Chasidut · Izhbitz
Mei HaShiloach, Volume I, Leviticus, Shmini/מי השלוח·
אוַיְהִי בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי כוּ'. "וַיִּקְחוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא" כוּ'. עִנְיַן מִיתַת נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא הוּא עַל פִּי מַה דְּאִיתָא (באבות) (תמיד ל"ב.) "אֵיזֶהוּ חָכָם הָרוֹאֶה אֶת הַנּוֹלָד". הָעִנְיָן בָּזֶה אַף שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים י"ח,י"ג) "תָּמִים תִּהְיֶה עִם ה' אֱלֹקֶיךָ" וְנִתְפָּרֵשׁ שָׁם שֶׁלֹּא יַרְבֶּה לְהִתְחַכֵּם, אַךְ רוֹאֶה אֶת הַנּוֹלָד הוּא, בְּזֶה הַמַּעֲשֶׂה עַצְמָהּ שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה יַחְקוֹר וְיִתְבּוֹנֵן אִם הַמַּעֲשֶׂה וְהָרָצוֹן הַזֶּה הוּא מְבֹרָר שֶׁיִּהְיֶה קַיָּם כֵּן לְעוֹלְמֵי עַד אֲפִילּוּ לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא. וְעִנְיַן קְטֹרֶת הוּא כִּדְאִיתָא בַּזֹּהַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ (במדבר קנ"א:) "מַאי קְטֹרֶת קְטִירָא דְכוֹלָא", הַיְינוּ שֶׁהַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ הוּא תּוֹךְ כָּל הַמַּעֲשִׂים שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ מִבְּרִיאַת הָעוֹלָם וְעַד סוֹפוֹ, וּבִלְתִּי רְצוֹנוֹ לֹא יֵעָשֶׂה שׁוּם דָּבָר, וְעַל זֶה מוֹרֶה עִנְיַן קְטֹרֶת כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּפָרָשַׁת תְּצַוֶּה [ד"ה ועשית]. וּבֶאֱמֶת כְּפִי מַה שֶּׁהָאָדָם מְקָרֵב עַצְמוֹ לַה', כֵּן זוֹכֶה לְהִתְגַּלּוּת אוֹר ה' מִבְּלִי לְבוּשִׁים שֶׁהֵם גְּדָרִים וּסְיָגִים, כִּי בָּאוֹר הַבָּרוּר, שָׁם לֹא נִמְצָא שׁוּם סְיָג וְאִסּוּר, וְשָׁם כָּל מַעֲשֵׂה הָאָדָם מְבֹרָרִים שֶׁהֵם לַה'. וְזֶהוּ עִנְיַן קְטֹרֶת שֶׁהָיָה סוֹד וְאָסוּר לְהִתְחַכֵּם בָּזֶה, כִּי רַק רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא יָרַד בְּשָׁלוֹם (חגיגה י"ד:) וְזֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ט"ז,א') "בְּקָרְבָתָם לִפְנֵי ה' וַיָּמֻתוּ", שֶׁהָיוּ מְקָרְבִים עַצְמָם לַה' וְהִסְתַּכְּלוּ בְּעֹמֶק הַצָּפוּן וְרָצוּ לַעֲמוֹד עַל בֵּירוּר הִתְנַהֲגוּת הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ, וְלָזֶה הַטַּעַם עַל "לֹא צִוָּה אוֹתָם" הוּא מֵרְכָא כְפוּלָא, הַיְינוּ שֶׁכָּל כָּךְ בָּעַר בְּלִבָּם אַהֲבַת ה' עַד שֶׁמָּסְרוּ נַפְשָׁם, כִּי מֵרְכָא הִיא לְשׁוֹן רַךְ שֶׁלִּבָּם נִתְרַכֵּךְ, וּכְפוּלָא הַיְינוּ כָּפוּל בְּרֹב טוֹבָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא צִוָּה הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ. וּלְפִי שֶׁהָיוּ צְעִירִים לְיָמִים וְלֹא אִנְּסִיבֵי וְלֹא אִתְכְּלָלוּ בְּמֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן כִּדְאִיתָא בַּזֹּהַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ (שמות ל"ז:), וְלֹא נָטְלוּ עֵצָה, וְלָזֶה הַפְּלוּגְתָּא בַּגְּמָ' חַד אָמַר שְׁתוּיֵי יַיִן הָיוּ הַיְינוּ שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִטְעוֹן עַל קָרְבוֹתָם שֶׁהָיְתָה חַס וְשָׁלוֹם מִקַּלּוּת רֹאשׁ, אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה כַּוָּנָתָם שֶׁיּוּסַר מֵהֶם עוֹל הַגְּדָרִים כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר, וְגַם מַאֲמַר הַמִּדְרָשׁ שֶׁהָיוּ מְחוּסְּרֵי בְגָדִים וּמַה הָיוּ חֲסֵרִים הַמְּעִיל (ויקרא רבה פרשה כ',ו') אַף שֶׁהַמְּעִיל אֵינוֹ רַק לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל רַק הֵם הִכְנִיסוּ עַצְמָם לְמָקוֹם שֶׁהָיוּ צְרִיכִים לִמְעִיל, וְהָבֵן.
