Mount Moriah (III)
Jerusalem in the Bible
Yeshivat Har Etzion
Shiur
10 - Mount Moriah and the Akeida (part II)
By Rav
Yitzchak Levi
In the first part of this shiur we discussed the story of the
"Akeida" as hinting to the Temple that was destined to be built on Mount Moriah
and the connections between this narrative and the stories of the Divine
revelation to Yaakov in Beit-El and the revelation to King David on the
threshing-floor of Aravna the Jebusite.
In this second part of the shiur, we shall examine the different
meanings of the Akeida and its significance for future
generations.
A. Choice of the sacrifice and choice of
the place of offering [1]
As we saw in the shiur on the name "Moriah," the term
"re'iya" (seeing) is sometimes meant in the sense of choosing. There are two examples of this in the
story of the Akeida:
"Avraham
said: God will choose for Himself (yir'eh lo) the sheep for the burnt
offering, my son" (22:8)
"Avraham
called the name of that place "Hashem yir'eh" ("God will choose")
(22:14)
In
the first verse, Avraham tells Yitzchak that it is God Who will choose the
sacrifice that He desires. In the
second verse, Avraham calls the place "Hashem yir'eh" in the sense that
"God will choose." Meaning, this place will be chosen by God - not by
mortals.
In this context there is an interesting parallel to the choice described
in Parashat Re'ei, where the Torah presents the Divine command to Am
Yisrael as the absolute opposite of paganism:
You
shall surely destroy all of the places where the nations whom you will inherit
worshipped their gods; upon the high mountains and upon the hills and under
every green tree. And you shall
shatter their altars and break their pillars, and burn their asherim with
fire, and cut down the carvings of their gods, and destroy their name from that
place.
You
shall not do so to the Lord your God.
To the place which the Lord your God will choose out of all your tribes,
to place His Name there you shall seek His dwelling and come to there."
(Devarim 12:2-5)
In contrast to the idolaters, WHO CHOOSE BY THEMSELVES where they will
serve their gods "upon the high mountains and upon the hills and under every
leafy tree" Israel is commanded to seek out God's dwelling place, to serve God
at the place where GOD WILL CHOOSE to cause His Name to dwell. These verses, then, parallel the story
of the Akeida in terms of the choice of the place of Divine
service.
The
parallel in terms of the choice of the sacrifice appears at the end of the same
chapter:
Guard
yourself lest you be ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed before
you, and lest you seek after their gods, saying: "How did these nations serve
their gods? I shall do the same." You shall not do this to the Lord your God,
for every abomination that God hates - they did for their gods, even their sons
and their daughters they burned in the fire to their gods. Every thing WHICH I COMMAND YOU, that is
what you shall observe to do; you shall not add to it, nor shall you detract
from it. (Ibid. 12:30-31 13;1)
Here
again, the Torah contrasts Am Yisrael and the other nations. The pagans
choose their sacrifices themselves, and will even burn their own sons and
daughters with fire. For Am
Yisrael, on the other hand, God establishes the sacrifices that must be
brought. This is an expression of
the philosophical principle discussed by Rabbi Yehuda ha-Levi in many different
places in Sefer ha-Kuzari (see, for example, II, 46) that one may come
close to God only through the paths that He commands, not through independent
initiatives. In other words, the
way or method of coming close to God is an integral part of His
service.
Thus, through the story of the Akeida, Avraham lays down for future
generations in accordance with the rule that "the deeds of the fathers are a
sign for their descendants" the fundamental principle that the choice of the
sacrifice, and the choice of the place for the sacrifice, are in God's hands.
These two points distinguish very
clearly between us and the nations of the world a matter whose practical
significance Am Yisrael will discover in Parashat Re'ei
[2].
B. Relationship between "re'iya" -
"seeing" (choosing) and "yir'a" awe,
fear
We have noted the use of the word "re'iya" in relation to God
in the sense of "choosing," and the sense of being seen (presenting oneself)
before God that is hinted to in the Akeida. Now, let us address the relationship, in
the story of the Akeida, between human "seeing" and "yir'a" (fear,
awe).
Twice the story mentions "seeing" with reference to Avraham. First, in verse 4, concerning the
discovery of the place:
"On
the third day, AVRAHAM LIFTED HIS EYES AND SAW the place from
afar."
