English translation — וילך ד

A.

Regarding the mitzvah of Hakhel, it is stated in the Mishnah

(and in the Gemara)¹

several details,

Rashi, however, in our parshah says only some details about this matter,

from which one can know which details are necessary for Hakhel according to the <b>simple meaning</b> of the verse.

Rashi focuses on the words²

"You shall read this Torah" and explains: "The king would read from the beginning of 'These are the words' as is stated in tractate Sotah on a wooden platform that they would make in the Temple courtyard."

The details that Rashi says stand in the Mishnah in tractate Sotah,

but in the Mishnah there stand yet several details that Rashi does <b>not</b> bring down

And the reason is understood simply,

because the subject of Rashi in his commentary on the Torah is to explain the plain meaning of Scripture,

not to bring down details of laws of commandments.

So it is not understood why Rashi brings down specifically <b>these</b> details of laws,

apparently a)

From where is the proof for them in the plain meaning of Scripture,

b)

They are also not relevant to <b>understanding</b> the plain meaning of the verse.

The first part of Rashi's commentary "The king would read from the beginning of these words" - is understandable: This is the explanation of the words that were said "to Joshua" and to the elders of Israel: You shall read this Torah.

a)

"תקרא" singular - the one to whom one says immediately after "הקהל" singular - a singular person who can gather together "את העם" is the king - "המלך הי' קורא",

and b)

"&lt;b&gt;את התורה הזאת&lt;/b&gt;" means "&lt;b&gt;את התורה הזאת &lt;/b&gt;לאמר ה' אלקינו גו'" - "from the beginning of אלה הדברים";

But the continuation of Rashi "על בימה של עץ שהיו עושין בעזרה" - &lt;b&gt;the &lt;/b&gt;laws seemingly have no connection to the explanation of the verse.

2.

At first glance, one could say,

that in our case Rashi wants to inform how the mitzvah of Hakhel took place,

since this was only during the time of the Temple,

and a five-year-old does not know how this was,

and furthermore, even during the time of the Temple itself,

this was not a regular thing,

but once in seven years,

therefore Rashi says "as is explained in tractate Sotah" — that the details of the mitzvah of Hakhel

(which Rashi does not say)

are there

(and if one wants, one can learn them)

in tractate Sotah.

But this explanation is not sustained,

because: a)

The fulfillment of the mitzvah of Hakhel is much simpler than many other mitzvot that were performed in the Temple,

beginning with the offering of the sacrifices and the like.

b)

According to this, Rashi should have stopped at the words "as it is stated in tractate Sotah" — why does he bring from there the details "on a wooden platform that they would make in the Temple Courtyard"?

c)

Rashi should have said "as it is stated in tractate Sotah" at the beginning of his commentary or

At the end of his commentary - not to insert it in the middle.

That from the plain meaning of Rashi's language it is implied,

that the reference to tractate Sotah refers only to what was said before "the king would read from the beginning of 'These are the words'"

(but not to the subsequent details,

although they also appear in tractate Sotah).

3.

Also at the beginning of his commentary one must understand: that which "the king would read" can be understood as Rashi takes it out from the plain meaning of the verse,

as above; or as the commentators say³

In the previous verse it says "And Moses commanded &lt;b&gt;them&lt;/b&gt;" - plural language,

and following this it says "&lt;b&gt;You shall read &lt;/b&gt;

(this Torah)

" - singular language&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt;.

One must say,

that here Moses turned to one who was special,

and since in the previous verses it is mentioned&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;

"And Moses called &lt;b&gt;to Joshua&lt;/b&gt;",

it is likely that he said this to Joshua,

who was,

as Rashi says two verses before this "speaks to the generation"&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;,

a king.

Also the continuation "from the beginning of these words" the source is understood,

as above.

And to add that Rashi also guarantees: it says two verses earlier&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;

the same language "And Moses wrote this Torah",

and there it means

(when he had finished)

the entire Torah&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;,

ba-

Rashi warrants that &lt;b&gt;here &lt;/b&gt;means "this Torah"

(not the entire Torah,

but)

only from Mishneh Torah.

