English translation — ראה א

1.

In the first verse of the portion "See, I am giving etc." Targum Onkelos translates the words "blessing and curse" — "birkhen u'lutin": and so he also translates the word "curse" in the subsequent verses.

In Targum Yonatan, however, he translates the word "and curse" — in the two verses

("blessing and curse,

and the curse if you do not listen")

"and its opposite"

(and likewise in Targum Yerushalmi in the second verse "and their opposites")¹.

One must understand,

what is the reason for the difference between the two translations in the interpretation of the word "curse"?

Furthermore, it is not understandable,

that in the subsequent verse "and the curse on Mount Ebal",

Targum Yonathan itself changes and interprets the word "the curse"

(not as before: and the opposite,

but)

- "and curses"²

(like Targum Onkelos).

2.

Further, it is perplexing in Targum Yonatan: a)

"Curse" is a concept and matter in itself,

"exchange" however means a <b>change</b> of a

(previous)

matter or state.

b)

"Exchange" - applies to two

matters that are <b>different</b> one from the other,

therefore one exchanges them,

they must however have a similarity between them,

therefore it is <b>applicable</b> to exchange them - but not to two things which are completely opposite one from the other,

like blessing and curse.

that this is regarding letters that have between them a commonality in a certain detail; and in the manner of what the Zohar&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;

the holy says that "V'ed is one &lt;b&gt;in substitutions of &lt;/b&gt;letters",

because of the fact that the letters "V'ed" have a connection to the letters "Echad"&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt;

: the Vav of "V'ed" replaces the Alef of "Echad",

because they both are from the letters "Ahoy"

(letters of continuation&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;

letters of rest&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;,

letters of breath&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;)&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;,

and so also the Chet of "Echad" changes to the Ayin of "V'ed",

because they are from the category of letters "Acha" which come from the throat&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;.

And the Dalet &lt;b&gt;Rabati&lt;/b&gt;

of "Echad" also the Dalet Beinoni of "V'ed" - both are however a Dalet].

How is it possible to interpret the word "קללה" as "&lt;b&gt;חילופא&lt;/b&gt;" and -of "ברכה"?

ג.

The explanation in this¹⁰

The difference

(<b>in general</b>)

between Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonatan

(and Yerushalmi)

consists in this,

that Targum Onkelos <b>translates</b> the words according to the plain meaning of Scripture,

and in a few places¹¹

according to its subject matter but the <b>plain meaning</b> of the subject,

but Targum Yonatan

(and Yerushalmi)

is in many places translated not only according to the plain meaning,

but he brings an explanation¹²,

brings midrashim of Chazal,

laws,

etc.,

and.¹³

And therefore Onkelos

(who explains according to the plain meaning of the verses)

translates the word "and a curse" — "and cursing."

According to the midrashim of Chazal, however, this is not simple: since the verse says the language "<b>I give</b> before you today" that it comes from the Above,

then how can one translate here that the <b>Above*</b>¹³

gives

- And whoever gives with a generous eye gives<b>**</b>¹³

- <b>Gives </b>a thing that is the opposite of good and blessing

("Lotins")

- It is understood that "no evil descends from above"¹⁴

and "from the mouth of the Most High does not come forth evil"¹⁵?

And for this reason Targum Yonatan <b>explains </b>that curse here means "exchange"¹⁶

- the opposite of blessing.

D.

H.

That which becomes a matter of "curse" is not from the side of the "<b>I give</b>" but from the side of the recipient,

through that which the recipient is not fitting, this blessing

(before it arrives to the recipient)

is "transformed" through the <b>deed </b>of the recipient from blessing to curse¹⁷

- <b>Similarly </b>to how the deed of the recipient of "you shall listen to the commandments of the L-rd your G-d" brings the "I give blessing".

In the later verse however,

where it says "<b>and you shall place</b> etc. the curse on Mount Eival" and there it does not speak about "<b>I am giving</b> before you"¹⁸,

is also Targum Yonatan according to its simple meaning "<b>and curses</b>".

4.

But it is still not smooth: how can one say that the "exchange - curse" is a thing that does not come from Above,

rather that is through the

Recipient,

At the time of the continuation of the verse "I am giving before you today a blessing and a curse" it is still understood,

That the words "I am giving" refer also to the word "and a curse"?

And especially since it says with a vav ha-mosif.

The explanation of this is:

The general concept of the translation of the Torah - from the Holy Language into Aramaic

(and the like)

- because of &lt;b&gt;Jews&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/b&gt;

came because of the exile and subjugation of Jews,

that because of the situation the necessity was created to translate the Torah&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;

into the various languages of the seventy nations.