Then,
in verse 13, concerning the discovery of the sacrifice:
"AVRAHAM
LIFTED HIS EYES AND SAW, and behold, a ram was behind, caught by his horns in
the thicket. So Avraham went and
took the ram, and offered it as a burnt offering in place of his
son."
These
two "seeings" parallel, in content, the two selections mentioned above, likewise
using the word "re'iya" (but this time referring to God): the selection
of the place and the selection of the sacrifice. In other words, while it is God Who
chooses the place and the sacrifice, He allows man to see to discover God's
choice by himself.
The concept of "yir'a" is actually not mentioned directly in
relation to Avraham, but rather appears in the context of Divine knowledge: "Now
I know that you FEAR GOD."
It is possible that the juxtaposition of verses 12-13 "Now I know that
you fear God
and Avraham lifted his eyes and saw, and behold, a ram
" is meant
to teach us that sometimes "yir'a" - fear, or awe, facilitates a higher
or more profound "re'iya" seeing.
Standing before God and fearing Him allows a person to see reality in a
clearer, truer way, and in this specific case to see that the ram is the
offering instead of Yitzchak.
A
similar connection arises in other places, such as in Tehillim
128:
"A
song of ascent: happy is anyone who fears God, who walks in His
ways
Behold,
so shall the man be blessed Who fears God.
May
God bless you from Zion, and may you see the goodness of Jerusalem all the days
of your life.
And
may you see your children's children peace upon Israel."
Fear
of God makes a person worthy of "seeing the goodness of Jerusalem" and "seeing
one's children's children" [3].
Similarly, in Tehillim 34:12-13:
"Come
now, my children, listen to me: I shall teach you fear of
God.
Who
is the man who seeks life, loving days to see good?"
Fear
of God makes it possible to see good.
On
the other hand, there is also SEEING THAT LEADS TO FEAR. An example of this in the context of
Mount Moriah is to be found in the case of David, in the threshing floor of
Aravna the Jebusite [4]. Like
Avraham in his time, David also lifts his eyes "HE SAW the angel of God
standing between the earth and the heavens, with his sword drawn in his hand,
stretched over Jerusalem." In the
wake of this vision, "David fell, along with the elders, covered with sackcloth,
upon their faces" (I Divrei Ha-yamim 21:16). Later on in the story, "When David saw
that God had answered him at the threshing floor of Aravna the Jebusite, he
offered there
but David could not go before it to ask of God, for he was
terrified of the sword of the angel of God" (Ibid. 28-30). In other words, fear of the sword of the
angel of God causes David to fear God.
A similar situation seeing God's face, which leads to fear is to be
found at the splitting of the Sea (Shemot 14:31):
"Israel
SAW the great hand that God had performed upon Egypt, and the nation FEARED God
and believed in God and in Moshe, His servant."
In any event, we learn that with regard to Mount Moriah, Avraham and
David give expression to both aspects of the connection between "yir'a"
and "re'iya": on one hand, fear leads to a higher or more profound
seeing; on the other hand, seeing God's face or the sword of His angel leads
to fear.
C. Significance of the Akeida as the first
sacrifice on Mount Moriah
One of the most fundamental questions that arise upon reading the story
of the Akeida concerns the relationship between the original command and the
ultimate conclusion of the Akeida.
The end of the story teaches us that God does NOT want human sacrifice,
and the Torah presents here for the first time the concept of the sacrifice
of an animal as replacement for human sacrifice [5]. But in light of such a clear and
unequivocal conclusion we may ask: what is the meaning of the vast, unfathomable
abyss separating the original command to sacrifice Yitzchak from this eventual
conclusion [6]?
We would like to propose here a direction that relates to the essence of
the test taking place specifically on Mount Moriah. The absolute, categorical
command is meant to clarify that the first sacrifice offered at this site (upon
the first altar built there, as far as we know from the text [7]) must be
altogether on the level of human sacrifice. How is this to be
achieved?
