English translation — ט"ו באב

A.

It stands in the Mishnah

(end of Tractate Ta'anit¹)

: said Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel: there were no good days for Israel like the fifteenth of Av and like Yom Kippur, on which the daughters of Jerusalem

(and some say — daughters of Israel²)

go out in borrowed white garments ..

and dance in the vineyards,

and what would they say: young man, lift now your eyes and see what you choose for yourself; do not set your eyes on beauty, set your eyes on family,

false is grace and vain is beauty, a G-d-fearing woman is the one who will be praised³

and it says: give her of the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates⁴.

One must understand:

a)

From the verses there is a proof only on that which they said "Do not cast your eyes on beauty" - because "<b>False </b>is grace <b>and vain </b>is beauty" - but not on the continuation - their saying "Cast your eyes <b>on family</b>"<sup>5</sup>.

And on the contrary: In the verses it is explicit "A woman <b>who fears the Lord </b>she shall be praised",

"And let her works praise her in the gates <b>her deeds</b>" - that her virtue consists in fear of the Lord and deeds,

and <b>not </b>

(only)

in family lineage<sup>6</sup>.

b)

How is it possible that <b>all </b>"daughters of Jerusalem" - among whom there were certainly also not any "of distinguished lineage" - should say "Cast your eyes <b>on family</b>"?

The question is even stronger: in the baraisa<sup>7</sup>

(on the mishnah)

it says,

that - "The beautiful ones, what would they say? 'Set your eyes on beauty, etc. of lineage ..

say 'Set your eyes on family, etc.' The ugly ones ..

say 'Take your purchase for the sake of<sup>8</sup>

heaven, etc.'" that - only the ones of lineage said "Set your eyes on family"<sup>9</sup>,

now how does the mishnah say in an absolute manner "<b>The daughters of Jerusalem </b>..

say ..

Set your eye on family"?

B.

Commentators<sup>10</sup>

learn,

that also in the mishnah are hinted

(by allusion)

the three different sayings of the three types of daughters of Jerusalem that are enumerated in the baraisa -

The words "Cast now your eyes <b>and see </b>what you choose for yourself" say the "beautiful ones,"

that one should see their beauty

(and as the continuation in the baraitha - "for a woman is only for beauty")

; "Do not set your eyes on beauty, set your eyes on family" say the "well-born ones"; and the "ugly ones,"

who have

(neither

(grace that comes from)

lineage,

and neither beauty,

but)

only "good deeds,"

say "Grace is false and beauty is vain, a woman <b>who fears the Lord </b>she shall be praised and say Give etc. and let her be praised in the gates <b>her deeds</b>"

(in the manner as it is stated in the baraitha that they say "Take your purchase <b>for the sake of heaven</b>").

And based on this, also the first difficulty is answered automatically

(mentioned above section 1)

- because the verses that are brought in the mishnah are not as proof of the aforementioned statement,

but a <b>separate </b>statement

(of the "ugly ones").

The explanation is however not smooth

(- in the simple meaning of the language of the Mishnah),

because:

a)

From the <b>indeterminate </b>language of the Mishnah - "the daughters of Jerusalem ..

and what would they say etc.'" - it implies,

that everything that stands further is the statement of "the daughters of Jerusalem" simply

(<b>all</b>).

2)

Why does the Mishnah specify details and specifically these details of the statements of each type,

and not the language and the details that are in the Baraitha?

- And on the contrary,

seemingly it would have been fitting that the Mishnah,

which is "a brief thing encompassing many matters"¹¹

should bring out the general point of each statement — "The beautiful ones say, 'Set your eyes on beauty'; the well-born say, 'Set your eyes on family'; the ugly ones say, 'Take your purchase for the sake of Heaven',"

and the Baraitha should then add

(on the Mishnah)

the details of the statement: "Young man, lift your eyes, etc."; "Do not set your eyes on beauty"; "Grace is deceitful..."

"...in the gates, her deeds."

(almost without addition and length)

clearly have brought out that these are three separate statements of three types of daughters of Jerusalem].

Therefore it is plausible to learn the Mishnah,

that "What would they say"

(all the daughters of Jerusalem who go out)

refers to the entire continuation of the subsequent speech; and the Baraitha adds to the Mishnah and specifies,

that in addition to the statement that all the daughters of Jerusalem said,

each type separately added another statement that is in accordance with the daughters of that type themselves.

3.

