English translation — יתרו א

Sicha 1*

pg 93

A.

On the verse1

"Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob and tell to the children of Israel" it is said in the Mechilta "Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob these are the women and tell to the children of Israel these are the men,

another matter: Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob in a soft language say the main things to the women and tell to the children of Israel and be precise with them"2.

And it requires explanation: from the language of the Mechilta

("another interpretation etc."³)

it is proven that there are two interpretations here,

and it is perplexing — what are the two interpretations of the verse?

Behold, these are two different matters,

that at first it explains who are "Beis Yaakov" and "Bnei Yisrael" — "these are the women...

these are the men" — and afterwards it explains the manner of speech to Beis Yaakov — in a soft language,

and the manner of speech to Bnei Yisrael — you shall be exacting with them.

And behold, in Midrash Rabbah⁴

on the verse it states: "Thus shall you say to the house of Yaakov" — these are the women; He said to them: say to them main things that they are able to hear,

"and tell the children of Yisrael" — these are the men; He said to them: say to them details of things that they are able to hear.

And at first glance it seems that this is like the second explanation in the Mechilta

(or the combination of the two explanations).

And one must understand the intent of the midrash,

(a)

it omits the phrase "in a soft language",

(b)

it adds "that they are able to hear"

(and likewise regarding the men it adds "that they are able to hear").

And seemingly it appears that the Mechilta and the Midrash disagree what Moshe said to the women,

that according to the Midrash he said to them only "main points",

whereas according to the Mechilta he said

(also)

words "soft",

and as explained in the commentaries<sup>5</sup>

that is words of appeasement,

that is,

explanation of the virtue of the commandments<sup>6</sup>

and the reward of their fulfillment etc.<sup>7</sup>.

[And one may add,

that from Rashi on the Torah it implies that "soft language" includes two matters — both words of appeasement etc. and "main points",

that they too are called "soft language" because they are easy to understand.

And Rashi's words on the verse: "To the house of Jacob these are the women, say to them in a soft language,

and tell the children of Israel punishments and details explain to the males,

things as hard as sinews" — that is a)

that he did not detail the explanation of "soft language",

b)

in "tell the children of Israel" he wrote "punishments and de-<pg>94</pg>

tails",

and it implies somewhat that he explains that "soft language" for women includes both matters<sup>8</sup>

: a)

the opposite of punishments,

that is, that he said the reward of the commandments; b)

the opposite of "details" — only a general saying and speaking,

the entirety of the commandments<sup>9</sup>].

And it requires explanation of the reason for the dispute of the Mechilta and the Midrash whether He said to the women only "headlines" or whether He said

(also)

"soft" things in the manner of the reward of commandments etc.

Also, one must be precise,

that in the Midrash it begins "These are the women" and afterwards it details "Say to them headlines etc."

(and similarly in "And tell the children of Israel",

it first explains "These are the men" and afterwards it details the content of the words — "Say to them details of things"),

whereas in the Mechilta

(in the second explanation)

it begins with the content of the words "in a soft language etc." and concludes that this is "for women".

2.

And one must say the point of the explanation in this:

The two interpretations in the Mechilta differ in the reason that the matters of the Torah¹⁰

were said in two manners — "you shall say" and "you shall tell": according to the first interpretation — the cause of this division is from the side of the recipients of the Torah,

"These the women..

these the men"; for the difference in the nature of the soul of women and men brought two manners

(types)

in the transmission of the words of Torah; but not so according to the second interpretation,

the division in the manner of transmission of the Torah has its foundation in the object itself of the words of Torah,

for thus it is required from the side of the Torah,

that first they must transmit "heads of matters" of Torah,

and only afterwards the "details"; and afterwards the verse adds,

that these two types in the words of Torah divide into two types among the Children of Israel,

the recipients of the Torah — "Thus you shall say

("soft language..

heads of matters")

to the House of Jacob"

(to the women),

"and you shall tell to the Children of Israel and you shall be precise with them".

And based on this, one can say,

that the midrash does not come

(as it appears from the surface of the language)

like the second interpretation in the Mechilta,

but rather, on the contrary,

explains and elucidates the first interpretation in the Mechilta,

that the reason for this division,

"These are the women..

these are the men",

is because it depends on what they are able to hear,

that is: from the perspective of the Torah itself there is no necessity for this division,

but rather since they need to transmit the Torah to the children of Israel,

men and women,

therefore Moshe divided the transmission of the Torah for each type according to what he is able to hear.

And there is no contradiction to this from that also in the midrash it uses the same language as in the Mechilta — "the heads of matters",

and it implies that for both of them

(the Mechilta<pg>95</pg>

(meaning of the letter)

and Midrash)

Those matters were said to the women — for the "headings" of the Midrash are not like the "headings" of the Mechilta.

