English translation — שמות ג

Sicha 3<pg>15</pg>

A.

And Moses took his wife and his sons and mounted them on the donkey and returned to the land of Egypt; and Moses took the staff of God in his hand<sup>1</sup>.

And Rashi [explains] "on the donkey" — "the designated donkey,

it is the donkey that Abraham saddled for the binding of Isaac<sup>2</sup>,

and it is [the one] that the King Messiah is destined to be revealed upon it, as it is said<sup>3</sup>

poor and riding on a donkey".

In simple terms, Rashi's intention is to explain what is written "on the donkey",

with the definite article heh⁴,

that from this it is proven that the intention is "the designated donkey",

and Rashi explains the uniqueness of the donkey — "it is the donkey that Abraham saddled etc."

But it must be understood:

a)

In order to explain the uniqueness of this donkey, it would seemingly suffice to say "it is the donkey that Abraham saddled" and nothing more,

because due to that it is already a "special donkey",

and what need is there to add that the donkey that Abraham our father saddled was for the binding of Isaac

(for we do not find in Scripture that Abraham saddled a donkey at another time or for another matter),

and moreover to add further that "it

(the donkey)

that the King Messiah is destined to reveal himself upon",

a wondrous thing and a very great miracle,

that the donkey would live and endure for thousands of years⁵

! And especially since all this does not pertain to understanding the verse.

b)

For what purpose does Rashi quote from the verse also the word "upon" — for according to the above he explains only the word "the donkey"?

2.

And behold, in the Gemara⁶

it is stated that this verse is one of the verses that they changed on account of the elders when they translated the Torah for King Ptolemy, and they wrote "And he mounted them upon a carrier of human beings,"

and Rashi explains⁷

"because it implies a camel, lest [one] say: Moses your teacher did not have a horse or a camel,"

and in Ibn Ezra here⁸

he explained the reason for this change: "because it is a way of degradation that the wife of the prophet should ride on one donkey, she and her two sons."

And based on this, there is room to say that Rashi's intention is also to resolve the above questions⁹,

why did Moses mount his wife and his two sons on one donkey¹⁰

(and especially, as it stands to reason in <pg>16</pg>

simplicity — together with all their belongings)

— and he did not load them onto

(a horse or a camel,

or)

several donkeys?

And therefore Rashi explains that it was not an ordinary donkey but "the designated donkey" that "is the donkey that Abraham saddled, etc.",

and since that is so,

it is no wonder how such a wondrous donkey¹¹

has the strength to carry a heavy load that is not usual and natural.

[And based on this, it can be said,

that this matter Rashi hints at in that he quoted from the verse also the word "on",

to emphasize,

that in his commentary he comes to explain and resolve that he loaded and burdened so much "on the donkey"].

However, this itself requires explanation: Why did Moses need to take a special donkey and ride his wife and his two sons and all their belongings on it — and he did not take several donkeys or a horse and camel and the like¹²?

3.

Also requires explanation:

This teaching in Rashi's commentary originates from Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer¹³,

but there it prefaces "It is the donkey, the son of the she-donkey that was created at twilight",

and Rashi omits this detail.

And even though also when Rashi brings teachings of Chazal, his way is not to copy them in their language and form, but rather he brings only what pertains to the plain meaning of the verse,

as has been explained several times

(and especially in our case, that in Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer the teaching comes on the verse about Avraham,

and Rashi here brings it to explain the verse of our parshah)

— nevertheless,

since the content of the teaching is to explain the uniqueness of this donkey,

it would have been fitting for Rashi to bring the detail in which the donkey was already distinguished and was known by it, that "it is the son of the she-donkey that was created at twilight"

— the matter that it is the donkey that "the King Messiah is destined to be revealed upon it,"

this is in the end of days, and how will this be settled according to the simple meaning of the verse.

