 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
"And the month which was turned"
On completion of the Mishkan and Rosh Hodesh Adar
(All rights reserved to Keren Yishai)
If you would be so kind as to bear with me, I would like to go into issues of Rosh Hodesh Adar and Purim, but will still begin with the conclusion of the construction of the Mishkan, the Tabernacle, in Parshat Pekudei at the conclusion of Shemot. In the past few weeks we have dealt mainly with the work involved in the building of the Mishkan. I noticed a very interesting thing that never occurred to me before. There is a connection, according to one tannaitic opinion, a very, very close one, between Rosh Hodesh Adar and the conclusion of the work on the Mishkan with which we find ourselves involved in Pekudei.
The Torah states in our parshah, at the beginning of the final chapter: "And the Lord spoke to Moses saying: On the first day of the first month you shall set up the Tabernacle of the Tent of Meeting" (Ex. 40:2). The expression you shall set up requires explanation. "You shall set up" is not the same as "you shall build" nor "you shall prepare," it refers to something already existing. The work on the Mishkan began the morning after Yom Kippur. Moses holds the convocation of the whole community of Israel and the work on the Mishkan. On that same day he informs them about the shekalim, we have spoken about the tent he pitches outside the camp, and of the judging that he begins. "You shall set up the Tabernacle" sounds as if the Mishkan had already previously been folded up somewhere and that what they had to do now was to actually set it up, as our Sages interpreted the statement, but in one derashah, a well-known one, the interpretation given is that the work of preparing the parts for the Mishkan took three months. If we begin on the 11th of Tishri, the day after Yom Kippur, then we find ourselves in Kislev by the way, in Hanukkah. That would mean that they waited with the Mishkan, and on the first day of the first month, the explicit date given — Rosh Hodesh Nisan — held the dedication of the Tabernacle, "you shall set up the Mishkan," fine.
But there is a different opinion in Midrash Tanhuma at the end of Parshat Pekudei, and it is very interesting:
Rabbi Hanina says that on the first of Adar the work on the Mishkan was completed…but since the Lord intended to combine the joy over the Mishkan with the joy of the day upon which Isaac was born—since Isaac was born on the first of Nisan— the Lord said, "For I am mixing their happiness, one happy event within another." This is a very strange midrash. First of all, Rosh Hodesh Adar is the date on which the work on the Mishkan was finished. I understand the homiletic idea that links the 25th of Kislev with the work on the Mishkan, but Rosh Hodesh Adar? This is Rosh Hodesh Adar which in time will turn from being a month that begins in sorrow to one of joy and from mourning to a festive day. Secondly, now they are waiting with the Mishkan, and it will be set up on Rosh Hodesh Nisan. If so, then I understand this too, for it says in the imperative to set it up on Rosh Hodesh Nisan, I do not need explanations. But then, suddenly, they say that actually setting it upon on Rosh Hodesh is a way to cut expenses, by joining happy events. You must make a birthday party to celebrate the birth of Isaac and you must celebrate the setting up of the Mishkan — so let's combine them. In any event, we still are not so clear, even today, exactly about this birthday celebration, for Isaac's mother conceived on Rosh ha-Shanah, and we have dealt more than once on the too short period between Rosh ha-Shanah and Rosh Hodesh Nisan, but our Sages have given their interpretations, so let's not go into it.
If so, he is born on Rosh Hodesh Nisan, and the Lord says I will intertwine for them one happy event within another, for one can mingle one joyous occasion with another, I will combine for them the joy over the birth of Isaac with the joy of the dedication of the Mishkan. A very strange midrash, and it demands thorough understanding. By the way, the midrash there goes on to say that "wiseguys" of those days would have put it differently: And the Lord said, I'll show them and mingle for them one happy event with another. As if in contrast to an opposition claiming the reverse, you do have to link it.
Let me stop here. I will get back to this at the very end if I can to the Mishkan and Isaac and the link between them. Enough for now at this stage, since we now have reason to deal with Pekudei and Rosh Hodesh Adar. Further on I want to show that this is not only a forced explanation linking us to Rosh Hodesh Adar.
"From the beginning of Adar rejoicings are increased" is a song but also a gemara, and halakhically this is very interesting. Does the entire month have significance? We are speaking here of dates. We do have "When Av comes in, rejoicings must be diminished" (Mishnah, Ta'anit 4:6), but that does not apply to the entire month, this is the din towards reaching Tisha b'Av, for the week in which it occurs. By the way, there are very practical laws, the week in which Tisha b'Av falls, one does not do laundry, does not cut one's hair or iron, there are definitions. But for "From the beginning of Adar rejoicings are increased" (Ta'anit 29a) there are no halakhic definitions, though don't tell that to any student, but there are no halakhic definitions to "From the beginning of Adar rejoicings are increased." And interestingly, this does not appear in Maimonides as a halakhah. In Maimonides and in the Shulhan Arukh there does appear a law in the Laws of Fasting in which it is written When Av comes in, rejoicings must be diminished," but there is no halakhah stating "from the beginning of Adar rejoicings are increased," and that is not because Maimonides did not appreciate the issue of rejoicing, totally opposite. Apparently it is difficult to translate this into halakhic definitions, as to how to give this expression, with what halakhic definition. I understand the halakhic definition of the diminishing of rejoicing — we don't whitewash the house, don't do laundry, don't or do eat meat. But what is the halakhic definition of increasing rejoicing in Adar? We are dealing here with halakhah, not with an idea. Then in the Talmud it appears as an idea, but Maimonides does not define it halakhically.
