English translation — בהר ב

1.

It has already been spoken many times,

that Rashi in his commentary on the Torah answers <b>all</b> questions that are raised in the plain meaning of Scripture

(and in the places where Rashi does not find an answer

(according to the plain approach)

— he says "I do not know" and the like¹).

Therefore, one must have an explanation:

In the beginning of our parshah the Torah says the laws of shemittah of lands,

and afterwards — the laws of yovel

(and continuing from this — "And when you sell etc. do not wrong etc."²).

And after the laws of shemittah and yovel etc. the Torah says³

: And you shall do My statutes etc. and the land shall give its fruit etc. And if you shall say what shall we eat etc. and I will command My blessing etc. and you shall sow etc.

One must understand: the question "And if you shall say what shall we eat etc."⁴

arises immediately when learning the laws of shemittah "and the land shall rest a sabbath to the Lord etc. your field you shall not sow etc. you shall not prune etc."⁵

; why does the Torah answer the question of "what shall we eat" only <b>after</b> the laws of yovel⁶

(and also — "And when you sell etc. do not wrong etc.")?

— if the matter were not in the manner of a question

("&lt;b&gt;And if you will say&lt;/b&gt; what shall we eat

etc.' and the answer — "And I will command etc.'),

one could answer that "And I will command etc." comes in continuation of the blessings that the Almighty says to Jews for &lt;b&gt;fulfilling&lt;/b&gt; the commandments of Shemittah and Yovel&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;

("And you shall do My statutes etc.")

— "And you shall dwell on the land securely, and the land shall give its fruit etc. and I will command My blessing etc. and it shall yield produce for three years";

Since however the Torah is there to &lt;b&gt;remove&lt;/b&gt; the &lt;b&gt;question&lt;/b&gt; "And if you will say, 'What will we eat?'",

it needed to be addressed immediately when the question arises

(right at the announcement of the law of shemittah&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;).

There are commentators&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;

who learn,

that the verses "And if you will say etc. and I will command My blessing etc. for the three years" refer

(also)

to &lt;b&gt;yovel&lt;/b&gt;

(the one after shemittah),

when one may not plow and sow etc. for &lt;b&gt;two&lt;/b&gt; consecutive years

(the year of shemittah and the year of yovel),

and about this the Torah says "and I will command My blessing etc. for the &lt;b&gt;three&lt;/b&gt; years" — and the

The above verses stand after the laws of Yovel.

But in <b>Rashi</b> one cannot learn it that way,

because <b>Rashi</b>¹⁰

teaches that the verses "And I will command My blessing etc. and you shall sow the eighth year etc." speak <b>not</b> about "Shmittah of the seventh year"

(which comes immediately adjacent before Yovel),

rather — "this verse was said <b>about all the other Shmittahs</b>"

(not before the year of Yovel).

And based on this it is puzzling¹¹

: why does Rashi not warn,

how does one wait with "this verse",

until <b>after</b> the laws of Jubilee etc.?

B.

Another question that Rashi should have warned about a priori:

From the language of the verse "&lt;b&gt;And if&lt;/b&gt; you say, 'What shall we eat?'" it implies that it is certain that they will ask thus

you say"

(like "And if the servant shall plainly say"&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;)],

And in the manner that Rashi explains the verse

(Regarding a false prophet)

"And if you say in your heart, 'How will we know etc.'" — "You are destined to say

when Chananiah etc. comes."

It is not smooth: why does the Torah use a language that means "you are destined to say",

as if thus should be the order of conduct¹⁷?

And superficially: this asking "And if you will say, 'What will we eat?'" shows

(superficially)¹⁸

that one does not rely completely,

G-d forbid,

on the Most High.

<b>And in the manner of</b> as one has already learned from Avraham that a sign of "And he believed in HaShem" is when "<b>not</b> did he ask of Him a sign"¹⁹.

"Further: right before the question "And if you will say etc." it stands in the verse

(as above)

"And the land shall give its fruit and you shall eat to satiety and you shall dwell securely upon it".

And Rashi explains: "And the land shall give etc. and you shall dwell securely upon it — &lt;b&gt;that you shall not worry&lt;/b&gt; about &lt;b&gt;famine&lt;/b&gt;; and you shall eat to satiety — even within the intestines there shall be blessing in it".

is most perplexing²⁰

: after the Torah says that the Almighty promises that there will not be <b>any</b> <b>worries</b> due to lack of grain and that there will be a supernatural blessing in the grain

("even within the intestines")

— how does <b>immediately thereafter</b> the <b>question</b> "And if you will say, 'What shall we eat?'" fit,

and especially with the wording "<b>And if</b>" — "<b>In the future</b> you will say"?