1“And it was, on the eighth day … and Nadav and Avihu, Aharon’s sons, each took a censer ….” (Vayikra, 9:1, 10:1)The death of Nadav and Avihu is related to what is said in the Pirkei Avot (and Masechet Tamid, 32b), “who is wise? He who sees what will be born in the future.” On the one hand, we are told (Devarim, 18:13), “be honest [simple] with Hashem your God,” which means not to be overly clever (becoming involved in predictions of the future). Yet still, we are to fulfill the advice of “seeing what is born in the future.” One does this by looking into the very action he is doing, deeply investigating and contemplating whether this action is refined to the extent that it will endure for all time, even in the world to come. The matter of the incense offering7 is as is said in the holy Zohar (Bamidbar, 151b), “what is incense [ketoret]? It is the connection [ketira] of everything.”8 and the surrounding light out of which all is formed are hinted at in the eleven spices in the incense. Furthermore, as mentioned elsewhere, Rabbi Yitzhak of Acco writes in his explanation Meirat Eineihem, that smoke, ashan, is an acronym for: olam, shana, nefesh, meaning place, time, and soul, the three main components of existence, as discussed in the Sefer Yetsirah.This means that God is involved in all the actions that are done from the creation of the world until its end, and without His will nothing could be done. The incense teaches of this, as it taught in the Mei HaShiloach in Parshat Tetsave (v. “and he made”). For truly, the closer a man brings himself to God, the more he merits the light of God without its garments, which are the borders and fences that protect the Divine Law. The light itself is completely refined, with no fences or prohibitions, and there it is made totally clear that all the actions of man are wholly given over to God. This is the matter of the incense, which is a secret of the Torah and forbidden to delve into with guile. With the four sages who entered the garden (Chagiga, 14b, the mystic plane of Divine secrets uncovered) only Rabbi Akiva left in peace (one died, one stricken with madness, one abandoned the Torah).This is why it says of Nadav and Avihu (Vayikra, 16:1), “who came close before God and died,” for they would bring themselves close to God, looking into the hidden depths, and wanted to stand on the refined, undressed truth of God’s conduct. This is why the cantillation marking on the word “not” [lo] in the verse, “which He commanded them not” (Vayikra, 10:1) is a mercha c’foola.This shows how their hearts burned with such an intense love of God that they gave over their very lives, for mercha is related to rach, or soft, that their hearts became weak; and cfoola, or cfool, meaning double, or an increase of good that God did not command. Since they were young, they were not included together with Moshe and Aharon, as it is said in the holy Zohar (Shemot, 37b), “they did not take their [Moshe and Aharon’s] advice.”What advice did they disregard? One opinion in the Gemara tells us that “they were drunk from wine,” claiming that they came to this state of intense closeness and became, God forbid, irreverent. Thus their intention was to remove all borders, as is explained, and here we have (the other advice that they disregarded in) the Midrash, which says that they entered missing some of the priestly garments. The missing garment was the me’il, the coat (made entirely of t’chellet, sky-blue wool, teaching of the intense fear of God, see Mei HaShiloach Parshat Tetsave) (Vayikra Rabba, 20:6). Even though the me’il is only for the high priest, they brought themselves to a place where they needed to wear the me’il,9 and understand.