In the Akeida, Avraham was required to display a double measure of
selflessness, for the command stood in stark and complete contrast to both the
Divine promise that "through Yitzchak shall your seed be called"
(Bereishit 21:12) and the moral world in which God guided Avraham - "the
path of God, to perform righteousness and justice" (Ibid. 18:19). The demand that he offer his son was
therefore meant to bring about a display of devotion and selflessness on a scale
that had not theretofore been seen in the world. Therefore, according to our theory, the
command is formulated in absolute language, to teach that the highest essence of
sacrifice is man's absolute readiness to give up his life (or the life of his
son) for the punctilious fulfillment of the Divine command: a supreme level of
both love and awe. The moment that
Avraham actually displayed this selflessness and devotion, the angel called to
him, and Avraham sacrificed the ram instead of Yitzchak
[8].
D.
The Akeida and the worship of
Molekh
The phenomenon of worship of Molekh was manifest in the Kingdom of Yehuda
during the reigns of Achaz, Menasheh, and Yehoyakim. The Torah (Vayikra 18:21; 20:1-5)
addresses the severity of the prohibition and establishes the death penalty as
its punishment. This is such a
terrible sin that Yirmiyahu points to it as a major cause of the destruction of
Jerusalem (Yirmiyahu 19).
Indeed, in certain senses this transgression manifests aspects of
idolatry, sexual immorality, and spilling of blood the three central reasons
for the destruction of the city and of the Temple (Yoma
9b):
·
Idolatry:
The Gemara (Sanhedrin 64a) records a debate as to whether this was actual
idolatry or a type of witchcraft.
·
Sexual
immorality: This prohibition is included in the section on forbidden sexual
relations (Vayikra 18:21), and we may explain this on the basis of the
commentary of Abarbanel (ad loc), teaching that the burning of one's
child retroactively desecrates the relationship with his mother
[9].
·
Spilling
of blood Chazal (Sanhedrin 64b) and the Rishonim are divided as
to whether Molekh-worshippers indeed burned their children with fire, or whether
they merely passed them over in between two fires. Ramban, in his commentary on the Torah
(Vayikra ad loc) brings strong proof that it involved real
burning.
What,
then, is the difference between burning children to Molekh and the command, in
the Akeida, to offer Yitzchak as a sacrfice [10]? There are, it seems, several
differences:
First of all, we must take into consideration the conclusion of the
Akeida, which as we have emphasized is clear: God does not desire human
sacrifice, and such sacrifice is not permitted anywhere in the Torah, for any
purpose whatsoever.
Secondly, the Akeida was a direct command from God, while the worshippers
of Molekh offered their children of their own free will.
Thirdly, there is a fundamental difference between the two acts from the
point of view of the perception that lies behind them. The perception of pagan sacrifice is
based on the idea of a cruel god, who can only be pacified with the most
precious of all gifts children.
The Torah's concept of sacrifice is entirely different: its aspiration is
towards supreme closeness to God, whether for the purposes of atonement for sin
or for praise and thanks. The
significance of sacrifice, according to the Torah, is uplifting reality towards
is Source, connection between the physical and the spiritual. Hence, its orientation is fundamentally
different from that of pagan sacrifice: love rather than terror; closeness
rather than fright; unmediated closeness rather than alienation [11].
In
this context it is interesting to note a teaching of Chazal
(Ta'anit 4a) on Yirmiyahu 19:5
"It
is written, "Which I did not command, nor did I speak it, nor did it arise in my
heart": "Which I did not command" this refers to the [sacrifice of the] son of
Meisha, King of Moav, as it is written; "He took his eldest son, who would reign
in his place, and offered him as a sacrifice" (II Melakhim 3:27); "Nor
did I speak it" this refers to Yiftach (Shoftim 11:31 onwards); "nor
did it arise in my heart" this is Yitzchak, son of
Avraham."
Rashi
explains: "That you should not say: Did the Holy One not similarly command
Yiftach, and Meisha, and Avraham?! for I [God] never commanded Meisha to burn
his son with fire
"nor did it arise in my heart" this is Yitzchak, son of
Avraham meaning that even though I commanded him, IT NEVER AROSE IN MY HEART
THAT HE SHOULD SLAUGHTER HIS SON, [IT WAS] ONLY TO TEST
HIM
."
Chazal
emphasize the fact that from the very start God never intended that Avraham
should slaughter Yitzchak (and therefore we need to seek out the reasons for the
categorical formulation of the original command, as we have done
above).