— and one does not find, seemingly, that Rashi answers the question in his commentary.

3.

And one could say that the reason why Rashi in our parshah does not give any answer to the questions mentioned in "And if you will say" — is because when a child of five years of age studying Scripture learns in Chumash about a question on a mitzvah with the language "And if you will say",

he recalls the first time he learned something similar — earlier at the end of Parshat Bo²¹

: "And it will be when your son asks you etc."; and remembering what Rashi explains there on "when your son asks you etc.",

the questions mentioned in our parshah become answered for him accordingly automatically:

The verse there says "And it will be when your son asks you tomorrow saying, 'What is this?'"

It follows

Rashi on "What is this" and explains: "This is a foolish child who does not know to deepen his question and closes and asks what is this,

And in another place he says²²

What are the testimonies and the statutes and the judgments etc. behold this is the question of a wise son.

The Torah spoke corresponding to four sons: the simple one²³

the wicked one and the one who does not know to ask and the one who asks in a wise manner."

It is not understood: what is the practical difference in <b>Parshat Bo</b> to know that "in <b>another place</b>" there is also a "question of a wise son"

(And consequently,

"The Torah spoke corresponding to <b>four</b> sons etc.")?

Even if one would say that Rashi wants to let know

(for whatever reason)

that there are "four sons" — it is not smooth,

why does he not say this &lt;b&gt;earlier&lt;/b&gt;:

In his commentary on the verse&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;

"And you shall perform this service" he says "He repeated and taught it because of a matter that was renewed in it,

in the first portion it is said&lt;sup&gt;25&lt;/sup&gt;

And it will be when they say ..

It speaks of a wicked son ..

And here 'And you shall tell your son'&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;

He <b>there</b> needed to protect that one should not think that "the Torah spoke" only regarding two sons,

but that later in the parshah comes

(also)

the question of the "foolish" son,

"And in another place ..

the question of the wise son",

so that "the Torah spoke regarding four sons"²⁷.

D.

And one can say the explanation in this:

In general, one is accustomed to interpret the words "the Torah spoke corresponding to four sons" in connection with the obligation of the telling of the Exodus from Egypt on Passover night — that the "questions" of the sons are regarding the commandments of Passover night; and "the Torah spoke corresponding to four sons" means that the Torah teaches that one should answer each of the sons according to his matter — but all in connection with Passover night.

It is indeed true that this is the intention of the words according to the way of <b>the Halachah</b>

(and as it stands in the Mechilta²⁸,

and so one says in the Haggadah of Passover)

But Rashi on the Torah is his matter to explain the plain meaning of the verse,

and in the plain meaning of the verses,

is the question of the "foolish child"

(not about the commandments of the night of Passover,

but)

regarding the commandment of the firstborn*²⁸,

which in the continuation to this stands his question.

who does not know to delve deeply

His question,

and not — "tam"

(as the language is in the Mechilta&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

and Haggadah of Pesach; and especially since Rashi himself continues

(according to the common version in Rashi&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;)

"The Torah spoke corresponding to four sons &lt;b&gt;tam&lt;/b&gt; etc.")

— because Pidyon HaBen is a mitzvah that does not have many details,

so,

that even a son who is not a wise one

(a &lt;b&gt;tam&lt;/b&gt;)

can also occupy himself with it,

and he will therefore not ask simply "mah zot"; and the one who asks "mah zot" is it only because he is a "tinok &lt;b&gt;tipesh&lt;/b&gt;".

But not so "the 'simple son' of the Haggadah,

whose question is about the commandments of Passover,

can already be of a higher type

(not a "fool"),

and on Passover night there is a multitude of types of commandments

(testimonies,

statutes and also judgments),

in which it is difficult to sort oneself out even for one who is not a "fool",

and the question "what is this" only shows that the questioner is a "simple son"&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;].

And likewise the question of the wise son in the plain sense of Scripture is not regarding Passover night,

rather he asks about commandments in general — "What are the testimonies and the statutes and the judgments which the Lord our God commanded you"

(and they answer him "We were slaves&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;

to Pharaoh etc. and the Lord brought us out etc. and commanded us etc. &lt;b&gt;all these statutes&lt;/b&gt; to fear etc.",

by which are meant &lt;b&gt;all&lt;/b&gt; the commandments of the Torah).

And based on this it is understood <b>simply</b> why Rashi does not bring the questions of the "foolish child" and "the question of the wise son" <b>earlier</b>

when he speaks about the question of the wicked one and the one who does not know how to ask — because these are entirely separate matters:

Earlier it discusses the question of the wicked son and about the "והגדת"

(to the one who does not know how to ask)

In connection with the mitzvos &lt;b&gt;on the night of Pesach&lt;/b&gt;; it has no connection with the question of the "fool" about the mitzvah of redeeming the firstborn,

And likewise not with the question of the wise son about "the testimonies and the statutes and the judgments"

(all mitzvos,

in general).