בוְאֵת שְׂעִיר הַחַטָּאת דָּרֹשׁ דָּרַשׁ מֹשֶׁה. עִנְיַן הַשְּׁנֵי דְּרִישׁוֹת, כְּעִנְיַן רֶמֶז שֶׁמְּרַמֵּז בַּגְּמָרָא (סנהדרין ק"ו:) עַל דּוֹאֵג וַאֲחִיתֹפֶל שֶׁלָּמְדוּ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת הֲלָכוֹת פְּסוּקוֹת בְּמִגְדָּל הַפּוֹרֵחַ בָּאֲוִיר הָרוֹמֵז לְגַגָּהּ שֶׁל לָמֶ"ד, כִּי הָאוֹת לָמֶ"ד מוֹרָה עַל יִשּׁוּב הַדַּעַת וְסֵדֶר בְּכָל מִצְוֹת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה עִם כָּל הַסְּפֵקוֹת שֶׁנּוֹלָד בַּלָּאוִין הָאֵלּוּ, וְגַם מוֹרָה עַל יִשּׁוּב הַדַּעַת בִּתְנוּעָה אַחֲרוֹנָה בִּבְלִיעַת הַמַּאֲכָל מִבֵּית הַבְּלִיעָה לַגּוּף לְהַכִּיר וּלְהָבִין אֵיזֶה שַׁיָּךְ לוֹ. וְזֶה שֶׁהֵשִׁיב לוֹ אַהֲרֹן (זבחים ק"א.) "אִם שָׁמַעְתָּ בְּקָדְשֵׁי שָׁעָה לֹא שָׁמַעְתָּ בְּקָדְשֵׁי דּוֹרוֹת". וְזֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "דָּרֹשׁ דָּרַשׁ מֹשֶׁה" שֶׁהֵשִׁיב לוֹ אַף שֶׁדָּרַשְׁתָּ כָּל צָרְכְּךָ, מִכָּל מָקוֹם אֵין לוֹ לְהָקֵל בְּקָדְשֵׁי דּוֹרוֹת. וְזֶהוּ סְמִיכוּת הַפָּרָשִׁיּוֹת אַחֲרֵי רוֹאוֹ כִּי בָנָיו נֶעֶנְשׁוּ לְפִי שֶׁרָצוּ לְהִסְתַּכֵּל בְּנִסְתָּרוֹת וַעֲתִידוֹת, וְזֶה בְּהֶכְרֵחַ לָנוּ לְהָבִין כִּי קָדְשֵׁי דּוֹרוֹת חֲמוּרִים מְאֹד וַחֲבִיבִים בְּעֵינֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לִמְאֹד, לָכֵן אֵינוֹ נָכוֹן לֶאֱכוֹל, וְאַחַר הַצַּעַר גָּדוֹל שֶׁהָיָה לָהֶם מִמִּיתַת נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא עַל יְדֵי זֶה זָכוּ וְנִיתַּן לָהֶם הִבָּדְלוּת מִמַּאֲכָלוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת.
2“And for the goat of the sin offering Moshe diligently inquired ….” (Vayikra, 10:16)(“Diligently inquired,” Rashi explains. “Two inquiries. Why was this one burned, and why were these not eaten?”) Why did he make two inquiries? This matter is hinted at in the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 106b), “concerning Doag and Achitophel who learned three hundred laws in the castle floating in the air hinted at in the ‘roof’ of the letter lamed.” (The letter lamed reaches higher than the other letters of the alphabet, and thus its roof is called a “castle floating in the air.”) The letter lamed teaches of a settled mind, and an understanding of the order in all the prohibitive mitzvot along with the uncertainties that arise from all these prohibitions. It also teaches of a settled mind in that it graphically represents the last turn in the swallowing of food from the palate into the esophagus and the body, as if to show the understanding of the proper place for the food to go. This is as Aharon answered him (Zevachim, 101a), “Perhaps you have heard of the special sacrifices of the hour, and have not heard of the regular sacrifices for all generations.”10, 10:17). ‘Perhaps,’ said Moshe to Aharon, ‘its blood entered the innermost sanctuary?’ [and therefore should have been burned]. ‘The blood was not brought into the sanctuary’, he answered. ‘Perhaps it was taken outside of the boundary [taken outside of the Temple, and therefore should have been burned]?’ he suggested. ‘It was in the sanctuary’, he replied. ‘And perhaps you offered it in a state of mourning, and thus disqualified it?’ ‘Moshe’, he answered, ‘did my sons offer it? I offered it.’ Then he exclaimed, ‘Behold, the blood of it was not brought within, and it was in the sanctuary, then you should certainly have eaten it, as I commanded, that they should eat it in a state of mourning.’ He said to him: ‘And there have befallen me such things as these, and if I had eaten the sin-offering today, would it have been pleasing in the sight of the Hashem (Vayikra, 10)? Perhaps you heard it in this way only about sacrifices of the hour (special sacrifices)? For if [you would apply it] to the [regular] sacrifices for all generations, [you may argue] a minori from tithe, which is of lesser holiness. For if the Torah said of the tithe, which is of a lesser holiness, “I have not eaten thereof in my mourning,” how much the more does it apply to sacrifices, which are more holy?’ When Moshe heard that, it pleased him. He admitted his mistake and Moshe was not ashamed to say, ‘I had not heard it’, but said, ‘I heard it and forgot.’ This is as it says, “and Moshe diligently inquired,” and he answered Moshe, “even if you have inquired all that you need to, still you are not to be lenient with the sacrifices for all generations.” This is why this passage follows the incident of the death of the sons of Aharon, for he saw that his sons were punished for wanting to look into hidden and future matters. From this we learn the stringency of the sacrifices for all generations, and how greatly beloved they are by God. Therefore they are not to be eaten. After the great tragedy they had undergone with the death of Nadav and Avihu, they merited greater boundaries to separate themselves with the following mitzvot of forbidden foods.
