities, but executors of the Divine will, who have no free choice. It seems that this is the meaning of the comment of Midrash Zuta [Lamentations 1:16]:

When God destroyed the Temple, He appointed watchmen on Jerusalem’s walls, (in effect saying:) “You must comfort Me, ‘Give comfort, give comfort, My people’ [Isaiah 40:1] - Comfort Me, comfort Me.”

                Parenthetically, according to this Midrash, the conclusion of reading the seven haftarot of consolation connects directly to its commencement, which is “Give comfort, give comfort, My people.”

                This being the case, the question which begs asking is: if the Divine will is to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple, what prevents God from doing this? Why have we not yet been privileged to see the Temple rebuild and Jerusalem reestablished?

                However, the Divine will to rebuild Jerusalem is the Divine attribute of mercy, which goes beyond the strict letter of the law embodied in the attribute of justice. Because of our sins (especially our failure to rectify “baseless hatred” which was the cause of the destruction of the Second Temple), the attribute of justice requires maintaining the state of the Temple’s destruction.

                The angels express the Divine will, however, realizing His will depends on us. Ultimately, through our yearnings and prayers for the Temple’s rebuilding, and even more so, our proper behavior in rectifying the sin of baseless hatred, we have the ability to assist the angels in fulfilling the Divine will. This is our obligation.

                As such, the three identifications of the watchmen appointed on Jerusalem’s walls are complimentary, not contradictory.

Man Created from the Place of His Atonement

And the Lord God formed man of dust from the earth, and He breathed into his nostrils the soul of life, and man became a living soul.                       Genesis 2:7

Rabbi Berechya and Rabbi Ḥelbo, quoting Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman, say: “Man was created from the place of his atonement, as Scripture says ‘You shall make an altar of earth for Me,’ [Exodus 20:21] the Holy One, blessed be He said: ‘Behold, I create him from the place of his atonement.’”

                                                  Breishit Rabba 14:8

            Our Sages taught that Adam was created from the site of the altar on Mount Moriah, the place where he brought the first sacrifice offered to the Creator.

            Maimonides considered this point sufficiently important that he cited it at beginning of his description of the Temple altar:

It is a tradition accepted by all that the place where Abraham built the altar upon which he bound Isaac was the same place where Noah built his altar when he left the ark, and this is the altar where Cain and Abel made their offerings. And so Adam the First made his offerings there after he was created. Indeed Adam was created from there, as the Rabbis said: "Adam was created from the place where he made his atonement". [Laws of the Temple 2:2]

            Zohar [2:24b] expands the Midrashic comment and specifies:

Rabbi Shimon (quotes that which) Rabbi Ḥizkiya stated: when the Holy One, blessed be He created Man, He created him from the dust of the earthly Temple, and gave him his soul from the dust of the heavenly Temple.

That is, Man’s body was created of the dust of the earthly Temple, while the source of his soul is the dust of the heavenly Temple.

            Rabbi Moshe Alshikh writes [commentary on Leviticus 1:3] that the altar “Is at the place of the gate of heaven - which is the point of connection between this world and the upper world.” Based upon Zohar’s comment, Man is the creature who combines within itself the heavenly and the earthly, thus it is only natural “that Man connect with the source from which he was detached,” and at this place to regain closeness to his Creator.”

            Alshikh further explains that our Sages chose their words carefully and exactly. They did not say “Man achieves atonement from the place of his creation,” rather “Man was created from the place of his atonement;” indicating that “From the inception, God’s intention was to create Man from earth which is conducive to attachment to the upper sanctity, in order to facilitate his approach to holiness,” and there to achieve atonement after he sinned. “Thus, it will not be foreign to Man to repent his sins, for the earth of which he was created is the point of connection to sanctity, and it is easy to reach holiness there.”

            Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch [commentary on Genesis 12:5] writes that the implication of Man’s creation from the dust of the site of the altar is that the place of Mankind’s birth is the very place where Man is continually renewed spiritually and morally.

Destination: Mount Moriah

The Lord said to Abram, “Leave your country, your relatives, and your father’s family, and go to the land I will show you.”                                 Genesis 12:1

Netziv comments that the intention is not for Abram to reach the Land of Israel, “Since he already knew the Land’s qualities and yearned for her, as the verse has already stated: (Abram set out with his father Teraḥ ‘To go to the land of Canaan.’” [Genesis 11:31] Rather, the explanation of “The land I will show you” is that “Within that land, I will show you which direction to turn, as the verse states ‘To the land of Moriah.’” [Genesis 22:20]

Rabbi Menaḥem Kasher, in his work Torah Shleima, quotes the manuscript of Midrash Or haAfela, which states: “‘To the land I will show you’ refers to the land of Moriah.”

