Loading...
 

Vol 16.45 - Tisa 3                        Spanish French Audio  Video

Hebrew Text:

Page 402   Page403   Page404   Page405   Page406   Page407  

Chumash-Shmot

Summary:

(5737) Rashi (Ex.32:11): "Why should the Egyptians say". And the difference between the punishment of "I will annihilate them (ibid.32:10)" and other punishments in the Torah  

 

Translation:

1. On the verse (Ex.32:11):

“Moshe pleaded before the L-rd, his G-d, and said: "Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled against Your people etc.?”

Rashi cites the words, “Why, G-d”

And explains:

“Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man? “

Plainly, Rashi here is attempting to explain in his comment, as the commentators explain.

Since Yidden transgressed a severe sin – idol worship (the Sin of the Calf) - it is understood why G-d was angry. Therefore, why is Moshe asking: "Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled against Your people”?

Because of this puzzlement, the other Torah commentators say that the meaning of “Lamah” (למה), here, is not “why”, but) “do not” (לא).

This means that Moshe beseeched G-d “do not be angry with Your people” (אל יחרה).

However, Rashi, who explains the simple meaning of the verse, also explains the word “lamah” here, literally as “why”.

Therefore, Rashi explains that the reason for the claim, “Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled against Your people” is because, “Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man?“

One must however understand:

Rashi, explains in Parshat Yitro that the reason why G-d said,

“I am the L-rd, your G-d

in the “singular” is in order to:

“Give an opening for Moshe to present a defense for the act of the Golden Calf. This is what is meant when he said: "Why, G-d, should You be angry at Your nation?" (Meaning:) "It was not to them that You issued the command: ‘You shall have no other gods’ but only to me.”

Therefore, why is Rashi looking here for another explanation for Moshe Rabbeinu’s claim, "Why, G-d, should You be angry at Your nation?"

One cannot say that Rashi means to explain the verse according to both reasons. Yet he does not cite the reason stated in Parshat Yitro, since he already stated it beforehand. For it is not logical that Rashi should here, in our Parsha, at the source of the aspect, completely not mention this explanation,

(even concisely using the expression, “an alternate explanation” (ד״א), and so forth),

and rely on that which he explained, as an aside and not in its place in Parshat Yitro.

Especially since that explanation is stronger. For it completely negates a claim against Yidden – not just anger that comes from jealousy.

One must therefore, say that these two explanations of Rashi, explain two different aspects, as will be explained.

2. One must also understand:

From Rashi’s plain wording, “Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man?“ it is understood that the aspect of “jealousy” is related to this idol itself – and such a claim against G-d is the opposite of respect.

Moreover:

This claim, “Is anyone jealous of another etc.” was asked of R’ Gamliel by Agrippas (a non-Jew)

(Regarding G-d being termed, “a jealous G-d”).

R’ Gamliel answered this (with a parable) that the “jealousy” was not against the idol, but against the idol worshippers.

According to this, it is puzzling:

  1. Even if one were to say that Rashi has a necessity to explain that, “Is anyone jealous of another etc.?“ was the essence of Moshe’s claim. Why, however, does he learn that the claim was regarding the idol itself

(Like the aforementioned question of Aggripas)

and not learn like the Midrash’s explanation (on this verse) of Moshe’s claim:

“Moshe said, ‘Master of the world, they made for you an aid (סִיּוּעַ), yet You are angry with them? This Calf that they made should be an aide to You’. G-d replied, ‘Moshe, are you also mistaken like them? It has no substance’. Moshe replied, ‘If so, why are You angry with Your children etc.’”

Which is:

  1. A more respectful wording.
  2. One that emphasizes just the anger “on them”, “on Your children”?

 

2. Since on Moshe’s claim to G-d, “Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man?“, we do not find, according to simple meaning of the verse, any response, it is not straightforward:

What is the commotion concerning the prohibition of idol worship, “You must not have any other gods before My Presence. You must not make for yourself etc.” since they have no substance?

3. It is also not understood:

Why does Rashi state these two aspects:

“(Why, G-d: Is anyone jealous of another, except) a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man?