SUMMARY
In this shiur (both this part and the previous one) we have seen
that the Akeida hints in its various aspects to the future site of the
Temple.
We noted the points of similarity and difference between the Akeida and
the revelation to Yaakov in Beit-El, as well as the revelation to David at the
threshing floor of Aravna the Jebusite, from the perspective of the type of
revelation, the essence of the sacrifice, and the nature of the revelation in
each case. We discussed the
principle of Divine choice of the sacrifice and of the place of sacrifice, and
saw that the altar of the Akeida the first altar to be built on Mount Moriah
is also the first expression that we find in the Torah of the Divine choice of
this spot. We examined the
relationship between "yir'a" (fear, awe) and "re'iya" (seeing),
and noted that the demand that Yitzchak be brought as a sacrifice in fact
represents a demand for psychological readiness for absolute selflessness. We concluded by considering the
uniqueness of the act of the Akeida, as opposed to worship of
Molekh.
This shiur has an appendix, in which we review briefly the
connection between Mount Moriah and Mount Sinai. In the next shiur we hope to
discuss the significance of the name Jerusalem
(Yerushalayim).
Appendix:
Mount Moriah and Mount Sinai
In the previous shiurim we dealt with various aspects of the
Akeida as hinting to the Temple that was destined to arise on Mount Moriah, and
its significance for future generations.
As a complement to that discussion, we shall briefly examine here the
relationship between the Akeida and the revelation at Mount Sinai, and the
significance of the concealment of Mount Moriah up until the days of King
David.
A. Order of revelation: Mount Moriah-Mount
Sinai-Mount Moriah
As we saw in the previous shiur, and as Rambam explains (Laws of
the Temple 2:2), Chazal point to a continuous tradition of Divine worship
on Mount Moriah, starting with Adam and continuing through Kayin and Hevel, as
well as Noach, up until the Akeida.
After the Akeida, we find no further explicit mention of Mount Moriah in
the Torah neither during the period of the forefathers, nor even during the
period of the tribes the children of Yaakov. Benei Yisrael are led to Egypt,
in the footsteps of Yosef; they leave Egypt after years of suffering and
subjugation, the Read Sea is split before them, and after a total of fifty days
they arrive at Mount Sinai. There,
Am Yisrael merits a Revelation of immense magnitude; they receive
the Torah and the two Tablets of the Covenant. In the wake of the giving of the second
set of Tablets, the Mishkan is built in the midst of the Israelite camp
as a direct but covert continuation of God's revelation to His nation at
Sinai.
After the Mishkan is built, Am Yisrael starts off on its
journey to Eretz Yisrael.
The Mishkan remains a portable structure that is carried along
with the nation during forty years of desert wanderings and which remains
temporarily housed for another 440 years in Eretz Yisrael, at different
stations Gilgal, Shilo, Nov and Givyon until, finally, it is brought to
Mount Moriah.
During all of this period of nomadic existence for the Mishkan, Benei
Yisrael establish themselves as a nation. This process of consolidation begins at
Mount Sinai, around the seminal Revelation in which the Torah and commandments
are given. Once they enter the
land, the return of the Mishkan to Mount Moriah is dependent upon the
consolidation of a stable monarchy which appears only in the days of David and
Shlomo. The revelation at the time
of the Akeida already revealed the uniqueness of Mount Moriah, but the
concealment of this place teaches us that its rediscovery requires effort,
searching, seeking as happened, eventually, in the days of
David.
B. Connection between Mount Sinai and Mount
Moriah
The Mishna, at the end of Ta'anit (26b),
teaches:
"Go
out, daughters of Zion, and see King Shlomo, with the crown with which his
mother crowned him on the day of his wedding, and on the day of the rejoicing of
his heart": "on the day of his wedding" this refers to the giving of the
Torah; "on the day of the rejoicing of his heart" this refers to the building
of the Temple, may it be rebuilt speedily in our days
This
Mishna clearly indicates a connection between the giving of the Torah and the
building of the Temple on Mount Moriah.
Indeed, both the giving of the Torah and the inauguration of the First
Temple took place on Yom Kippur, and the Mishna that points to the connection
between these two events also discusses Yom Kippur, as one of two especially
joyful days celebrated by Benei Yisrael.
