English translation — אמור ב

Sicha b<pg>67</pg>

A.

At the end of our parshah it is said<sup>1</sup>

: "And the son of an Israelite woman went out, and he was the son of an Egyptian man, etc. And the son of the Israelite woman pronounced the Name and blasphemed, and they brought him to Moses, and his mother's name was Shelomith the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan."

And our Sages, of blessed memory, said<sup>2</sup>

that this verse comes to teach us "that they were not suspected

(Israel)

of illicit relations" — "to make known<sup>3</sup>

the praise of Israel that there was not among them except this one, and the verse publicized him and specified him<sup>4</sup>

,

And about them it is explicit in the Writings<sup>5</sup>

"A garden locked is my sister, my bride, a spring locked, a fountain sealed",

and as also brought in Rashi<sup>6</sup>

"And his mother's name was Shelomith the daughter of Dibri,

the praise of Israel that the verse publicized this one, to say that she alone was, etc.'"

And behold, even according to this exposition, the failure of Shlomit bat Divri was not intentional,

And as the Ra"am proved here from Rashi's words in Parshat Shemot<sup>7</sup>

"From what he wrote..

Regarding striking a Hebrew man, that the husband of Shlomit bat Divri was, and he set his eyes on her, and at night he stood him up and took him out of his house, and he returned and entered his house and came upon his wife when she thought he was her husband, and the man returned to his house and sensed the matter, and when the Egyptian saw that he sensed the matter, he would strike him and oppress him all day,

It implies that she was mistaken and not willful"<sup>8</sup>.

And based on this, the greatness of the praise of Israel that is learned from here is understood,

That this, that the rest of the women of Israel were not ensnared in this, means that it was not even in a manner of coercion or mistake<sup>9</sup>.

And therefore the verse informs us "and the name of his mother was Shlomis bas Divri" — even though it is not the way of the Torah to publicize and make known the disgrace of Israel<sup>10</sup>,

and all the more so in our case that the discussion is about an unintentional sin — that the purpose is not to publicize the disgrace of a Jewish woman, heaven forbid,

but rather the opposite,

to publicize the praise of Israel,

that failure in forbidden relations was completely excluded among them

(even not unintentionally<sup>11</sup>

and under duress)<sup>12</sup>.

<pg>62</pg>

And what Rashi in his commentary continues to explain "Shlomis,

she would chatter peace upon you peace upon you peace upon you,

chattering with words asking about the peace of everyone,

bas Divri she was a talkative woman speaking with every person",

already the commentators wrote<sup>13</sup>,

that his intention is to explain that even she herself was not publicized for disgrace in this verse,

for this is not her proper name but rather only after her deeds

(and thus it is not publicized who this woman is).

And still one needs to understand in the essence of the matter that the Torah tells the disgrace

of a Jewish woman,

whatever she may be

(even though through this the praise of Israel is publicized),

and behold even "the disgrace

of an unclean animal the Scripture did not speak."

2.

And now according to its simple meaning one can say,

with the preface of what is said in the commentaries,

that this that the Scripture elaborated in the details of the lineage of the blasphemer is in order to explain how it is possible that a man from the children of Israel would come to curse the Name, may He be spared,

that in truth such a thing is not conceivable in a Jewish man,

except that

his father was an Egyptian man and his mother was raped because she was a talkative woman,

behold since he was not proper seed,

therefore he descended to such a level until "and he blasphemed etc. the Name and cursed."

And based on this, it can be said,

that just as the very telling of the incident of the blasphemer is not a matter of this that the Torah does not relate and publicize the disgrace of Israel — because the intent of the verse is not to relate disgrace but to inform [of] a law and a deed of a rabbi¹⁸,

the law of the blasphemer,

his obligation of death and the details of laws connected to it

(and also details of laws that were said in connection and relation to this law¹⁹

"And to the children of Israel you shall speak, saying"),

so too is it regarding the relation and the conduct of his mother,

that it is in order to warn most strongly about the matter of the conduct and the modesty of a daughter of Israel from being talkative

(even in a manner of asking about the well-being of everyone)²⁰,

and from being loquacious,

since from such conduct it is possible that there will come not only a corruption for her etc.,

but that a son will be born who will blaspheme etc. may G-d spare us.