            Based upon the above, we understand that the purpose of Abram’s journey from his country, his relatives and his father’s house was specifically to reach Mount Moriah, and this was the Divine designation for this journey.

Indeed, eight verses after we read God’s call on Abram to go to the land which He will show him, the verse informs us that “Abram traveled, continually traveling southward.” Rashi comments: “All of Abram’s journeys were to the south of the Land of Israel, the direction of Jerusalem.”

It is not surprising that the Divine designation of our Father Abraham’s first journey is Mount Moriah. Mount Moriah includes the holiest spot in the world, the Foundation Stone, the site of the Holy of Holies and the place from which God commenced creation. [Mishna, Keilim 1:6; Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 54b] Maharal of Prague’s approach is that the sanctity of the Land derives from the fact that the Holy City, and in particular, the Temple Mount, the holiest place in the world, are located within her. Thus, in order to benefit from the Land’s sanctity, Abraham needed to reach its ultimate source: Mount Moriah.

            Thus, the destination of Abram’s journey was Mount Moriah.

The Paradigm of Jewish Land Purchase

And Abraham listened to Ephron, and Abraham weighed out to Ephron the silver that he had named in the hearing of the sons of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, accepted by the merchant.                                    Genesis 23:16

        The opening chapter of Parashat Ḥayye Sarah presents in detail the negotiations between Abraham and the sons of Heth for the purchase of the Machpela Cave, the first land purchase in Israel by a Jew, including the purchase price.

            When Jacob instructed his son Joseph to bury him in the Land of Israel, Jacob did not merely mention that the burial place must be the Machpela Cave, but added the information “This is the field Abraham purchased from Ephron the Hittite as a burial site.” [Genesis 49:30] As well, the description of Joseph’s execution of his father’s request includes the information that the place was purchased by Abraham, with the name of the seller and the purchase price again stated explicitly:

They carried him to the land of Canaan and buried him in the cave at Machpelah in the field near Mamre, which Abraham had purchased as a burial site from Ephron the Hittite.                             Genesis 50:3

            Similarly, we find the verse specifying the price paid for the parcel of land in Shechem purchased by Jacob:

He bought the section of the field where he pitched his tent from the sons of Hamor, Shechem's father, for one hundred qesitahs.                    Genesis 33:19

Here, as well, when the parcel of land is mentioned again (as the burial place of Joseph) the verse again specifically notes the purchase price and the seller’s name:

Joseph's bones, which the Israelites had brought up from Egypt, were buried at Shechem in the parcel of land Jacob had purchased from the sons of Hamor, Shechem's father, for one hundred qesitahs .It was an inheritance for Joseph's descendants.     Joshua 24:32

            There is a third land purchase for which the Bible details the purchase price and the seller’s name: the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite, which is the Temple Mount:

The king answered Araunah, "No, I insist on buying it from you for a fair price, for I will not offer to the Lord my God burnt offerings that cost (me) nothing." David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver. II Samuel 24:24

            We may note that in King David’s purchase of the threshing floor of Araunah, as Abraham’s purchase of the Machpela Cave, the Jewish buyer refused to accept the land for free.

            Also concerning the purchase of the site which became the capital of the Kingdom of Israel during the reign of Omri, we read details of the seller and the purchase price:

He purchased the hill Samaria from Shemer for the price of two talents of silver, and he built a town on the hill, naming it Samaria, after Shemer the (previous) owner of the hill.                   I Kings 16:24

            Thus, our parasha presents the paradigm of Jewish land purchase in the Land of Israel.

            Rashi, in his first comment on Ḥumash, quotes the comment of Rabbi Yitzḥak (whose source is Midrash Tanḥuma), according to which the right of the Nation of Israel to its Land rests upon the Divine will to give us the Desired Land. However, we find a Midrash which states:

There are three places (in the Land) which the nations of the world cannot deceive Israel and claim they are stolen, and these are they: the Machpela Cave, the Temple and Joseph’s Tomb.          Breishit Rabba 79:7

That is, our rights to these three places rest upon their legal purchase by our fathers and our king.