The question is however:

a)

From where does Rashi in peshuto shel mikra actually take that it means only "from the beginning of these words"?

meaning that from peshuto shel mikra one indeed does not know this,

but rather so it stands in tractate Sotah,

because then the question remains - why should one &lt;b&gt;according to the plain sense &lt;/b&gt;not learn that this is the same as two verses earlier,

the entire Torah]&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;?

b)

Since the language of the verse is "this Torah", Rashi should have said "the king would read the repetition of the &lt;b&gt;Torah&lt;/b&gt;"&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;,

or the book &lt;b&gt;this &lt;/b&gt;and the like,

corresponding to the language of the verse "this Torah",

not - from where he &lt;b&gt;begins&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;.

One cannot say that Rashi writes "from the beginning of these words" because this is

(consistent with the halacha and the)

language of the Mishnah,

for the intent of Rashi is

(not to inform specific laws,

as above),

but to interpret the words and the simple meaning in the verse.

D.

The explanation of all this will be understood by prefacing the precise language of Rashi

"The king <b>was</b> reading, etc."

Seemingly: Since Rashi does not come to state laws but only to explain the plain meaning of the verse,

he should have said the translation "תקרא,

the king".

The wording "the king <b>was</b> reading" indicates that also with this he comes

(not only to translate the verse but)

to relate the law

(and in practice)

how the commandment of Hakhel took place.

So the explanation in this is: the plain meaning of Scripture in the portion of Vayelech,

that Moshe relates that "I am one hundred and twenty years old today"¹²,

and he tells them how the conduct will be immediately after his death¹³,

when they will cross the Jordan,

and afterwards is "And Moshe called Yehoshua and said to him etc. 'Be strong and courageous, for you shall bring this people etc. and you shall apportion it to them etc.'" and continuing from this "And Moshe wrote this Torah and gave it to the priests etc." and then comes the statement "And Moshe commanded them saying: At the end of seven years etc. when all Israel comes etc. Hakhel" -

is simply the command a continuation of the previous verses¹⁴

- an announcement to "this people" to the "kohanim, sons of Levi" that He gave them the Torah,

and

"you shall read this Torah" in the singular,

is an instruction to <b>Joshua</b>,

that at the end of seven years after entering the land of Israel

(after the death of Moses)¹⁵,

there should be "Hakhel" and arouse Jews "and they shall see the Lord your God and guard to do all the words of this Torah" through Joshua's reading before them "this Torah" the entire Torah¹⁶,

which Moses gave to the kohanim, sons of Levi.

To refute the explanation&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;,

Rashi says "the king would read from the beginning of these words",

with which he makes clear,

that: a)

this was so when there is a king - a &lt;b&gt;commandment for generations&lt;/b&gt;,

not only at the end of seven years from their entry into the land&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;.

b)

the announcement was to

Joshua not as the one who brings Israel into the land&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;,

but as &lt;b&gt;king&lt;/b&gt;.

c)

they read "from the beginning of these words" - not the entire Torah

(which Moses gave to the priests, the sons of Levi).

H.

The necessity to say that one did not read the entire Torah is understood <b>simply</b>²⁰

Since the intention was "so that they hear and so that they learn and fear the Lord your God and be careful to do [all the words of this Torah] etc."²¹,

so here it is relevant to the portions that arouse and urge that it should be "and fear the Lord your God and be careful to do etc."

Therefore Rashi says "from the beginning of these words" - not "Mishneh Torah" and the like - because in the words "these words" it is emphasized that these are words of rebuke²²

which Moses spoke to admonish the Jews²³

regarding the fulfillment and observance of the commandments close to his death.

And likewise Moses commanded that the king

(in the likeness of Moses)

at the end of every seven years in the coming generations should read these words of rebuke before the Jews²⁴.

One can however ask: also several portions and verses of "these words" are not relevant

(directly at least)

to "and they shall see the L-rd your G-d and keep to do all the words of this Torah"?

Therefore Rashi emphasizes "from the beginning of these words as it is said in tractate Sotah" — he began from these words,

and afterwards read as stated in tractate Sotah,

where it is enumerated which portions in these words the king read and which he skipped²⁵.