3.

Explanation of the matter:

In the category of "headings of matters" — two types¹¹

:

A)

"Headings of matters" in the manner of our Sages, may their memory be blessed,¹²

"A person should always teach his student in a short way,"

that the teacher who learns with his student,

must condense all the length of the give-and-take and the multitude of details,

into "headings of matters,"

short things,

so that the student can receive them.

b)

"heads of things" that are,

on the contrary,

the principle from which all details of the matter branch out.

And in the manner of the language of the Mishnah that it is "a brief thing that includes many matters"&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;,

that all details of the give-and-take in the Gemara are hinted at in the language of the Mishnah.

And so we find also regarding the giving of the Torah,

that at first the Ten Commandments were given,

which are the general principles of the entire Torah,

that "all 613 commandments are included in the Ten Commandments"&lt;sup&gt;14&lt;/sup&gt;.

And in this itself,

only the first two commandments,

"I am [the Lord your God] and you shall not have [other gods]",

from the mouth of the Almighty we heard them&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;,

because they are "the general principles of the entire Torah"

(that "I am includes all 248 positive commandments and you shall not have includes all 365 negative commandments")&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;

— for this is the order of the giving of the Torah,

that its beginning is in the saying of the "general principles",

"heads of things",

in which all the details are included.

[And based on this, we can explain what our sages, of blessed memory, said&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;

that initially the Holy One, blessed be He, said all Ten Commandments in one utterance,

and only afterwards were all the commandments stated individually,

"that He repeated and explained each and every commandment by itself" — for at first glance it is perplexing: since He repeated and explained each commandment individually,

what reason was there to say them initially in one utterance that the ear cannot hear?

— Rather, this is the order of the giving of the Torah from the Holy One, blessed be He,

that first there is the "great principle" of the entire Torah,

that the entire Torah is only "one utterance"&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;,

and afterwards comes the detail of the Torah: first into the Ten Commandments,

each commandment by itself,

and afterwards into the 613 commandments,

and within this itself — the multitude of details of the commandments,

until "and maidens without number"&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;].

And this is the difference between "the heads of matters" in the Mechilta and "the heads of matters" in the Midrash: in both, it speaks of the "principle" that is in the Torah,

except that in the Midrash it stands regarding the principles of the Torah "that they

[the women]

are able to hear",

meaning brief matters that the student can receive,

for since women's minds are light, therefore they are told only "heads of matters" and not the multitude of details; whereas "heads of matters" in the Mechilta means "heads of matters" in essence,

the principles of the Torah from which all the details of the Torah branch out

[and according to the Mechilta, the principles of the Torah belong specifically to women,

as follows].

4.

Based on this we find that there is a fundamental difference between the Mechilta and the Midrash in the manner of the connection of women to words of Torah:&lt;pg&gt;96&lt;/pg&gt;

To the Midrash, women are given only "what they are able to hear,"

i.e., only the matters that pertain to them; but not so to the Mechilta,

where the condition "that they are able to hear" is not mentioned,

rather on the contrary,

women are given the essence of Torah and the general,

"heads of matters" from which the details that were said to men branch off.

And one can say that there is in this a practical difference regarding positive time-bound commandments from which women are exempt

(And also Torah study, that women are exempt from the commandment of Torah study)

:

According to the midrash — from the outset these matters were not given to them,

that is, they are not commanded regarding them at all,

for only "that which they are able to hear" was given to them;

But not according to the Mechilta,

since they were given "heads of matters",

that is, the general principles of the entire Torah,

behold, they have a connection to the entire Torah,

and the exemption is only regarding their fulfillment in deed,

but the giving of the Torah and its commandments,

behold, the entire Torah and its commandments

(also positive time-bound commandments)²²

were given also to women²³,

and that they are not obligated in their performance does not diminish at all the giving and receiving.

And it will be sweetened even more according to what the AriZal said²⁴

that "when the male performs the commandment, there is no need that also the women perform it separately, because she is already included with him at the time that he performs that commandment..

But negative commandments etc.'",

And he concludes "and this is the secret of what our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said²⁵

his wife is like his own body",

and as it is also stated in the Zohar²⁶

that the man and the woman each by himself is "half a body"²⁷

[And this matter is not only<pg>97</pg>

In married women but also in Jewish daughters who have not yet been married^*27,

for since a man and a woman together are one soul²⁸,

and each one by itself is "half a body",

so even before the joining of the two halves together,

the action of the man benefits his "other half",

the woman].

5.

Based on this, one may explain the reason that only in the Mechilta does it precede "with a soft language",

but not in the Midrash: "soft language" means words of appeasement,

as above.