The Mishna defines the giving of the Torah as a "day of his wedding,"
while the day of the building of the Temple is referred to as the "day of the
rejoicing of his heart." The giving
of the Torah marking the beginning of the covenant between the Holy One and
His nation represents a direct preparation and precursor to the building of
the Temple, which symbolizes the completion of the forging of this covenant, and
its establishment in a permanent home.
Indeed, the connection between the Torah which was given at Mount Sinai
and the Temple which was built on Mount Moriah finds expression in several
spheres [12]: the location of the Book of the Torah inside the Ark of the
Covenant; the Book of the Torah that is placed in the courtyard of the Temple;
the 'hak'hel' gathering a renewal of the experience of Sinai once every
seven years at the end of the Sabbatical year; and in the encounter with the
great Torah sages of the generation at the Temple at the time of the
pilgrimage. It is no coincidence
that one of Chazal's interpretations for the name "moriah" is
based on its derivation from the word "hora'a" teaching: "The mountain
from which teaching emanated to Israel" (Ta'anit
16a).
A further connection between the giving of the Torah and the Temple is
the awe that characterizes the encounter with both. In fact, the Torah explicitly connects
these two focuses of awe in the commandment, "You shall observe My Shabbatot,
and fear My Sanctuary; I am God" (Vayikra 26:2) [13]. In Sefer Devarim (4:10) we
read:
The
day when you stood before the Lord your God at Chorev, when God said to me:
"Gather the nation to Me, that I may make them hear My words, that they may
learn to fear Me all the days that they live upon the land, and teach their
children."
We
find another explicit reference to the connection between these two mountains
Mount Sinai ("the mountain of God") and Mount Moriah ("the mountain where God
desired as His abode") in Psalm 68 (verses 16-18):
"The
MOUNTAIN OF GOD; mountain of Bashan, mountain of high peaks, mountain of Bashan:
why do you look askance, mountain of high peaks, at THE MOUNTAIN WHICH GOD HAS
DESIRED AS HIS ABODE? God will surely dwell there forever."
The
psalm makes mention of the "mountain of God," and goes on to mention Mount Sinai
several times, but "the mountain which God has desired as His abode" - Mount Moriah is the place where God
will dwell forever.
Midrash
Tehillim
explains this psalm as follows:
"The
mountain which God has desired as His abode" this refers to Sinai, which is
lower than all of you (mountains), as it is written: "I dwell in exaltedness and
holiness; and [also] with the oppressed and lowly of spirit," and it is written,
"For God is great: the lowly shall see, and the high shall know from afar." Can God's Presence remain there [at
Mount Sinai] forever? [No,] therefore we are told, "Surely God shall dwell
forever" He returned His Presence to the heavens.
And
as for Sinai where did it come from? Rabbi Yossi taught:
It
was taken and separated from Mount Moriah, as challa is separated from
the dough from the place where Yitzchak was bound. The Holy One said: Since Yitzchak was
bound there, it is appropriate that his descendants receive the Torah upon
it. And from where do we know that
it is destined to return to its place? As it is written, "The mountain of God's
House shall be established at the head of the mountains" these are Tavor and
Carmel and Sinai and Zion. "The
mountains" (he-harim) "God lifted" (Hashem herim); in other
words, like the number of the five books of the Torah.
The
Midrash uses language full of imagery to allude to the inner connection between
the two mountains Sinai and Moriah; the giving of the Torah, which began on
Sinai, continues at Mount Moriah.
The distinction or division between the two mountains is described by the
Midrash as comparable to the separation of challa from the dough. Sinai is the "separated piece," as it
were, that is raised up on high.
In summary, then, the uniqueness of Mount Moriah was known from the time
of the Creation and up until the days of Avraham. This place was known to have special
properties for a unique connection with God. After the Akeida, the location of the
place was concealed from the consciousness of the forefathers and the
tribes. Meanwhile, at the time of
the Exodus, the receiving of the Torah and the construction of the
Mishkan, Mount Sinai "took the place" of Mount Moriah, as it were
[14]. From this point onwards,
throughout 480 years, there is a gradual return to Mount Moriah up to the
actual building of the Temple by Shlomo.
