English translation — בחוקותי א

Talk a<pg>168</pg>

A.

"And I will remember My covenant with Jacob, and also My covenant with Isaac, and also My covenant with Abraham I will remember, etc."¹,

And in Rashi: "Why are they enumerated

[the patriarchs]

backwards? That is to say, Jacob the small is worthy for this,

and if he is not worthy, behold Isaac is with him,

and if he is not worthy, behold Abraham is with him, who is worthy"².

And superficially its source³

in Toras Kohanim⁴

on the verse,

and this is its wording: "And why were the fathers stated backwards,

but if the deed of Avraham is not sufficient — the deed of Yitzchak,

and if the deed of Yitzchak is not sufficient — the deed of Yaakov,

each and every one is sufficient that the world should be sustained for his sake."

But Rashi in his commentary changed several details from the drasha of the Toras Kohanim,

and moreover, his commentary is the opposite of the commentary of the Toras Kohanim:

In Toras Kohanim it begins from Avraham,

and continues "if the deed of Avraham is not sufficient — the deed of Yitzchak",

and concludes with Yaakov; whereas Rashi writes in reverse order "Sufficient is Yaakov..

and if he is not sufficient then Yitzchak etc. then Avraham".

The reason for this change is understood simply,

because Rashi explains the plain meaning of the verse,

and in the verse it precedes "My covenant Yaakov" to "My covenant Yitzchak..

My covenant Avraham",

from this it is understood,

that this is also the order of mentioning the covenant of the Patriarchs&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;

— "Sufficient is Yaakov..

and if he is not sufficient then Yitzchak with him

( — "and also My covenant Yitzchak")

etc. Avraham with him"

( — "and also My covenant Avraham").

But we must explain and clarify the reason for this difference — that according to the Toras Kohanim,

the merit of Jacob is greater than the merit of Isaac⁶,

and that of Isaac is greater than that of Abraham,

therefore⁷

"If the deeds of Abraham are insufficient — the deeds of Isaac

(which are greater⁸),

and if the deeds of Isaac are insufficient —<pg>169</pg>

the deeds of Jacob"

(as above)

; whereas according to Rashi,

who begins with Jacob and ends with Abraham,

it is understood,

that his opinion is the opposite,

that the merit of Abraham is greater than that of Isaac,

and that of Isaac is greater than that of Jacob⁹.

And another difference: In Toras Kohanim it concludes "it is fitting for each and every one to hang..

on him",

meaning that each one of the Patriarchs individually is fitting

[except that when the situation is very bad¹⁰,

and they need a greater merit and "the deed of Avraham" is not enough,

they hang on the merit of "the deed of Yitzchak",

or more than that,

"the deed of Yaakov"]

; but Rashi is precise in his language "and if he is not worthy, behold Yitzchak is with him..

behold Avraham is with him"¹¹

— meaning not that the merit of each one individually is sufficient¹²,

but they join together with each other and even all of them together¹³.

[Simply understood is the reason that Rashi changed in this detail from Toras Kohanim,

because in the verse it is said "and also My covenant with Yitzchak and also My covenant with Avraham I will remember",

meaning that it is explicit in the plain sense of Scripture that the intention is not that He will mention each of the Patriarchs individually,

but that He will join them together with each other¹⁴,

and therefore Rashi emphasizes,

that he comes to explain the plain sense of Scripture,

"Yitzchak is with him..

Avraham is with him".

But one must explain the reason of these opinions — that according to the Toras Kohanim, the merit of each one of the Patriarchs individually is sufficient,

whereas according to the plain sense of Scripture,

the remembrance of the covenant of the Patriarchs of Isaac is specifically in the manner of "with him",

in combination with Jacob and also regarding Abraham].

2.

There are commentators¹⁵,

that these two changes are dependent on each other — for according to Rashi, Jacob is "the choicest of the Patriarchs"¹⁶

and his merit is greater than that of Abraham and than that of Isaac,

therefore Rashi writes "Behold Isaac with him..