גוַיִּשְׁמַע מֹשֶׁה וַיִּיטַב בְּעֵינָיו. אַחַר כָּךְ הֵבִין מֹשֶׁה הָעִנְיָן שֶׁיָּפֶה עָשָׂה אַהֲרֹן שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל הַשָּׂעִיר שֶׁל רֹאשׁ חוֹדֶשׁ אַךְ נִפְלָא בְּעֵינָיו מֵהֵיכָן דָּן אַהֲרֹן כֵּן, הֲלֹא אַחַר כָּל הַדְּרִישׁוֹת הָיָה לוֹ לֶאֱכוֹל, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב "אָכוֹל תֹּאכְלוּ אוֹתָהּ בַּקֹּדֶשׁ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוֵּיתִי", עַד שֶׁהֵשִׁיב לוֹ אַהֲרֹן מֵעִנְיַן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּ, וּבָזֶה הָעִנְיָן נִמְצָא עַמְקוּת גָּדוֹל כִּי שְׂעִיר רֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ רוֹמֵז לַהֲבָאַת כַּפָּרָה עַל מְעִיטַת הַיָּרֵחַ, וּשְׂעִיר רֹאשׁ חוֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן נִשְׂרַף שֶׁלֹּא רָצָה אַהֲרֹן לְאוֹכְלוֹ וּמִזֶּה הֵבִין מֹשֶׁה עַד עֵת, וְהַדְּבָרִים עֲמוּקִים.
3“And Moshe heard, and it was well in his eyes.” (Vayikra, 10:20)Afterwards Moshe understood the matter, for Aharon had done well in not eating the goat offering of the new moon. Yet still, it was a wonder to Moshe how Aharon knew to make such a judgment. Is it not so that after all of the inquiries he should have eaten it, as it is written (Vayikra, 10:18), “you shall surely eat it in the holy place as I have commanded,” until Aharon answered him with the matter of the death of Nadav and Avihu. This subject contains great depths, for the goat offering of the new moon hints at bringing atonement for reduction in size of the moon.11 The first goat of the new moon was burned, for Aharon did not want to eat it, and from here Moshe understood until now. The matter is very deep.
דסִימָנֵי עוֹפוֹת טְהוֹרִים. אִיתָא בַּגְּמָרָא (חולין ס"ה.) שֶׁאֵינוֹ דּוֹרֵס וְיֵשׁ לוֹ זֶפֶק וְקֻרְקְבָנוֹ נִקְלָף וְאֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה, וְהָאַרְבָּעָה סִימָנִים הָאֵלּוּ מְרַמְּזִים בְּנֶפֶשׁ הָאָדָם, הַדּוֹרֵס נִתְפָּרֵשׁ בַּגְּמָרָא שֶׁאוֹכֵל מִיָּד כְּשֶׁטּוֹרֵף וְאֵינוֹ מַמְתִּין עַד שֶׁתָּמוּת, זֶה מוֹרֶה עַל כַּעַס. וְהַפֵּירוּשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי שֶׁל דּוֹרֵס הוּא שֶׁאוֹחֵז בְּרַגְלוֹ הַמַּאֲכָל כְּשֶׁאוֹכֵל, מוֹרֶה עַל חֶסְרוֹן בִּטְחוֹנוֹ בַּה' וְיָרֵא פֶּן יִקַּח מִמֶּנּוּ הַטּוֹב שֶׁחָלַק לוֹ, וְגַם הָאָדָם צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת נָקִי בְּאֵלּוּ הַשְּׁנַיִם שֶׁלֹּא יִכְעַס וְיִהְיֶה לוֹ בִּטָּחוֹן בַּה'. וְאֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה מוֹרָה עַל יִשּׁוּב הַדַּעַת כִּי בְּהָאֶצְבַּע הוּא מַחְזִיר פָּנָיו מִן הָרֶגֶל, וְרוֹמֵז כִּי בְּכָל מְרוּצָתוֹ יֵשׁ לוֹ מַעֲצוֹר וְיִשּׁוּב הַדַּעַת, פֶּן נָכוֹן לְפָנָיו לָשׁוּב לַאֲחוֹרָיו. וְזֶפֶק מוֹרֶה שֶׁיִּהְיֶה מְמוּלָּא בְּדִבְרֵי