And it must be said,

that Rashi's intention here is to explain not

(only)

the uniqueness of this donkey in general

(as in Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer),

but primarily the uniqueness of the donkey regarding our matter — regarding the going of Moses from Midian to Egypt in order to redeem Israel,

and therefore he also brought the detail that "it is that the King Messiah is destined to be revealed upon it,"

that is to say that this donkey was designated for the redemption of Israel — for the going of Moses with his wife and sons to Egypt was in order to redeem the children of Israel from the land of Egypt¹⁴.

But according to this, it is not understood on the other hand: the matter&lt;pg&gt;17&lt;/pg&gt;

the phrase "the donkey that Abraham saddled for the Binding of Isaac",

at first glance is not relevant to our discussion&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;.

4.

And one can say the explanation in this:

In his commentary here Rashi comes to explain the superfluity in the verse,

which superficially is not understood¹⁶

why does he need to explain and detail the manner of Moses and his family's going to Egypt — "And he mounted them on the donkey" — and did not write concisely "And Moses took his wife and his sons and returned to the land of Egypt etc." — and in Rashi's explanation the connection of this detail to the entirety of this portion is settled,

as follows.

In the give-and-take between Moses and the Holy One, blessed be He, regarding his mission to redeem Israel,

that the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded him "Go and I will send you to Pharaoh and bring out My people, the children of Israel, from Egypt"¹⁷

and Moses refused to accept the mission,

behold at the end of the seven days during which "the Holy One, blessed be He, was persuading Moses at the bush to go on His mission"¹⁸

Moses said "Please send by the hand You will send"¹⁹,

and according to Rashi's commentary, in this response there are two matters: a)

"that he did not want to take greatness over Aaron his brother who was greater than him and a prophet"¹⁸,

and therefore he said "Please send by the hand You will send" — "by the hand of whom You are accustomed to send, and he is Aaron"²⁰,

b)

"by another whom You wish to send, for it is not my end to bring them into the land and to be their redeemer in the future"²⁰.

However,

in the end Moses accepted upon himself the mission to bring out the children of Israel,

and Rashi explains²¹

that this is because "His anger flared up against him and he accepted upon himself",

but it is not explained in the verse in what and how Moses' aforementioned claim was negated

[and although in the verse it continues²²

"Is not Aaron your brother the Levite? I know that he can speak well, and also behold he is coming out to meet you, and when he sees you he will be glad in his heart",

as Rashi explains "not as you think that he will be resentful of you that you are rising to greatness",

it is not so smooth, because Moses' refusal was not only due to Aaron's resentment,

but that he did not want to take greatness over Aaron his brother who was greater than him].

And therefore it can be said,

that when Moses agreed to fulfill the mission of the Holy One, blessed be He,

the answer to his claims was hinted at in that He caused²³

the Holy One, blessed be He,²⁴

that the going to fulfill the mission would be by means of the donkey "the special one" — "which is the donkey that Abraham saddled for the binding of Isaac and which the King Messiah is destined to ride upon,"

in which are explained the two matters²⁵

:<pg>18</pg>

In "the binding of Isaac"

(when Abraham saddled his donkey)

he was commanded — "and offer him there as a burnt offering"²⁶,

and nevertheless our father Abraham did not hesitate for a moment to fulfill the command of God,

and on the contrary "he hastened to the mitzvah" and even saddled his donkey "himself and did not command one of his servants"²⁷.

And from this it is understood all the more so and a fortiori in our subject,

even though there is in this a taking of "greatness"

(and in addition to the very taking of the greatness — it is possible that it will come to resentment on the part of Aaron,

or that at least he will not be willing and accept it with a whole heart)

— how it is necessary to fulfill the command of the Name in its fullness and with joy and a whole heart.

And in connection with the second claim "that it is not my end to bring them into the land and to be their redeemer in the future" — Hashem hinted to him "and he is the one about whom the King Mashiach is destined to be revealed",

meaning that they are not two separate matters and redemptions,

but rather that the future redemption through the King Mashiach,

it is a continuation of this redemption of the Exodus from Egypt through Moses,

and the future redemption and the revelation of the King Mashiach depends on the power of Moses²⁸

and his activity in the redemption of Egypt.