Abraham with him",

for his intention is not

(in the plain sense of Scripture)

that "if

(Jacob)

is not worthy" the merit of Isaac alone suffices

(and on the contrary — the merit of Jacob is greater than that of Isaac),

but rather then they combine his merit<pg>170</pg>

of Yitzchak with Yaakov

("Yitzchak with him")

And likewise regarding Avraham.

But

[Added that still it requires understanding the reasoning of the opinions,

that according to the Toras Kohanim the verse emphasizes the merit of each one of the Patriarchs individually

("It is sufficient for each and every one that the world should be sustained for his sake"),

and according to Rashi their combination with each other is emphasized

("Behold Yitzchak with him..

Avraham with him")

— behold]

Rashi writes in his commentary "Yaakov the small is worthy of this",

that simply his intention is,

that even though Yaakov is "small" relative to the other patriarchs&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;,

nevertheless "Yaakov the small is worthy of this"

(except that "if he is not worthy — behold Yitzchak etc. and if he is not worthy behold Avraham is with him who is worthy")

— that is that Rashi does not hold

(like the Toras Kohanim)

that the merit of Yaakov is greater than that of Yitzchak and Avraham,

but rather Yaakov is "small" compared to them,

and Avraham is the greatest of all&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;.

[And simply it can be said,

that the words of Rashi here,

that Yaakov is "small" relative to Avraham and Yitzchak,

come in continuation,

founded on his commentary earlier

(in Parshat Tisa&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;)

on the verse "Remember Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yisrael"

(after the sin of the golden calf)

— "If for burning, remember Avraham who gave himself to be burned for You in Ur Kasdim,

if for killing, remember Yitzchak who stretched out his neck for the binding,

if for exile, remember Yaakov who went into exile to Charan",

from which it is understood that the merit of Avraham is greater than that of Yitzchak

(and Yaakov),

because he "gave himself to be burned for You",

and below it is the merit of Yitzchak "who stretched out his neck for the binding"&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;,

and below them is the merit of Yaakov that we do not find in him actual self-sacrifice,

but only the matter of exile].

And from all the above it is understood,

that there are two manners in the relationship of the Patriarchs to each other: in one manner, each one that precedes his fellow is greater than him,

the merit of Abraham is greater than the merit of Isaac and the merit of Isaac than Jacob; and in the second manner, each later one is greater,

for Jacob is the chosen of all the Patriarchs,

and Isaac is more excellent than Abraham.

And the difference between the Torat Kohanim and Rashi is in the explanation of these verses,

what determines in the mention of the covenant of the Patriarchs — whether the matter in which Jacob is the "smallest",

or the matter in which Jacob is the main

(the chosen of the Patriarchs).

And in this also depends the second difference — for in the matter in which Jacob is greater than Isaac and than Abraham,

there is merit in each and every one of the Patriarchs by himself

(regarding the mention of the covenant),

"each and every one is worthy that the world be suspended for his sake"; but in the matter in which Abraham is greater than Isaac and Isaac than Jacob,

there is a need for their combination with each other

(for this mention),

to combine the quality of Abraham and Isaac with the quality of Jacob

(even though Jacob is the "smallest" among them).

3.

And one must say the explanation in this according to a change in the version in Rashi's commentary regarding the Toras Kohanim: In the Toras Kohanim the language is "if the deeds of Avraham are not sufficient, the deeds of Yitzchak etc., the deeds of Yaakov",

whereas Rashi writes "sufficient is Yaakov etc., behold Yitzchak etc., behold Avraham...

that he is sufficient",

and omits the word "deeds".

And this is,

that for the Toras Kohanim

(the main)

the emphasis here

(in the mention of the covenant of the Patriarchs)

is the merit of the "deeds" of the Patriarchs

(and in this the superiority of Yaakov over the other Patriarchs is great)

; whereas for Rashi

(the main)

the emphasis in this mention is the merit of Avraham Yitzchak and Yaakov in their own right,

that is, the very fact that they are "Patriarchs"

(and in this the main superiority is in Avraham,

except that in order for this merit to protect his children after him

(it is possible that)

it must be joined with Yitzchak and also with Yaakov,

even though "Yaakov the small one").