6.

But the question arises: since the intention is in order that they should hear etc., it is not understood: Jews,

entering the land,

were more than six hundred thousand men of military age,

in addition to those younger than twenty etc. and the women,

and all the more so — in the land of Israel years afterward,

how is it possible that all the Jews could hear the words of the king?

And that which we find several times in the Torah that Moshe spoke to all of Israel - a)

But it does not say that there were also women and children present²⁶,

b)

It does not say that all had

to hear all the words from the mouth of Moshe Rabbeinu and at once²⁷.

Not so here a)

Where he says "Assemble the people, the men, the women, and the children" b)

And the commandment is "Read this Torah ... <b>in their ears</b> ..." - how is it possible that <b>all</b> should be able to hear it²⁸?

Therefore Rashi must add that he read it "<b>upon a platform</b>" - a high place,

so that all²⁹

should

(see them³⁰

and)

and be able to hear³¹.

saying that this was "on the bimah",

Rashi must immediately ensure that this was "of wood that they would make in the azarah" - thereby removing the questions that arise from the fact that we had already <b>earlier </b>learned in Chumash:

a)

Since it says in the verse that "you shall read this Torah" should be "when all of Israel comes to see the <b>face of</b>,

<b>the Lord your God</b>"³²,

it implies that this was there where there was <b>the face of the Lord your God</b>,

<b>inside </b>- <b>inside</b>,

a miracle the greatest! And how can one change and build a bimah in the Beis HaMikdash.

Rashi says <b>in the azarah</b>,

as we find several times³³

"And the glory of the Lord appeared" at the <b>entrance </b>of the Tent of Meeting.

b)

One learned about the Mishkan,

that the matters of the Mishkan were used every day³⁴

(and understandably that it is also so - at the Holy Temple).

How does it come that there should stand a bimah in the Temple for the sake of using it once in seven years?

Also it would presumably have interfered with the regular service in the Holy Temple during all the time³⁵.

Therefore Rashi adds "<b>of wood that they would make</b>" - this was a temporary thing,

of wood³⁶,

that <b>they would make</b> - it

was made³⁷

then at that time

(every seven years)³⁸.

z.

wondrous topics³⁹

on the topic of the halacha that one can derive from this Rashi:

In that the king reads the portions of Mishneh Torah, there are two opinions&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;

whether this is a law concerning the king,

d.

e.

This is one of the obligations of &lt;b&gt;the king &lt;/b&gt;that at the time of Hakhel he must read the portions of the Torah before all the people; or this is a law concerning the commandment of Hakhel,

that the portions must then be read by the king.

Similarly, one can ponder regarding the bimah that they made then,

whether this is because of the king,

from the aspect of his honor

(and the like)

one must make for him a bimah so that he should read from it; or this is from the aspect of the laws and commandments of Hakhel.

And simply, this depends

(the first question)

from where one derives that the king must read from the Torah⁴¹

: Rashi in his commentary on the Mishnah⁴²

says: "And that reading is by the hand of the king, as it is taught in the Sifri in the portion of <b>the king</b> 'the copy of this Torah,' one does not read on the day of Hakhel except in Mishneh Torah,"

i.

e.

one derives this from a verse in the portion of the king⁴³,

simply,

because this is one of the laws and obligations of the king⁴⁴.

If, however, one derives this from the verse in our portion,

"<b>You shall read</b> this Torah,"

as above,

it is understood⁴⁵

that this is one of

The laws in the mitzvah of Hakhel⁴⁶.

And according to the above it comes out seemingly,

that Rashi in his commentary on the Torah

(according to the simple meaning of the plain text)

teaches that these matters are obligations and details of laws in the mitzvah of Hakhel,

that we learn from the verse in the portion of Hakhel "You shall read this Torah" - both that "the king would read" and also the making of the platform,

that this is so that all Jews should be able to hear the portions of the Torah,

as above⁴⁷.

