English translation — ואתחנן א

1.

In connection with the laws of Shabbat — that keeping Shabbat is one of the seven Noachide laws,

written

in our parshah¹

— namely in the Mishnah at the end of tractate Shabbat²

: "And it happened in the days of the father of Rabbi Tzadok and in the days of Abba Shaul ben Batnit that they sealed the opening

with a jug

and tied the shard

with a reed to know if the vat has a handbreadth opening or not.

And from their words we learned that one may seal, measure, and tie on Shabbat."

That is, on Shabbat it is permitted to seal the window,

to measure and to tie a knot that is not permanent³.

"They tied the shard" and afterwards

(and by this)

they measured "to know if the vat has a handbreadth opening or not."

And also it could be said that the reason for the precedence of the law of "plugging" is

but also]

because of the principle

(understood from the words of the Tosafot⁷)

that in two words of the order

it is explained that only measuring for a mitzvah is permitted,

and similarly regarding tying it is explicit in the Shulchan Aruch⁵

that only for the purpose of a mitzvah is it permitted to tie a craftsman's knot that is not permanent.

However, regarding plugging it is explained in the Tosafot there⁶

that it is permitted even not for the purpose of a mitzvah].

And see the marginal note there:

The reason why the order in the Mishnah is "they plug" and afterwards "and they measure and they tie",

One can say simply because thus was the incident,

that at first "they plugged the opening",

and afterwards they tied and measured.

But according to this it should have said "and they tie

(and afterwards)

and they measure" - for first

This is it and specifically this, and consequently it is understood that one must first change the law that has more novelty⁸

- and therefore here first comes the law of "plugging" because of the advantage of its novelty

(And this is because they permitted plugging even though it resembles building - therefore it is forced)

that this is in any case also not for the sake of a mitzvah

(Because for the sake of a mitzvah they would not permit, as explained in Tosafot⁹),

but measuring and tying, which they permitted only for the sake of a mitzvah,

as above - this reason does not apply to the precedence of "and they measure" over "and they tie",

for the novelty of the law in both is equal,

and there is no advantage of novelty in measuring - it is logical that the order in the Mishnah should be according to their order in actual practice - tying before measuring.

And on the contrary: ostensibly, in the permit of tying

There is a novelty more than in the permitted measurement:

The prohibition of measurement on Shabbat is "because it is a weekday act and a desecration of Shabbat"¹⁰,

but not so

Prohibition of tying a knot that is not of

permanent is for the reason

(And in a manner)

that "from the words of the Scribes"

This is also called "of kaima"¹¹,

meaning a connection that is similar to a Torah-binding.

And based on this it is more simple to forbid

(ibid.)

a binding that is similar to a Torah-prohibited labor,

than to forbid

(ibid.)

measuring which is only a mundane act etc.

And therefore when they permitted both

(for the sake of a mitzvah)

behold in the permit of binding there is a greater novelty than in the permit of measuring — and so also for this reason it should have said first "and they bind" and then "and they measure".

2.

And it will be understood with the introduction of what we learned at the beginning of tractate Shabbat<sup>12</sup>

that the labor of carrying out is not forbidden from the Torah except in a manner where the one who carries out performs an uprooting and a placing.

But with uprooting alone without placing,

or with placing without uprooting,

it is forbidden only by rabbinic decree<sup>13</sup>.

And the known<sup>14</sup>

difficulty on this: why should it not be forbidden from the Torah also uprooting alone,

or placing alone,

on the grounds of half a measure which is forbidden from the Torah<sup>15</sup>

(also in the labors of Shabbat<sup>16</sup>)?

And it is explained*<sup>16</sup>

in the resolution of the matter,

based on the precision in the emphasis of the language of this very rule: the prohibition from the Torah is specifically "in half a measure" — that is, that which is lacking only in the measure,

the quantity of the prohibition and not in its essence and quality.

But if the lack is in the essence of the prohibition, the Torah did not forbid.

