English translation — האזינו

Listen<pg>206</pg>

A.

"He found him in a desert land"¹,

And Rashi explained: "He found them faithful to Him in a desert land, that they accepted upon themselves His Torah and His kingship and His yoke, which Ishmael and Esau did not do, as it is said²

And He shone from Seir to them, He appeared from Mount Paran"

(And after he explains the entire continuation of the verse, he returns and brings that "Onkelos translated,

He found him — He supplied him all his needs in the desert, like 'and found'³

for them,

not⁴

we found for us the mountain").

The reason that Rashi did not explain this verse

("He found him in a desert land")

its simple meaning as it is,

that the Holy One, blessed be He, "found" the people of Israel in the desert⁵,

namely the choice of the Holy One, blessed be He, of the people of Israel in the Sinai desert

(at the time of the Giving of the Torah)⁶,

one can say⁷,

because the beginning of the choice of the people of Israel was before their arrival in the desert,

when they were in Egypt,

as is explicit in the verse⁸

"to come to take for Himself a nation from the midst of a nation",

and if so, it is difficult to say that the "finding" of the people of Israel was in the desert⁹.

And therefore Rashi explained that "He found him in a desert land" means that the Holy One, blessed be He, found the Children of Israel "faithful

(to Him)

in a desert land, that they accepted upon themselves His Torah etc."

But at first glance, even this explanation requires examination — and in the language of the Ramban¹⁰

: "This is not according to the reason of the section,

for the verse rebuked Israel and mentions the good deeds that the Lord did for them, and they repaid Him¹¹

evil for good"

(and as Rashi explains below¹²

"These are words of rebuke, to call heaven and earth to witness...

and the entire matter refers to 'Remember the days of old'¹³...

thus He did to them etc.'")

— and how does it fit to insert in the midst of these words of rebuke,

about the praise of Israel "faithful...

that they accepted upon themselves His Torah etc."?

And based on this, Rashi should have brought

(only)

the interpretation of the Targum¹⁴

"He found him — He provided him all his needs in the desert."

And especially since the continuation of this same verse "He encircled him, He gave him understanding, He guarded him, etc.,"

refers to "the good things that the Lord did with them,"

as Rashi explains: "He encircled him,

there He surrounded them and encompassed them with clouds and surrounded them with banners..

And He surrounded them at the bottom of the mountain, etc.

He gave him understanding,

there with Torah and understanding.

He guarded him,

from the serpent, the fiery serpent, and the scorpion, and from the nations" — and if so, certainly it would have been more fitting to interpret also the beginning of the verse which comes to describe the "good things that the Lord did with them."

[Y”M&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;

The difficulty in the explanation of the Targum — because "&lt;pg&gt;207&lt;/pg&gt;

the language of the verse does not tolerate it, that it would have been proper to say "yimtza'ehu".

But at first glance this is not sufficient,

because

(aside from the fact that it is possible to explain as the Rashbam&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;

"like 'and He found'&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;

for them,

the Holy One, blessed be He, is found for them,

the Holy One, blessed be He, was their sufficiency" — in any case, however)

at first glance this difficulty is not

(which is only in the word "yimtza'ehu")

so great as the difficulty in Rashi's first explanation,

which is a general difficulty in the content of the explanation,

that "it is not because of the passage"

(and also not "because of" the conclusion of this verse itself)

— and in any case it would have been proper for Rashi to preface the explanation of the Targum

(as the first and primary explanation in the simple meaning of the verse)].

2.

Rashbam explains,

that this explanation comes in continuation of the verses and Rashi's commentaries that precede it,

"Because he gave the reason for the salvation of the generation of the Dispersion from destruction and said because in the future there will come out from them the number of the children of Israel

[When the Most High gave nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the borders of the peoples according to the number of the children of Israel¹⁷,

and as Rashi explains there],

and afterwards he explained what is the significance of the number of the children of Israel that the generation of the Dispersion merited to be saved from destruction on their account and he said¹⁸

Because they are the portion of the Lord and His inheritance

[as Rashi explains there "Why all this? Because His portion was captured among them etc. and who is His portion..

His people Jacob, the lot of His inheritance"],

he needed to further inform why these merited to be His people and His inheritance more than the children of Ishmael and the children of Esau who are from the children of Abraham and Isaac like these,

and he said because He found these faithful to Him in the land of the desert who accepted His Torah and His kingship".

But his explanation requires examination,

for it is explicit in Rashi on the verse before this another reason for this "Why did these merit to be His people and His inheritance more than the children of Ishmael and the children of Esau",

and this is his language: "Jacob the lot of His inheritance,

and he is the third of the patriarchs who is tripled in three merits the merit of his father's father and the merit of his father and his own merit behold three like this cord which is made of three strands and he and his sons were His inheritance and not Ishmael the son of Abraham nor Esau the son of Isaac"

(who do not have "three merits")

— and if so why did he "need to further inform why these merited..

more than the children of Ishmael and the children of Esau"?

