The Mystery of the "Sent Goat" | Rabbi Shmuel Goldin | September 30th 2025

Uh we are in the shadow of Yong Kipur and we are going to be somewhat industrious today, somewhat brave because we're going to examine what has to be one of the strangest rituals in our tradition. One which obviously we no longer perform. It was attached to the beta mikdash. And yet it's a a ritual that that warrants our examination. And that's the ritual which I call the ritual the scent goat. All right. Now everybody uses this term scapegoat. That's the word that's been used uh throughout history. But the the Hebrew term is seir hamish which literally means the scent goat. Uh and we're going to try to understand what this ritual is all about. If you take a look at the top of page one, you'll find that the first two paragraphs underscored the source of this ritual. Tell us tell us what exactly is supposed to happen. First section our own should separate for the from the people two he goats as a sin offering. The rabbis tell us that these two goats were supposed to be as much as possible identical. They were you were tried you had to have if you could you had to have two goats that were the same color the same size as much as possible and then you then what does doanim go you should take lots one go roll for hashem and one go roll for the second goat is to be sent out into the wilderness to some uh destination known as a next take go down to the next part of the page alas. He should Aron should place his hands upon the living goat. This the goat one of the goats has just been slaughtered as a as a carbon. So now we're dealing with the living goat which is the zazel and he shall confess. He should confess on the head of the of the gar of this goat all of the sins of Kali Israel that have that they are guilty of should make a vidui and then vin should place them on the heads of literally place them on the head of the goat and he's supposed to send it out bey which is another sheep here as to what an ishit is. But it's a a person to take the little the pushhat that many say it's someone who's prepared, someone who knows what he's doing, someone who can do the job well and isn't going to have to wander around in the desert. He knows exactly where he's going. Okay. The rabbis acknowledge the problem with this with this ritual. They they understand it because we look at it and we're baffled. What what is this all about? It seems to be counterintuitive based upon everything we know about Judaism. What? I'm placing sins on the head of a goat. This this really doesn't make much sense. It's it's against chuva is a personal pro uh process that we're supposed to do on yung kipper. What what are we being taught by this ritual? So the first acknowledgement at the bottom of the page is the rabbis sayu you shall observe myote word specific my statutes. [Music] What areim? They are laws which give fodder to the nations of the world and Satan to to to attack us to to question. In other words, these are so puzzling even though we might accept them that the nations of the world are going to use us for fodder. They're going to say, "Oh my goodness, you guys have a scent goat. You put out a sen goat. You put out uh you put out sins on the head of the goat. It's ridiculous what what's going on here. The second source is even more interesting. And and by the way, then they then that source then lists a number of which the tal is one. >> Is there a difference between >> uh no not to not to my knowledge. >> What excuse me like unknown. Sounds like an reason. >> All right, we'll see. We'll we'll get to that in a minute. We'll get to whether hookim have a reason or don't have a reason in just a moment. But so misunderstood was this ritual in the time of the Mishna that a change was made in the process. If you take a look at the Mishna on page two, told they erected a ramp to put the goat out of the reach of the populace because before that ramp was there what was happening the bavim those who were the the Babylonians and the rabbis say some of them say it's not the Babylonians it's someone else whatever they but it were people within the context of the community What were they doing? They were pulling at the hair of the goat and they were going, "Go, go, go, go. Get out of here." In other words, take our sins. Go. The rabbis were so upset that this was the perspective of that populace that what did they do? They erected a ramp. The goat was now outside the reach of the of the people and they couldn't treat it that way and they couldn't interpret it that way. Okay. So before we get to the Sierra Mash itself, now that we've noted the problems with it and the admission of Kazal concerning those problems, let's take a look at the concept of hukim in general and the two sukim are very are very powerfully foundational and they are if you take a look at page two section three they're found in paras kadoshi You shall not um take aven revenge or bear a grudge against your neighbor. Love, and I'm going to quote this. I'm going to actually quote this phrase as it should be quoted, not as it's always quoted. Love for your neighbor as for yourself. Now, let me let me explain what I'm saying here. And this this is again another shar but very quickly. You're not supposed to love a neighbor as much as you love yourself. The Ramban says it outright in quoting