5.

Based on this, however, the previous question becomes even stronger: why does Rashi add

(continuing from "this is a foolish child ..

and asks 'what is this'")

"And in another place it says ..

the question of the wise son" — according to the above, the "question of the wise son" indeed has no connection with the question of the "fool"

(which is a question only about redeeming the firstborn)

And on the other hand: if Rashi connects them

(although their questions are not in the same subjects)

— why does Rashi not connect them earlier,

by the question of the wicked son and the one who does not know how to ask

(as above)?

The reasoning in this is:

When one learns that on the night of Pesach there is a <b>commandment</b> to answer the question of a wicked son,

and likewise — "And you shall tell your son"

(who does not know how to ask),

one could learn,

that this is a special law regarding <b>Pesach</b>: just as the Exodus from Egypt is a fundamental matter in the entire Torah

(as it is stated — in the simple meaning of the verse — in many verses),

one must be certain that all sons will participate in the commandments of the night of Pesach.

And especially after Pharaoh's claim "Go now, the men" — and not

"your little ones"³⁴.

And for this reason the Torah says,

that Jews should occupy themselves also with a wicked son and one who does not know how to ask,

because by these two types there is a concern,

that if one will not explain to them the commandments of the night of Passover,

they will not fulfill the commandments: the wicked son is indeed one who

(in the language of Rashi

"removed himself from the collective" — one must "bring him back" into "this service" of "the Passover sacrifice"

; and one who does not know how to ask is a son who does not even understand that there is something to ask,

even not "what is this" — one must draw him into the commandments.

And as Rashi

explains the matter of "And you shall tell your son" — "and the Scripture teaches you that you should open for him with words of aggadah that draw the heart".

But not so by the types of "simple"

(simple)

and wise one would have thought,

that it is not so important to answer their questions,

because regarding them there is no concern that lack of understanding will lead to not fulfilling the commandment — it is only a request for reason and explanation.

And therefore it is not stated in the Torah that

(and what)

one must answer them.

But when one comes to the verse "And it will be when your son asks you" regarding the redemption of the firstborn,

one sees that

(a)

also regarding other commandments the Torah obligates answering the questions of a "son",

and

(b)

the Torah states

(that and—what)

to answer also the questions of a "foolish child" —

The question arises: surely a wise son also asks questions about commandments,

and moreover, being wise he presumably has more questions — if one must answer the question of a "foolish child",

then all the more so the Torah should have provided to deal with the questions of a wise son!

Rashi says — indeed, yes: And in another place it says ..

Question of a wise son.

And this is the precise wording of Rashi in continuation of this — "&lt;b&gt;The Torah spoke&lt;/b&gt; corresponding to four sons": with this Rashi means — &lt;b&gt;according to the plain meaning&lt;/b&gt; of the language — that &lt;b&gt;the Torah in general&lt;/b&gt;

(not only in connection with the night of Passover)

speaks about all the "four sons",

d.

e.

One finds in the Torah

(the Written Torah)

an instruction that one should answer the questions of &lt;b&gt;all&lt;/b&gt; types of sons,

"the simple son&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;

the wicked son and the one who does not know how to ask and the one who asks in a wise manner".

6.

Based on the above — then "&lt;b&gt;the Torah spoke &lt;/b&gt;corresponding to four sons" — one understands,

that everywhere that one finds in the Torah a "question" about a commandment,

one must clarify regarding which type of "son" the Torah is speaking &lt;b&gt;here&lt;/b&gt;.

or even a question that comes from a doubt or weakness in faith — it can be a question of a wise son,

whose purpose of his question is in order to clarify,

understand the details of the matter

(in the manner of the question of the wise son — What are the testimonies, statutes, and laws)].

And so too in our matter: with that which the Torah places the question "And if you will say" at the conclusion of the entire subject

(also only the laws of Yovel&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;),

and moreover — immediately after the blessings and promises of the Most High "and the land will give its produce and you will eat to satiety etc.",

the Torah makes clear,

that here it is not a question of a "wicked son" whom one needs through the answer to protect that he should fulfill the commandments

Shemittah

(because in such a case the Torah would have warned &lt;b&gt;immediately&lt;/b&gt; at the announcement of the commandment of Shemittah,

as above)

rather this is a "question of a &lt;b&gt;wise son&lt;/b&gt;"&lt;sup&gt;38&lt;/sup&gt;,

and the content of his question is:

Learning the promises of the Most High "ונתנה הארץ פרי׳ ואכלתם לשובע גו׳״ — a "בן חכם" wants to understand the &lt;b&gt;פרטי ואופני&lt;/b&gt; of the blessing: in &lt;b&gt;which manner&lt;/b&gt; will the blessing of G-d come&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;

in the years when "&lt;b&gt;לא&lt;/b&gt; נזרע &lt;b&gt;ולא&lt;/b&gt; נאסוף את תבואתנו"?

and until — by giving in the years "מן" from heaven,

as in the desert during the forty years — and daily!].