All in all, Mount Moriah accompanied the process of the consolidation of
Am Yisrael as a nation. The
beginning of this process was at the giving of the Torah, and in the wake of
this great event the nation followed God in the desert and thereafter in
Eretz Yisrael. Because the
place was concealed, there arose a need to seek out the mountain. Thus, it was only after the emergence of
a permanent regime and stable monarchy in Eretz Yisrael that the mountain
was once again revealed, and the Temple built upon it.
C. Differences between Mount Sinai and
Mount Moriah
Despite the many connections between the two mountains, there are also
significant differences. First and
foremost is the fact that the holiness of Mount Sinai existed only at the time
of the Revelation; once that event was over "When the shofar sounds long, they
shall ascend the mountain" (Shemot 19:13). The Gemara (Ta'anit 21b) comments
on this, as follows:
We
learn: Rabbi Yossi said, "It is not a man's place that brings him honor, rather,
a man honors his place. We see in
the case of Mount Sinai that so long as the Divine Presence rested there the
Torah says, "Even the flocks and the cattle shall not graze facing that
mountain." As soon as the Divine
Presence departed from there the Torah says, "When the shofar sounds long,
they shall ascend the mountain."
The
same applies to the status of the Mishkan: the sanctity of its location
exists only so long as the Mishkan functions there; once it moves on
its sanctity also dissolves. In
contrast, the sanctity of Mount Moriah is eternal; the destruction of the Temple
does not bring it to an end. Mount
Moriah was destined to be the resting place of the Divine Presence from the time
of Creation. From the moment it was revealed and the Temple was built there, in
the time of David and Shlomo, its sanctity was permanently established. As the Rambam teaches: "Because the
sanctity of the Temple and of Jerusalem derive from the Divine Presence, and the
Divine Presence is never nullified" (Laws of the Temple, Chapter
6:14).
What is the significance of this difference between the two mountains?
Aside from the essential difference
between the two revelations a one-time, temporary revelation on Mount
Sinai and an ongoing revelation on Mount Moriah it would appear that the
difference between the respective sanctities of the to places reflects several
other differences between the two revelations:
1.
The
revelation at Sinai was an other-worldly, one-time event in human history, which
left no traces on the physical, geographic spot where it took place. The revelation on Mount Moriah, on the
other hand, was less ethereal, and left its mark on the physical world
[15].
2.
At
Mount Sinai, the initiative, appearance, and content of the revelation all came
from God. The human partnership in
the Revelation at Sinai was expressed in listening to God's word, accepting the
Torah, and internalizing the revelation.
In the Mishkan and afterward in the Temple there is a
fundamental demand for human partnership, both in terms of seeking out the place
("You shall seek His dwelling and you shall come to there") and in the
construction of the Temple ("They shall make Me a Sanctuary, that I may dwell in
their midst").
3.
The
revelation at Sinai was meant for Am Yisrael alone, while the revelation
at Mount Moriah is ultimately meant to reveal God's Kingship over the entire
world. This distinction is
emphasized by the prophets: Am Yisrael, which at Sinai became a "kingdom
of priests and a holy nation," is meant to bring the whole world to a
recognition of God's Kingship. In
this sense, we may say that Mount Sinai leads to Mount Moriah
[16].
In summary: the revelation at Sinai was an ethereal, one-time, unique
Divine revelation to Am Yisrael, and it took place at God's sole
discretion. This event signified
the formal start of the connection between God and Am Yisrael; when the
event was over, the journey began in the direction of Mount Moriah where
revelation is permanent, universal, and demands active involvement by
man.
SUMMARY
In this appendix we have examined the significance of the connection
between the Revelation at Sinai on one hand and the Akeida and building of the
Temple on Mount Moriah, on the other.
In the next shiur, as mentioned, we hope to discuss the
significance of the name Jerusalem (Yerushalayim).
Notes:
[1] Rav
Mordekhai Breuer offers a beautiful commentary on this issue in his book
"Pirkei Mo'adot," pp. 332-333; we quote its essence
here.
[2] Further on
in the shiur we shall address the hint here at the polar divide that
separates the story of the Akeida from the burning of sons and daughters to
Molekh.