5.

Based on the above, we can also explain several precise expressions in Rashi:

a)

Regarding the first matter, he wrote "it is the donkey that Abraham saddled,"

And regarding the second matter, he wrote "it is the one upon which the King Messiah is destined to be revealed."

And at first glance, just as by Abraham he used the language of the verse

("And he saddled his donkey"),

so too should he have used the language of the verse regarding Messiah, "riding on a donkey,"

and he should have said "and it is the one upon which the King Messiah is destined to ride"

(in the manner of the language of Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer¹³).

b)

In Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer there: "that in the future the son of David will ride upon it",

whereas Rashi changed and wrote "the king Messiah".

And the explanation of this:

As explained elsewhere

(section 3),

that in Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer his intention is to enumerate all the virtues of the donkey that Abraham our father saddled for the Binding of Isaac,

that "it is the donkey, the son of the she-donkey that was created at twilight..

It is the donkey that Moses rode when he came to Egypt..

It is the donkey that the son of David is destined to ride",

and therefore he was precise with the language of the verse that is said about him "poor and riding on a donkey",

and called him by the name "son of David":

But the intention of Rashi here is

(as above)

to explain the connection of this donkey to our subject,

and as above that in this special donkey is hinted the answer to Moses' refusal — and this is the precision of Rashi's language in the two details

(as above)

:

Regarding the first matter, Rashi wrote: "It is the donkey that Abraham saddled for the Binding of Isaac,"

because with this he comes to explain that the fulfillment of G‑d's command must be without calculations,

as above,

and this matter is emphasized primarily in that Abraham our father himself saddled the donkey for the Binding of Isaac

(as above),

which indicates his alacrity and joy in fulfilling G‑d's command

(love disrupts the order²⁷)

;

And regarding the second matter,

in which his intention is to emphasize how the future redemption that is to come is a continuation of this mission to redeem the children of Israel from Egypt,

it is not sufficient to say simply "that the son of David will ride upon it in the future,"

because this language has no special significance in connection with the redemption of Israel,

since it is possible that the son of David will ride upon it in general

(not as the redeemer of Israel).

For even that this indicates that it is a special donkey,

that the son of David is accustomed to ride specifically upon this donkey,

nevertheless it is not specifically related to the matter of redemption;<pg>19</pg>

And therefore Rashi precisely says "that the future king Moshiach will be revealed upon it",

meaning that the donkey belongs to him

(a)

as "the king Moshiach"

(and not only as "the son of David"),

and furthermore

(b)

in connection with the act of redemption,

"to be revealed upon it"

(and not only for "to ride upon it").

6.

And furthermore it can be said,

that also this "that the future king Moshiach will be revealed upon it" belongs

(not only to Moses' claim that he will not ultimately bring them into the land and redeem them in the future,

but)

also to his first claim

(and the main one)

that he does not want to take greatness etc. in place of Aaron his brother who is greater than him

(that with this began his refusal also at the beginning of God's speaking to him&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;,

"Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh").

And with an introduction of the precise wording of Rashi who cited from the verse "poor and riding on a donkey",

at first glance,

why did Rashi also cite this word,

For if Rashi's intention was to cite the part of the verse that indicates that it refers to the King Messiah, he should have cited the language before this "your king will come to you, righteous and saved etc."

And it must be said that his intention is only to mark the verse in which it is explicit that he rides on the donkey,

And if so, why did he precisely bring also the word "poor and riding on a donkey",

And especially that it is seemingly contradictory to what he says "the King Messiah".

And the explanation: In the explanation of the verse "poor and riding on a donkey" Rashi explained "poor — humble"³⁰,

"and riding on a donkey — it is a trait of humility".