And beyond this: That which as a result of this deed a son was born who blasphemed,

is a wondrous thing,

for she did not stumble in this intentionally but was mistaken,

and that she was "asking about the well-being of everyone"²¹

was not a matter of licentiousness,

but a matter of conduct with a pleasant countenance toward everyone²²,

and nevertheless from this came out such a son who blasphemed<pg>63</pg>

r"l — and this is a special sign to warn a very great warning to each and every one about the greatness of caution in modesty etc.

And according to this there is room to say more than this,

that in this that the Scripture publicized it — there is also something of her praise,

that through her Israel learned the greatness of caution in the matter of modesty.

And see what was explained elsewhere regarding Noach,

that this that "some interpret him disparagingly",

is not a matter of "disparagement" — because even though Noach himself, being in a very low and inferior generation, did not pray for the people of his generation like Avraham and Moshe

(since "he had no one in whom to place merit like Moshe"),

and if so, there was no deficiency in him,

nevertheless,

so that a stumbling block should not come from this, heaven forbid, in later generations,

to say that it is not a deficiency if one does not pray for the people of the generation,

therefore some say

that one is compelled to say that this matter is a thing of "disparagement",

that this very thing that they interpret such conduct as a disgrace,

this is "his merit" of Noach,

that Noach himself wants that they emphasize that one must pray for the people of the generation,

in order to ensure that a deficiency should not come from this in another generation.

And similarly in our matter,

that the rectification of Shlomis bas Divri is in this very thing that the Scripture publicized her

(and with such emphasis),

that from this comes the lesson and the purpose of caution for the women of Israel regarding the greatness of modesty even in speech etc.,

and this very thing is her merit and praise of Shlomis].

3.

But superficially, the above-mentioned drasha of our Sages of blessed memory,

that the verse here informs "the praise of Israel that there was among them only this one and it publicized and the verse specified it",

its content is not that the praise is the study

(the teaching of the law)

about the matter of modesty,

but rather its interpretation,

that the verse informs and tells the praise of Israel

(that they were not suspected of illicit relations)

in this very thing that it publicizes the disgrace of Shelomith.

And this thing

(the telling of the praise of Israel through the publication of the disgrace of Shelomith)

requires explanation,

how is it possible that the praise of Israel be revealed through the telling and publication of the disgrace of one of the children of Israel? — for just as it is in the law²⁷

that for the good and benefit of the many we do not nullify the existence of the individual,

similarly, seemingly, regarding the matter of telling virtues and disgraces,

it is forced to say that the praise of Israel be revealed specifically through the disgrace of one of Israel.

And especially since one of the matters that were innovated at the giving of the Torah to the people of Israel is learned from what is said²⁸

"I am the Lord your God" — in the singular,

that each and every one as an individual in himself has importance and virtue,

and it is not nullified and dragged after the collective,

and as our Sages of blessed memory said²⁹

"Each and every one is obligated to say: For my sake the world was created",

[that this is one of the differences between other creations and the children of Israel,

that in all creations the purpose is not in themselves,

and they were created only for the sake of Israel and for the sake of the Torah&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;,

and just as it is in the totality of their existence that they are not for their own sake,

so too is it in their particulars,

that it is possible that each particular is secondary to the whole,

whereas in Israel,

just as the entirety of the people of Israel is not a "means" for the sake of another matter,

but&lt;pg&gt;64&lt;/pg&gt;

the purpose of the intention is in him,

so it is regarding each one of them in particular,

that one cannot say that one Jewish person serves only as a "means" for his fellow Jew,

and also not for the sake of the whole and the community,

but the purpose of the intention is also in each and every one by himself]&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;.

