~ Why do you think we have a set of blessings and curses as we approach the end of Leviticus?
~ What do you make of the blessings?
~ What do you make of the fact that the blessings have 10 verses, and the curses have 32 verses?
The initial ending of Leviticus (Chap. 27 was added later) follows a pattern common to treaties in the ancient Near East: it provides blessings for remaining loyal to God (the suzerain) and curses for spurning him. A similar pattern, with greater rhetoric and emotional force, occurs in Deut. 28–30, with briefer examples in Ex. 23:25ff. and Josh. 24:20. The blessings center around peace and its attendant benefit, agricultural abundance; the curses detail, in increasing force, the calamities brought on by war: famine, defeat, and ultimately exile.
That the curses take up much more room than the blessings is not surprising, given the didactic nature of the chapter; this is also characteristic of ancient Near Eastern suzerain-vassal treaty literature, where the major emphasis is placed on what will happen if the pact is violated. ... The pattern (suggested by H. L. Ginsberg, who is quoted by Levine) moves from doom to hope, and then to an explanation of why restoration has been delayed. In any event, it should be noted (as Levine does) that the curses are not all doom; they do, at various points, leave the door open for Israel’s “turning,” a point much emphasized by the Prophets.
Lev. 26 is the first great monotheistic response to catastrophe, built on the idea that human beings have the capacity to influence their own fate by obeying or disobeying God. In Judaism, which was to experience numerous such catastrophes over the course of its history, literary response became an important mode of coping. Christianity took its own characteristic path in answering some of the same issues on a personal level.
וְאִם־תֵּֽלְכ֤וּ עִמִּי֙ קֶ֔רִי וְלֹ֥א תֹאב֖וּ לִשְׁמֹ֣עַֽ לִ֑י וְיָסַפְתִּ֤י עֲלֵיכֶם֙ מַכָּ֔ה שֶׁ֖בַע כְּחַטֹּאתֵיכֶֽם׃
Now if you walk with me [in] opposition, and do not consent to hearken to me,
I will continue against you blows, sevenfold, according to your sins—
וְאִ֨ם־בְּאֵ֔לֶּה לֹ֥א תִוָּסְר֖וּ לִ֑י וַהֲלַכְתֶּ֥ם עִמִּ֖י קֶֽרִי׃
Now if, after these-things, you do not accept-discipline from me,
but [continue to] walk with me [in] opposition,
וְהָלַכְתִּ֧י אַף־אֲנִ֛י עִמָּכֶ֖ם בְּקֶ֑רִי וְהִכֵּיתִ֤י אֶתְכֶם֙ גַּם־אָ֔נִי שֶׁ֖בַע עַל־חַטֹּאתֵיכֶֽם׃
I will walk with you, I myself, with opposition;
I will strike you, yes, I myself, sevenfold for your sins:
וְאִ֨ם־בְּזֹ֔את לֹ֥א תִשְׁמְע֖וּ לִ֑י וַהֲלַכְתֶּ֥ם עִמִּ֖י בְּקֶֽרִי׃
And if after this you will not hearken to me,
but [still] walk with me with opposition,
וְהָלַכְתִּ֥י עִמָּכֶ֖ם בַּחֲמַת־קֶ֑רִי וְיִסַּרְתִּ֤י אֶתְכֶם֙ אַף־אָ֔נִי שֶׁ֖בַע עַל־חַטֹּאתֵיכֶֽם׃
I will walk with you in the heat of opposition;
I will discipline you, even I myself, sevenfold for your sins!
וְהִתְוַדּ֤וּ אֶת־עֲוֺנָם֙ וְאֶת־עֲוֺ֣ן אֲבֹתָ֔ם בְּמַעֲלָ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֣ר מָֽעֲלוּ־בִ֑י וְאַ֕ף אֲשֶׁר־הָֽלְכ֥וּ עִמִּ֖י בְּקֶֽרִי׃
Now should they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, in their breaking-faith by which they broke-faith with me
—yes, since they have walked with me in opposition,
אַף־אֲנִ֗י אֵלֵ֤ךְ עִמָּם֙ בְּקֶ֔רִי וְהֵבֵאתִ֣י אֹתָ֔ם בְּאֶ֖רֶץ אֹיְבֵיהֶ֑ם אוֹ־אָ֣ז יִכָּנַ֗ע לְבָבָם֙ הֶֽעָרֵ֔ל וְאָ֖ז יִרְצ֥וּ אֶת־עֲוֺנָֽם׃
yes, I myself will walk with them in opposition,
and will bring them into the land of their enemies—
if then their foreskinned heart should humble itself,
if then they should find-acceptance regarding their iniquity,
וַיִּקָּ֥ר אֱלֹקִ֖ים אֶל־בִּלְעָ֑ם וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֵלָ֗יו אֶת־שִׁבְעַ֤ת הַֽמִּזְבְּחֹת֙ עָרַ֔כְתִּי וָאַ֛עַל פָּ֥ר וָאַ֖יִל בַּמִּזְבֵּֽחַ׃
And God encountered Bil’am;
he said to him:
The seven altars I have arranged,
and I have offered-up a bull and a ram on [each] altar.