One cannot say that this is because this is the wording of the verse (“Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom, nor the strong man boast of his strength, nor the rich man boast of his riches”), or that these words are also cited in the aforementioned story in the Talmud, for:

  1. In the verse, and in the aforementioned story, there is also a third aspect “is a rich man jealous of another man’s wealth?” (Alternatively, “another wealthy man”). Yet Rashi omits this.
  2. As it known, Rashi uses a double (explanation) (and, in general – an elaborate explanation) specifically when both of the explanations (or – the elaborate explanation) are related to the explanation of the simple meaning of the verses (פשוטן של כתובים). Not, because this is the wording in Scripture or the statement of the Sages. Therefore, one must understand: How are these two aspects related to the simple meaning of the verse?

4. The explanation of this is:

Rashi’s necessity for the explanation,

“Is anyone jealous etc.? “

is because on the words,

“Why, G-d etc.”

(or as it states in other editions of Rashi, “Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled”)

which Rashi cites in the heading of his comment, it is not straightforward:

After G-d told Moshe,

“Now leave Me alone, and My anger will be kindled against them so that I will annihilate them etc.”

Moshe should have at the onset clarified what “I will annihilate them” means, and claim,

“Why, G-d, should You annihilate Your people” (and so forth).

Only afterward, should he have stated,

“Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled”.

Yet in actuality, he first pleaded,

“Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled”,

and only afterward stated (v. 12),

“to annihilate them (from upon the face of the earth)”?

The explanation of this is:

Moshe did not have any question on the essential penalty of death for the Sin of the Calf. For it already states beforehand in the Torah, that there are many sins which incur the punishment of death, G-d forbid. Moreover, we do not find any claim or puzzlement for this. The reason for this is plainly understood: For a severe sin, one receives a harsh punishment – death, G-d forbid.

The question, here, is related to the manner of the punishment - “I will annihilate them” – which must be connected with a specific reason.

It is a maxim in Torah, that the penalty and punishment of death can specifically only be incurred when there are witnesses (after there has been warning) and after the investigation and inquiry of Beit Din (court).

Even when Torah uses the wording, “You shall not allow a sorceress to live”, which plainly means that one must not allow the “sorceress” to live. Nevertheless, Rashi explains that this does not mean that we should kill every “sorceress” that we see, but that “she shall be executed by the court (Beit din)”.

Moreover, even regarding the first sin, the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, where G-d expressly stated in the warning to Adam HaRishon:

“You shall not eat from it, for on the day you eat from it, you will certainly die.”

Nevertheless, we see that Adam HaRishon was not punished for his transgression with the death penalty and immediate death. Rather, he only died, after he had lived nine-hundred and thirty years.

Whereas here, by the Sin of the Calf, G-d states, “Now leave Me alone, .. and I will annihilate them”. The punishment was death, immediately after the sin. Moreover, “I will annihilate them” referred to all the Yidden, even those that did not worship the Calf –

This is also understood from the continuation of G-d’s words,

“I will make you into a great nation”

(and as Rashi states: “If a chair with three legs cannot stand up before You when You are angry, how much less will a chair with one leg”)

Such a severe punishment cannot be due to the sin itself, but rather because, “My anger is kindled against them”.

 (Which therefore, is reason for the severe punishment – more than what is due for the actual sin)

This, therefore, was Moshe’s claim:

“Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled . . Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man etc.?”

This enables one to understand why such a harsh punishment was incurred for the severe sin of idol worship.

Especially, since serving “other gods” (״אלקים אחרים״) has no place in reason (שכל), to think that they have any substance, G-d forbid (and also there is no place in characteristics (מידות), to have a desire for it).

As Rashi previously explains, “Other gods - which are not actually gods but others made them into gods over themselves”.

Therefore, it is understood that for such a severe sin, there incurs a harsh punishment.

 However, since G-d said, “I will annihilate them”

  1. Without Beit Din
  2. Immediately
  3. For all Yidden

This proves that this is a punishment which comes not just because of (and in conjunction to the sin of) the worshippers of the Calf, but rather due to anger () which is related to the idol itself.

Therefore, Moshe pleaded,

“Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled against Your people” – because of the Golden Calf – “Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man etc.? “:

The Calf has no being that it should cause “jealousy” (the wrath) of the idol and that this should lead to the punishment of, “I will annihilate them” for all Yidden and immediately.

5. According to this, it is understood why Rashi does not cite, here, the explanation that he brings in Parshat Yitro:

“To give an opening for Moshe to present a defense . .This is what is meant when he said: "Why, G-d, should You be angry at Your nation?" (Meaning:) "It was not to them that You issued the command: ‘You shall have no other gods’ but only to me.”