Also in the baraisa one must understand:

a)

What kind of place does the statement

(of the "beautiful ones")

"Set your eyes on beauty"?

- It is indeed a teaching in the Torah "Grace is false &lt;b&gt;and beauty &lt;/b&gt;is vain".

And especially since the "beautiful ones" themselves say indeed

(as it stands in the Mishnah)

"&lt;b&gt;Do &lt;/b&gt;not set your eyes on beauty ..

Grace is false and beauty is vain"

(according to the above explanation that all the daughters of Jerusalem say this)

b)

With what is "Take your acquisition for the sake of Heaven" a reason to take "<b>ugly ones</b>" specifically?

Commentators¹²

teach that also the "ugly ones" have good deeds,

and with "Take your acquisition for the sake of Heaven" they mean,

that one should not look at "beauty" and "family",

but only at fear of Heaven and good deeds

("for the sake of Heaven").

But the explanation requires clarification,

because also the statement of the distinguished ones "Set your eyes on family" comes,

simply,

to bring out the <b>spiritual</b> advantage of lineage of family - as the Tosefet Yom Tov says "since presumably the distinguished ones are G-d-fearing"¹³

- it comes out,

that also the choosing of the distinguished ones is "for the sake of <b>Heaven</b>",

then in what consists the advantage of "for the sake of Heaven" by the "ugly ones"?

4.

Continuing to the above baraita, the Gemara brings a statement

(from "Ulla Bira'ah said Rabbi Elazar")

- and with this the tractate is concluded - "In the future, the Holy One, blessed be He, will make a dance for the righteous and He will sit among them in the Garden of Eden, and each and every one will point with his finger, as it is said¹⁴

And one shall say on that day, 'Behold, this is our G-d, for whom we waited, that He might save us; this is the L-rd, for whom we waited, we will be glad and rejoice in His salvation.'"

The connection of this maamar to the mishnah is understood simply: in continuation of that which the mishnah relates that "the daughters of Jerusalem go out and dance

(like to dance &lt;b&gt;in dances&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;

- Rashi)

in the vineyards etc.'",

the Gemara brings the maamar that "in the future, the Holy One, blessed be He, will make a &lt;b&gt;dance &lt;/b&gt;for the righteous etc."&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;.

It is, however, plausible,

that the connection of the maamar with the mishnah and baraita is not from the aspect of a single detail in the matter,

that here

(as in the mishnah and baraita)

it speaks about a dance — but only from the aspect of several details of the dance that stand in the continuation of the maamar: "And He sits among them etc. and each and every one points with his finger, as it is said, 'And he said etc.'"

Also one must say: from that which the Gemara brings the statement in proximity to the baraita

(which comes in continuation of the &lt;b&gt;saying &lt;/b&gt;of the daughters of Jerusalem)

-and not in a separate section on the words of the Mishnah "they go out and dance etc."

(and the like)

- it is implied,

that the statement "The Holy One, blessed be He, will in the future etc." has a continuation and connection to the content of the &lt;b&gt;baraita &lt;/b&gt;

(regarding the three types of saying of the daughters of Jerusalem).

5.

In the conclusion of the tractate one also finds a wonder in the commentaries of Rashi and Tosafot:

On "He pointed with His finger" Rashi explains: "And he says: This is Hashem for whom we waited and He will save us; this is Hashem for whom we waited, we will rejoice and be glad in His salvation"; also Tosafos says similarly,

And this is his language: Each one points with his finger at the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is said: Behold, this is our God for whom we waited, etc., we will rejoice and be glad in His salvation.

Is very perplexing: What are Rashi and Tosafos adding*&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;

to that which is &lt;b&gt;explicit &lt;/b&gt;in the Gemara&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;?

And one could say,

that Rashi and Tosafos disagree in the explanation of the words “&lt;b&gt;that it is said &lt;/b&gt;and he said on that day behold etc.”:

Rashi explains,

that the Gemara derives from the cited verse not only that “each and every one points with his finger”&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;,

but also that at the time of the act they will &lt;b&gt;say &lt;/b&gt;the words

(of the verse)

“this is Hashem etc.”; and therefore Rashi adds to the language of the Gemara: “

(points with his finger),

&lt;b&gt;and says &lt;/b&gt;

(this is Hashem etc.)

i.

e.

that at the time of the dance there will be both matters:

points with his finger,

&lt;b&gt;and says &lt;/b&gt;this etc.&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;.