But in this itself there are two ways how the sufferings of the exile are seen and interpreted:

According to Targum Onkelos,

The translation of <b>Bavel</b>²¹

- the place of exile where concealment and hiding are in full force²²

- the sufferings are taken as they appear simply: a matter of "lutin

(- curse)

According to Targum Yonatan and Yerushalmi,

that they

are translations from Eretz Yisrael²³

-where there is not such a concealment and hiding from the side of the exile - one sees more in a revealed way the inner aspect of the thing

(corresponds also to the aforementioned,

that their manner of translation is according to the midrashim of Chazal,

which reveal the inner aspect of the Written Torah),

and therefore they express,

that the sufferings of the exile are truly "a substitution",

in the manner of the aforementioned a substitution of two things that are of one type - because only the manner of the drawing down of the blessing is changed but the intention and purpose

(and inner aspect)

is good and blessing.

And in the manner of what is stated²⁴

: And He afflicted you and starved you etc. for just as a man chastens his son, Hashem your G-d chastens you - so that it should be - and you shall keep the commandments of Hashem your G-d etc. Who brings you to a good land etc.²⁵.

In order that the Jews²⁶

should become refined and receive the revelations²⁷

hidden of the redemption²⁸.

And this one says in the language of translation

(not in the Holy Tongue),

which in simple meaning is the purpose of every translation that also the simple people,

who do not understand any

the holy tongue,

should be able to understand matters of Torah²⁰

the inner reason of "curse" and exile one says not only to Torah scholars etc.,

upon whom the exile did not have an effect so much,

but also &lt;b&gt;and mainly &lt;/b&gt;to the simple people,

upon whom the concealment and permission had an effect so strongly that they must come to the translation into seventy languages — also to them one reveals the inner content of "curse" and the pains of exile.

All this is at the beginning of the portion and the summary of its content,

; d.

d.

h.

When one says the general principles of the matter of the service, its content and its purpose,

then one says the purpose and the inner intention of "curse"; when one is, however, at the actual service — "And it will be, when the Lord your God brings you to the land which you are coming there to inherit" — then in order to affect and penetrate the animal soul and evil inclination,

it is required that one translate it simply: "Meltetia",

for only in this manner can one dominate the evil inclination,

as our Rabbis of blessed memory said²⁹

"Always should a person provoke ..

against the evil inclination".

h.

ה.

The reason that the Torah says,

that the curse that "I place before you" is a matter of "exchange",

is not only with the intention to lighten the service of Jews,

but this also pertains to the essence of the matter.

The explanation of this - in the inner aspect of the matters - and with the preface that according to the simple meaning of Scripture

(and so he also interprets in Midrash Rabbah³⁰)

here "I place" refers to

Hashem: seemingly the question arises: since "Anochi

(I give)

" is higher than Names and even than letter and point and all of the Zohar³¹

- simple unity,

so how is it possible to say that from <b>simple unity</b> should come also the <b>second</b> manner of drawing down of

("curse" -)

"opposite"?

So the matter in this is in the manner explained elsewhere³²,

that true simplicity expresses itself specifically in division: at the time the simple essence is revealed in multiple lines,

especially when they are opposites,

this itself is the proof that He is not <b>depicted and defined</b> in any depiction or description G-d forbid,

but He is simple in the utmost simplicity,

that therefore for Him also the many and opposite lines are no hindrance.

And since the simple unity of "Anochi" is revealed,

as it were,

specifically through the opposite line "Chilufa",

it turns out that the extension of Divinity downward through <b>the </b>line is,

as it were,

higher and deeper than the extension in a manner of "blessing" and revealed good.

And this corresponds to what the Alter Rebbe explains³³

that the innerness of the matter of sufferings is the aspect of good of the hidden world,

of Yud-Hei of the Name Havayah,

which is higher than revealed good

- These are concealed kindnesses,

which cannot come down in a manner of revealed kindness;

And this is also the explanation

(inner)

of that which it states³⁴

"He whom Hashem loves He rebukes" — that the concept of "He whom Hashem loves",

the great love and special closeness from the Above,

is drawn down in a manner of "He rebukes" — concealed kindnesses,

for revealed kindness is the externality of kindness²⁸.

And based on this is further explained the reason that the sufferings and the like,

which appear as a "curse",

are called "exchange",

because "in truth they are only blessings" and they are even higher than blessings in a revealed manner³⁵

- it is only "exchange": a substitution in the <b>modes </b>of influence,

which is because in their root they are higher than revealed <b>kindnesses</b>³⁶.

But in order that also these blessings and hidden kindnesses should come to revelation,

that one should see with fleshly eyes that these are kindnesses,

is this through that Jews know and recognize that the sufferings are hidden kindnesses that come from the Most High and this causes them to be "<b>happy </b>with sufferings",

there becomes through this revealed the inwardness and root

from this also now that Hashem will give the good ..

revealed³⁷.