When we do go into this a bit, in any event, in the world of halakhah, we discover that there is significance to the entire month of Adar from aspect of the issue of Purim. This entire month is the month that was turn from sorrow to rejoicing, from mourning to festival day. A great number of verses concern the month: "And the twelfth month is the month of Adar," "in the month they hoped, in the day that the enemies of the Jews hoped to have power over them, though it was turned to the contrary." The entire month, as it were, turns into a concept of rejoicing which must be understood. But in order to anchor this and to "quantify it" in the world of halakhah, I would like to consider a number of halakhic definitions, with your permission.
Here we have one of the halakhot, in the Shulhan Arukh (Orah Hayyim, 788:7): "One sailing on the sea or moving in a caravan who does not find a megillah to take with him, let him read it on the 13th or the 12th or the 11th with reciting the blessing." Great. By the way, how did they come to the 13th or the 12th or the 11th? For those who remember, it is in the mishnah that begins tractate Megillah. "Megillat Esther is read on the 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, or 15th." We remember that in the unwalled cities it is read on the 14th and in the walled cities on the 15th. The 11th, 12th, or 13th is because of the villagers who do not have a minyan, and until they gather together on Monday and Thursday, we calculate that it will fall on the 11th, 12th, or 13th, fine. In line with this the halakhah rules, and that is how the Shulhan Arukh decides, the same din as given in the Mishnah in the time of the villagers. This, too, is interesting, the more recent halakhah in the Shulhan Arukh appeals to a prior petor (release)! The Tur writes 650 years ago, the law for the villagers applies to our period regarding some one who is sailing on a boat, that he to can read on the megillah on the 11th.
So for Purim they read on the 11th, 12th, or 13th, when they have market days and then they do or do not have a minyan. But whoever sets on in a journey in a caravan may be traveling for a month or more. "And if it is to possible to wait for these days," that is, he cannot wait for the 11th, 12th, or 13th, he only has a ritually fit megillah on 2 Adar. "Some say that he reads even from the beginning of the month" (ibid.). Very interesting. Why? The Mishnah Berurah (se'if katan 21) states "Even from the beginning of the month. As it is written "And the month which was turned from sorrow to joy." That means that the month which was turned, has halakhic significance and precisely that month. Therefore, one cannot read the megillah, for example, in Shevat, for he is not reading it in commemoration of the historical event but there is halakhic significance to reading the megillah in the entire month of Adar.
This whole issue of the meal, and mishlo'ah manot, of gifts to the poor, concerns not only interesting characteristics making Purim distinct. There are things here essentially different from any other holiday. The gifts to the poor I would categorize as part of the deeds of charity. The meal, you may say that there is a commandment to make a meal on each holiday, soon we shall see that it is different for Purim. But on Purim, both for the meal and mainly for mishlo'ah manot, there is a din that exists only for Purim, to which nothing is similar at any other point in the year. First of all, mishlo'ah manot is found nowhere else, no other day in the calendar has mishlo'ah manot, this is a special, strange law applying only to Purim. Why was it decided upon? What happened? I have seen that someone claims something that, at the least, seems to me a bit odd; he proposes that technically they simply "gathered themselves together, and stood for their lives," so all the gang went out to call up the reserves, all of them were together. So since they had "gathered themselves together, and stood for their lives," it turned out that not everyone had brought food, so it was necessary to give mishlo'ah manot to each other, because they had to give to anyone who did not have food. An important Jew wrote that, but I think it is quite incorrect. He based his ideas on what is written in Nehemiah, where it tells that Nehemiah gathered the Jews in the open space of the Water Gate and he read the Torah to them, and then he told them not to weep, for it was now Rosh ha-Shanah and one must be glad. And then he reveals to the Jews who were returning after 70 years of exile in Babylonia that there is Rosh ha-Shanah and there is Sukkot, and he tells them that "now the joy of the Lord is your strength," and says, among other things, to begin to give each other, "and send portions to them for whom nothing is prepared" (Neh. 8:10). This is the only other time in the Bible in which the expression "sending portions" is mentioned. But there it is really for one who does not have food, while on Purim that's absolutely not the case. The gifts to the poor are for those who do not have, but the sending of portions one to the other, is not because anyone is lacking food.
Perhaps before we look at the law for the Purim meal, we shall turn to the law on mishlo'ah manot, it is so odd, it is as follows (Mishnah Berurah, Beur Halakhah, se'if katan 4), "And each person is obligated to send his fellow man two portions of meat or types of food as it is written, 'sending portions one to another,' two gifts to one person. And whoever sends more generously to friends is praiseworthy," nothing here indicates that the recipient needs it. "And if he doesn't have, he exchanges with the other fellow, this one sending the other his meal, and that one sending that one his meal, so that they should fulfill 'sending portions one to another.'" This is not connected to giving to one who doesn't have! This is just trading.
There is a fascinating halakhah that appears in Hayyei Adam, though not everyone rules this way, but it shows to what extent mishlo'ah manot is not a social welfare issue. I wish to understand it in order to understand Purim. The Hayyei Adam proved from the Yerushalmi "that if you send a rich person an item of low value," that is, if you send him steak at a lower level than he is used to, "you have not fulfilled the obligation of mishlo'ah manot," and the same conclusion can be drawn from Ritba according to one version of the gemara. Indeed, the other posekim do not mention this idea and it is worthwhile being careful about it from the outset (Mishnah Berurah, Beur Halakhah, se'if katan 20). This is very interesting, it means, that anyone dealing with mishlo'ah manot to a rich person must take into consideration what that person does or does not eat and pay attention to what he is sending. This halakhah certainly makes the concept of mishlo'ah manot not something that a person needs. One must understand the idea, what was it they were telling us here?