On this, Tosafos says "Each and every one, the Holy One, blessed be He, shows with His finger, as it is said, 'Behold, this is our God, etc.'",

He omits the beginning of the verse "And one shall say on that day" - with this Tosafos intends to clarify,

that

(a)

(a)

the Gemara is only [bringing] the proof

("as it is said")

regarding "shows

(the Holy One, blessed be He)

with His finger",

and

(b)

(b)

the beginning of the verse "And one shall say on that day"

(the saying)

is not relevant and pertinent here²⁰.

One must, however, understand: what are the rationales of the opinions

(the dispute between Rashi and Tosafos),

whether the saying of the righteous is pertinent here in this sugya,

or not²¹?

6.

The explanation of all this:

It is understood and simple,

that that which "the daughters of Jerusalem go out etc." in the days of the Fifteenth of Av and Yom Kippur,

was a matter of holiness; it is therefore also understood,

that they then did not intend to bring out their physical virtues

(beauty,

wealth²²

or

the

like.)

in themselves — rather such virtues that according to the Torah they are fitting to be a reason and cause for matchmaking and marriage.

they mean the true quality

(&lt;b&gt;the spiritual&lt;/b&gt;)

in this&lt;sup&gt;23&lt;/sup&gt;,

for physical beauty derives from spiritual beauty.

And as is known&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;,

that the fact that children are born beautiful physically depends on the fact that the conduct of father and mother is in holiness and purity etc.

(so then the children receive beautiful spiritual qualities

(and garments of the soul)&lt;sup&gt;25&lt;/sup&gt;,

and therefore they are beautiful also physically)].

And in this there are two virtues:

The &lt;b&gt;particular &lt;/b&gt;virtue that exists by &lt;b&gt;the &lt;/b&gt;daughter of Jerusalem specifically;

(b)

The general virtue that all daughters of Jerusalem have; the virtue is &lt;b&gt;transmitted &lt;/b&gt;to children and children's children until the end of all generations&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;.

And in this is the difference between the Mishnah and the Baraita:

In the Mishnah it speaks mainly about the general virtue,

which exists among all the daughters of Jerusalem -

(a)

(a)

By <b>every</b> daughter of Jerusalem there is a spiritual virtue,

by virtue of which she is in the category of "a woman <b>who fears the Lord</b>, she shall be praised"; and

(b)

This virtue is rooted in her in such a way that it will be transmitted to the children whom she has and educates,

as is hinted in the second verse that the Mishnah brings: "Give <b>her</b> of the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates."

not only from the aspect of the virtues themselves

(which have already been enumerated at length and in detail earlier — גמלתהו etc. &lt;b&gt;ותעש &lt;/b&gt;etc. &lt;b&gt;מפרי כפי' &lt;/b&gt;etc.)

is &lt;b&gt;היא תתהלל&lt;/b&gt;,

but also from the aspect of her children — „פרי ידי'" and „מעשי'" — is „תנו לה" and „ויהללוה בשערים".

But the baraisa speaks about the particular

(spiritual)

virtue of each type of "daughters of Jerusalem,"

as follows.

7.

What is the certainty that &lt;b&gt;every &lt;/b&gt;daughter of Jerusalem is in the category of "a woman who fears the Lord,"

and that this is in a manner of "the fruit of my hands and my deeds" as above — the daughters of Jerusalem answer this: "Choose &lt;b&gt;please &lt;/b&gt; lift up your eyes and see etc. Do not set your eyes on beauty, set your eyes on family":

One must not look at virtues

(both spiritual and physical)

as one sees them with the eyes,

in the usual manner

rather it must be „<b>Lift up your eyes and see</b>"

(as explained in note 27

„<b>Lift up</b> your eyes on high - it will be - and see who created these")

- with a higher and inner look: see the <b>root and source</b>²⁸

from where the virtues originate and come down -

And this means „set your eyes <b>on the family</b>"

- what in a broader sense&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;

means "family" not only the parents etc.,

but all who have an effect and influence on her

(spiritual)

essence - including her teachers and educators

(as one finds in several places in Chazal&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

that they are designated and called "parents" of the student and educatee),

and especially and particularly

(since that the term family is said of the entire nation&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;)

That which she is from the family of Israel,

daughter of Sarah Rivkah Rachel and Leah,

the <b>Matriarchs</b>,

from whom she has <b>by inheritance</b> her Jewish traits.