            Clearly, there is no contradiction. Rabbi Yitzḥak’s words are addressed to the Nation of Israel internally. We must understand and appreciate that our claim to the Promised Land flows exclusively from God’s will that His nation be in His Land. However, we cannot expect the nations of the world to understand and accept this truth. Therefore, Breishit Rabba presents a claim to which the nations can relate: our rights stem from our ancestors’ purchases. It is for this reason that the Bible stresses the details of these purchases: the buyer the seller and the sale price. In essence, this information serves as the purchase deed which confirms our property rights.

            Ultimately, the comments of Rabbi Yitzḥak quoted by Rashi presents the basic condition for our property claims. It is perfectly obvious that if we, the Nation of Israel, do not understand and accept that the Land was given by God to us and only to us, the nations of the world will not accept our claim.

            This perhaps explains the irony of our current reality in Israel. In a sense the three most hotly contested areas of the country are those “Which the nations cannot claim are stolen by Israel” My rabbi, Rabbi Yaakov Wahrhaftig, explained that the intent of the Midrash is that if the Nation of Israel fully understood the truth that these three places belong to us exclusively, no one could have the audacity to claim otherwise. Since this is not the case, we ourselves have given the nations the possibility of claiming we have stolen the Land.

This Dvar Torah is based upon a lesson of Rabbi Amnon Bazak.

Complete Man

Therefore, a man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.                                             Genesis 2:24

            Netziv understands our verse to be the continuation of the Creator’s decree "It is not good that man is alone; I shall make him a helpmate opposite him (k’negdo)." [Genesis 2:18] In order to realize the purpose of being part of a couple, a man must leave his parents and “cleave to his wife, thus becoming as one flesh, loving her as if there were a single person.”

           Our verse adds that the prerequisite for a woman to become a helpmate is reciprocity in the marital relationship. The purpose of being a couple cannot be realized if one of the spouses rules over the other. “The woman is not secondary to her husband, but they must be as one flesh.” Each of the spouses must consider the needs and benefit of the other as he/she considers his/her own needs and benefit. This is the approach which is necessary to achieve true love.

          Yehuda Kiehl [Da’at Mikra] offers an enlightening comment: “The primary lesson which emerges from the description of the woman being formed of Adam’s rib is that husband and wife must complement each other as if they are ‘one flesh.’”

            Indeed, the Torah is consistent in its approach to being a couple:

Male and female He created them, and He blessed them, and He called their name man (Adam) on the day they were created.                            Genesis 5:2

            Though the verse refers to the first two human beings, Adam and Eve, it declares that God called their name (singular) man.

            Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe writes:

Man and woman together make a single Man (Adam). “And he called their name Adam” – a single man.

            Rabbi Wolbe expands and comments:

Until marriage, one is but half a person, and only upon marriage does one become a complete person. Following marriage there is no longer “I” but “we;” husband and wife together. Before marriage, the half-person is called “I” while following marriage, the spouses together form a whole person. All one’s traits must be focused on this, that they truly be as a single person.

       Indeed, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda elucidates our verse to mean that “Anyone who has no wife is an incomplete man,” [Breishit Rabba 17:2] while Rabbi Elazar goes further and states: “Any man who has no wife is not a man (at all).” [Yalkut Shimoni, Genesis 23]

         It is clear and obvious that achieving this goal is quite difficult.

         Rabbi Aryeh Levin once accompanied his wife to her doctor’s appointment, and when the physician asked what the problem is, Rabbi Levin responded “Her foot hurts us.”

This Dvar Torah is dedicated to the memory of my wife. Through God’s grace, Gloria was my helpmate for more than forty-one years.

Fifty Shekels or Six Hundred?

But only in the place the Lord will choose in one of your tribes; there you shall offer up your burnt offerings, and there you shall do all that I command you.                                    Deuteronomy 12:14

In one of your tribes – in the portion of Benjamin, yet above Scripture states “Of all your tribes,” [verse 5] how can the verses be reconciled? When King David purchased the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite, he collected money from all the tribes, yet the threshing floor itself was within the portion of Benjamin.                                              Rashi

            King David’s purchase of the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite, which is the site of the altar of the Temple [II Samuel 24:18] is described twice in the Bible. Toward the end of Second Samuel, the verse states “David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver;’" [ibid.,v.25]      while First Chronicles [21:25] reports that “David gave to Ornan (who is Araunah) for the place six-hundred  shekels of gold weight.” Our Sages were sensitive to the apparent contradiction, and teach:

It was taught: One text says, “David gave to Ornan for the place six hundred shekels of gold by weight;” whereas it is written, “David bought the threshing-floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.” How can these be reconciled? He collected fifty (shekels) from each tribe, which amounted to six hundred in all.                                Babylonian Talmud. Zevaḥim 116b

            Our Sages’ tradition is that King David collected fifty shekels from each of the twelve tribes for the purchase of the threshing floor of Araunah, and hence the total price paid was six-hundred shekels. Thus, there is no contradiction between the verses; rather, Second Samuel presents the unit price per tribe, while First Chronicles presents the total price.