&lt;pg&gt;171&lt;/pg&gt;

And this will be understood with the introduction of a general distinction between the Toras Kohanim and Rashi in these verses²¹

:

These verses

(that are at the end of the admonition)

explain the order of the end of the exile and the order of the redemption: "And they will confess²²

their iniquity etc., then their uncircumcised heart will be humbled, and then they will appease their iniquity,

and I will remember My covenant etc."

And behold, in Toras Kohanim it explains "and they will confess their iniquity" — "these words are on the side of repentance",

"then their uncircumcised heart will be humbled" — "these words are on the side of repentance",

and that is to say that according to the explanation of Toras Kohanim there is here the doing of repentance; but in Rashi the matter of repentance is not mentioned here,

and on the contrary,

on the words "and then they will appease their iniquity" Rashi explains — "they will atone for their iniquity through their sufferings"²³,

for appeasement and atonement for the iniquities come

(not because they did repentance,

but rather)

through the sufferings²⁴.

that this is a fundamental difference between the interpretation of the Toras Kohanim and Rashi regarding the reason that the redemption will come

(which is discussed in the verse)

: according to the Toras Kohanim, it will come because of the merits of Israel,

since they repented for their sins and their iniquity was atoned for,

therefore they are worthy and merited the redemption; but according to Rashi, the atonement is not because of their repentance and merits of Israel,

rather the Holy One, blessed be He, brings upon them sufferings and through this their iniquity is atoned,

and in the language of the verse — which Rashi brings here²⁵

— "And that which comes into your mind etc. surely with a strong hand etc."²⁶,

that the Holy One, blessed be He, returns Israel "under the wings"²⁷

in a manner of "a strong hand"

(and not of their own will).

And just as they differ regarding the cause of the appeasement of sins that brings the redemption

(whether it is because of repentance or because of sufferings),

so too they differ regarding the essence of remembering the covenant of the forefathers and its effect concerning the redemption.

Behold, that there is a need for remembering the covenant of the fathers so that Bnei Yisrael will return to their land,

even though their iniquity has already been atoned for,

it is understood,

as explained in the Ohr HaChayim²⁸,

that "the confession will help to ease upon them the evil decrees, but to return them to their place

(to the Land of Israel)

requires the merit of the fathers."

But regarding the essence of this remembering and its effect, the Toras Kohanim and Rashi differ:

According to the Toras Kohanim, that the appeasement of the iniquities which brings the redemption comes through the repentance of Israel,

that is, that Israel from their own side are worthy of redemption,

it can be said,

that the need for remembering the covenant of the fathers is,

because repentance

(only)

nullifies the evil

(their iniquity),

but in order that they be worthy of redemption

(which is through "and I will turn to you",

"and I will place My dwelling in your midst..

and I will walk in your midst"²⁹),

they also need merits

[and it can be said that this is similar to what we find regarding the redemption from Egypt,

that since "they did not have mitzvos in their hands to occupy themselves with in order to be redeemed..

He gave them two mitzvos: the blood of the Passover offering and the blood of circumcision"³⁰]

;

And this is the matter of remembering the covenant of the fathers,

that through and by virtue of this covenant being cut,

behold the merit of the good deeds of the fathers stands for the children of Israel³¹

until the end of all generations

[for this is the content of the covenant cut between the Holy One, blessed be He, and the fathers,

that this is not a covenant

(only)

for them,

but rather their being the fathers of the children of Israel,

behold the covenant with<pg>172</pg>

the fathers is automatically a covenant cut with all the children of Israel,

their seed after them,

until the end of all generations],

and this is considered as if they have good deeds and they are worthy of redemption.