And it must be said that since through this that the Scripture publicized the praise of Israel is revealed,

this is not considered a disgrace for her,

and on the contrary,

this itself is her praise&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;

that through her the Torah announces the praise of Israel that they were not suspected of illicit relations,

"A garden locked is my sister, my bride, a spring locked, a fountain sealed."

An example of the matter — regarding the prohibition of bal tashchit: the prohibition is only when the act is in a destructive and damaging way&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;,

but when through the damage a repair comes,

there is no prohibition of bal tashchit here&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;.

And along the lines of the law regarding Shabbat labor that "all who damage are exempt"&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;

["One who tears garments or burns them or breaks vessels in a destructive way, behold this one is exempt"&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;],

but "one who tears in his anger or etc. is liable because he settles his mind with this thing and his inclination will rest, and since his anger subsides with this thing, behold he is like one who repairs and is liable"&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;.

4.

And additionally one can say,

And with the preface that we find a dispute³⁸

whether a person is obligated to put himself into a situation of doubtful danger for the sake of saving his fellow from certain danger.

And there are those who say³⁹

that the dispute does not apply regarding the entirety of Israel,

for then certainly the individual is obligated to put himself into danger for the sake of saving the entirety of Israel.

And one can say,

that this is not because saving the entirety of Israel overrides the life of the individual,

but rather because, since each individual is a part of the whole,

a part of the public,

behold it is found,

that the saving of the entirety of Israel is also the saving of the individual.

And if the matters are said regarding danger to life⁴⁰,

all the more so and a fortiori regarding the matter of telling and publicizing a matter of disgrace,

and furthermore,

that there is in this<pb>65</pb>

rescue only but a story of "the praise of Israel" that touches the foundation of all of Israel,

that the beginning of the choosing and creation of the people of Israel was in a manner of "a garden locked, my sister, bride,

a spring locked,

a fountain sealed",

that they were not suspected of illicit relations,

that this is not a flaw for the sake of praise only but that the praise

(of all of Israel)

is her praise

(also)

of Shlomit herself.

Heh.

And in the inwardness of the matters it can be said:

It is known that all things in the world are included in three levels: 1)

things of holiness,

2)

things that are permitted,

3)

things that are forbidden.

That the difference between them is: the explanation of "permitted" is "that it is not bound and forbidden in the hands of the external forces"⁴¹,

and this means that a person can refine the thing from the husk of nogah and elevate the good within it to holiness,

in the manner of "one who eats the fat of an ox of Israel and drinks spiced wine to broaden his mind towards G‑d and His Torah etc. or for the sake of fulfilling the mitzvah of delight of Shabbos and Yom Tov, then the vitality of the meat and wine that was influenced from the husk of nogah is refined and ascends to G‑d as an elevation-offering and as a sacrifice",

as explained in Tanya⁴¹.

Whereas "forbidden" is that it is forbidden and bound in the hands of the husks,

"forbidden foods etc. that are from the three completely impure husks are forbidden and bound in the hands of the external forces forever and do not ascend from there until their day comes and death is swallowed up forever"⁴¹.

However, also in this time it is possible that they will ascend to holiness, as the Alter Rebbe says there&lt;sup&gt;41&lt;/sup&gt;

by means of "that he will do such a great repentance that intentional sins become for him like actual merits, which is repentance from love from the depths of the heart etc., since through this he comes to this great love,"

therefore also the intentional sins ascend to become merits.

And similarly it is understood in our subject regarding Shlomis,

since "the rejected one will not be rejected from Him"&lt;sup&gt;42&lt;/sup&gt;,

behold, the correction of this which was the opposite of modesty and holiness,

is when this act&lt;sup&gt;43&lt;/sup&gt;

brings to modesty and to the ultimate of modesty — the announcement of "the praise of Israel" "that they were not suspected of illicit relations" and about all of them it is said "a locked garden is my sister, the bride,

a locked spring, a sealed fountain."

And along the lines of the above in the words of the Alter Rebbe,

that through repentance out of love, intentional sins become merits,

"since through this one comes to this great love".

(From the talks of Shabbos Parshas Emor 5725,

Shabbos Parshas Bamidbar 5746)