            There is great significance to our Sages’ comment. The Temple Mount and the altar are intended to unite the tribes of God into a single nation, and it is therefore inconceivable that they belong to any single tribe as opposed to belonging to the Collective Israel. Therefore King David collected an equal sum of money from each of the twelve tribes to insure that the threshing floor belonged to all the tribes rather to any single tribe.

            This approach is consistent with our Sages’ opinion that Jerusalem was not divided among the tribes. [Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 12a; Megila 26a; Bava Kama 86b; and cited by Maimonides as halacha, Laws of Impurity of Tzara’at 14:11] The simplest explanation of the Sages’ opinion is that since Jerusalem is destined to unite the nation of Israel, it cannot possibly belong to any single tribe, but must be the domain of the Collective Israel.

            In fact, the concept of Jerusalem in general and the Temple specifically as that which unites Israel runs as a golden thread through the Holy City’s history, and one who does not understand this point simply cannot understand the essence of Jerusalem.

       This understanding of Jerusalem’s destiny explains our Sages’ determination that Jerusalem was destroyed because of unfounded hatred among the Jews. [Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 9b] Once Jerusalem became a focus of hatred among the Jews, she ceased being herself, and the city’s destruction became inevitable.

            Equally, this understanding explains Rabbi Kook’s famous comment: “Given that we were destroyed and the entire world destroyed because of unfounded hatred, we will be rebuilt and the world will be rebuilt with us through ‘unbounded love’.” When we bring Jerusalem to realization of her destiny of uniting Israel, her rebuilding will become inevitable.

Love and Fear

(He will do this) if you listen to the voice of the Lord your God by keeping His commandments and His statutes written in the scroll of this law (and) if you return to (el) the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.    Deuteronomy 30:10

            The first century CE Aramaic translation of Yonatan ben Uziel understands the verse to refer to repentance which is motivated by fear of Heaven.

            Alshikh, among others, sees the verse as referring to repentance which is motivated by love of God.

            In the final chapter of his Laws of Repentance [10:1-2], Maimonides explains the superiority of Divine service motivated by love of God over that motivated by fear of Heaven:

Only one who serves God out love of has the attribute of wisdom and the quality of the Prophets, (and) this is the level commanded us by the Holy One, blessed be He, through Moses, as the verse states “You shall love the Lord your God.” [Deuteronomy 6:5]

            Netziv as well understands the verse to be dealing with repentance out of love, and he adds the insightful comment that repentance motivated by fear of Heaven expresses self-love, based upon fear of punishment, and not love of God.

            HaK’tav v’haKabbala notes that in verse two the Torah used a different wording (which is not evident in translation): “And you must return to (ad) the Lord your God,” and distinguishes between the two Hebrew words: “ad” implies approaching near, but not entering, while “el” means entering within. One who repents out of fear of Heaven cannot fully connect with God, since the impact of his former sins remaining a barrier between himself and God. However, concerning repentance motivated by love of God, our Sages taught:

Great is repentance, as one’s intentional sins are counted for him as merits.                        Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 86b

Thus, this type of repentance allows one to reach complete attachment to God.

            The verse’s choice of words is significant, teaching that repentance motivated by love of God truly allows the penitent to establish a personal and non-mediated connection with Him.

Future Past

Remember the days of old; reflect upon the years of (other) generations. Ask your father, and he will tell you; your elders, and they will inform you.                                  Deuteronomy 32:7

            The poem of Ha’azinu is Moses’ survey of the entire history of the nation of Israel, “From beginning to end, including all that will occur for the nation in the future, beginning with the creation of the world and ending with the days of Messiah, as the verse states ‘Remember the days of old’,” as Rabbeinu Beḥayye writes in his introduction to the parasha.

            Though the Book of Deuteronomy is known as the repetition of Torah, and it opens with a review of Israel’s experiences during the forty years of wandering in the wilderness, its basic focus is forward looking. Essentially, the view to the past informs the view to the future, and the quintessential point is continuity.

            It is significant that in the Holy Tongue the root of the word for forward “kadima” means that which is past. The word itself teaches that for the nation of Israel the past enlightens the future. There is no possibility of divorcing Israel’s past from its present and future.