And this is because a mission from G-d,

even though the content of the mission is to be the redeemer of Israel,

this depends specifically on the matter of humility and his ultimate self-nullification,

that through this specifically is drawn and rests upon him the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He,

in the language of the verse³¹

"I dwell in the high and holy place, and with the contrite and lowly of spirit".

And in this is hinted the answer to Moses,

who did not want to take greatness etc.,

and argued "Who am I" — "What am I important"²⁹

: this argument indicates his humility,

and if so, on the contrary,

specifically this was needed to be by Moses in order to be worthy of this mission,

for this that the Holy One, blessed be He, chose him to redeem Israel,

is specifically from the aspect that he is "Who am I" "What am I important".

7.

The inner point of the Torah in Rashi's commentary:

According to what we have learned previously, there is a distinction between the donkey of Avraham and the donkey of Moshe and the donkey of the King Moshiach: Regarding the donkey of Avraham it is stated that Avraham saddled the donkey; regarding the donkey of Moshe — "And he mounted them upon the donkey"; and regarding the donkey of Moshiach Rashi says "The King Moshiach is destined to be revealed upon it"

(Although in the verse it is stated "riding on a donkey").

And it can be said,

that the above distinctions in language correspond to the three levels and degrees in the drawing down of holiness into the world,

in the three periods of Avraham, Moshe, and the King Moshiach.

Explanation of the matter:

It is explained in the commentaries³²

that "donkey" alludes and indicates the "materiality" of the body and the materiality of the world in general

[And known also is the interpretation of the Baal Shem Tov³³

on the verse³⁴

"When you see the donkey of your enemy etc.",

that it refers to the materiality of the body].

And this is the entirety of the connection between the matter of the redemption and specifically "donkey"

[Therefore both Moshe

(first redeemer)

and the king<pg>20</pg>

the Messiah

(final redeemer)³⁵

will ride on a donkey]

— because the inner and essential content of the redemption is the revelation of His holiness, blessed be He,

that for this purpose there must be breaking and refinement and clarification of the material,

both the material of the body of a man and woman of Israel in particular and the materiality of the world in general,

and in the language of our master the Elder

(the baal hahillula of 24 Tevet³⁶)

in the book of Tanya³⁷,

that the purpose of the creation of the world will be in the days of the Messiah,

"that then the physicality of the body and the world will be refined and they will be able to receive the revelation of the light of G-d."

And behold, in the action of man in clarification and refinement of the material of the body,

there are in general three modes:

a)

The main work of man is to reveal the light of his soul, which is in concealment and hiding in the matter of the body,

for "a wild ass is born a man"³⁸,

and by his nature he goes after the desires of his body,

and his work is to act upon himself not to incline after the desires etc. but to engage in Torah and mitzvos.

And according to this manner, the work is in the way of conquest and control,

that man controls his body and his animal soul,

and subdues the matter of his body in such a way that the matter of the body will not conceal and hide the light of his soul.

b)

Above this is the work to refine the matter of the body itself,

that the body itself will serve G-d,

which is through changing his natural character traits,

that he will not desire the pleasures of the world etc.³⁹.

But in the clarification and refinement of the material of the body itself — there are two ways:

(a)

Clarification and refinement of the body that comes from the side of the light of the soul,

that is,

that his devotion to matters of holiness is with such intensity,

that the abundance of the light of holiness in the soul also acts upon his body to become clarified and refined.

According to this way,

the holiness in the person is the holiness of his soul,

except that the body,

by being clarified and refined,

becomes a vessel for the light of the soul.

(b)

Refinement of the body from its own perspective,

That is, that a person works with his body until the body from its own perspective becomes an object of holiness⁴⁰.