There, Rashi explains the emphasis of Moshe’s claim.

(According to the explanation that is relevant there, at the place of the Commandment).

Namely that there is an “opening/defense” (פתחון פה) even for the worshippers of the Calf themselves, that even they are not deserving of any punishment at all due to the Commandment “You shall not have any other gods etc.”

However, in learning the simple meaning of the verse, here, in the telling of the entire episode, it is proven from the expression,

“Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled etc.”

that the question is not on the actual punishment of the worshippers of the Calf, but on the aspect of “Your anger” with regard to the idol itself, as aforementioned at length.

6. Accordingly, it is also understood why Rashi states here, the two expressions: “a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man”:

In G-d’s speech to Moshe,

“Go, descend, for your people have acted corruptly etc.”

G-d said:

“They have quickly turned away from the path that I have commanded them; they have made themselves a molten Calf! And they have prostrated themselves before it, slaughtered sacrifices to it, and said: 'These are your gods, O Israel, who have brought you up from the land of Egypt.' ”

Although the Yidden did indeed say this, why however, did G-d state this verse? What relevance does their saying, “These are your gods, O Israel, who have brought you up from the land of Egypt” have to do with the severe sin of “they have made themselves a molten Calf! And they have prostrated themselves before it”?

We similarly find that in Moshe’s plea to G-d, “Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled against Your people”, that he includes “whom You have brought up from the land of Egypt with great power and with a strong hand”.

However, from this itself, it is a proof that the anger (the aspect of “jealousy”) (also) had a relation to that which they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who have brought you up from the land of Egypt”.

On this was Moshe’s question, “Is anyone jealous? “, on both details: “wisdom” and “strength”.

The explanation of this is:

To lead the Yidden out of Egypt and lead them in the desert, there had to be two things:

  • “Wisdom” and
  • “Strength”.

However, not (the necessity of) wealth as is understood.

For the particulars of the exodus from Egypt etc. with the miracles and wonders were connected with great wisdom (as they were designed) and strength (as they were actually performed).

Moreover:

The reason that the worshippers of the Calf required help etc. was not due to a lack of wealth. For as Rashi has already told us – the Yidden already had phenomenal wealth from the plunder of Egypt and even more from the plunder of the Splitting of the Sea.

This is why Moshe Rabbeinu said: “Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled”

This “jealousy” in the Calf, has no place. For “Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man? “

The truth is that indeed, G-d took them out of “Egypt with great power and with a strong hand”, and not the Calf, G-d forbid. This idol had no wisdom nor strength. Therefore, how is “jealousy” relevant for this idol!

From the homiletic style of Torah in Rashi's commentary (Yayina shel Torah):

Seemingly, one must, after all, understand:

Although, with regard to this idol, there is no place for “jealousy”. For “Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man? “.

However, for those who worshipped the Calf and said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who have brought you up from the land of Egypt”, there is indeed, seemingly a place, G-d forbid, for the aspect of “jealousy” – “a jealous G-d” (א־ל קנא) against the worshippers of the Calf. For they believed that the Calf was “wise” and “strong”.

The explanation of this is:

A Yid, of his own accord, has no mistake regarding idol worship. He knows that it is just wood and stone, and he allots no significance to idol worship, even when he succumbs to this sin.

For “Even while the sin is being committed, one always believes in the One G‑d, and remains faithful to Him”

As the Alter Rebbe states:

“A Yid does not want, nor can he be torn from G-dliness”

The reason that the idol worshipper said, “These are your gods, O Israel”, is just because “a spirit of folly entered into him” (and this prompts such talk).

This spirit of folly is a separate thing from the Yidden themselves (which is why it states. “It enters into him”).

This is why Moshe pleaded,

“Why, G-d, should Your anger be kindled against Your people”.

Even against “Your people”, against to the Yidden, there must not be any place for “jealousy”. For due to their essence, they are completely devoid of considering, G-d forbid, the idol as “wise” or “strong”. Therefore, it is “Is anyone jealous of another, except a wise man of a wise man, or a strong man of a strong man? “.

This accomplished that, “G-d reconsidered etc.”

MSichas Shabbat Parshat Tisa 5732

 

Links:
 
Date Delivered:   Reviewer:       
Date Modified:    Date Reviewed:  
Contributor: