Circumspect Mordechai

 

For if you persist in keeping quiet at a time like this, relief and deliverance will come to the Jews from another place, while you and your father’s house will perish; and who knows whether it was for such a time that you attained the royal position? Esther 4:14

Undoubtedly, when we read (or hear) Megilat Esther, it is clear to us that indeed it was for such a time that Esther attained the royal position, and it is reasonable to assume that Mordechai, as well, believed that Esther was chosen queen of Persia and Media through the hand of God. Yet, Mordechai does not pretend to understand the ways of God, and he therefore takes great care in wording his comment. Despite his personal belief, Mordechai will not state as a categorical that he understands God’s secrets, and therefore merely suggests the possibility that it is God’s providence which brought Esther to the throne of Persia in order to save His chosen nation.

In his careful and circumspect choice of words, Mordechai teaches us a valuable lesson. In our times, there is no shortage of those who “know” that the scourge of traffic accidents is the result of desecrating Shabbat, and that rockets were fired into southern Israel because of breaches of modesty. Mordechai’s approach is restrained, and follows the statement of the Sage (quoted in Sefer Ikkarim by Rabbi Yosef Albo [1380–1444], and attributed by some to Maimonides) concerning the nature of God: “were I to understand Him, I would be Him.”

 

           

Nation Land and Creator

They will know that I, the Lord, am their God, Who brought them out of the land of Egypt in order that I may dwell in their midst; I am the Lord, their God.                                                Exodus 29:46

                Among our classical commentators, Naḥmanides, and following him, Rabbeinu Beḥayye, note that the implication of the verse is that having the Shechina manifest within the Nation of Israel serves not only the nation’s need, but that of God as well!

                One of the verses which Naḥmanides cites in support of his contention, contains the words of Joshua in the aftermath of the failed attempt to capture Ai:

When the Canaanites and all the inhabitants of the Land hear about this, they will surround us and wipe out and cut off our name from the earth; and what will You do for Your great Name?        Joshua 7:9

                Indeed, the connection among the Nation of Israel, its Land and the Creator is so strong that the very presence of Israel outside its Land constitutes a desecration of God’s name. Ezekiel delivered God’s words:

But then when they entered the other nations, they defiled My holy name because it was said of them, "These are the Lord’s people, yet they left his Land."                                                36:20

While the simple meaning of the verse seems to be that it was the Israelites’ behavior in the diaspora which defiled God’s name, according to Midrash Eicha Rabba, the nations asked in astonishment “If you are indeed the Lord’s people, why have you left His Land?” It is possible to understand this comment to mean that God’s name was defiled by the very fact that His nation is to be found outside the Land.

                This being the case, the corollary is that Israel’s return to its Land rectifies the desecration of God’s name caused by their having left the Land. Indeed, Rabbi J. B. Soloveitchik wrote “You have no idea how the Name of the Almighty was glorified and extolled, and His kingdom reestablished, by the establishment of the State of Israel.”

Tabernacle Sinai and Eden

            Yehuda Kiehl, in the introduction to his commentary on Genesis [Da’at Mikra] presents a most insightful analysis which sees the concept of the Tabernacle as if a golden thread which is woven into the fabric of Israel’s history, and even earlier, to Man’s first domicile on earth, the Garden of Eden.

            Kiehl quotes Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch’s comment that the Tabernacle is “a mobile Sinai.” Just as at Mount Sinai there were two distinct areas of sanctity, and the second more stringent than the first (only Moses was permitted to ascend the heights of Mount Sinai), so too the Tabernacle/Temple was divided into the holy and holy of holies. Additionally, just as Moses ascended into the “thick cloud” [Exodus 19:9] which enveloped Mount Sinai, so too the high priest entered the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur in the “cloud of incense” [Leviticus 16:13].

            Yet the ideal of the Tabernacle/Temple is much more ancient than the revelation at Sinai, and it is inherent within the creation of the world, since the very existence of the world is dependent upon this ideal.

            Our Sages [Babylonian Talmud, Pesaḥim 54a, Nedarim 39b, as well as a number of Midrashim] count the Temple and the Garden of Eden among seven things created prior to the creation of the world. The Talmudic sage Reish Lakish [Midrash Tanḥuma, Pekudei 40] notes that the Tabernacle is also called a garden, yet it is dearer to the Almighty than is the Garden of Eden, since the Tabernacle is called “My garden” [Song of Songs 5:1].

            Just as the cherubim guarded the “path to the tree of life” within the Garden of Eden [Genesis 3:24], so too the cherubim protected the Ark of Covenant within the Holy of Holies. Professor U. Cassuto suggested that the cherubim of the Tabernacle served as a reminder of mankind’s home within the Garden of Eden prior to his sin.

            Kiehl quotes our Sages’ understanding of the verse: “God took the man and placed him in the Garden of Eden to work it (the Hebrew can also be translated “to serve it”) and watch it” [Genesis 2:15] as referring to Divine service, the service of sacrifices, a service which was transferred to the Tabernacle/Temple.