תּוֹרָה שֶׁאַחַר שֶׁאָכַל בִּכְדֵי שָׂבְעוֹ מַנִּיחַ הַמּוֹתָר בְּתוֹךְ הַזֶּפֶק לְזִכָּרוֹן שֶׁיֵּהָנֶה מִזֶּה גַּם אַחַר כָּךְ, כִּדְאִיתָא (ברכות כ"ח.) בְּרַבִּי זֵירָא כְּשֶׁהָיָה עָיֵף מִדִּבְרֵי תּוֹרָה הָלַךְ וְיָשַׁב עַל פִּתְחָא דְּרַבִּי נָתָן בַּר טוֹבִי אָמַר כִּי אָזְלֵי רַבָּנָן מִבֵּי רַב אֵיקוּם מִקַּמַּיְהוּ שֶׁלֹּא רָצָה לֵישֵׁב בָּטֵל כְּלָל. וְקֻרְקְבָנוֹ נִקְלָף הַיְינוּ שֶׁלֹּא יָנוּחַ כֹּחַ הַמַּאֲכָל לְהִתְפַּשֵּׁט לִגְרוֹם לוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם שׁוּם נְטִיָּה מֵה', וְגַם רֶמֶז שֶׁיִּקְרַת תַּלְמִיד חָכָם מְכוּסָּה כִּי אֵין דִּמְיוֹן וְעֵרֶךְ לְשַׁעֵר יִקְרַת תַּלְמִיד חָכָם בְּאוֹר תּוֹרָתוֹ בָּעוֹלָם הַבָּא, כִּי הַנִּרְאֶה בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה אֵין דִּמְיוֹן וְשִׁיעוּר נֶגֶד יַקְרוּתוֹ בָּעוֹלָם הַבָּא.
4The outward signs of pure birds. It is written in the Gemara (Chullin, 65a), “[These are the signs of a pure bird.] It does not seize its prey, it has a crop, a gizzard that can be peeled, and an extra toe.” These four signs are hinted at in the soul of man. “Seizing its prey” is explained by the Gemara as a bird that eats its prey immediately once it is captured, and does not wait until its prey dies. This teaches of anger. The second explanation of “seizing its prey” is that it clutches its prey with its claws while it eats, which teaches of a lack of trust in God, for it fears that the good that was given to it will be taken away. So, too, man must be clean in these two matters, not to become angry, and to trust in God. “An extra toe” teaches of a settled mind. By means of its toe it pushes its attention away from that which has become habitual,12 in Hebrew means both “habitual” (hergel) and “foot.” hinting at the ability to contain itself when it wants to fulfill its own will, lest it finds itself comfortably settling into old habits. “A crop” teaches of being filled with words of Torah, for after it has eaten its fill it places the remainder inside its crop, as a reminder to benefit from it afterwards. This is as it is written in the Gemara (Berachot, 28a), “When Rabbi Zeira was exhausted from his study of the Torah, he would go and sit in front of the door of Rabbi Natan bar Tovi, for when the sages would exit, he would stand in their honor. In this way he did not sit idle even for a moment.” “A gizzard that can be peeled” means not to let the power in the food spread into the body and cause any deviation, God forbid, from God. This also hints that the preciousness of the Torah scholar is concealed, for there is no comparison between the preciousness of his study in this world and the supreme preciousness of its light in the world to come.