And so it is in our discussion,

that the uprooting or the placing alone are half a labor and not half a measure — half in the quality and definitions and essence of the action of carrying out,

therefore it is not forbidden from the Torah.

And it may be said that this also applies to tying — for seemingly, even in a knot that is not permanent

(i.e., when the completion is lacking

(in completeness)

of the act of tying,

"skilled work"<sup>17</sup>,

because he does not tie "with the intention that it remain so for as long as it can possibly endure, etc."<sup>18</sup>)

one must ask: why should it not be prohibited from the Torah on the grounds of half a measure?

And the answer is in the manner of the above: this is not half a measure

(in its quantity)

of the work,

but rather half a work — lacking in the quality and the definitions and the essence of the work,

for the "intention that it remain so forever" is part of its quality and the definitions of the work,

and without it, the definition of the work is lacking<sup>19</sup>

and therefore it is not prohibited from the Torah.

3.

But according to this, it requires further explanation:

In the labor of carrying, with only uprooting or placing

(which is forbidden by rabbinic law),

we do not find that they permitted it for the sake of a mitzvah; and on the contrary: it is explained in the commentaries²⁰,

that the reason why the Sages taught in their Mishnah at the beginning of Tractate Shabbat the law of carrying regarding a poor person and a rich person,

is in order to teach that also carrying of giving charity from a rich person to a poor person is forbidden — that is, it is forbidden even for the sake of a mitzvah and uprooting or placing alone by rabbinic law — and what is different about the half-labor of tying

(which is not permanent)

that they permitted it for the sake of a mitzvah²¹?

And the reason for the difference, one can say,

that although both are forbidden by rabbinic decree,

nevertheless, the reason for the prohibition is not equal: the reason for the prohibition of carrying out by uprooting or by placing alone is "a decree lest each one of them come to do a melachah

of complete [melachah] on Shabbat"²²,

from the type of things,

"that the Sages forbade etc. a decree lest from them come an issur skilah"²³

; in contrast, the reason for the prohibition of tying a knot that is not permanent is because "by rabbinic decree this is also called permanent since it is destined to endure for some time",

namely that it is from the type of melachot "that the Sages forbade²⁴

etc. because they are similar to melachot"²⁵.

And since the prohibition of the work of tying

(which is not a permanent knot)

is not due to a decree lest one come through this to a Torah prohibition,

but only because it resembles a Torah work,

behold, in this there is room to distinguish and say that it is different in a place where there is some need

(a mitzvah and the like)

; but not so regarding the work of uprooting or placing

(alone),

whose prohibition is due to lest one come through it to a Torah prohibition,

behold, it is logical that for this one should be concerned and prohibit even when the work is for the sake of a mitzvah.

But this very thing requires explanation: why, in truth, did they not decree from the outset of the law also regarding the work of tying that is not permanent — since it is a half-work — for there is room to be concerned lest one come to make a permanent knot, which is a Torah work,

and therefore it should be prohibited even for the sake of a mitzvah?

And the matters are a kal vachomer²⁶

: if they decreed regarding uprooting or placing alone,

even though one cannot come from it to a complete labor except through an additional action

(to place it after the uprooting,

or to precede the placing — uprooting²⁷),

surely all the more so that they should have decreed regarding a connection that is not a Sabbath rest, that in order to transgress through it a prohibition from the Torah, it lacks only the "intent that it remain thus forever."

D.

And the explanation in this:

In explaining the reason²⁸

that the Torah prohibited specifically a permanent knot,

it may be said: the essence of the act of tying — a connection and unification of two things

(threads and the like)

And the knot is not worthy of being called a true connection and unification except in a manner that it is made with the intention that "it will remain thus forever."

And that is, that the intent that it be a knot

of permanence is a condition in the act of tying.

Therefore, if one intended from the outset to tie them only for some time and to untie them afterwards,

then even during the time that they are tied together,

it is not a true connection²⁹

and it is not in the category of tying³⁰

that the Torah prohibited

The Torah³¹.