And.

Based on the above, it is very understandable the connection between the parshah and its haftarah,

as well as with the haftarot of the Seven of Consolation in general³⁸

In the haftaros it speaks about the consolation that Hashem Himself will comfort the Jews and in a manner of "Anochi Anochi Hu Menachemchem"³⁹,

twice "Anochi" - a higher revelation than at the giving of the Torah,

where it says once "Anochi"⁴⁰

; and thus in the haftaros it speaks about the great influence of "&lt;b&gt;Verav &lt;/b&gt;tov leveis Yisrael"⁴¹

which one does not find in the rest of the haftaros.

That the reason for this is: in the time of the Shivah d'Nechemta are revealed the &lt;b&gt;hidden&lt;/b&gt; kindnesses⁴²,

which were concealed in the three afflictions,

in the time of the Three Weeks; because,

as above,

due to their higher root their good and kindness was not seen openly⁴³,

and on the contrary,

externally it appeared as distress and calamities -

And the activity of the Seven of Consolation is,

that also this higher good comes to revelation⁴⁴.

And also the order and <b>manner </b>of the revelation of the kindnesses is hinted at in the haftorahs,

especially in the haftorah of our parshah⁴⁵

"Ani so'arah lo nuchamah etc."

The Abudraham⁴⁶

brings from the Midrash a reason for the haftarot of the "Seven of Consolation" and their order: In the first haftarah, the Almighty says to the prophets "Comfort, comfort My people,"

that <b>they</b> should comfort the Jews.

To this comes the response of the Congregation of Israel

(in the second haftarah)

"And Zion said, 'The L<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">ord</span> has forsaken me'"

(that such consolation,

through the prophets is for them as if "The L<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">ord</span> has forsaken me")

— they want that the consolation should come

(not through prophets,

but)

from the Almighty Himself.

And when the prophets convey the Almighty

(in the third haftarah)

that "Afflicted one, storm-tossed, not comforted,"

upon this the Almighty says

(in the fourth haftarah)

"<b>I, I</b> am He who comforts you,"

that He accepts their claim and He Himself comforts them.

And in continuation of this come

(the fifth and sixth haftarot)

"Sing, O barren one, you who did not bear" and "Arise, shine, for your light has come,"

which are consolations that the Almighty Himself says to the Jews.

And upon this the Congregation of Israel responds

(in the seventh haftarah)

"I will greatly rejoice in the L<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">ord</span>,"

that now — after this

when the Almighty Himself comforts them "Sing, O barren one" and "Arise, shine" — is "I will greatly rejoice in the L<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">ord</span>, my soul shall exult in my God etc." — the Almighty Himself.

It is seemingly not understood: The Almighty is indeed omniscient and knows the future,

He indeed knew from the outset that the consolation through the prophets would not be accepted by Jews and He Himself would comfort them — now why did He wait with &lt;b&gt;His &lt;/b&gt;consolation, as it were, until the Jews would come with the claim that "The Lord has forsaken me, and the Lord has forgotten me"?

But according to the above it is understood: Since it is the time that comes after the greatest descent of Tisha B'Av,

therefore it could be that Jews would be satisfied with the consolation through the prophets,

and especially since this is a double consolation&lt;sup&gt;47&lt;/sup&gt;

— but then it means that Jews accept the calamities as a punishment and curse in itself, may G-d forbid,

(for which the consolation of the prophets is sufficient)

and not that in the calamity itself is hidden a sublime kindness,

which comes from the Almighty Himself;

Since however that after the consolation of the prophets the Jews argue "The Lord has forsaken me and my Lord has forgotten me",

that not only is this for them insufficient,

but moreover: "The Lord has forsaken me and my Lord has forgotten me" - this is a proof that Jews know and feel that the calamities and descent are only "the opposite",

that in truth they are concealed kindnesses,

and therefore they argue regarding the consolation by means of

the prophets: not this is the revelation of the inwardness and intention of exile; from this the magnitude of the calamities it is proven that these are most hidden kindnesses,

such kindnesses and consolations that can come only from the Most High Himself;

And the recognition and knowledge itself brings out the revelation⁴⁸,

The Almighty is from-

lives with their claim,

that the consolation through the prophets is not sufficient - the matter of a small consolation is not a consolation - and He, blessed be He, Himself says: I, I am He who comforts you,

until it will be in completeness in the true and complete redemption, and then one will see openly and with physical eyes the kindnesses of the Most High in the revealed and manifest good.

(From the sicha of Shabbos Parshas Re'eh 5726)