By the way, I have seen explanations of 'sending portions one to another' as not really an issue of need but to make someone happy. The day is a day of gladness, so each person should make the other happy, fine. We have, for example, the din of ve-samahta be-hagekha ("you shall rejoice in your feast") for every holiday, this is nothing new for Purim. The Torah taught us "you shall rejoice in your feast" for Sukkot, and we know about if for Passover and Shavuot, that's great. How does one rejoice? Well, the halakhah states that you make each person rejoice with that which makes him happy. The law says the man rejoices in food, the woman in beautiful clothes, each one rejoicing with something of his own. This is very interesting, regarding 'sending portions one to another,' it is written: "One is obligated to send his fellowman two portions of meat or two kinds of food for it is said 'sending portions one to another.'" The Mishnah Berurah (Be'ur Halakhah, se'if katan 20) immediately responds that it is types of food "and not clothing or other things." If you send a suit worth a thousand dollars you have not fulfilled the obligation of Mishlo'ah Manot. Then this is not ve-samahta, it must definitely ve food. "And this is the law regarding drinks which do qualify since drinks are considered part of food," so it is sufficient to send one type of food and one type of drink. This is a fascinating halakhah which we must understand well. By the way, posekim state that a book is also not considered mishlo'ah manot. Rabbi Ovadia has written on this at length in a number of his responsa. It is an excellent item, and nice to receive and nice to give, but it does not fulfill the obligation of mishlo'ah manot, even if you give a whole book shelf worth, you must still send food, and according to Hayyei Adam it must be food at the level of the one who is receiving it.
So if we are dealing with food, let's go back for a moment to the issue of se'udat Purim, the Purim meal, where we find the second strange thing existing only on this day of the year. We said that that it is a commandment to rejoice on every holiday, but no other holiday has mishlo'ah manot. Perhaps every holiday has a commandment to help, but there is no holiday that has a commandment not to help, but rather to give things to each other and maximum to trade food. Now there is another thing that only occurs with Purim and it is even more difficult, we are already familiar with it and it is even stranger "It is the duty of a man to mellow himself [with wine] on Purim" (Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim, 695:2), we know all this already, this is not only a song, but halakhah. "Until he can't tell the difference between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai." The Rama comes and states it thus: "For some say a person is supposed to get drunk to such a degree." How did he interpret the Shulhan Arukh there, what was the Shulhan Arukh saying? That one is to get so drunk, "but rather one should drink more than his study?" The intention is not that he should drink more than he studies, nor that he should drink more than usual, but rather drink more than usual "and sleep." Since he drinks more than he is used to, he will fall asleep. "And while he is sleeping he cannot differentiate between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai." It may be that some people enjoy this halakhah. "Some do more and some do less," of what? Of drunkenness, of wine. "But only that his heart should be directed towards the heavens,." This refers to sacrifices, but the Rama uses the phrase to refer to the amount of wine he drinks.
The Hafetz Haim questions this in Mishnah Berurah, Be'ur Halakhah (se'if katan 4), "'a person is supposed to get mellow [on wine] on Purim..'. and if you say, how could our Sages make obligatory what is mentioned in the Torah and in the Prophets in a number of places, that drunkenness is a great stumbling block." Then suddenly they come on Purim and say you should get drunk. The Maharil, and the Rama who cites him, kind of round out the corners and say, how do we get to "he doesn't know [the difference]"? He sleeps. But if this were the peshat, the straightforward meaning, then it would state a person is supposed to sleep, and if he can't do it, then he should drink more than usual. That is, according to the Maharil, the intention is actually that he should drink more than usual, as if it were a sleeping pill. He is supposed to sleep, that is, he is supposed "not to know the difference." How? Then I have a suggestion — you should drink. But the Shulhan Arukh certainly didn't see things that way. Beur ha-Halakhah asks, "How could our Sages make obligatory something that in the Torah and the Prophets appears a number of times and says that drunkenness is a great stumbling block"? This is still a fascinating halakhah, that the Purim meal is not like all the other festival meals. At no other meal is there a commandment to drink to a state of drunkenness drunk, just the opposite, it is forbidden. But on Purim it is a commandment, even though, this meal is not like all other meals.
By the way, "a person is supposed to get mellow [on wine] on Purim" appears in the Shulhan Arukh under Laws for a Meal, it is law 2 under the halakhot of seu'dat Purim. Halakhah 1 on seu'dat Purim opens with the quote from the Rama "It is a mitzva to make seu'dat Purim a grand meal," this is also a kind of special issue. What is meant by "grand"? I do not know how to define it, but the obligation to get drunk on Purim which is the straightforward meaning of "a man is obligated to become mellow [on wine]" as stated in the Shulahn Arukh, not only is there no such thing with any other holiday as I questioned regarding mishlo'ah manot, but it is in contrast to all the other 364 days of the year. An opposite approach. How did the Rama phrase it? " [it is] mentioned in the Torah and Prophets in a number of places that drunkenness is a great stumbling block." The drunk is always presents in a negative like, as with Lot, Noah, in the Prophets.