And based on this it will be understood that without the knowledge that the connection is maintained, the matter is not that a part of the completeness of the work's action is missing,

but rather that the essence of the work of binding is absent from the outset³²,

for the threads are not truly tied and united,

and this is nothing other than an action

Of the drawing near and touching of the threads only and the like³³.

And since there is in this not even a bit and part of that labor which the Torah forbade³⁴,

therefore they did not decree concerning it³⁵

lest one come

from part of it to do all of it and transgress a prohibition from the Torah³⁶.

And now it is understood that the reason that nevertheless the sages forbade it is only because in its externality this labor resembles the labor of tying that is from the Torah; and since it is not from the reason of a decree,

therefore it is permitted for the sake of a mitzvah etc.

But not so the labor of carrying out by means of removal or placing alone:

The definition of this labor from the Torah,

it is carrying out

(or bringing in)

from domain to domain³⁷,

including several parts and details: removal,

placing etc.

When in his action a part and detail of the essence of the labor is missing,

although then it is not a complete labor even in its quality and essence,

nevertheless the portion that he did and effected is indeed a part of the action of carrying out — and therefore one must forbid its part because of a decree lest he come to do all of it and transgress a prohibition from the Torah; and for the reason of this decree one must be concerned also in a place that it is for the sake of a commandment etc.

5.

Based on this will also be explained the reason that they taught in the Mishnah

(at the end of the tractate)

"they measure" and afterwards "they tie":

It was stated above that in tying a knot that is not a professional knot that the Sages prohibited, there is no part of the act of tying that is Torah-prohibited,

the prohibition is only because the knot resembles a complete tying from the Torah.

That is, its prohibition does not come from the aspect of the act of tying,

but only because there is to liken it to another matter,

to a prohibited labor - without any connection to it.

7.

A.

Were it not for the resemblance, there is no reason to prohibit the tying in and of itself.

But not so the act of measuring,

that even though its prohibition is not due to connection to a forbidden labor from the Torah

(not a part of it nor similar to it),

but rather the entire basis of its prohibition is only rabbinic — however on the other hand, from this very thing it is proven that its prohibition is intrinsic,

due to the act of measuring: "for it is a weekday act and a desecration of Shabbat."

And for this reason it stands to reason that in measuring,

which is in the category of an intrinsically prohibited act³⁸,

one should be more stringent with it than with tying

(whose prohibition is not intrinsic,

as above).

And therefore when the Mishnah comes to teach that both were permitted for the sake of a mitzvah,

then in the permission of measuring there is greater novelty,

and therefore it stated

(according to the aforementioned words of Tosafot that the novel point must be taught first)

"they measure" first and afterwards "and they tie."

6.

The explanation according to the inner aspect of the matters, why these three matters are repeated in the order of "they plug, and they measure, and they tie" — and with a preface of the precise wording "they plug etc.,"

in the present tense and a definite action,

and it did not teach "it is permitted to plug etc." and the like,

from which is implied a hint

that thus they must do and thus they always do:

It was explained elsewhere³⁹

the reason

(according to the inwardness of the matters⁴⁰)

why tractate Shabbat begins specifically with the laws of hotza'ah — because in spirituality this is a general matter in all the prohibitions of Shabbat: through doing the forbidden labors one carries out from a private domain

(the Unique One of the world)

to a public domain

(the rows of separation — the world of kelipot)⁴¹,

and therefore the matter of hotza'ah comes as a general introduction to all the laws of Shabbat; likewise it is also regarding the conclusion and seal of the tractate that "everything follows the conclusion"⁴²,

where there is explained a general matter that is accomplished through the entirety of Shabbat observance

(in all its details)

— as will be explained below.

It is explained in many places⁴³

the distinction between the three times of Shabbat: a)

the eve

(night)

of Shabbat; b)

the day of Shabbat; c)

the time of Minchah of Shabbat,

the ratzon of all ratzonim⁴⁴

— that on Shabbat night is the ascent of Malchut from BYA to Atzilut,

for on weekdays Malchut descends to BYA to refine clarifications,

and as it is said⁴⁵

"Her feet descend etc.",

and on Shabbat night she ascends from there to Atzilut.