And furthermore, the main point: even if you say that there is room to interpret that this verse comes in continuation of the previous one

("For the portion of the Lord is His people, etc."),

still needs explanation: since the second part of the verse

("He encompassed him, He gave him understanding, etc.")

speaks

(also according to Rashi)

about the good things that the Lord did for Israel

(and according to the content of the entire section)

— what is the necessity to divide the verse into two,

and to explain,

that its first part is a continuation and conclusion of "For the portion of the Lord is His people, etc.",

and its second part is a matter in itself?

3.

Also, one must understand the lengthy language of Rashi: "He found them faithful to Him in a desert land, who accepted upon themselves His Torah and His kingship and His yoke":

Rashi's introduction "He found faithful ones in a desert land",

is understood,

that this refers

(also)

to the continuation of the verse "and in a desolate howling wilderness",

as Rashi says there "even there they followed after faith and did not say to Moses how can we go out into deserts&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;

etc. to go&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;

after Me in the desert",

and that is that the "general principle"&lt;pg&gt;208&lt;/pg&gt;

of the verse is,

that the Holy One, blessed be He, "found faithful ones in a desert land",

and in this two details

(a)

they accepted His Torah etc.,

(b)

they did not say how can we go out into deserts etc.

But it is unclear,

Why does Rashi specify three matters in connection with the receiving of the Torah — “that they accepted upon themselves His Torah and His Kingship and His yoke”,

and did not say briefly “that they accepted His Torah”

[like his language below on the verse²¹

“And He shone from Seir to them, He appeared from Mount Paran” — which he brings here at the conclusion of his commentary — “that they would accept the Torah and they did not want”]?

Also it is unclear, what are the two matters “His Kingship and His yoke” — for seemingly they are the same,

as the usual expression²²

“the yoke of the Kingship

(of Heaven)

”?

At first glance one could say that "His yoke" means "the yoke of the commandments"

(for the yoke of the kingdom and the yoke of the commandments are two things²³,

as also brought in Rashi²⁴

"You have accepted My kingship upon yourselves; from now on accept My decrees")

— but it is forced to explain thus,

because

(a)

At first glance the yoke of the commandments is included in the acceptance of "His Torah"

(which simply refers not only to the study of Torah but also to the fulfillment of the commandments of the Torah)

;

(b)

In any case,

Rashi should not have left "His yoke" vague

(which is also interpreted as the yoke of the kingdom²⁵)

but rather explained "and His yoke of commandments" and the like.

D.

And one can say the explanation of this:

Rashi's explanation on "He found him" is a continuation of his explanation in the preceding verse — "For the portion of the Lord is His people,

Why all this

[That He did not destroy the nations]

Because His portion was captive among them and destined to come out,

And who is His portion — His people,

And who is His people — Jacob the lot of His inheritance",

And he goes on to explain it

(Not about the people of Israel — who are called in many verses by the name "Jacob" — but)

About our father Jacob,

Who is "the lot of His inheritance"

("The third of the patriarchs who is tripled in three merits..

Like this rope"²⁶)

— And at first glance it is not consistent,

That he began with "His people" and ended with "Jacob

(Our father)

",

And he should have said "the children of Jacob the lot of His inheritance"²⁷?

And from this Rashi concludes,

That "He found him in a desert land" is a continuation of "Jacob the lot of His inheritance",

That at first the verse explains the greatness of our father Jacob

(Because of this only he is the portion and inheritance of the Holy One, blessed be He,

And not Ishmael and Esau)

— "Jacob the lot of His inheritance",

"Tripled in three merits": And afterwards the verse continues,

That the tripled merits of our father Jacob were drawn down to his children

("His people")

— Therefore "the portion of the Lord is His people" — that also with them there are three merits,

"That they accepted upon themselves His Torah and His kingship and His yoke" — corresponding to the "three merits" of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,

As follows.

And based on this, the reason is understood why Rashi returns repeatedly to negate the children of Esau and the children of Ishmael — that just as Ishmael and Esau themselves did not have "three merits"

(and consequently they are not "His inheritance")

— so too is it also with their descendants

(the nations of Ishmael and Esau&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;),

that the three merits of the people of Israel

(which correspond to the three Patriarchs as above),

that "they accepted upon themselves His Torah, His kingship, and His yoke",

&lt;pg&gt;209&lt;/pg&gt;

were not found among them,

"which Ishmael and Esau did not do".

5.