— one answers him,

that the blessing will be in a manner that the earth will in the sixth year produce a <b>multitude</b> of produce,

"and it shall yield the produce for the three years."

7.

In the inner dimension of the matters:

One has already spoken several times&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;

About that which the Torah presents a matter in the manner of question and answer — "And if you will say, 'What shall we eat?' etc. 'And I will command My blessing' etc." — so since "the Torah is eternal"&lt;sup&gt;41&lt;/sup&gt;,

it follows that the question "And if you will say, 'What shall we eat?'" is an eternal question.

Also after one has seen the good results of

(The answer —)

"And I will command My blessing etc." in the earlier sabbatical years,

the question "And if you will say, 'What shall we eat?'" can come anew —

Because shemittah is the service of nullifying the <b>yesh</b>,

i.e.,

that

that in essence the "worker" is a "yesh",

only he nullifies his yesh from the aspect of <b>acceptance of the yoke</b> of the kingdom of heaven,

and from the aspect of his yesh there remains for him a giving of place for a question,

a difficulty — and each time in particular one must say to him "and I will command My blessing etc."

But according to the above explanation,

that here it speaks about "the question of a wise son",

whose questions are indeed <b>not</b> from the aspect of the yesh, G-d forbid,

but,

on the contrary,

from the aspect of wisdom — why is there such a question by a "wise son"?

Then the explanation in this: The miracle of "And I will command My blessing etc. in the &lt;b&gt;sixth&lt;/b&gt; year and it will produce the crop for three years" is not only above nature&lt;sup&gt;42&lt;/sup&gt;,

but it is &lt;b&gt;the opposite&lt;/b&gt; of nature entirely: According to the ways of nature a field becomes "weaker"

(leaner)

from year to year&lt;sup&gt;43&lt;/sup&gt;

— moreover — &lt;b&gt;the&lt;/b&gt; way of nature is one of the &lt;b&gt;reasons&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;44&lt;/sup&gt;

for Shemittah

Lands "and the land shall rest a sabbath to the Lord" in order that "the land shall yield its produce &lt;b&gt;and be strengthened &lt;/b&gt;in its fallen state" —

And specifically in the "sixth year",

when the earth is in its "weakest" state and condition,

it gives forth produce "&lt;b&gt;for three&lt;/b&gt; years"!

And since this is a miracle that has no hold at all in nature — and on the contrary: it is specifically in a manner of the complete opposite of nature — a matter that is completely above intellect —

The wise son asks "And if you will say, 'What will we eat?'" even after the answer of "And I will command My blessing,"

it remains a matter that is completely above intellect.

8.

It is known⁴⁵

that the "six years" and the "seventh year" are corresponding to the six millennia that the world exists and the seventh millennium.

So in this there is the question "And if you will say, what will we eat in the seventh year"⁴⁶

: finding oneself "in the sixth year",

in the sixth millennium before the coming of Moshiach,

that all these matters and revelations of the days of Moshiach are "dependent on our deeds and ser-

Our Rabbis taught⁴⁷

<b>Nevertheless</b> — the question arises "What shall we eat in the seventh year": being in the sixth millennium,

that due to the decline of the generations we are "weaker" than previous generations,

the generation is worthy in its perfection — now how can <b>we</b> continue the redemption,

clarify "in the seventh year"?

Says the Almighty <b>and promises</b> "And I will command My blessing etc.",

one does the service of the "sixth year",

the service in the time of exile which is through self-sacrifice and self-nullification above reason and intellect,

the Almighty gives the blessing from above,

that the sowing of the sixth year — not looking at the fact that it is a "lean field" etc. — it will be with blessing,

and with the blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He,

and moreover — it will be produce "for <b>three</b> years",

one draws down the matters and revelations of the future to come, revelation after revelation after revelation — which are divided generally into <b>three</b> ascents⁴⁸

— "He will revive us⁴⁹

after two days; on the <b>third</b> day He will raise us up and we shall live before Him".

(From sichos of Shabbos Parshas Behar 5733,

5719; second night of Pesach 5728)