But not according to Rashi,

that the appeasement of the sin that brings the redemption comes through this that Hashem "returns them under the wings of..

with a strong hand"²⁷

(by bringing upon them sufferings that atone for their sins),

it can be said,

that just as the appeasement of the sin is not dependent on the deed of Israel,

so too the merit of the redemption is not dependent

(so much)

on the level in the deed,

but rather it is

(also)

a result of the deed of Hashem with the Patriarchs,

that since Hashem cut a covenant with the Patriarchs that He will redeem their children,

therefore,

there is no difference

(so much)

if they are worthy of redemption, but in the end He redeems them from servitude to freedom

[except that as long as their sin is not appeased,

this is in contradiction to the covenant and it is impossible that they be redeemed,

but after their sin is appeased through sufferings,

then they are redeemed through the remembering of the covenant of the Patriarchs].

And therefore the merit of the deed of the Patriarchs does not matter here,

but rather the cutting of the covenant that Hashem made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as Patriarchs,

that since He cut a covenant with the Patriarchs,

there is no difference in the condition of the children,

and Hashem fulfills His promise in whatever condition it is.

4.

Based on all the above, also the other differences will be explained

(the above)

between the Toras Kohanim and Rashi on the verse "And I will remember etc."

[Whether Yaakov is the chosen one among the Patriarchs or that Yaakov is "the small one",

and also whether a combination of each other and of all of them together is needed]

:

That the Holy One, blessed be He, established that Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov are the Patriarchs of the people of Israel,

that their descendants after them are the chosen nation to whom the Torah was given etc. — this is because of³²

their self-sacrifice and their devotion to G-d,

and in this the greatness of Avraham over the other Patriarchs is great³³,

that even though he was born to Terach and grew up among idol worshippers etc.,

he recognized his Creator through his own effort,

to the extent that he gave himself to be burned for the sanctification of His name, may He be blessed,

that through this he became the father of the nation;

But on the other hand, there is an advantage in Yaakov,

that specifically because he was a son of Yitzchak and a grandson of Avraham³⁴,

therefore,

even though he did not need the self-sacrifice of Avraham

(and of Yitzchak),

nevertheless,

since he was born and raised by Avraham and Yitzchak,

behold his deeds and his service were in the ultimate holiness,

and simply,

that from his childhood he was "dwelling in tents",

"the tent of Shem and the tent of Ever"³⁵,

and to the extent that there was no flaw in his offspring

(even though from Avraham came Yishmael and from Yitzchak came Esav)³⁶,

and therefore he is called¹⁶

"the chosen one among the Patriarchs".

And this is the content of the difference between the Toras Kohanim and Rashi:

In Toras Kohanim that the emphasis is on the deeds of the Patriarchs,

then in this there is an advantage in the merit of the deed of Jacob over the deed of Isaac and over the deed of Abraham,

since the deed of Jacob was in ultimate holiness as mentioned above; but not so in Rashi, where the emphasis is on the Patriarchs themselves,

as Patriarchs,

then in this Jacob is the "small one",

and therefore Rashi begins with Jacob and ends with Abraham "who is worthy".

But on the other hand,

specifically because of this there is a need to join the merit of Abraham and of Isaac with Jacob

("Isaac with him..

Abraham with him")

— because this that Abraham is the "father" of his descendants after him

(and&lt;pg&gt;173&lt;/pg&gt;

Yitzchak)

can come from this³⁷

influence also to

(the children of)

Yishmael and to

(the children of)

Esav³⁸,

since they too came from

(the seed of)

Avraham and Yitzchak³⁹

;

And this is that Rashi precisely states "And if he is not worthy, behold Yitzchak is with him..

Avraham is with him",

that in order that the merit of the Patriarchs should stand specifically for the children of Israel,

this is by joining Avraham and Yitzchak with Yaakov⁴⁰,

for then the remembrance of the covenant of Avraham and Yitzchak pertains only to the children of Israel.

(From the talk of Shabbat Parshat Bechukotai 5728)