הסִימָנֵי שֶׁרֶץ הָעוֹף, שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם כְּרָעַיִם לְנַתֵּר בָּהֶם עַל הָאָרֶץ. וְהוּא כָּעִנְיָן הַמְבֹאָר בְּמַסֶּכֶת בְּרָכוֹת [ל"ג.] גְּדוֹלָה דֵּעָה שֶׁנִּתְּנָה בֵּין שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת, גָּדוֹל מִקְדָּשׁ שֶׁנִּתַּן בֵּין שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת, אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה גְּדוֹלָה נְקָמָה שֶׁנִּתְּנָה בֵּין שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת, אִין בְּמִילְּתָא מִיהָא גְּדוֹלָה. הַיְינוּ הַשָּׁמַיִם נֶגֶד הַדֵּעָה וְהַמִּקְדָּשׁ הֵם מַקִּיפִים רְצוֹן ה' תָּמִיד וְזֶהוּ שֶׁנִּתְּנוּ בֵּין שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת, אֲבָל נְקָמָה לֹא, כִּי אֵינָהּ טוֹבָה בִּתְמִידוּת, כִּי צָרִיךְ הָאָדָם לְכַוֵּן הָעֵת וְהַנֶּפֶשׁ וְהַמָּקוֹם שֶׁיִּהְיֶה מְכֻוָּן לִרְצוֹן הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ כִּי בִּתְמִידוּת אֵינוֹ מֻכְשָׁר בְּעֵינֵי הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ, וְזֶה בְּמַעֲשֵׂה פִּנְחָס וְזִמְרִי שֶׁהָיָה פִּנְחָס צָרִיךְ לְכַוֵּן, כִּי תּוֹרַת קַנָּאִין פּוֹגְעִין בּוֹ הוּא רַק בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה כִּי זֶה הָיָה אֶחָד מֵעֲשָׂרָה נִסִּים, שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא פֵּרֵשׁ זִמְרִי וַהֲרָגוֹ לְפִנְחָס לֹא הָיָה נֶעֱנָשׁ עָלָיו (סנהדרין פ"ב.) כַּמְבֹאָר, וְזֶהוּ "אֲשֶׁר לוֹ כְרָעַיִם לְנַתֵּר" וְכוּ׳, הַיְינוּ שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת לְהָאָדָם הַכֹּחַ בְּמִדּוֹת נְקָמָה לִפְעָמִים רַק שֶׁיְּכַוֵּון הָעֵת שֶׁהוּא רְצוֹן הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ, וְיִהְיֶה בִּיכָלְתּוֹ מִיָּד לְנַתֵּר וְלִקְפֹּץ מִזֶּה הַמִּדָּה וְלֹא יִשָּׁאֵר בְּלִבּוֹ שׁוּם כַּעַס וְשִׂנְאָה אַחַר כָּךְ וְהָבֵן.
5“Yet these you may eat of every flying creeping that goes on four [legs], which has legs above their feet, and uses them to leap on the earth.” (Vayikra, 11:21)This is similar to the matter discussed in the Gemara (Berachot, 33a), “Great is knowledge, since it is placed between two names of God [“For a God of knowledge is God,” Shmuel 1, 2:3]. Great is the Sanctuary [Mikdash], since it is placed between two names [“You have made, O God, the Sanctuary, O God,” Shemot, 15:17]. In refutation to this, one said, if so, you could also say, great is vengeance, since it is placed between two names [“God of Vengeance is God,” Tehilim, 94:1].” Meaning, the heavens corresponds to knowledge, and the Sanctuary (Mikdash) is that which is constantly surrounded by God’s will. This is “placed between two names of God.”13 Yet it is not so with vengeance, for vengeance is not always good. One must calculate the proper time, place, and person regarding the vengeance, for it must be set in accordance with God’s will, for it is not always proper in God’s view.We find this in the incident with Pinchas and Zimri. Pinchas had to consider his intentions carefully (and in a split second). Even though the law says “zealots may harm them,”14 this was one of the ten miracles performed for Pinchas at that time, for if Zimri had separated and risen up to kill Pinchas, he would not have been punished (Sanhedrin, 82a), as is explained. This is the inner meaning of “that has legs above its feet, and uses them to jump,” meaning that a man must have the power in the aspect of vengeance at times, where he must intend the exact moment that is God’s will. Then he must have the ability to immediately “leap” and jump from this mode of behavior, where afterwards no remnant of anger and hatred will be left in his heart. Understand.
וסִימָנֵי בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, מַעֲלַת גֵּרָה וּמַפְרֶסֶת פַּרְסָה. מַעֲלַת גֵּרָה הַיְינוּ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ חוֹטֵף הַטּוֹב מֵהַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ וְתָמִיד הוּא מוּכָן לְהַחֲזִירוֹ, אַף שֶׁקִּבֵּל כְּבָר הוּא מוּכָן לְהַחֲזִירוֹ וְרַק מְקַבְּלוֹ בְּנַיְיחָא. וּמַפְרִיס פַּרְסָה הוּא שֶׁאֵינוֹ קוֹפֵץ יָדָיו לֶאֱחֹז בְּמַה שֶּׁנֶּחֱלַק לוֹ מֵהַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ, וְזֶהוּ מִגֹּדֶל בִּטְחוֹנוֹ בַּה' כִּי עַל זֶה רוֹמֵז מַפְרִיס פַּרְסָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (תהלים י"ח,ל"ז) "תַּרְחִיב צַעֲדִי" שֶׁעוֹמֵד בַּמֶּרְחָב.