And since the worlds receive from the sefirah of Malchut,

then there shines in BYA the sefirah of Malchut as it is in Atzilut.

Afterwards

On the day of Shabbat, the aspect of life is more elevated,

in the aspect of Zeir Anpin,

the attributes of Atzilut.

And afterwards, at the time of Rava d'Ravin, there is the revelation of the aspect and level that is above Zeir Anpin and Nukva,

from which comes the union of Zeir Anpin and Nukva.

Therefore we say in the evening prayer of Shabbat "and they shall rest in her"

(Nukva),

in the morning prayer "and they shall rest in him"

(Zeir Anpin),

and in the afternoon prayer "and they shall rest in them"

(union of Zeir Anpin and Nukva)⁴⁶.

And behold, since on Shabbat night there is the ascent of the worlds⁴⁷,

the sefirah of Nukva shines in Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah as it is in Atzilut,

therefore all the husks are nullified on

(the night of)

Shabbat⁴⁸

: on weekdays,

since Nukva descends to refine the sparks in the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, the husks have a "grasp of place",

therefore the husks are not nullified in the worlds.

But on Shabbat,

since the sefirah of Nukva then ascends to Atzilut,

where there is no evil at all, and as it is said⁴⁹

"No evil shall sojourn with You",

therefore the world is in such a state that the husks are nullified.

However,

it is understood,

that this

(the ascent of the kingship and the nullification of the husks etc.)

belongs and is connected

(in a certain measure⁵⁰)

to the service of man⁵¹.

And therefore our sages, may their memory be blessed, said⁵²

(regarding the service of the children of Israel)

: "We become a partner with the Holy One, blessed be He, in the work of creation" — and from the explanations of this is according to what our sages, may their memory be blessed, said⁵³

"The north wind does not circulate,"

meaning that from the perspective of creation in itself, the north side,

which indicates

(the source and place⁵⁴)

of the husks

(as it is said⁵⁵

"From the north evil will open")

is open,

that there is a place for the husks.

But on Shabbat,

that through the service of the children of Israel

(the kingship ascends and through this)

the husks are nullified,

it is as if they make and seal⁵⁶

the north side and the creation is completed.

And this is that the children of Israel become "a partner with the Holy One, blessed be He⁵⁷

in the work of creation,"

that they also effect in the creation of the world.

And this thing is done immediately with the entrance of Shabbat through the acceptance of Shabbat and its observance then.

And afterwards,

as the reward of this work,

they are elevated

(on the day of Shabbat)

to a more elevated level,

to the revelation of the light of Zeir Anpin of Atzilut.

And afterwards they are elevated even more — until the revelation of the light that is above Zeir Anpin and Malchut,

and unites them.

And this is what is at the conclusion of tractate Shabbat — namely, at the conclusion

(And guarding⁵⁸)

all the laws

(tractate)

Shabbat

(which are all included in the caution regarding the prohibition of carrying out at the beginning of the tractate,

as above)

— comes the “announcement” about the three elevations in the reward of this labor — and they are hinted at in the three matters and specifically according to this order: “they plug, they measure, and they tie”:

On the night of Shabbat,

they effect the elevation of Malchut, the elevation of the worlds, and the nullification of the husks,

through which they stop up and "plug" the space of the northern wind; and afterwards they arrive at the revelation of the aspect of the middot of Atzilut — "and they measure"

(which is from the word measure,

as the language of our sages, of blessed memory⁵⁹

"With the measure that a person measures, they measure for him"),

and afterwards they ascend to the aspect of "and they bind",

that the light that is above Zeir Anpin and Malchut shines, which binds and unites them,

And through this also binds all the worlds entirely — that they all become one domain, a private domain⁶⁰

Connecting them to the Unique One of the world⁶¹.

(From the talk of Shabbat Parshat Shlach 5722)