(יז) זָכ֕וֹר אֵ֛ת אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה לְךָ֖ עֲמָלֵ֑ק בַּדֶּ֖רֶךְ בְּצֵאתְכֶ֥ם מִמִּצְרָֽיִם׃ (יח) אֲשֶׁ֨ר קָֽרְךָ֜ בַּדֶּ֗רֶךְ וַיְזַנֵּ֤ב בְּךָ֙ כׇּל־הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִ֣ים אַֽחֲרֶ֔יךָ וְאַתָּ֖ה עָיֵ֣ף וְיָגֵ֑עַ וְלֹ֥א יָרֵ֖א אֱלֹקִֽים׃
(17) Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey, after you left Egypt— (18) how, undeterred by fear of God, he surprised you on the march, when you were famished and weary, and cut down all the stragglers in your rear.
וַיִּקְרָ֖א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר ה' אֵלָ֔יו מֵאֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד לֵאמֹֽר׃
And he called to Moshe—
YHWH spoke to him from the Tent of Appointment, saying:
(ג) מעשה בר' שמעון בן חלפתא שבא ערב שבת ולא היה לו מאין לאכול, ערב שבת עם חשיכה, יצא לו חוץ מן העיר ונתפלל לפני הקב"ה, מיד נתנה לו אבן טובה מן השמים, ונכנס ונתנה לשולחני, ופירנס את השבת, והיה יושב ואוכל בלילי שבת, אמרה לו אשתו מהיכן אלו, אמר לה ממה שפירנס הקב"ה, אמרה לו אם אין אתה אומר לי איני טועמת כלום עד שתאמר לי, אמר לה כך וכך היה מעשה ונתפללתי וניתנה לי אבן טובה מן השמים ואלו ממנה, אמרה לו איני טועמת כלום עד שתאמר לי שאתה מחזירה למוצאי שבת, אמר לה למה, אמרה לו מחר אתה בא וחביריך עמך והם נוטלם יותר ואתה נוטל פחות מהם, למה שאין מתן שכרה של תורה אלא לעולם הבא, שנאמר ותשחק ליום אחרון, כיון שהלך השבת עמד והחזירה, מיד ניטלה ממנו.
(3) There is a story about R. Simeon ben Halafta, that he came <home> on Sabbath eve and did not have anything to eat. On Sabbath eve at nightfall he went outside of the city and prayed to the Holy One. Immediately a precious stone was given to him from heaven. So he came in, gave it to the money-changer, and provided for the Sabbath. Then he sat down to eat on the Sabbath night. His wife said to him: Where did these < provisions > come from? He said to her: From what the Holy One supplied. She said to him: If you do not tell me, I am not tasting anything until you will tell me. He said to her: Thus and so is what happened: I prayed, a precious stone was given to me from heaven, and these things came from that. She said to him: I am not tasting anything until you give me your word that you will return it on the evening after the Sabbath. He said to her: Why? She said to him: In the future < life > you will come with your friends; and they will take more, with you taking less than they. Why? Because there is no reward for Torah except in the world to come. Thus it is stated (in Prov. 31:25): AND YOU WILL LAUGH AT THE LATTER DAY. As soon as the Sabbath had gone, he arose and returned it. Immediately it was taken from him.
~ What is the point of the story?
~ Who directs Shimon ben Halafta, and why?
~ Tanchuma: earliest midrash era, 150-200 CE. Shimon ben Halafta was one of the last tannaim (Mishnah rabbis, 200 CE)
והיה עקב תשמעון. זש"ה אורח חיים פן תפלס נעו מעגלותיה לא תדע (משלי ה ו), שלא תהיה נושא ונותן במצותיה של תורה ורואה איזה שכרה של תורה ומצוה מרובה ועושה אותה, למה נעו מעגלותיה לא תדע, מטולטלין הם שבילי התורה, אמר ר' חייא משל למה הדבר דומה, למלך שהיה לו פרדס, והכניס בו פועלים, ולא גילה להם המלך שכר נטיעותיו, כי אילו גילה להם שכר נטיעותיו רואה איזה נטיעה שכרה מרובה ונוטעין אותה, נמצאת מלאכת הפרדס מקצתה בטילה ומקצתה קיימת, כך לא גילה הקב"ה בתורה שכר כל מצוה ומצוה, שאילו גילה נמצאו המצות מקצתן קיימות ומקצתן בטילות, ור' אחא בשם ר' אבא בר כהנא טילטל הקב"ה שכר עושה מצות בעולם הזה, כדי שיהו ישראל עושין אותם משלם.