6Signs of Pure Animals. “Whatever has parted hooves, is cloven footed, and chews the cud, of these you may eat” (Vayikra, 11:2). “Chews the cud” means one who does not snatch the good from God, and is always willing to return it. Even if he has already received it he is ready to return it, and he only receives it in a pleasant way. “That has parted hooves” means that his hands do not jump to seize that which God has allotted him, and this comes out of his great trust in God. “That has parted hooves” hints at this, as it is written (Tehilim, 18:37), “You have enlarged my steps under me,” meaning that he stands in a wide space.
זבַּגָּמָל כְּתִיב "פַּרְסָה אֵינֶנּוּ מַפְרִיס" לְשׁוֹן הֹוֶה, וּבַשָּׁפָן כְּתִיב "לֹא יַפְרִיס" לְשׁוֹן עָתִיד, וּבָאַרְנֶבֶת כְּתִיב "לֹא הִפְרִיסָה" לְשׁוֹן עָבָר. וְהָעִנְיָן בָּזֶה כִּי גָּמָל מוֹרֶה עַל מְהִירוּת וְזֶה מַה דְּאִיתָא בְּמַסֶּכֶת שַׁבָּת [ק"ד.] מַאי טַעְמָא מַהֲדַר אַפֵּי דְּגִימֶ"ל לְגַבֵּיהּ דְּדָלֶ"ת שֶׁכֵּן דֶּרֶךְ גּוֹמְלֵי חֲסָדִים לִרְדֹּף אַחַר דַּלִּים, וּכְשֶׁלֹּא בְּמָקוֹם הָרָאוּי אָז הוּא מְהִירוּת שֶׁאֵינוֹ נוֹשֵׂא חֵן בְּעֵינֵי הַבְּרִיּוֹת גַּם כֵּן, עַל כֵּן נֶאֱמַר בּוֹ לְשׁוֹן הֹוֶה הַיְינוּ שֶׁבִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה נִכָּר שֶׁהַמַּעֲשֶׂה אֵינָהּ נְכוֹנָה, וְזֶה עִנְיָן אוֹת גִּימֶ"ל כְּשֶׁהוּא בְּיוֹ"ד מוֹרֶה עַל גְּמִילוּת חֲסָדִים, וּכְשֶׁהוּא שֶׁלֹּא בְּיוֹ"ד מוֹרֶה עַל מְהִירוּת הַנִּקְרָא גָּמָל. וְעִנְיַן שָׁפָן הוּא הַנִּרְאֶה לִבְנֵי אָדָם לְיִשּׁוּב הַדַּעַת וַעֲנָוָה אַךְ לֹא בָּזֹאת בָּחַר הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ, וְהוּא כָּעִנְיָן שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בַּפָּסוּק [פר' בשלח] "וַיּוֹתִירוּ מִמֶּנּוּ אֲנָשִׁים", כִּי הֵם הֶחֱזִיקוּ אֶת עַצְמָם לַעֲנָוִים בְּמַה שֶּׁהוֹתִירוּ, פֶּן לֹא יִהְיוּ כְּדָאִים בְּעֵינֵי הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ שֶׁיַּזְמִין לָהֶם מָן עַל יוֹם מָחָר, וְזֶה הוּא עֲנָוָה פְּסוּלָה שֶׁלֹּא בָּחַר בָּהּ הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ, כִּי אֵין צָרִיךְ שֶׁיַּחֲזִיק הָאָדָם אֶת עַצְמוֹ שֶׁהוּא קָטָן מִכֹּל, כִּי הֵם הוֹצִיאוּ אֶת עַצְמָם מִכְּלַל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל הֵם כְּדָאִים וְרַק הֵם אֵינָם כְּדַאי, וְאַף שֶׁנִּרְאֶה לְעַיִן אֱנוֹשִׁי לְיִשּׁוּב הַדַּעַת וַעֲנָוָה וְנוֹשֵׂא חֵן בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה בְּעֵינֵי הַבְּרִיּוֹת, אַךְ בְּעֵינֵי הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ לֹא נָכוֹן הוּא וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר (שמות ט"ז,כ') "וַיָּרֻם תּוֹלָעִים וַיִּבְאַשׁ", כִּי תּוֹלַעַת רוֹמֵז לְמִדַּת עֲנָוָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמַר דָּוִד הַמֶּלֶךְ עָלָיו הַשָּׁלוֹם (תהלים כ"ב,ז') "וְאָנֹכִי תוֹלַעַת" אַךְ עִנְוְתָנוּתוֹ שֶׁל דָּוִד הָיְתָה נוֹשֵׂאת חֵן בְּעֵינֵי הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ, וַעֲלֵיהֶם נֶאֱמַר "וַיִּבְאַשׁ", וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר בַּשָּׁפָן לְשׁוֹן עָתִיד מֵחֲמַת שֶׁאַף שֶׁנּוֹשֵׂא חֵן בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה רַק שֶׁאַחַר כָּךְ מִתְבָּרֵר שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה מִמִּדּוֹת הַטּוֹב. וְהָאַרְנֶבֶת מוֹרָה לְעַז פָּנִים, שֶׁאַף שֶׁרוֹאֶה שֶׁאֵין בְּשָׁרְשׁוֹ שׁוּם חַיִּים כְּלָל מִכָּל מָקוֹם יִרְצֶה שֶׁיִּפְעוֹל כִּרְצוֹנוֹ וְזֶהוּ חֻצְפָּה כְּלַפֵּי שְׁמַיָּא, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּבִלְעָם הָרָשָׁע, שֶׁאַף שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא "לֹא תֵלֵךְ" מִכָּל מָקוֹם הִתְאַמֵּץ וְזֶה הוּא רְאָיָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ חֶסְרוֹן בְּשָׁרְשׁוֹ, וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר לְשׁוֹן עָבָר.
7Of the Camel it is written, “since it chews the cud but is not cloven-footed,” in the present tense. With the badger it is written, “and it will not split its foot,” in the future tense. And with the rabbit it is written, “it has not split its foot,” in the past tense. The camel teaches of quickness (rather, undue haste). This is what is said in the Gemara (Shabbat, 104a), “for what reason is the face of the letter gimmel—ג?—turned towards the letter that follows it, dalet—ד For it is the nature of those who do acts of kindness (“gomlei chassidim—the same letters as gimel, and the same letters for camel, gamal) to run after the the poor (poor, dal is the same letters as dalet).” When the kindness goes to a place that it is not warranted it is a result of undue haste, and also finds no favor in the surrounding creation. Therefore of the camel (gamal, the same as gomlei chassadim, those who do kindness, and the letter gimel), the nature of its hoof is expressed in the present tense, for immediately at the time of the action one sees that it is not proper. This is the nature of the letter gimel—for when it is spelled with a yud [gimel yud mem lamed] it means acts of kindness—gemilut chassadim—and when it is not spelled with a yud it teaches of undue haste, called gamal, the camel.The badger teaches of a quality that appears to others as humility and a settled mind, yet truly it is behavior that God did not choose (meaning it is not genuine). This is discussed above in Parshat Beshalach on the verse (Shemot, 16:20), “and some of them left it [the manna] until morning, and it bred worms, and became loathsome.” That is, they fancied themselves as being humble in leaving it over, on the chance that the next day God would not consider them worthy to have given them manna, and then on the morrow they would still have some. This is defunct humility, which God did not choose, for one should not view himself as being the least important, and in this they took themselves out of the community of Israel, where all of Israel is worthy, and only they are not. This would first appear to be an expression of the good qualities of a settled mind and humility. At the time of the action (of their deeming themselves unworthy) it would find favor in the view of their surrounding community. However, in God view it is not proper, and of this it is said (Shemot 16:20), “and it bred worms and became loathsome,” for worm teaches of the quality of humility, as David haMelech said (Tehilim, 22:7), “and I am a worm.” However, the humility of David haMelech was favorable in God’s view, yet of them, it is written, “and it became loathsome.” Thus the sign of impurity for the badger is written in the future tense, for even though such an action appears favorable (appears to come from true humility and a settled mind) at the time of the action, it will later become clear that it was not a good attribute.The rabbit teaches of brazenness. Even though he sees within himself that there is no root of life, nevertheless he wants things to go according to his will. This is brazenness towards Heaven. This is explained concerning the evil Bilaam, for even though the Holy One, blessed be He, told him not to go, nonetheless he was obstinate, and this is proof that there is a deficiency at the root (and thus, in the past). This is why the rabbit’s sign of impurity is mentioned in the past tense.