[3] In his
commentary to this psalm, Rav Y. Shaviv ("Yesod ha-Ma'aleh," Tevunot
Publishers, Jerusalem 5744, pp. 137-143) notes the connection between fear or
awe of God and the blessing of children and grandchildren, and shows how this
blessing was realized through Yosef, who saw a third generation through
Ephraim's grandchildren as well as "also the children of Makhir, son of
Menasheh, were brought up on Yosef's knees" (Bereishit 50:23), and also
through Iyov, who also feared God, and who merited to see four generations of
his descendants. The same idea
arises from Tehillim 103:17 "God's loving kindness is from everlasting
to everlasting upon those who fear Him, and His righteousness to children's
children
."
[4] In general,
this section (Divrei Ha-yamim 21) sees multiple uses of the root
"r-a-h" in different senses.
[5] There is a
well-known dispute among the Rishonim concerning the reason for the
sacrifices. The Ramban, commenting
on the beginning of Vayikra (1:9) disagrees with the view of the Rambam,
who maintains that the sacrifices were instituted for the purposes of softening
the prevalent and accepted norm of idolatry. The Ramban proposes, instead, that the
parts of the animal that are sacrificed actually replace the body parts of the
personal offering it. In other
words, God suffices with the offering of an animal as a sacrifice but
theoretically one could imagine human sacrifice as atonement for sin. A well-known teaching of the Rashbam (on
Bereishit 22:1) explains that the story of the Akeida is juxtaposed to
the covenant that Avraham forged with Avimelekh, because the Akeida was a
punishment to Avraham for what he relinquished through this covenant. We shall not elaborate any further
here.
[6]
Chazal and the Rishonim offer various interpretations of this
contradiction; the different approaches include different understandings as to
the essence of the test, or even the claim that the conclusion is actually to be
found right at the start, in the command itself, which was to "bring up"
(le-ha'alot) Yitzchak but not to sacrifice him. We shall not elaborate any further
here.
[7] The Rambam
(Laws of the Temple, 2:1-2) quotes a rabbinical tradition (Pirkei de-Rabbi
Eliezer, chapter 31) that Adam, Kayin and Hevel, as well as Noach all also
sacrificed on Mount Moriah.
[8] We do not
pretend, within this framework, to cover in any measure the subject of the
Akeida, which is elevated beyond our understanding and includes many different
issues and very broad philosophical perceptions. We have addressed only one aspect of the
Akeida, relating to the essence of Mount Moriah.
[9] Obviously,
this is not a classic instance of sexual immorality, but there is something of a
desecration and distortion of the sexual bond.
[10] The
offering up as a sacrifice of the son of the King of Moav, upon the wall, with
the expectation that this would bring victory, evoked Divine fury upon Israel
(II Melakhim 3:27).
[11] We have
dealt here with the significance of animal sacrifice as a replacement for the
person. However, Rav Kook (see, for
example, Olat Ra'aya, part I, p. 292, on the verse "May it be sweet to
God
") points out a further aspect to the sacrifice: uplifting the animal itself
towards its Source. Serving as a
sacrifice is the greatest closeness that an animal can achieve with the Creator,
through its blood. We shall not
elaborate further here.
[12] We listed
the connections in detail in the shiur on Mount Moriah, its identity, and
meanings of its name.
[13] This
subject needs much elaboration and proof, but the scope of this shiur
does not allow for it here.
[14] In fact,
the special status of Mount Sinai is recognized already at the time of God's
revelation to Moshe at the burning bush.
[15] This
teaching is reportedly quoted from Rav Dessler (Ha-Dam Ha-kadosh,"
Jerusalem 5717, p.
187).
[16] It is
interesting that the greater and more lofty revelation which has no impact on
the physical world remains superior, temporary, and unrepeatable, while the
"lower" revelation, which does have an impact on the material world, continues
to exist over time and is eternal.
Apparently, the reason for this is that God "constricted" His revelation,
as it were, at Mount Moriah at the time that He chose it at the Creation of the
world, in order to facilitate the existence of the world, and in order to allow
the world to be brought to perfection.
At Sinai essentially an other-worldly and one-time event meant to
commence the consolidation of the nation around the giving of the Torah God
was fully revealed, as it were.
Translated by
Kaeren Fish
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!