(Deut. 7:12:) AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS IF YOU HEED <THESE STATUTES>. This text is related (to Prov. 5:6): SHE DOES NOT STEER A STRAIGHT PATH OF LIFE; HER WAYS WANDER, AND SHE DOES NOT KNOW IT. You should not practice give and take among the commandments of Torah to see which reward of Torah and commandment is greatest and perform that one. Why? (Ibid.:) HER WAYS WANDER, AND SHE DOES NOT KNOW IT. The paths of the Torah are movable. R. Hiyya said: A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To a king who had an orchard and introduced workers into it, but the king did not disclose to them the reward (i.e., the payment) for his seedlings, because if he revealed the reward for his <various> seedlings, one would see which seedling increased <their> reward, and plant that one. The work in the orchard would end up with some of it suspended and some of it carried out. Similarly the Holy One did not reveal the reward for each and every commandment in the Torah; for if he had revealed it, the commandments would have been found with some of them carried out and some of them suspended. R. Aha also <said> in the name of R. Abba bar Kahana: The Holy One has made the reward for fulfilling commandments irregular in this world, so that Israel would totally fulfill them.
~ How does this midrash converse with the previous one?
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב בשעה שעלה משה למרום מצאו להקב"ה שיושב וקושר כתרים לאותיות אמר לפניו רבש"ע מי מעכב על ידך אמר לו אדם אחד יש שעתיד להיות בסוף כמה דורות ועקיבא בן יוסף שמו שעתיד לדרוש על כל קוץ וקוץ תילין תילין של הלכות אמר לפניו רבש"ע הראהו לי אמר לו חזור לאחורך הלך וישב בסוף שמונה שורות ולא היה יודע מה הן אומרים תשש כחו כיון שהגיע לדבר אחד אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי מנין לך אמר להן הלכה למשה מסיני נתיישבה דעתו חזר ובא לפני הקב"ה אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם יש לך אדם כזה ואתה נותן תורה ע"י אמר לו שתוק כך עלה במחשבה לפני אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם הראיתני תורתו הראני שכרו אמר לו חזור [לאחורך] חזר לאחוריו ראה ששוקלין בשרו במקולין אמר לפניו רבש"ע זו תורה וזו שכרה א"ל שתוק כך עלה במחשבה לפני
~ What is the basic question in this midrash?
~ Is there a solution?
~ Rav Yehuda was active c.250 - c.290 CE, being an Amora (rabbi involved in the discussions of the Gemara). Rabbi Akiva was born in 50 CE and was killed by the Hadrianic persecutions in 135 CE.
~ How does this midrash converse with the previous one?
~ What is the basic message?
רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא חֲלַשׁ. עָל לְגַבֵּיהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אֲמַר לֵיהּ: חֲבִיבִין עָלֶיךָ יִסּוּרִין? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לֹא הֵן וְלֹא שְׂכָרָן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הַב לִי יְדָךְ. יְהַב לֵיהּ יְדֵיהּ, וְאוֹקְמֵיהּ. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן חֲלַשׁ. עָל לְגַבֵּיהּ רַבִּי חֲנִינָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: חֲבִיבִין עָלֶיךָ יִסּוּרִין? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לֹא הֵן וְלֹא שְׂכָרָן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הַב לִי יְדָךְ. יְהַב לֵיהּ יְדֵיהּ, וְאוֹקְמֵיהּ.
The Gemara continues to address the issue of suffering and affliction: Rabbi Yoḥanan’s student, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, fell ill. Rabbi Yoḥanan entered to visit him, and said to him: Is your suffering dear to you? Do you desire to be ill and afflicted? Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: I welcome neither this suffering nor its reward. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: Give me your hand. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba gave him his hand, and Rabbi Yoḥanan stood him up and restored him to health. Rabbi Yoḥanan fell ill. Rabbi Ḥanina entered to visit him, and said to him: Is your suffering dear to you? Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: I welcome neither this suffering nor its reward. Rabbi Ḥanina said to him: Give me your hand. He gave him his hand, and Rabbi Ḥanina stood him up and restored him to health.
~ Hiyya bar Abba active during c.290 - c.320 CE; Rabbi Yochanan active during c.250 - c.290 CE; Rabbi Hanina of Tzipori active c.350 - c.375 CE.
~ What is the initial expectation regarding suffering? What is the answer of both Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba and Rabbi Yochanan?
~ What is the purpose of suffering for Shimon Bar Yochai?
~ How can you understand this position, given the background of the Hadrianic persecutions?