Be'ur Ha-Halakhah (se'if katan 4) explains this "and one must say that because all the miracles performed for the Jews in the time of Ahasuerus took place at feasts since at first Vashti was harassed at a feast and then came Esther, and there is the issue of Haman and his fall at a feast, so the Sages required us to become drunk so that the great miracle will be remembered by the drinking of wine." This does not seem to be a full answer. If the prohibition is such as it is and there is no positive example for drunkenness in the Torah and Prophets, then it is difficult to turn everything topsy-turvy only because everything took place there at a feast! After all, what really going on, Ahasuerus made a feast over Vashti, so what, does that give us a custom handed down by our forefathers? We have to do what he did with Vashti? Esther made a feast, because she was seeking a way to invite Ahasurerus and Haman, so she fixed it that the King and Haman would come — and tomorrow we will drink. Is this a reason for the commandment on Purim to do something exceptional not done on the other 364 days of the year, and to do what we are warned against all year through and to get drunk? I understand the Rama, who says that "until he doesn't know [the difference]" means that he should fall asleep. But the author doesn't want to accept that.
By the way, the Mishnah Berurah concludes and says that this is the Rama's system, that is Eliyahu Raba, "And in any event, all this regarding the mitzva and not to delay," that is, even if one did not become drunk he has fulfilled his obligation. But the questions still remains a question, why what is considered a negative thing at all other time, is considered an obligation here. This is essential for joy, essential for the meal, since a feast occurred there a number of times. And it is interesting that not even once, and not even by allusion, is it noted that the meal held there was entirely for a honorable, holy purpose. On the contrary, the feasts in Megillat Esther, as I see them, when you read them as they are, are the reason for not drinking. I would now understand that we had won and did to have need of the customs of Ahasuerus, Vashti and all the feast and the abandoned vulgarity described in Megillat Esther? And in the end, what is the upshot? We drink!
By the way, according to the Rama it is not clear what is "until he doesn't know," and we said that he should sleep and not know, but this apparently is not the straightforward meaning as seen by the Shulhan Arukh. So how does the Shulhan Arukh interpret it? What kind of commandment is this, why shouldn't he be able to differentiate between "cursed be Haman" and "blessed be Mordecai"? What is so bad about that? The Mishnah Berurah (Be'ur Halakhah, Mishnah Berurah, se'if katan 4) says, "This is the first defeat". What does cursed be Haman mean? It is not that he should not differentiate between Haman and Mordecai, but the intention is "that this is the first fall from which great revenge derived." Cursed be Haman is the revenge that they took on Haman. And blessed be Mordecai, "and is there a greater favor than this greatness of Mordecai who was blessed by the Lord and who rose to the heights," that is, what is cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai? Cursed be Haman is the next to last chapter in Megillat Esther, when they took Haman's ten sons, hanged them on the tree and the whole story. Blessed be Mordecai is that he was appointed second to the king. And that one does not know the difference between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai is that he does not remember what is in chapter 9 and what in chapter 10, and he has mixed them all together.
And the Mishnah Berurah explains that "before he got drunk he surely thanked God for the two favorable acts." For before he got drunk, then he of course remembered precisely those two favors and said thank you to God for Haman's downfall, and expressed gratitude for Mordecai's promotion. "And thereby Hazal said that he should not stop giving praise to the Lord for this in joy until he reaches a state where he does not differentiate anymore between what is better, this or that." Cursed be Haman and Blessed be Mordecai is not that he should not differentiate between the evil person and the righteous one, but that he should not be able to differentiate between favor A and favor B, between one miracle and another. He adds at the end, "and see in E"Z who wrote that, in any event, he should be careful over washing his hands and saying the blessing over bread and grace after meals and there should be the joy of mitzva., and not wild vulgarity, that he should remember even if drunk. And he concludes interestingly, "And look in Peri Megaddim who wrote that the issue of the Purim meal and gifts to the need and mishloa'h manot, possibly require kavvanah (devoted intention) for the purpose of mitzva." Anyone conversant with the world of halakhah and who is familiar with concept of "kavvanah for the purpose of mitzva" knows that what is written here is revolutionary. All commandments require intention, but you fulfill them even without it. In contrast, the Peri Megaddim now claims, and is quoted in the halakhah in the Mishnah Berurah, that it may be that mishlo'ah manot and gifts to the poor and the Purim meal require kavannah. Pay attention, to which commandment did this not apply? Reading the megillah. Becoming mellow with wine is with the meal, but reading the megillah, he did not mention. Mishlo'ah manot, Purim meal, gifts to the poor — this is the meal that it is worthwhile getting get drunk at according to the Shulhan Arukh, but there should be kavanah. "Perhaps require kavvanah...for the purpose of mitzva." It is always good that there is kavannah, yet a person fulfills his task without it. But here it is apparently needed, otherwise the whole business does not count.
I wish to summarize briefly what is written there, the statements are very, very difficult, for it is somewhat difficult to accept as is the explanations given up to this point in the Mishnah Berurah and in Be'ur Halakhah in the name of other Aharonim. Let's begin with Question 1: What makes a whole month a month of joy? We are aware of the 14th and the 15th. Second, what kind of odd halakhot do we have here? Se'udat Purim is obligatory, completely different from all the other meals in the year. First of all, for no meal and for no holiday have we seen any commandment to have kavvanah towards the meal. Actually, there is no commandment to have meals, this does not appear as a commandment, there is no positive commandment to have a meal. Whoever does not want to eat, doesn't have to eat; who ever does not feel right about this—so don't do it. Secondly, drunkenness at the meal. It is difficult to accept, as we have already said, that the reason for drunkenness at the meal is that a feast appears in the megillah. So okay, if you follow the Rama's system "until he sleeps," then what is "until he does not know"? And the mishlo'ah manot is certainly, we now realize, not for the purpose of giving to one another because of someone's welfare situation, that comes under gifts to the poor.So what is mishlo'ah manot?
By the way, even the gifts to the poor are different than all the rest of the year. On Purim there is a very important din to remember, on Purim whoever asks, get. Any person who puts out his hand and requests a gift must be given something without checking his need. This is Purim, once a year.
I want to begin everything with the question that I consider the most difficult of all — the issue of drunkenness. This drunkenness, which in all truth the posekim, too, had great reservations in accepting, how should we teach about it? Yes, no, what's right about it? The plain halakah in the language of gemara is almost unequivocal in meaning. "It is the duty of a man to mellow himself [with wine] on Purim until he cannot tell the difference between 'cursed be Haman' and 'blessed be Mordecai.'" I have a feeling that we understood it correctly even at the beginning, before we learned the peshat that "cursed be Haman" is chapter 9 and "blessed be Mordecai" is chapter 10. Cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai until he will be drunk and not know anything, so I have understood this sentence. It is true that I do not understand why, but the sentence I think I understand.
Now, I wish to address the entire concept of Purim and rejoicing that permeates the entire month and the concept of joy, the deep idea of the joyousness of Purim in the words of the Maharal of Prague. Here a basic revolution occurs not only in understanding Purim, but perhaps in the entire understanding of the world. Permit me to make a short introduction before turning to the Maharal. I said earlier that the commandment for joy is not an innovation with Purim. The word simha appears in Megillat Esther, "and made it a day of feasting and gladness," "the city of Shushan rejoiced and was glad," the motif of gladness appears numerous times, but rejoicing is not the innovation of Purim. The commandment to rejoice is to be joyful on the holidays. The commandment to be happy appears in the Torah regarding being happy in living. How is it written in the parshat ha-tokhahah (the section of rebuke, Deuteronomy 28), that the curse comes from what? "Because you served not the Lord your God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, for the abundance of all things" (Deut. 28:48). This is not the innovation of Purim. We did not see anywhere, "Because you served not the Lord your God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart," so drink too much. And yet there is still an essential difference in the context of rejoicing.
Moreover, Purim is not called yom tov or hag, it is designated as a day of feasting and joy, and "should make them days of feasting and joy, and of sending portions one to another, and gifts to the poor…" Sukkot was designated because God made the children of Israel dwell in booths, and now on Sukkot we must do such and such things. We must dwell in the Sukkah, bless the lulav, use the four species, and be joyous. It is true that one should be happy in everything, but the commandment of "you shall rejoice in your feast," from the aspect of legal definition, is a commandment distinct from the issue involved in Sukkot. Why do I celebrate Sukkot? Not because a day of joy was designated, but because on Sukkot God took the children of Israel out of Egypt, and now it is so joyous that it is the time of our rejoicing. Why do I make Passover? For that is the day when God took me out of Egypt. And the seventh day of Passover, because that is the day of the parting of the Red Sea. Now there is a holiday, so there is an issue of joy. Then comes the question of how to be joyous? The answer is with meat, with wine, sacrifices, with fine clothing, fine. Purim is not called a day of praise and thanksgiving, as is Hanukkah, for example. True, Purim is not from the Torah; right, it is comes from the time of the Second Temple, of the Oral Law. Okay, Hanukkah is even later, but it was designated for praise and thanksgiving. By the way, on Purim there actually is no Hallel. What is there on Purim? Food, to eat a grand meal. Importantly there is a megillah that after the fact, in some kind of extenuating circumstances, it is quite possible to fulfill ones obligation also on 3 Adar. This Jew on the ship, what did he do on Purim? If he did everything as written in the Shulhan Arukh and did not study the Mishnah Berurah where you go to sleep in the middle, or that he want to go to sleep but it is difficult for him on the ship. What did he do on Purim? He eats, gets drunk, sends portions to another, and gives gifts to the poor. That is what he is obliged to do, nothing will help him. You don't have [the necessary items], take care that you will have. And if you have nothing, then that which you do eat trade with a companion of yours. The megillah you read on 4 Adar. You must understand this, "and make it a day of feasting and gladness," gladness is the essence of the day, now this day will be detailed by X number of halakhot. In contrast, the essence of Passover is remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt. This is an important halakhic point, and it must be expressed through joy and also by eating matzah.
By the way, from where do we derive the obligation to drink to the point of mellow on Purim? That is the straightforward interpretation of the verse. Feasting and gladness. Feasting first, then gladness. The verse says to drink. If the verse says to drink a little, then it is not called a day of feasting, when the Shulhan Arukh says, "more than he is used to," it does not make this formulation at random but "also a person is obliged to drink enough to become mellow," for it interprets the verse straightforwardly, since the verse says a "day of feasting and gladness," it means a grand meal, a feast. That is, when the Bet Din in Mordecai's time determined how we should commemorate Purim, it decided that we will remember it by feasting, which in that generation caused not a few traumas, since the memory of those feasts are noted in Megillat Esther
The Maharal of Prague (introduction to Or Hadash) laid down a great principle which serves an introduction to everything, "and why are the days of Purim days of feasting and gladness, which are bodily indulgences." The concept of bodily indulgences does not seem to derive from our schools of thought, but it is still not so bad, because we are not cut off completely from them. We must eat and drink the year round, we are not ascetics. But regarding Purim, the Maharal takes a different tack, "One's drunkenness must reach such a level that it cancels out the intellect." The only way for the intellect to disappear, is if you are drunk, now I want pure corpus. And that certainly does not sound as if it comes from our schools. "And as it says to drink until I mellow on Purim until he does not know the difference between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai". He accepts all he explanations that the Mishnah Berurah does, that cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai are chapters 9 and 10, but how did he understand it? As we did at the beginning, that it will be without a rational differentiation. Every day I say the blessing "who gave the rooster the intelligence to discern" and also every day atta honen la'adam da'at ("you grant man knowledge"). One of the greatest admorim used to say that he understood every word of the Sabbath prayers, but that he had just one request, that "you grant mankind knowledge" should be inserted in the first three paragraphs before "mekaddesh ha-shabbat". Why? Because also on the Sabbath one needs honen da'at, the discernment, the wisdom. While on Purim my aspiration is — estrangement from reason, the body should be present, not the intellect.
"Since it has been determined that the Purim days are ones of feasting and gladness which are physical indulgences, so one should be drawn completely towards the bodily indulgences to the point that the intellect disappears completely." If you cannot do so, then after the fact, you receive all kinds of dispensations from the Rama and the Maharil, but at the beginning you are supposed to do it. And he continues " For the body and the intellect are two opposites, such that if one rises, the other falls, and the more one tends toward the intellect, the more he is opposed to physical indulgences, so they said that one must drink to the point of mellowness on Purim until he does not know the difference between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai, because then the intellect is totally gone," and now he add the finishing touch to his argument. "And then a person becomes totally physical and even between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai he cannot differentiate, ever though it is because of cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai there is feasting and gladness," for why am I glad.? Because cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai, the opposite situation came into being
I think that there is a very deep point here which says everything. On Purim, explains the Maharal at length in his continuation, Haman sought to do for the first time that which Amalek wanted — the body, anything with the name Jew on it in the entire world had to disappear—men, women, children, old people, and all their booty with contempt. Every infant, every organ, every tendon that said Judaism had to be destroyed. This is not the battle of an intellectual idea, this is a war seems from the outside to be the easiest, this is a war for bodies. But at a deeper level one must perceive, this is the only war that is a war against roots, for Haman comes and says — there is a holiness in the very body of the Jew. This Jewish being, the physical existence of the Jew, disturbs him. And even if he gets what he wants, even then it will disturb him. This is the beginning of the theory of race in its most complete form. The existence of the body is Haman's war. The evil Haman is the very one who knows to come to Ahasuerus and tell him "there is a certain people" and it is scattered and divided and it always exists, and this existence we must annihilate. You see how scattered it is, see how all the objective data will not allow him to survive, and yet nothing finishes him off. We have to destroy the root.
Here I wish to address the most difficult point of all and that is the point the Maharal wants to teach. The deepest root of the Jew is not his reasoning, not is studying, nor his intellect, nor even his observance of the Torah, but he being a Jew. He is a Jew, that is a fact. He represents a concept, not as a private person, he represents a concept that exist in the world in a physical manner. Haman has no objection to some philosophical mummy that will represent the entire world Jewish community, he is only unwilling to see any physical entity in the form of a body called Jew. This is very interesting, the only motif appearing in Esther is "Israel", it is not the children of Israel, nor the Jewish people, but yehudim, little "kikes," that's our name. "Whether Mordecai is from the seed of the Jews," "a Jewish man was in Shushan the capital," "the Jews had light and gladness." The Sefat Emet says that in the time of Megillat Esther we were not so important, we were actually quite lowly, but Jews we were, and that was what the war was about. On Hanukkah they wanted to destroy us spiritually, so when we are victorious, we have to say Hallel. On Purim they wanted to finish off our bodies, so when we are victorious, we have to drink, drink, drink, and drink until our intellect is completely gone, and it will be revealed that our body is holy and pure. There is no fiercer war than this. How is it written, that Purim is like Kippurim, it is the same thing and it is exactly, exactly, exactly the opposite. Yom Kippur is the only day in the year when it is our task to cancel out the body and put our intellect in charge, while Purim is the only day of the year on which it is our task to cancel out the intellect and put the body in charge. For on Yom Kippur the enemy is our evil inclination, Satan, the Angel of Death. On Purim, our enemy is Haman. And on Purim, as on Yom Kippur, the explanation is that in order to reach the truly proper level of Yom Kippur — come, let's see test whether you remember the that the holiest thing that we have within us, is that I am a Jew. God made me a Jew, that Jew who is the lowest in the world is a representative of God, of the Jewish people, nothing will help. So Amalek wants to destroy, he obfuscates his intentions with all kinds of prattling, with all types of explanations. If Mordecai will bow down, if Mordecai won't bow down, if he would only behave better. He really loves it when we think that the more we cave in, the more we give up, we will say more, and will give more, the war will change, and he does not understand all along that there is a war against something else here, not against the children of Israel, but against the Jews, "gathered themselves together, and stood for their lives." There is no other book among the 24 of the Bible in which this appellations occurs so constantly, he there are Jews. Jews, the only reason for which they would like to destroy them, is that they are Jews, and it will not help if there are a million studies and another million that will try to explain from what this comes.
How are we supposed to remember what Amalek did? In the strangest way. Usually to remember something you need intellect. Here, no. To remember you do not need intellect, you need the body, for from whomever is holy and pure, then the secret that comes out of him when wine goes into him, this is also his body. What is the function of this day? Very simple, you make sure that your friend eats, and even if he has food, no difference, he should eat more. And if you do not have, so exchange meals. Remind him of his body, and he will remind you about yours.
How does that well known Hasidic story go? The one about the fellow who eats and eats, because he remembers how the Cossacks had burned his father. His father had been so thin, so this fellow used to say, "When they come to burn me, it will take them a long time. There is tremendous depth to the Jew's having a body. This is something that the Gentiles never liked to hear, and we loved it so much that they did not like to hear it, for we so much liked being spiritual, it worked so well with the Galut, our exile, and with many other things. Today, too, we sometimes love it again. One must remember — Jews have a body, an entity, and it is against the body they want to fight, our root is our body. This is the total opposite of what we are used to and that is the victory of Purim. Therefore we are to make grand feasts of our meals. What is a day of feasting and gladness? And what, after all, is gladness? Gladness is knowing that you do not have anything that is not connected to the source, not only are your reasonings connected to the source, but every organ in you, every cell, every tendon is Jewish. Now you can rejoice and be glad. What am I rejoicing about on Passover? On the Exodus from Egypt. What are you glad about on Shavuot? That we received the Torah. What are you glad about on Purim? That He did not make me a non-Jew! About that I am glad in simple Hebrew, that I am a Jew. This is a tremendous joy greater than all the other joys that a Jew can celebrate. I am from this nation, even if it is more popular to forget it. This is the gladness that turns the entire day into net happiness, for there is no addition, there is no further reason, for there was actually not that occurred in history, nothing, there was nothing more than plans. But evil persons had plans all through history. And was Haman the last one to have plans? Perhaps had we been somewhat larger, a bit more watchful, even after the plans that only last week we all learned of and read about and discussed, perhaps even then we would have had to make Purim. Plans, plans for terrorist acts, for destruction, plans. But the pace today is no rapid that within the hour there are always more important news.
Purim is a different story, plans that were thwarted by someone and who said, gentlemen, now must say thank you to the Lord that the plans were cancelled, when they were only an inch away from being carried out. The plan was not against any idea but against every Jewish limb or organ that exists. There is no greater joy for the Jews who can go back and remind his intellect that all his body is representative of this eternity that is expressed here in reality, in the word, in a physical entity, and not in ephemeral ideas of a book or a museum.
There is a horrible story in the Talmud about Rabbi Hinina ben Teradyon. It tell show they came to kill Rabbi Hinina ben Teradyon, one of the Ten Martyrs. The story's very beginning is interesting, it concerns a meeting of Rabbi Hinina ben Teradyon, whose daughter, Beruria, was the wife of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Hinina ben Teradyon met with a tanna Jose b. Kisma, and he spoke with him precisely about Purim-money. And the Talmud (Avodah Zarah 18a) relates, "On their return, they found R. Hanina b. Teradyon sitting and occupying himself with the Torah, publicly gathering assemblies, and keeping a Torah scroll in his bosom," which is how Rabbi Teryadon went about at all times, with a Torah scroll in his bosom. "they took hold of him, wrapped him in the Scroll of the Law, placed bundles of branches round him and set them on fire. They then brought tufts of wool, which they had soaked in water, and placed them over his heart." Just look at their evilness. You've decided to burn him, so burn him, but so it slowly. They brought tufts of wool soaked in water, so the fire and water would conflict with each other. "So that he should not expire quickly." And his daughter saw him. This was all done by the enemy soldiers. For whoever knows history, and many of us know it not as history but as something current with them at all times, remembers that it was not against their souls they tried to fight but against every organ. "His daughter exclaimed, 'Father, that I should see you in this state!" This is how I see you now? By the way, this is a strange question, what does she mean? "He replied, 'If it were I alone being burned it would have been a thing hard to bear; but now that l am burning together with the Scroll of the Law, He who will have regard for the plight of the Torah will also have regard for my plight.'" How to interpret that, Hinina ben Teradyon, are you not more important to God than a Torah Scroll? That is how he will have regard for your plight? "His disciples called out, 'Rabbi, what do you see?' He answered them, 'The parchments are being burned but the letters are soaring high.' 'Then open your mouth so that the fire will enter it.'" He told them, I will not do it of my own accord, "Let Him who gave me [my soul] take it away, but no one should injure oneself." There was a certain Gentile there among the executioners, "the executioner then said to him, 'Rabbi, if I increase the flame and take away the tufts of wool from over your heart," to make the fire burn hotter, "will you bring me into the life to come?" I will help you, "'Yes,' he replied. 'Then swear unto me.' He swore unto him." How did this executioner endanger himself in the eyes of his officers? "He thereupon raised the flame and removed the tufts of wool from over his heart, and his soul departed speedily." But the executioner realized he had nothing to live for. So he "jumped and threw himself into the fire. And a heavenly voice exclaimed: R. Hanina b. Teradyon and the executioner," this evil person who only a second ago had done a kind of lovingkindness, "have been assigned to the world to come. When Rabbi heard it he wept and said: One may acquire eternal life in a single hour, another after many years."
This is a horrifying story whose depths must be plunged. I heard more than once from Rabbi Goldwicht, zt"l, who explained this wonderful story. He said the daughter asked her father, why are they torturing you body so much? I can understand they want the Torah, that they want your soul, I understand, but what do they want from your body? What to they care about it? Are they going to gain anything from this? "Father, that I should see you in this state? "He replied," that was what he replied to. "If it were I alone being burned it would have been a thing hard to bear." My body as a private person really is not of value, but my body is not my private property, my body is the body of a Jew, now there is a Torah scroll with me, do you know, my daughter, what a Torah scroll is? (Once when we spoke about the Torah scroll.) A Torah scroll is the skin of large cattle, parchment, and within the parchment of the large cattle, there are a great many holy letters, not because they are holy, but because I wrote them for the sake of the sanctity of the Torah scroll! "If it were I alone being burned it would have been a thing hard to bear," but now "He who will have regard for the plight of the Torah will also have regard for my plight." It is impossible to burn letters floating in the air, so why is it forbidden to burn a Torah scroll? For the strength of the Torah scroll comes from its being written on the skin of a large cattle, that it what makes the book a Torah scroll. So what, are you consecrating skin? No, but I want to tell that the world that these letters floating in the air have a physical entity through which they exist. And now "He who will have regard for the plight of the Torah will also have regard for my plight." As he was being burned, his students said to him, "'Rabbi, what do you see?' He answered them, "'The parchments are being burned but the letters are soaring high.'" Whoever has a body, if his body is being burned, knows that the letters continue to float.
Look at what that executioner said to him, I know what the argument is about, I understand what the body of Hinina ben Teradyon is. If I help you so that the body of Hinina ben Teradyon will suffer less, will I receive Olam ha-Ba. He said yes. "And a heavenly voice exclaimed: R. Hanina b. Teradyon and the executioner have been assigned to the world to come. The execution understood in a second what Haman tried to deny, that there is a one nation and it has a body, and the body will continue to exist. This is "until he doesn't not know." 'Does not know' in its plain meaning, 'Does not know' means to reached the level at which I have no need for rational explanations, or intellect, or any idea, any party, any idea, to any of them, on that I am a Jew in my body. The I reach the height of this eternity of "there is a certain people." Purim and Yom ha-Kippurim, all the appointed times are annulled, but Purim will never be annulled. For perhaps commemoration of the Exodus from Egypt, or the sekhakh covering the Sukkah perhaps won't be needed in the future, because there will be greater miracles. But the commemoration of the yehudi, the Jew, they will need in the future, that the Jews lives in actuality inside his body.
Purim for all the importance of "make it a day of feasting and gladness," is not a day on which melakhah is prohibited, the custom was not do it on Purim, who has time anyway to work on Purim, but it is not forbidden on it. Indeed, Rabbi Kook said, certainly melakhah is not prohibited on Purim, for on Purim what is the problem of melakhah and the body. You can do melakhah, no problem. On every other holiday you should not work, to give you time to think about the main idea, Purim don't think. On Purim every action you do is holy, on Purim the body is holy. Once Rabbi Kook stood up in the middle of the Purim meal when it was very late, this was in 1934, and he said (Ma'amarei ha-Ro'eh, p. 57 [Hebrew]) then "And through the occasion of "can't tell the difference between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai," supreme recognition will come for finding unknown Jew in us, and brothers will reveal themselves to each other, and hand will be given to hand, and a loud voice will call out: as in the days of myrrh and myrtle, let it be said today, that there is one united people and firm in its strength, to rebuild all of the destruction through his internal treasure hidden from view in which is inherent the blessing of "go gather all the Jews." That is what he said, and finished with an grand toast, "It is the duty of a man to mellow himself [with wine] on Purim until he can't tell the difference between cursed be Haman and blessed be Mordecai. This was a derashah that was taken down verbatim at the time he made it, and then he addressed the public there, "and let us say, le-hayyim, le-hayyim, for a good life and peace on all Israel, and say Amen." This is the concept of Purim, this is the "until he can't tell the difference."
We opened our discussion with the Mishkan, with Rosh Hodesh Adar, Rosh Hodesh
Nisan and Isaac. Time is needed to do justice to them, so I will only raise one point now. The Mishkan is the reality of place permeated by Divine Presence, it was completed on Rosh Hodesh Adar. The great joy at the finishing of the Mishkan is the joy that influences this entire month. Wait with the Mishkan until Isaac's birthday, since Isaac is the figure from among the other forefathers who was never called "Isaac Isaac." For each of the others we have Abraham Abraham, Jacob Jacob, Moses Moses, for there is Abraham the soul and Abraham the body, there is Jacob the soul and Jacob the body, but Isaac is the one who discovered that everything is something else, so he is the one who prays outside the house, not in the mountain, but in the field. He hunts. And on his birthday we have to set up the Mishkan, for between Rosh Hodesh Adar and Rosh Hodesh Nisan the Mishkan is waiting to be folded. So is there a happier month? The Mishkan is folded waiting to be placed in the light on the birthday of the man who taught how to connect the body and the soul. And at the high spot of this month every year gather Jews who are called only in this megillah by the lowest title, the simplest, most holy, more than other adjectives. And they say, "gather together all the Jews," and what will we do? We will eat and drink. That is "and make it a day of feasting and rejoicing."
<A t a r t e c>
Home | Contact Us | Keren Yishai | Rav Mordechai Elon
Learn the Mekorot | Read the Shiur