            Rabbi Yitzḥak Levi notes that there are two approaches. The first approach sees the Tabernacle/Temple as a continuation of the existence of the Garden of Eden within the world. Just as the Garden of Eden brought blessing to the world, so to the Temple is intended to bring physical and spiritual blessing to the entire world, and in this sense, the Temple indeed perpetuates the Garden of Eden for the People of Israel and the entire world. The second approach sees the Temple as the rectification of the sin of Eve and Adam within Eden.  A number of contrasts between the Garden of Eden and the Temple demonstrate this point: the mission of the cherubim when God stationed them “east of Eden” [Genesis 3:24] was to prevent man from inappropriate closeness to God, while in the Temple they represent the greatest closeness to Him; Adam was clothed for the first time following his sin , while the clothes of the High Priest are intended to convey “dignity and beauty” [Exodus 28:2,40]; after sinning, Adam was unable to stand before the Divine voice [Genesis 3:10], while in contrast, Moses entered the Tabernacle to hear the call of the Divine voice.

            There is no contradiction between the two approaches, rather they are complementary. The Temple indeed carries with it both the aspects of continuity of Eden and of rectification of man’s sin. Ultimately, the parallel between the Temple and the Garden of Eden conveys hope and optimism for the world’s return to its pristine state of purity and completeness, with direct and unmediated closeness between Israel and God, and a renewal of direct dialogue between man and his Creator.

            Based upon the above comments, Rabbi Hirsch’s comment that the Tabernacle is a “rejuvenated temporary Eden” is easily understood.

 

 

 

Abraham Isaac and Israel

The haftara of Parshat Ki Tissa relates the dramatic confrontation between Elijah and the prophets of Ba’al [I Kings 18:19-39], and includes details of Elijah’s repair of the altar of God:

And Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, unto whom the word of God came, saying: “Israel shall be your name.” [I Kings 18:31]

Radak (Rabbi David Kimchi [1160-1235]) comments that Elijah’s choosing twelve stones teaches that all twelve tribes must be united. Based upon Radak’s comment, we can assume that the words “according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob” were spoken by Elijah himself.

The final phrase of the verse (which, apparently is a parenthetic comment, added by the prophet Jeremiah, who authored the Books of Kings, [Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra 14b]) mentioning that God changed Jacob’s name to Israel, seems superfluous. Our Sages [Breishit Rabba 35:10] understood that this phrase conveys God’s approval of Elijah’s actions on Mount Carmel, despite the fact that once the Temple was dedicated by King Solomon, sacrifices may not be brought on any altar, save that of the Temple. (See Rashi on the verse.)

Perhaps the phrase also hints that the Kingdom of Israel will be reunited with the Kingdom of Judah, and implies that once again, all twelve tribes will offer their sacrifices upon the altar of the temple in Jerusalem.

It is clearly not by chance that Elijah himself referred to Israel rather than Jacob:

And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the evening offering, that Elijah the prophet came near, and said: “O God, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Israel, let it be known this day that You are God in Israel, and that I am Your servant, and that I have done all these things at Your word.” [I Kings 18:36]

As Yehuda Kiehl noted in Da’at Mikra on the verse, this is one of only four times in the entire Bible in which the names of the Forefathers include “Israel” rather than “Jacob.” Significantly, the first instance is in the parasha, when Moses completed his plea to God to save the Israelites after the sin of the golden calf:

Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants, to whom You swore by Your own self, and said to them: “I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it forever.” [Exodus 32:13]

Our classical commentators (see, for example, Radak quoted above) note that the name Israel implies a higher level of power and authority than the name “Jacob,” since the Holy Land was conveyed to the nation in perpetuity in the name of Israel. Thus, echoing Moses, Elijah invoked the name “Israel” to imply to all the assembled citizens of the Kingdom of Israel that it is only through devotion to their own traditions and rejecting the false gods imposed upon them by the evil queen Jezebel that they can truly realize their national potential. [I Kings 18:21]

 

 

 

 

Purim and Napoleon

Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai was asked by his disciples, “Why were the enemies of Israel (a euphemism for Israel itself) in that generation deserving of extermination?” He said to them: “You yourselves provide the answer.” They said: “Because they enjoyed the feast of that wicked one.”                                Babylonian Talmud, Megilla 12a

            According to Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai, the retribution of Haman resulted from the fact that the Jews benefitted from Ahasuerus’ feast.

            Pirḥei Levanon (quoted in MeOtzareinu haYashan) notes that bar Yoḥai did not attribute the retribution to the Jews having eaten at the feast, since they could have excused that due to having been forced to participate (others suggest that since, at the feast, “No one was forced,” [Esther 1:8] the Jews violated no halachot in participating in the feast), but attributes it to the fact that the Jews enjoyed the feast. Our Sages taught that at his feast Ahasuerus used vessels which had been taken from the Temple. [Babylonian Talmud, Megilla 11b] A nation which enjoys a feast whose host celebrates their national disaster and the destruction of their Temple, is worthy of annihilation.

            None other than Napoleon Bonaparte presented the opposite side:

            The story is told that one summer day, Napoleon, while walking through the streets of Paris, passed a synagogue and heard the sound of people praying and weeping inside. Turning to one of his aides, a Jewish officer, the emperor asked, “What is going on in there?” “Today is Tisha B’Av,” came the reply, “and the Jews are mourning the destruction of their holy Temple.” Napoleon asked “When was this temple destroyed?” and upon hearing the response “Over seventeen hundred years ago,” Napoleon commented “If the Jews are still crying after so many years, then I am certain their Temple will one day be rebuilt!”