MISHNA: Anyone who performs one mitzva has goodness bestowed upon him, his life is lengthened, and he inherits the land, i.e., life in the World-to-Come. And anyone who does not perform one mitzva does not have goodness bestowed upon him, his life is not lengthened, and he does not inherit the land of the World-to-Come. GEMARA: And the Gemara raises a contradiction from a mishna (Pe’a 1:1): These are the matters that a person engages in and enjoys their profits in this world, and the principal reward remains for him for the World-to-Come, and they are: Honoring one’s father and mother, acts of loving kindness, hospitality toward guests, and bringing peace between one person and another; and Torah study is equal to all of them. This indicates that one is rewarded in this world only for fulfilling these mitzvot, but not for fulfilling all mitzvot. Rav Yehuda said that this is what the mishna is saying: Anyone who performs one mitzva in addition to his other merits, and thereby tips the scale of all his deeds to the side of righteousness, has goodness bestowed upon him and is compared to one who fulfills the entire Torah. The Gemara asks: One can learn by inference from here that with regard to those mitzvot listed in the mishna in Pe’a one is rewarded even for one of them, notwithstanding the fact that overall his sins are more numerous. Rav Shemaya said: The other mishna serves to say that if one’s sins and merits were of equal balance, i.e., he has accrued an equal amount of merit and sin, one of these mitzvot tilts the scale in his favor. The Gemara further asks: And does anyone who performs one mitzva in addition to his other merits have goodness bestowed upon him in this world? The Gemara raises a contradiction from a baraita: Anyone whose merits are greater than his sins is punished with suffering in order to cleanse his sins in this world and enable him to merit full reward for his mitzvot in the World-to-Come. And due to this punishment he appears to observers like one who burned the entire Torah without leaving even one letter remaining of it. Conversely, anyone whose sins are greater than his merits has goodness bestowed upon him in this world, and he appears like one who has fulfilled the entire Torah without lacking the fulfillment of even one letter of it. Abaye said: When the mishna said that he is rewarded, it means that he has one good day and one bad day. He is rewarded for the mitzvot he performs; nevertheless, occasionally he also has bad days which cleanse him of his sins, and the baraita is referring to those days. Rava said that the mishna and this baraita represent two different opinions. In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya’akov, who says: There is no reward for performance of a mitzva in this world. As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Ya’akov says: There is not a single mitzva written in the Torah whose reward is stated alongside it, which is not dependent on the resurrection of the dead. How so? With regard to honoring one’s father and mother it is written: “That your days may be long, and that it may go well with you” (Deuteronomy 5:16). With regard to the dispatch of the mother bird from the nest it is written: “That it may be well with you, and that you may prolong your days” (Deuteronomy 22:7). Despite this, it occurred that there was one whose father said to him: Climb to the top of the building and fetch me chicks. And he climbed to the top of the building and dispatched the mother bird and took the young, thereby simultaneously fulfilling the mitzva to dispatch the mother bird from the nest and the mitzva to honor one’s parents, but upon his return he fell and died. Where is the goodness of the days of this one, and where is the length of days of this one? Rather, the verse “that it may be well with you” means in the world where all is well, and “that your days may be long” is referring to the world that is entirely long. The Gemara asks: But perhaps this incident never occurred? It is possible that everyone who performs these mitzvot is rewarded in this world, and the situation described by Rabbi Ya’akov never happened. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ya’akov himself saw an incident of this kind. The Gemara asks: But perhaps that man was contemplating sin at the time, and he was punished for his thoughts? The Gemara answers that there is a principle that the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not link a bad thought to an action, i.e., one is not punished for thoughts alone. The Gemara asks: But perhaps he was contemplating idol worship at the time, and it is written with regard to idol worship: “So I may take the house of Israel in their own heart” (Ezekiel 14:5), which indicates that one is punished for idolatrous thoughts. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ya’akov was saying this as well: If it enters your mind that there is reward for performing a mitzva in this world, why didn’t these mitzvot protect him so that he should not come to contemplate idol worship? Since that man was not protected from thoughts of idol worship at the time, this indicates that the performance of mitzvot does not entitle one to merit reward in this world. The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rabbi Elazar say that those on the path to perform a mitzva are not susceptible to harm? How is it possible that this individual, who was sent by his father to perform a mitzva, could have died? The Gemara answers: There, Rabbi Elazar is referring those on their way to perform a mitzva, which is different, as one is not susceptible to harm when he is on his way to fulfill a mitzva. In this case the individual was harmed on his return, and one is not afforded protection after having performed a mitzva. The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rabbi Elazar say that those on the path to perform a mitzva are not susceptible to harm, neither when they are on their way to perform the mitzva nor when they are returning from performing the mitzva? The Gemara answers: In that case it was a rickety ladder, and therefore the danger was established; and anywhere that the danger is established one may not rely on a miracle, as it is written with regard to God’s command to Samuel to anoint David as king in place of Saul: “And Samuel said: How will I go, and Saul will hear and kill me; and God said: Take in your hand a calf and say: I have come to sacrifice an offering to God” (I Samuel 16:2). Although God Himself issued the command, there was concern with regard to the established dangers. Rav Yosef said: Had Aḥer, literally Other, the appellation of the former Sage Elisha ben Avuya, interpreted this aforementioned verse: “That it may go well with you” (Deuteronomy 5:16), homiletically, as referring to the World-to-Come, as did Rabbi Ya’akov, son of his daughter, he would not have sinned. The Gemara asks: And what caused Aḥer to sin? There are those who say he saw a case like this, where a son went up to the roof on his father’s command, dispatched the mother bird, and then died. It was witnessing this episode that led Elisha ben Avuya astray. And there are those who say that he saw the tongue of Ḥutzpit the disseminator after the latter was executed by the government, thrown in the street, and dragged along by something else, a euphemism for a pig. He said: Shall a mouth that produced pearls lap up dirt? For this reason he went out and sinned.