And one could say that the intention is to this very thing that was said to them that they are connected to "the heads of matters",

i.e., the essence and general principles of the Torah

[and based on this, what is said in the Mechilta "with a soft language say heads of matters",

means that the saying of "heads of matters" is the "soft language",

and not as above section 1].

And therefore,

according to the Mechilta, in this order the superiority of the women over the men is evident,

that only to them are said "heads of matters",

the general principles of the Torah,

therefore it is emphasized in the Mechilta that He said to the women "with a soft language",

the superiority of the women over the men; but according to the Midrash it is the opposite: "Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob" indicates the contraction and descent of the words of Torah to women,

that they do not reveal to them words of Torah like to men because they cannot hear so much,

and therefore the Midrash omitted this expression.

And based on this, the continuation of the language of the midrash is also understood,

that after this explanation it continues "another explanation: why [were] women first? Because they are eager in [performing] commandments",

for on the surface it is not understood: in the first explanation, the matter of the precedence of women to men is not mentioned at all,

and what is the intention of the midrash "another explanation: why [were] women first"?

And according to the above, it can be said that the intention of the midrash is,

that the difficulty in the first explanation in the midrash is,

that since they do not say to women except what they are able to hear

(which is less than men),

if so, "why [were] women first"&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;?

And therefore the midrash explains that there is a matter due to which women are first — "that they are eager in [performing] commandments".

However, according to the second explanation in the Mechilta, the reason for the precedence of women to men is simply understood,

because this is the order of the giving of the words of Torah,

that first come the general principles of the Torah

("the heads of matters"),

and afterwards the details

(as in the Ten Commandments above).

6.

However, this requires explanation — why to the Mechilta were said "heads of matters",

"general principles of the Torah",

specifically to women,

and not to men?

And it can be said,

that this is in accordance with a general superiority that we find in women over men in the matter of serving God in general.

For behold we see that with women there is more revealed faith in God and fear of God³⁰,

that even though the reason for this in the revealed is because "their intellect is not so strong

(therefore)

they are close

(more)

to accept with faith

(simple)

and they act without inquiry"³¹,

nevertheless the root of the matter is because faith shines in them as it is from the side of the Holy One, blessed be He.

And perhaps one could say that for this reason there is a distinction regarding the matter of lineage,

that the essence and entirety of Israel depends specifically on the mother,

that one born to a Jewish mother is a Jew

(even when the father is not Jewish),

and only the details and distinctions among the children of Israel themselves,

Kohen, Levi, Israel,

depend on

(the family of)

the father.

And since the Torah and commandments were given specifically to Israel,

therefore,

to the mother, upon whom the holiness of Israel depends,

there was a special giving of the entire Torah,

"the heads of matters",

which belong to faith&lt;pg&gt;98&lt;/pg&gt;

In Hashem and fear of Hashem etc.

(which are the entirety of the entire Torah,

and in the language of the verse&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;

"And Hashem commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear Hashem etc.")

; and to the father, in whom are dependent the distinctions and particular levels of Israel,

were given to him specifically the details,

particulars of the commandments.

And it may be said,

that this itself is the reason that women are exempt from fulfillment of positive time-bound commandments,

for in the commandments themselves,

behold, negative commandments and positive commandments that are not time-bound,

were not drawn and came into the particular limitations of time like positive time-bound commandments,

therefore women, since they are connected specifically to the entirety of the Torah and the commandments,

are obligated only in negative commandments and positive commandments that are not time-bound.

[And perhaps one can say that this is the content of the explanation of the AriZal that "there is no need that also the women should do it alone,

for she is already included with him at the time that he does that commandment",

for this matter that in the occupation with Torah and commandments,

the action in the particulars of the limitations of time,

belongs to the "half of the body" the second — the male part of the soul].

And behold it is written "As the days of your going out from the land of Egypt I will show him wonders"³³,

that just as it was in the Exodus from Egypt,

that in the reward

(in the merit)

of righteous women of that generation Israel were redeemed from Egypt³⁴,

and through this³⁵

all the children of Israel received the Torah

("for when you bring out the people from Egypt you will serve God on this mountain"³⁶),

so it is in the future redemption that is to come,

that in the merit of righteous women³⁷

they go out from this exile,

and they merit to learn the Torah of the Messiah,

who will teach Torah to the entire people,

from their smallest to their greatest,

that his teaching will be in a manner of seeing³⁸,

he will teach the great principle of the Torah,

and it is known that in the future the essential innerness of the Torah will be revealed,

speedily in our days literally.

(From sichos of Shabbos Parshas Yisro 5745,

25 Iyar 5744)