And then one will see,

that

(a)

even among those in whom one does not perceive any spiritual virtue - this is only externally,

but internally,

since she is from the family of Israel,

she is in the category of "a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised"

(although for now this is hidden)

(b)

furthermore,

that the truth of the virtues of "daughters of Jerusalem" does not consist in "adornment" - the virtues as they appear externally

- but specifically the virtues that are in a manner of "family": these are inherited virtues that are transmitted from generation to generation.

8.

On this the baraita adds,

that after one cautions the "cast your eyes &lt;b&gt;upon the family &lt;/b&gt;..

a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised" - that one looks and one perceives the essential virtue

("family")

of every daughter of Israel,

by virtue of which she is "a woman who fears the Lord" - &lt;b&gt;then &lt;/b&gt;can be included in this "she shall be praised"

(not only her "fear of the Lord",

but)

also her &lt;b&gt;grace and beauty&lt;/b&gt;*&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;,

for then they too are true virtues.

And therefore one finds in the baraisa that each type of the daughters of Jerusalem then expressed its particular quality

(hidden and visible)

"Beautiful ones" - the daughters of Jerusalem whose are seen &lt;b&gt;openly &lt;/b&gt;their

(spiritual)

qualities and the beauty of their soul traits

(and as above section 6,

that physical beauty derives from spiritual beauty),

and therefore they say "Set your eyes on beauty" - those whose quality is in a manner of &lt;b&gt;open&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;.

"Yichusdike" [of distinguished lineage] - such ones that in them themselves one does not see so openly their virtues and good qualities,

but since they stem from families of distinguished lineage,

from baalei Torah and good character traits &lt;b&gt;dor dor&lt;/b&gt; [generation after generation],

one can be certain that they also educated their daughters to go and conduct themselves in the way of their family,

and in the same path they will also educate their children - and therefore they say "give your eyes &lt;b&gt;to the family&lt;/b&gt;",

meaning "family" in the narrow sense,

the particular family.

"Mekho'ores" [ugly ones] - such a type of Bnos Yerushalayim [daughters of Jerusalem],

in which one does not see spiritual virtues - also not in the conduct of their parents,

and they also did not have anyone else who would educate them properly - and thus they are "mekho'ores" [ugly] spiritually and consequently also physically.

But these are the daughters of Jerusalem,

that the knowledge itself that they are ugly evokes in them a movement of bitterness and lowliness and self-nullification³³,

and not looking at what they did not have from whom to receive lofty virtues - are <b>they themselves</b> upon themselves accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven - in the manner of acceptance of the yoke; until this itself evokes in them the lofty feeling that they express in the words "take your purchase for the sake of heaven",

that they want such grooms who are entirely for the sake of heaven,

not thinking about virtues etc.³⁴.

And through this it then comes out openly that also they have the virtue of "family" - for which also the ugly ones say

(together with all the daughters of Jerusalem,

as in the mishnah)

"set your eyes on family" - for this brokenness that a Jewish daughter has from that she is among the ugly ones,

without any spiritual virtue,

comes from that she is from the family of Israel,

a daughter of Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah,

and therefore she feels that it is "bitter³⁵

has forsaken you the Lord your God".

9.

The above difference between the Mishnah and the Baraita

(that in the Mishnah it speaks about the general quality of all the daughters of Jerusalem and the Baraita speaks about the specific qualities of each type)

is also expressed in the difference in content and continuation of the topics of the Mishnah and Baraita.

In that dance was expressed the unity and peace that was among the daughters of Jerusalem

(for which they went out "in borrowed white garments so as not to embarrass the one who does not have"³⁶)

- and with this is understood the continuation of the Mishnah "and so it says³⁷

Go forth and see, O daughters of Zion, King Solomon" - "the King <b>to whom peace </b>belongs"³⁸

: This is the explanation.

How <b>can </b>there be unity and peace among all the daughters of Jerusalem - through "Go forth and see etc. King Solomon",

when this is connected with "the King to whom peace belongs",

who makes peace among all the daughters of Jerusalem.

And the unity is in two ways&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;

(a)

From the perspective of the inner point within them, it sounds as if they are from the outset one reality,

the reality of "daughters of Jerusalem,"

without any differences;

(b)

Even from the perspective of their particular virtues - that in their opinions etc. they are equal*&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;,

in this each one is different from another - they are in unity and in peace.