~ What is the basic explanation of the Talmud?
(א) אם בחקותי תלכו וגומר עד איש כי יפליא לנדור נדר. ויש לשאול שאלות בכאן: (ב) השאלה הא' למה זה היו יעודי התורה ושכרה כלם דברים גשמיים כמו שזכרו בברית הזה ולא יעדם בשלמות הנפשיי ושכר הנשמה אחר המות באשר הוא סוף כל האדם והצלחתו האמתית וטובות העצמי. וכבר שות שתו השערה האויבים עם הכתוב הזה וכחשו היות לישראל שכר נפשיי אחר המות מפני זה. גם יקשה איך יהיו התבואות כפי שמירת המצות ויהיה שכר שומר מצוה לתת מטר ארצו בעתו ולחוטא שיעצר את השמים ולא יהיה מטר והנה אזכור אח"ז דעות החכמים בהתר זה:
If you walk in my statutes (Lev. 26:3) - Many questions can be asked. The first one is: Why is the reward for keeping Torah and mitzvot all physical things, as written in this covenant, and not soul perfection, and spiritual reward in the afterlife, given that death is the end of all humans, and the true measure of their success and essential goodness? Also, the enemies have gone out of their gates and lied, pointing out to this verse as the proof that there is no spiritual reward for Israel after death because of this. And also this is difficult: how would the produce given according to the observance of mitzvot, since the reward to the one who observes the mitzvah is rain on the land, in its time, but for the sinner that the sky would close, and rain would not fall? And I will after this recall the opinions of the sages in this matter.
(יז) התשובה הא' היא שהטובות והרעות שבאו בפרשיות הברית אינן שכר ולא עונש על המצוות כי הנה השכר או עונש האמיתי הוא רוחני מגיע אל הנפש בעולם הנשמות ושכר מצוות בהאי עלמא ליכא. והתורה לא רצתה להזכיר שכר המצוות וענשם האמתי כדי שיעבוד האדם את בוראו לשמה ולא לתקות העונש. וכמו שאמרו בספרי ואהבת את ה' אלקיך כל מה שתעשה לא תעשה אלא מאהבה. וכן אמרו במצותיו חפץ מאד ולא בשכר מצוותי אבל הטובות והרעות שנזכרו בדברי הברית היו בלבד הסרת המונעים והרחקת הדברים המעכבים את האדם מקנין שלמותו כאלו יאמר אם תעשה ותשמור מצותי הנה אני אסיר מתוכך מוטה וכל דבר מעכב ומונע באופן שתוכל לקנות יותר שלמותך. ואם לא תשמור גם אני אביא עליך עכובים ומונעים כמלחמות וחליי' ורעב באופן שתתרחק יותר משלמותיך והדעת הזה תמצאהו בדברי הרב הגדול בפי' המשנה בפרק רלק והביאו גם כן בספר המדע ואני במקום הנזכר טענתי טענות רבות כנגד הדעת הזה:
The answer to the first question: the good and the bad that come in the portions of the covenant are not reward and punishment for mitzvot, since the real reward and punishment is spiritual, something that pertains to the soul, in the world of souls, and "there is reward for mitzvot in this world" (Kiddushin 39b). And the Torah did not want to say explicitly the true reward and punishment for mitzvot so that a person would serve their creator without any ulterior motive, like the expectation of punishment. It is as they wrote in Sifri: "you shall love hashem your God - meaning, everything you do is out of love." And also they said "God love mitzvot" and not "the reward of mitzvot." Yet the good and evil mentined in the words of this covenant were there solely for taking away the impediments and obstacles that prevent a person from acquiring their peace, as if to say "if you observe My mitzvot I will take from your internal forces all those that prevent and impede, so as to enable you to acquire your peace completely. And if you don't observe, I will also bring on you impediments and obstacles, like wars, disease, hunger, so that you will be far away from your peace, and this opinion can be found in what the great rabbi [Maimonides] wrote in his explanation for the Mishnah, Perek Chelek, and also brought this in his Sefer Hamada, and I in that place wrote many objections to this opinion.
~ What do you think about Abarbanel's position? What pressures is he responding to? [Might skip for lack of time; next source is the center of this discussion]
~ Don Itzchak Abarbanel, Portugal, 1437 - 1508 CE.