But not so in his commentary on the Talmud,

he explains the plain meaning of the Mishnah,

and the Mishnah calls it "<b>the portion of the king</b>"⁴⁸

and throughout the entire continuation of the Mishnah it is emphasized

(several times)

the honor of the king, as he says "And he sits upon it; the synagogue attendant takes the Torah scroll and gives it to the head of the synagogue, and the head of the synagogue ...

to the deputy, etc., to the High Priest, and the High Priest gives it to the king

(that "all of it is for the honor of the king"⁴⁹

( <b>he reads while seated</b>⁵⁰

etc.'"

(And likewise regarding the platform, the wording stands "they make <b>for him</b>⁵¹

a platform of wood"),

Therefore Rashi teaches in Shas "as it is taught in the Sifri in the portion of HaMelech"⁵²

- that this is a law in the commandment of a king.

8.

The meaning of the Torah in Rashi's commentary:

Already spoken many times,

that the Torah is eternal⁵³

and although the mitzvah of Hakhel physically in the Beis HaMikdash is now not applicable,

it is however present here in spiritual service⁵⁴

in the personal Mishkan and Mikdash which is within each and every one of Israel⁵⁵.

The content of the matter of Hakhel for every Jew is the gathering and assembly of all his soul powers and his thought, speech and action⁵⁶,

to bring in and place them all into his inner Beis HaMikdash -

And this must be — "the king would read" — the reading and drawing down to all the powers of the soul is through "the king,"

which in the powers of the soul is the bittul and acceptance of the yoke of the kingdom of heaven that exists in every Jew.

(In the manner that the Tzemach Tzedek⁵⁷

explains⁵⁸

regarding a king in its simple sense — that the king draws down the matter of acceptance of the yoke and fear of God⁵⁹

to all Jews)⁶⁰.

And about this they say that "the king was reading" is relevant to the law and commandment of Hakhel: the "so that they will hear and so that they will learn &lt;b&gt;and fear the L-rd&lt;/b&gt;" is specifically then when it comes from the side of acceptance of the yoke.

But when it comes from the side of his delight and pleasure,

there can become mixed into this a feeling and movement from his own existence,

then there is lacking in the completeness of the intention of "&lt;b&gt;and fear &lt;/b&gt;the L-rd your G-d".

9.

To this comes the continuation,

that the acceptance of the yoke and fear must be in a manner of "a platform".

If this is from the side of the acceptance of the yoke and fear alone, it can effect upon him a movement of nullification like a doorpost that is trodden upon, and he will not be able to do the service properly&lt;sup&gt;61&lt;/sup&gt;.

Therefore this must be in a manner of "a platform",

a movement of strength,

he will overcome

like a lion&lt;sup&gt;62&lt;/sup&gt;,

also from this aspect, by him can be the elevation and exaltation over the evil inclination,

the "&lt;b&gt;one should provoke &lt;/b&gt;the good inclination against the evil inclination"&lt;sup&gt;63&lt;/sup&gt;.

and the elevation and exaltation in this matter of the king's assembly effects that the proclamation of "the king would read",

should be "heard",

until it should have a fulfillment and effect in all the faculties of the soul and the intellectual powers and emotional attributes throughout the entire year.

Meanwhile one must however ensure,

that it must be a)

<b>of wood </b>b)

<b>that they would make </b>in the azarah:

The movement of "bimah",

lifting and exaltation,

should only be in a temporary manner of <b>wood</b>,

and use it only in matters of holiness "in the azarah"

(at the time that he needs to do the service of "Hakhel",

gathering of all the forces etc.).

But when he finds himself <b>not</b> in the azarah,

not in an elevated state and situation of holiness and service of G-d,

can from this come forth a movement of exaltation contrary to the intention⁶⁴.

And particularly standing in the days of <b>preparation</b> for the year of Hakhel,

one gives every Jew the powers to be able to carry out the matter of Hakhel in his private sanctuary,

and through this one merits to fulfill the commandment of Hakhel simply in the Third Beis HaMikdash, and one will hear the reading of the Torah from King Moshiach in the coming year of Hakhel upon us and upon all Israel for good.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Vayelech 5735)