And just as it is in the service of each individual in particular — so it is in the totality of the materiality of the world,

that there are three modes in the clarification and refinement of materiality,

through which the holiness of the Blessed One is revealed in the world:

a)

Subduing and nullifying the coarseness and materiality of the world which prevents the indwelling of holiness,

that nullification and breaking of materiality gives place that there should be a revelation of holiness in the world.

b)

That the physicality of the world becomes clarified and refined until it becomes a vessel for the revelation of the light of holiness.

3)

The ultimate perfection in clarification and refinement<pg>21</pg>

the world,

that physicality itself will become holy,

that this will be in the future to come,

when the prophecy will be fulfilled⁴¹

"And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh together shall see that the mouth of the Lord has spoken,"

that is, that this will be the nature of the "flesh" in the future to come,

that it will be refined until the flesh will have the capacity

(from its own side)

to see "that the mouth of the Lord has spoken"⁴².

8.

And this is the difference between the three periods of Avraham, Moshe, and Moshiach:

In the days of Avraham,

when "the Torah had not yet been given...

the materiality of the world had not yet been clarified and refined"⁴³,

Avraham's action was to nullify, to subdue, and to break the materiality of the world so that it would not interfere with the revelation of the light of holiness.

And this is the precise wording of Rashi "it is the donkey that Abraham saddled"⁴⁴,

that the "saddling" of the donkey indicates the subjugation of the material⁴⁵

;

In the days of Moses,

after the completion and refinement in the "iron furnace"⁴⁶

of the Egyptian exile,

"which refined Israel through the difficulty of servitude in mortar and bricks..

And when Israel were refined, the world and its physicality and materiality were also refined"⁴⁷

— the world reached a state that its physicality would be a vessel for the light of holiness;

And this is what is said about Moses "and he mounted them on the donkey",

that the work of "saddling" the donkey was already done by Abraham our father,

and it was already possible to have the "riding" on the donkey,

that the light of holiness be drawn into the materiality of the world.

But then it was still in the manner of "and he mounted them on the donkey",

meaning that the light of holiness "rides" and shines upon

(by means of)

the materiality,

but the revelation of the light of holiness is not related to the "donkey" itself,

but to the rider upon it.

But the refinement of the physicality and materiality of the world in the future to come is in a manner of "In the future, the King Moshiach will be revealed upon it,"

that the revelation of the light of Moshiach will be through the "donkey" itself,

that the material will be refined so much that it itself will reveal the light of holiness in the world.

And based on this, we can explain the inner reason for another distinction among the three donkeys of Avraham, Moshe, and Moshiach: By Avraham it is not stated that he himself rode on the donkey

(and it is implied that the donkey carried only the wood and the knife, while he and Yitzchak

(and his two lads)

did not ride on the donkey but walked on foot)

; by Moshe it is stated that he mounted his wife and his sons, and it is not stated that he himself rode on it; whereas by the King Moshiach it is explicit "and riding on a donkey."

And according to what was explained above, one can say the reason for this⁴⁸

: In the time of Abraham,

when “the materiality of the world had not yet been clarified and refined”,

there was not yet a connection between Abraham himself

(and Isaac),

with the “donkey”; by Moses,

when already “the world and its physicality and materiality had been refined”

in a manner that it could be a vessel for the light of holiness,

he mounted his wife and his sons on the donkey,

but since the materiality of the world in itself had not yet been sanctified

(and the effect of refinement is only that<pg>22</pg>

it becomes a vessel for the light of holiness that shines from above),

therefore there was still no “connection” between the “donkey” and Moses himself;

And specifically in the future to come,

when the materiality of the world itself will reveal the light of holiness,

"In the future, King Moshiach will be revealed upon it",

then King Moshiach himself will ride upon it,

for then it will be revealed,

and in a manner of "as waters cover the sea"⁴⁹,

how that the true reality of every created being is "the truth of its existence"⁵⁰

etc.,

and in the language of the Admor HaEmtza'i⁵¹,

that then it will be revealed that "the existent creature" is one with "the true Existent".

(From sichot of Shabbat Parshat Shemot 5747; 19 Kislev 5748)