(א) והתהלכתי בתוככם. פירש"י אטייל עמכם בגן עדן כו', דעתו לסלק מעל תורתינו הקדושה כל טוען ומערער האומר יש לי מקום ללון ולומר מאחר שלא נזכר בתורה עיקר השכר לנשמה, אם כן ודאי אין כח במצות אלו להנחיל עושיהם השכר הנפשי לעולם הבא, ותכלית עשייתם אינו כי אם לקבל השכר בעולם הזה האחוז בחבלי בוז וכבר נתעוררו על ספק זה שלמים וכן רבים ובאו בהיתר ספק זה שבעה דעות זכרם מהרי"א בחבורו והאריך בהם, ואני באתי לקצר בכל היכולת ולסדרם פה כדי להסתים פי דוברי עתק על תורתינו הקדושה. (ב) הדעה האחת, הוא דעת הרמב"ם, שכל אלו היעודים אינן עיקר השכר, וכל הרעות והטובות שנזכרו כאן בפרשה זו הם מדברים מענין הסרת המונעים לבד, ורצה לומר שאם תשמור מצותי אסיר ממך כל מונעים כמלחמות וחליים ורעב ויגון באופן שתוכל לעבוד את ה' בלא שום מונע, אבל עיקר השכר של העולם הבא אינו נזכר כאן כדי שיעבוד את בוראו לשמה, ולא מחמת השכר ההוא או מיראת העונש עיין בספר המדע (הלכות תשובה ט א). (ג) הדעה השניה, הוא דעת הראב"ע, בפר' האזינו (לב לט) וז"ל ולפי דעתי שהתורה נתנה לכל ולא לאחד לבדו, ודברי העולם הבא לא יבינו אחד מיני אלף כי עמוק הוא עכ"ל. ודעתו לפי שקשה לצייר אותו שכר כי הגשמי לא ישיג ענין הרוחני, על כן העלימה התורה דבר עמוק זה מן ההמון מרוב קוצר דעתם. (ד) הדעה השלישית, הוא דעת רבינו בחיי הזקן, זכרו הראב"ע פר' האזינו ונטה לדבריו וגם הרמב"ן נטה לדעה זו והוא, שכל היעודים שבתורה הם למעלה מן הטבע, שאין זה דבר טבעי שירדו גשמים בזמן שעושין המצות ויכלא הגשם מן הארץ כשאין עושין רצונו של מקום ברוך הוא, אמנם מה שתעלה הנפש למקום חוצבה זהו דבר טבעי אל הנשמה ואין זה בדרך פלא, ואחר שמצינו בתורה עונש כרת אל הנפש החוטאת שתהיה נכרתת ממקום חוצבה מזה יש ללמוד שאם לא תחטא שתשוב אל מלונה אל מקום אשר היה שם אהלה בתחילה, ונראה שעל זה נאמר (תהלים לז לד) קוה אל ה' וירוממך לרשת ארץ בהכרת רשעים תראה. רצה לומר באותו כרת המיועדת בתורה לרשעים תראה כי יש שכר נפשי שירוממך ה' לרשת ארץ החיים כי תעלה הנפש למקום חוצבה מדאיצטריך להכרית נפש הרשעים משם.
(ה) הדעה הרביעית היא, לפי שבימים ההם היו כל העולם מכחישים השגחת השם יתברך, והיו טוענים שכל הנעשה בעולם הכל בהכרח ולא ברצון רצה הקדוש ברוך הוא לאמת פנת ההשגחה על ידי יעודים אלו אשר עיניהם הרואות שכל העושה רצון בוראו מושגח לטובה בכל ההשגחות הללו, ואילו היה מייעד להם השכר הרוחני עדיין ישארו בכפירה זו כי הרוצה לשקר ירחיק עדיו, ועיקר דעת הזה הוא דעת רבינו ניסים בפר' בראשית ושרשה בספר הכוזרי (מאמר ראשון קד-קו) כשאמר הכוזרי אל החבר רואה אני שיעודי זולתכם שמנים ודשנים יותר מיעודיכם, השיבו החבר אבל הם כלם לאחר המות ואין בחיים מהם מאומה ולא דבר שיעיד החוש עליהם, אמר הכוזרי ולא ראיתי אחד מהמאמינים ביעודים ההם מתאוים לקנותה מהרה, אבל אם היה בידו לאחרם אלף שנים ושהוא ישאר בזכירת החיים ובעול העולם הזה ורוב עצבונו היה בוחר בזה עכ"ל. וזה באמת תשובה נצחת לומר שיעדה התורה הדבר אשר בו האדם חפץ מאד.
(ו) הדעה החמישית היא, שקודם קבלת התורה היו עובדים כוכבים ומזלות והיו עושים להם עבודות מיוחדות כדי להמשיך מהם הברכה בתבואות ולהביא גשמים בעתם ושאר הצלחות הגוף, וכשנתן הקדוש ברוך הוא התורה ומנעם מן אותן עבודות הוצרך להבטיחם שגם על ידי שמירת התורה יזכו לאותן יעודים, ועל ידי עבודות הכוכבים ומזלות יחסרו כל אלה אבל חיי העולם הבא לא הוצרך ליעדם כי גם על ידי אותן עבודות לא היו מובטחים בו. וזה דעת רב סעדיה בספר האמונות אשר לו וגם בספר מורה נבוכים חלק ג'.
