God and Me

“In full assemblies, bless God, the Lord, you that are from the source of Israel” (Psalms 68:27), indicating that even children that are in the “source,” i.e., their mother’s womb, blessed God when they gathered at the sea. The Gemara asks: But the fetuses could not see, so how could they have honestly said: “This is my God and I will glorify him”? Rabbi Tanḥum says: Their mother’s stomach was transformed for them like luminous crystal [aspaklarya], and they saw through it. § On that same day Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hyrcanus taught that Job served the Holy One, Blessed be He, only out of love, as it is stated: “Though He will slay me, still I will trust in Him [lo]” (Job 13:15). The mishna continues that the word lo in the verse is ambiguous as to whether it is indicative of Job expressing his yearning for God or his lack thereof. The Gemara asks: Let us see whether this word lo is written lamed alef, and therefore its meaning is: I will not trust, or whether it is written lamed vav, according to which its meaning is: I trust in Him. Why is there room for doubt with regard to the meaning of the verse? The Gemara counters: But is it true that anywhere that the word lo is written lamed alef, its meaning is: Not? If that is so, then in the verse: “In all their affliction He was [lo] afflicted” (Isaiah 63:9), where the word lo is written lamed alef, so too, does it mean: Not, i.e., God was not afflicted in the afflictions of the Jewish people? And if you would say that indeed that is the meaning of the verse, but isn’t it written in the continuation of that same verse: “And the angel of His Presence saved them,” which clearly indicates that God was concerned with their afflictions? Evidently, the word lo in that verse means: “In all their affliction He was afflicted.” Rather, is it not clear that lamed alef sometimes indicates this and sometimes indicates that? Therefore, the mishna had to derive the proper meaning of the word from another verse. It is taught in a baraita (Tosefta 6:1) that Rabbi Meir says: It is stated with regard to Job that he was “God-fearing” (Job 1:1), and it is stated with regard to Abraham that he was “God-fearing” (Genesis 22:12). Just as the description “God-fearing,” which is stated with regard to Abraham, is referring to Abraham’s fearing God out of love, so too, the description “God-fearing” that is stated with regard to Job indicates that Job feared God out of love. The Gemara asks: And with regard to Abraham himself, from where do we derive that he acted out of a sense of love? As it is written: “The offspring of Abraham who loved Me” (Isaiah 41:8). The Gemara asks: What difference is there between one who performs mitzvot out of love and one who performs mitzvot out of fear? The Gemara answers: There is that which is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Greater is the one who performs mitzvot out of love than the one who performs mitzvot out of fear, as with regard to this one who acts out of fear, his merits endure for one thousand generations, and with regard to that one who serves God out of love, his merits endure for two thousand generations. Proof of this assertion is that here it is written: “And showing mercy unto thousands of generations of those who love Me and keep My commandments” (Exodus 20:5), indicating that merits can last for thousands of generations for those who act out of love, and there it is written: “Know therefore that the Lord your God, He is God; the faithful God, Who keeps the covenant and mercy with those who love Him and keep His commandments for a thousand generations” (Deuteronomy 7:9). The first verse indicates that those who act out of love retain their merits for thousands of generations, whereas the second verse, which mentions only one thousand generations of merit, is referring to the merits of those who keep God’s mitzvot out of fear. The Gemara asks: But there also, in the second verse, it is written: “The faithful God, Who keeps the covenant and mercy with those who love Him and keep His commandments for a thousand generations” (Deuteronomy 7:9). Why is the verse interpreted specifically with regard to those who worship God out of fear, yet it is written that they keep His mitzvot out of love? Both types of people seem to be indicated in both verses. The Gemara answers: That verse, which mentions one thousand generations, is understood as referring to that which is adjacent to it. The phrase “for a thousand generations” is understood as referring those who perform mitzvot out of fear, as it is written immediately preceding the phrase “and keep His commandments,” which does not mention love. And this verse, which mentions thousands of generations, is understood as referring to that which is adjacent to it: “Unto thousands of generations of those who love Me.” It happened that there were these two students who were sitting before Rava, and one said to him: It was read to me in my dream: “How abundant is Your goodness, which You have laid up for those who fear You” (Psalms 31:20). And one said to Rava: It was read to me in my dream: “So shall all those who take refuge in You rejoice; they will forever shout for joy, and You will shelter them; let them also who love Your name exult in You” (Psalms 5:12). Rava said to them: You are both completely righteous Sages. One Sage, the second dreamer, serves God out of love, and one Sage, the first dreamer, serves God out of fear. Each Sage’s dream corresponded to his manner of serving God.

(2) On each day of Sukkot, the kohanim in the Temple would circle the altar once; on the seventh day they circled it seven times. During these hakafot (circuits) they called out: “Lord, please, save us. Lord, please, grant us success” (“Ana Hashem hoshi’a na. Ana Hashem hatzliḥa na”). According to R. Yehuda, they called out: “Ani Va-hu, hoshi’a na” (Sukka 45a). Some maintain that they carried the lulav with them during the hakafot, while others maintain that they carried the aravot (Sukka 43b).8There is a debate in Sukka 43b (and the Rishonim explaining it) as to what the kohanim held during the hakafot in the Temple. According to Rashi, they held aravot; Tosafot agrees and adds that when the hakafot were finished, the aravot were left standing by the side of the altar. In contrast, Rambam (MT Laws of Shofar, Sukka, and Lulav 7:22-23) and Ran maintain that the hakafot were done while holding the lulav. Rambam adds that the aravot were left standing alongside the altar rather than used during hakafot. Our custom follows that of Rambam: We do the hakafot while carrying the lulav. On Hoshana Rabba, after the completion of the hakafot, we put down the lulav and pick up aravot. (However, according to SA 664:3, on Hoshana Rabba the hakafot are done with aravot.)

(3) אני הוא – in Gematria (the numerical value) of “We beseech you, O LORD”, and furthermore they are two names which are part of the name of “the world of creation. Another explanation: when he and I are in trouble, I am with him on the path when in trouble, “Save us.”

(1) אני – is from the names of the Holy One, Blessed be He. And similarly, "הוא" , this is what the expounders of eh Talmud (compare Rashi, Tractate Sukkah 45a). But I state that he reads and intends to whom he stated: “I, I am he,” for that which is written is stated in the victory of Israel and their salvation, like those, he will say, you who states (Deuteronomy 32:39): “See, then, that I, I am He, [There is no God besides Me].” Save us as you you have promised us. And there are those from the Geonim that stated that our subject is that whenever that I and He are in trouble, save us (compare the Tosafot, s.v. אני והוא). And this is via metaphor and it is what is said, may He be exalted and beautified (Psalms 91:15): “I will be with him in distress.”