Explanation of the matter:

The content of the three matters of "His Torah and His Kingship and His Yoke" simply is:

"His Torah" namely

(in general)

the study of Torah,

is a matter that pertains to the intellect of man.

Therefore,

also the matter of keeping the commandments of the Torah which is in the language "acceptance of His Torah",

does not emphasize acceptance of the decrees of the Holy One, blessed be He,

but only the instructions of the Torah that have a reason in the intellect.

When a person accepts "His kingship" of the Holy One, blessed be He,

it is included in this that he will accept His decrees,

for this is the matter of kingship,

that the people accept upon themselves to listen to the king and to accept His decrees,

even if they do not know or understand the reason etc.

But acceptance of "His yoke" is a deeper matter,

that not only do they accept upon themselves to fulfill the commandments of the King,

but they subjugate their existence to Him,

that always His yoke is laid upon them.

And this is the innovation in "His yoke" over "His kingship": acceptance of kingship

(simple)

does not negate complete freedom in his private life,

and as with a human king,

that his rule and his laws do not pertain to

(all)

the details of a person's life,

but only to matters that pertain to the life of the state,

the kingdom or to the king; but acceptance of yoke is like a true slave²⁹

who is subjugated to his master in a constant and permanent manner,

by day and by night,

and his life is not his own because always his master's yoke is upon him.

And these are the three matters that were renewed in the children of Israel through the receiving of the Torah: In addition to this that they accepted upon themselves to fulfill the instructions of the Torah,

And this further — that they accepted upon themselves His kingship, may He be blessed,

(And they said "we will do" before "we will hear"³⁰),

Also they accepted upon themselves His yoke, the Holy One, blessed be He,

"To be subjugated to Me"³¹.

And according to this is also understood the connection between these three matters and the three Patriarchs,

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob — because each of the Patriarchs was distinguished — according to the simple meaning of the verse — in one of these three virtues:

"His Torah" — we find specifically by our father Yaakov,

who engaged in Torah,

as it is said³²

"And Yaakov was a wholesome man, dwelling in tents",

"the tent of Shem and the tent of Ever"³³

(and even in his mother's womb Yaakov was "stirring to go out" when Rivkah was "passing by the study halls of Shem and Ever"³⁴)

;

"His kingship" — it is from the virtues of Avraham our father,

who engaged in publicizing the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, in the world,

as it is said³⁵

"And he called there in the name of the Lord, God of the world",

and as Rashi explains there,

that Avraham caused that the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, be called "God of the entire world",

and likewise Rashi explains³⁶

that through Avraham the Holy One, blessed be He, is called "God of the earth";

And "yoke" — that its meaning is a constant yoke,

to the extent that a person has no freedom for himself at all — this corresponds to the service of Yitzchak,

and as Rashi explains&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;

that through the Akeidah Yitzchak became "a perfect burnt-offering"

(which is entirely for G-d)

— and because of this he was not permitted to leave the Land for outside the Land or to marry a maidservant,

&lt;pg&gt;210&lt;/pg&gt;

for his entire existence was permeated with the holiness of a burnt-offering&lt;sup&gt;38&lt;/sup&gt;

(in the manner of the concept of the "yoke",

which does not leave any detail in a person that is not permeated with subjugation and nullification).

6.

The meaning of the Torah in Rashi's commentary:

In the explanation of the verse "He found him in a desert land",

specifically the language of finding,

explains the Admor HaTzemach Tzedek³⁹,

that "the concept of finding is a precious thing and also comes not in order and gradation",

and based on this he explains Rashi's language "He found them faithful to Him in a desert land" — the concept of faith,

because "the concept of faith

(that)

is above wisdom",

like the concept of finding which is "above wisdom"

(and one could say that this is as simple,

that finding comes to a person absentmindedly).

And based on this, we must explain the reason that Rashi did not suffice with "they accepted His Torah" but also adds "His kingship and His yoke" — because this that the Holy One, blessed be He, "found" as it were the children of Israel in the desert,

in a manner of "finding" that is above order and gradation — this is because

(also)

the service of Israel is in such a manner,

that in addition to that the children of Israel accepted His Torah,

they also accepted His kingship and His yoke,

which is complete self-nullification,

above intellect

(like the nullification of a servant to his master),

and therefore measure for measure,

"He found him in a desert land",

that the Holy One, blessed be He, connects as it were with the children of Israel in a manner of finding,

not according to order and gradation and above measurement and limitation.

However, "in a desert land",

at the time of the Giving of the Torah,

this was in revelation only "temporarily",

but the main revelation will be in the future⁴⁰,

with the coming of David, the King Messiah,

about whom it is said⁴¹

"I have found David My servant",

speedily in our days, literally.

(From sichos of Shabbos Parshas Haazinu 5732,

5737)