And this is the difference between the Mishnah and the Baraita: In the Mishnah it speaks about the collective of the daughters of Jerusalem

(of Jews),

as they are one reality; and in the Baraita,

where their details are heard,

it is revealed that the peace and unity was not because the particular virtues became &lt;b&gt;nullified&lt;/b&gt;

(i.e.

they were not then heard),

they were not then heard),

but on the contrary: Not looking at the revealed differences between the various virtues of the daughters of Jerusalem,

which were expressed by them &lt;b&gt;explicitly&lt;/b&gt;,

they all went together in one dance,

in peace and unity.

And with this is explained what the Gemara brings in continuation to the Baraisa the statement "The Holy One, blessed be He, will in the future make a dance for the righteous etc. and each and every one will point with his finger etc." - what this means that each righteous person will "point" to the Holy One, blessed be He, with <b>his</b> finger,

according to <b>his</b> level and comprehension⁴⁰

- and nevertheless they will <b>then</b> all be united in one dance.

Yud.

In particular,

is in this second manner of peace and unity

(- also from the aspect of <b>the particulars</b>)

there are two manners - and in our matter

(in the peace among the righteous)

a)

Although every tzaddik is <b>different</b> from the other in his avodah and his madregah — but since <b>Hashem</b> “sits among them,”

that on the highest level all these distinctions of levels are not a contradiction one to the other,

He, blessed be He, “makes peace in His high places” between them,

that all tzaddikim,

together with their differences,

should stand in unity all of them together

(in one circle).

b)

There is influence and interinclusion of one with the other,

each one <b>influences</b> from his avodah and madregah to the other,

until there is a complete interinclusion and unity among all the distinctions of levels of tzaddikim.

And this is the novelty of Rashi: "Each one points with his finger &lt;b&gt;and says &lt;/b&gt;this is G-d etc."

d.

e.

Every tzaddik will also "say" — influence — to all the &lt;b&gt;other tzaddikim&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;41&lt;/sup&gt;

in the circle,

from &lt;b&gt;his &lt;/b&gt;service and level.

However, according to the view of the Tosafos, in the circle there was only "the Holy One, blessed be He, points with His finger",

but the saying

(and he will say on that day)

is &lt;b&gt;not &lt;/b&gt;to the other tzaddikim in the circle,

as an influence

(rather it is only a saying of praise and the like)

— because according to their approach, the peace and unity &lt;b&gt;in the circle &lt;/b&gt;is not in a manner of &lt;b&gt;inter-inclusion &lt;/b&gt;of the aspects and levels,

as will be explained below.

11.

The concept of "circle-dance",

in a circle,

alludes to the aspect of without limit "that has no end"

(as explained in Rabbeinu Bachya&lt;sup&gt;42&lt;/sup&gt;)

- and "in the future the Holy One, blessed be He, will make a circle-dance for the righteous" means,

that their delight and joy etc. will be beyond measure and limitation.

4.

5.

It will indeed be "each and every one points &lt;b&gt;with his finger&lt;/b&gt;" - each according to &lt;b&gt;his &lt;/b&gt;level and particular aspect as above,

only that this will be in a manner that the essential point will shine

(the "crown")

of his level which is beyond measure and limitation.

And therefore Tosafot learn that here there was no inter-inclusion of the levels - because "inter-inclusion" applies only in "extension",

which gives a place for a second level apart from Him.

But in the essential point of one level there is no place for a second level&lt;sup&gt;43&lt;/sup&gt;

- and consequently one must say,

that the peace and unity &lt;b&gt;that is in the circle-dance &lt;/b&gt;is only in the first manner mentioned above&lt;sup&gt;44&lt;/sup&gt;

(section 10).

And this is also consistent with the statement of our Sages

that in the future, "each one is <b>scorched</b> by the canopy of his fellow" - "canopy" is the aspect of chupah

(some vocalize with segol)

encompassing,

the "crown" of the tzaddik and his level; and in "canopy" and crown there is no interinclusion - on the contrary,

the second one's "canopy" is - "<b>scorched</b>

by the canopy of his fellow".

And it can be said,

that Rashi teaches,

that this will be only at the beginning of the future time; afterwards, however, the true unity from the aspect of the Essence will be revealed,

that the Essence bears all <b>opposites as one</b>.

And from the aspect of <b>that</b> revelation,

there will be the <b>interinclusion</b> of all the levels of the tzaddikim

(also the aspect of the crown within them),

in true peace and unity.

(From the sicha of the 15th of Av, 5735)