(ז) הדעה הששית היא, שמאחר שנאמר והתהלכתי בתוככם ונתתי משכני בתוככם שזהו דיבוק השכינה אל ישראל אפילו בעולם הזה שהנשמה נסתבכה עם החומר קל וחומר שתהיה דבקה אל השכינה אחר הפרדה מן החומר, הנה כל מה שיעדו הדתות המזויפות אחר המות יעדה התורה לנו גם בחיי העולם הזה והנבואה המצויה בינינו תוכיח וזו הדעה תמצא גם כן בתשובת החבר למלך הכוזר בסוף מאמר א' מספרו והחזיק בדעה זו רבינו ניסים בדרש החדש.
(ח) הדעה השביעית היא, שכל היעודים הנזכרים בתורה הם לכללות האומה כי העולם נידון אחר רובו ויעוד הגשמים והתבואה והשלום וכיוצא בהם יהיה לכל ישראל כאחד, אבל שכר הנפשי לעולם הבא אינו לכללות האומה אלא כל איש בפני עצמו נידון שם על פי מעשיו, ונרמזו במצות כיבוד אב ואם ושלוח הקן לכל איש מישראל, ודעה זו היא בספר עקרים וברמב"ן פרשת עקב (יא יג) בפסוק בכל לבבכם עיין שם. בשבעה דרכים אלו ינוסו הדוברות עתק על תורתינו הקדושה, מלבד מה שראינו בעינינו כמה גדלה חיבת ה' אל אבותינו אברהם יצחק ויעקב. ואילו היתה הצלחתם בעולם הזה סוף הצלחתם אם כן מה יתרון היה לאברהם על נמרוד הרשע כי זה מלך בכיפה ואברהם היה נע ונד כל הימים מתהלך מאהל אל אהל מגוי אל גוי, וכן יצחק ויעקב לא ידענו מה היה להם מן השכר האמיתי כי אם זה השכר המיועד לזרעם הוא סוף שכרם מה כשרון לבעליו כי אחרי מותם ינחלו זרעם את הארץ והמה יצאו מן העולם ריקם מכל עמלם, ואפילו לישראל נוחלי הארץ מה יתרון להם אפילו בזמן השלוה על כל מלכי הארץ אשר צלחו ומלכו בעולם כמותם ומקצתם יותר מהמה, אין זה כי אם שרב טוב הצפון לצדיקים הוא חלקם ונחלתם של האבות ושל כל תולדותיהם כיוצא בהם כי תורה אחת לכלם.
(1) And I will walk among you - the explanation of Rashi "I will walk with you in Gan Eden" - his idea is to remove from our holy Torah any and every claimant who says "I have a place to rest" by stating that there is no point in our Torah that affirms a reward for the soul, if so, the only force of mitzvot is to make one inherit the reward for a soul in the world to come, and the practical reality of doing mitzvot is to receive rewards in this world, this world tied up in disgrace. And many were already aroused to doubt - but here are seven different ideas of our sages, and I come to summarize and organize their opinions so as to stop up the mouths that say untruths about our holy Torah.
The first opinion, Ramba"m's, is that all these promises aren't (considered) the main reward, rather all that is mentioned here are things which remove challenges and obstacles that would prevent a person from serving the Holy One, meaning, if you observe My mitzvot I will remove from you everything that prevents, such as wars, sicknesses, hunger, grief so you will be ablt to serve God without any obstacle, but the essence of the reward is of the world to Come and it is not mentioned so a person would serve the Creator for its own sake, and not because of desire of reward or fear of punishment, see Sevefr Hamada (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Teshuvah 9:1)
The second opinion is from Rabbi Avraham ben Ezra, in his commentary to parashat haazinu, and these are his words: "according to my opinion the Torah was given to all and not to one individual, and the things about the World to Come cannot be understood even in its one thousandth, because it is very deep." And in his opinion, since it is hard to picture such a reward, since what is physical cannot grasp what is spiritual, the Torah concealed this very deep issue from the many due to their limited awareness.
The third opinion is Rabbeinu Bechaye's. It is the same of the Ramban's, and this is that all the promises of the Torah are above Nature, since it is not a natural thing for rain to fall at the time when we do a mitzvah, and that rain should cease from the earth when we do not do the will of the Place, Blessed be. However, the soul going up to the place from which it was hewn is a natural thing to the soul and this is not a miracle, and the punishment of excision [karet] in the Torah is that it will be excised from the place it was hewn, and from this we can learn that if the soul does not sin, she returns to her lodge, to the place where her tent was at the beginning (Gen. 13:3) and it seems that on this it is written "Look to the LORD and keep to His way, and He will raise you high that you may inherit the land; when the wicked are cut off, you shall see it" (Ps. 37:34). Meaning, in that excision of the wicked, promised in the Torah, you will see that there is spiritual reward that God will raise you to inherit the land of the living, when the soul goes up to the place from which was hewn, since it is needed to cut off the souls of the evil ones from there.
The fourth opinion - since in those days everyone was lying regarding the Holy Name's Providence, and were contending that everything that happens in the world is of necessity, and not of the will of the Creator, the Holy One wanted to prove that part of Providence is true through those promises, that eyes could see, that those who do the will of their Creator received good with all those goodnesses, and if the promise was spiritual they would still remain in this denial since the one who wants to lie could distance [oneself] from the end, and the essence of this opinion comes from Rabbeinu Nissim's commentary in the parsha of Bereshit and its root is in the Sefer Kuzari (Kuzari 1:110-112): "The anticipations of other religions are grosser and more sensuous than yours" and the friend explained "But none of them are realized till after death, whilst during this life nothing points to them. The Kuzari: May be; I have never seen any one who believed in these promises desire their speedy fulfillment. On the contrary, if he could delay them a thousand years, and remain in the bonds of this life in spite of the hardship of this world, he would prefer it." And this is, in truth, the best explanation, that the Torah is promising something that a person really wants.
The fifth opinion is that before receiving the Torah they were all idolaters and they did all sorts of specific rituals so as to continue the blessings for produce and bring rain on their time and all other bodily success, and when the Holy One of Blessing gave the Torah and prohibited those rituals, God wanted to assure them that through the keeping of the Torah they would receive those promises, and that through the idolatrous rituals they would lack all those, but the life in the world to come was not included in the promises because it was not assured through those rituals either. And this is the opinion of Rav Saadia Gaon, in the Book of Beliefs and Opinions, and also in the Guide for the Perplexed, third part.
The sixth opinion is that after it says "I will walk about in your midst"(Lev. 26:12) and "I will place My Mishkan among you" (Lev. 26:11) this is the clinging of the Shechina on Israel, even in this world where the soul is entangled in the material, that the soul should cling to the Shechina after she is separated from the material, behold, every promise of the fake religions regarding what happens after death the Torah has promised us also in this life of this world, and the prophecy found with us also proves that, and this opinion you will find in the responses of the Friend to the King Kuzari at the end of the first dialogue in his book, and Rabbeinu Nissim also supported this opinion in a new explanation.
The seventh opinion is that all the promises written in the Torah are for the nation in general, since the world is judged according to the majority, and the promise of rain, produce and peace and so on is for the whole people Israel as one, but the reward of the soul in the world to come is not included in the promises for the people in general, rather, it is to every individual, who will be judged according to that individual's deeds, and this is hinted in the mitzvot of honoring parents and in the sending away the mother bird, and this opinion is found in the Book of Principles (R. Joseph Albo) and in the commentary of the Ramban on parashat Ekev (Ramban on Deuteronomy 11:13) on the verse "with all your heart and all your soul" see there. And on those seven ways great words were said regarding our holy Torah, and so our own eyes see the greatness of the love of the Holy One for our patriarchs Avraham, Itzchak and Yaakov. And were their success in this world the end of their success, what would be the difference between Avraham and the evil Nimrod, who was a king in a domed castle, and Avraham just a wanderer from tent to tent and people to people, and also Yitzchak and Yaakov we have no idea what happened to them regarding the real reward, since this reward promised to their descendants is the end of their reward, what is the profit to the master that after their deaths their children will inherit the land, and they would take leave of this world empty despite all their efforts? What profit would be to them, even in a peaceful time in which all kings were successful and reigned in this world, and some even more than others, only if a great goodness comes to the righteous , which is their portion and the inheritance of the patriarchs, and of all their descendants, since there is only one Torah to all.
~ At each explanation, pause: what do you think? Is this good logic? What pressures are being responded to?
~ Why did Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz, the author of Kli Yakar, decide to provide seven different explanations?
~ Shlomo Ephraim Luntschitz (1550 - 1619 CE), popularly know as Kli Yakar after his homiletic commentary on the Torah, was a Polish rabbi who served as chief rabbi of Prague after the Maharal (Shlomo Luria).
The sages he quotes:
- Rashi: France (1040-1105)
- Rambam: Spain 1138-Egypt 1204
- Rabbeinu Bechaye: Zaragoza, Spain (1255-1340)
- Rabbeinu Nissim: Barcelona, Spain (1320-1380)
- Saadia Gaon: Abassid Caliphate (Egypt, 882/892- Babylonia 942); was the Gaon of the Academy of Sura in Babylonia.
- Ramban: Spain 1194–Israel 1270; fled Spain after winning disputation.
- Kuzari - written by Yehudah Halevi (Toledo, Spain 1075 - Jerusalem, 1086); saw the Reconquista and the first crusade.
- R. Joseph Albo: Spain (1380-1444); participated in disputations.
When he was young, Dov Ber of Metzrich, the Maggid of Metzrich, reportedly lived in great poverty with his wife. One legend relates that when a child was born, they had no money to pay the midwife. His wife complained and the Maggid went outside to "curse" Israel. He went outside and said: "O children of Israel, may abundant blessings come upon you!" When his wife complained a second time, he went outside again and cried: "Let all happiness come to the children of Israel—but they shall give their money to thorn bushes and stones!" The baby was too weak to cry, and the Maggid sighed rather than "cursing". Immediately the answer came, and a voice said: "You have lost your share in the coming world." The Maggid replied: "Well, then, the reward has been done away with. Now I can begin to serve in good earnest." Martin Buber. Tales of the Hasidim, Schocken 1947; this edition 1991, p. 98-99.