Gammoras. If if if I'm on a desert island and I have enough water to sustain me until I'm rescued and someone else is there and if we split it, we're both going to die. Do I have to give him water? No. If there's a fire and my house is on fire and his house is on fire, am I supposed to run and save his house or my my house? So I the is that you're not supposed to love your neighbor as yourself? What what is the Raman explains it is love for your neighbor what you would love for yourself. Meaning want for him or her what you would want for yourself. And that you see love your neighbor as yourself is is not doable. I mean it's like you know we're saying oh wonderful wonderful yes want for your neighbor is for yourself is tremendously difficult but doable. If you are you're applying for a job and there's two of you and your neighbor gets the job. You're supposed to try to be as happy for that person as you would be if you had gotten the job. Now when I say it's tremendously difficult, it's tremendously difficult but it's doable. It can be done. In other words, I can train myself to be so selfless. Now is it can do have I done that yet? Not yet. And have you done that yet? Perhaps maybe you have. But it's it's a very difficult but that's the literal translation. It's you don't love someone else as yourself. You want for someone else what you want for yourself. Yes. >> Uh let's say It's you and a rob of the community. Let's say maybe you should try to save his house before yours. If I'm The answer is I'm not obligated to do it even if I'm the R of the community. If if my if what is mine is endangered and what is his endangered, mine takes priority. That's the hal. Now, would a rabbi make a and say, "I don't want to get fired. I'm going to go to saving whatever who knows." But the answer is there's no obligation on anybody to say to to treat a possessions of someone else over your own. >> Even a safer Torah in the house. >> Ah, that's different. That's different. If say a Torah is in the house, then I'm not dealing with his possessions and my possessions. I'm dealing with a whole different issue. Okay. Now that's the first p which has nothing to do with our but I it's very important. The next observe myim or my serve myim. You should not create mixtures of of animals. You should not wear a mixture of wool and linen. These are hukim. Now on theseim Rashi and the Ramban have a very significant difference if we take them literally. Rashi says if you take a look Rashi saysim are mitzvot of a king literally which have no reason. All right. Now I saw the the I changed the interpret to be the translation here because the translation was that have no reason that we know that's not that's not literal literally it is have no reason along comes on these same says below top it's not it's absolutely wrong to assume that any one of the statutes given by a buru is reasonless. It has a reason but we don't know it. And now this is this is particularly important. Why? Because it ties into another bachlo which is am I allowed to search for reasons inim. All right. Can if the Torah gives me if there's no reason then I'm not supposed to. If there is a reason I don't understand it I'm being challenged. Maybe I should try. Now Rashi by the way actually gives us a reason for hukim in his statement that there is no reason for hukim. Why does it look how he couch look how he couches it? He says hame these are the statutes of a king that have no reason. Now, if you you're a subject of a king and he ordains 10 laws and you go ahead and you say, you know, nine of them make sense, but that 10th I'm not going to observe. Are you showing loyalty to the king? >> No. It's when you observe that tenth that you show loyalty to the king. So when Rashi says, what's he saying? He's saying if you take him literally, he's saying they have no reason, but they have a reason. That reason is is to show loyalty to a kadeshbar. And I'm going to tell you a quick story about how what hoops we will go through to avoid observance of kukim and to rationalize it. Number of years ago, I was in Englewood for maybe about 10 years as a rabbi. Someone came up to me and said, "Rabbi, you don't know what's going on. You don't know that on Saturday night your congregants are going to the diner. They're eating out in a non-coosher restaurant. And not only that, but when we go out to that with them, they're pressuring us to go to the diner. And now this is in Bergen County, which doesn't have did not have as many restaurants then as it does now, but it had enough. You didn't have to go to the diner. So it was ridiculous. So I I saw red. First of all, I was upset that I I had not even known this was occurring. And secondly, I so I got up the next morning on sha the next chabas morning turned to the community and said these two quoted these tipsukim and now what's strange about these two tupsukim is that the leap that they make from one to the other that Torah makes from one to the other love your neighbor as yourself observe my statue the first is something that's at that the the pinnacle of understandability The second, why are you making a from something on to totally? So I said the reason is perhaps that the Torah wants us to recognize that these sets of laws are equally important and statutes that you understand are not more important necessarily than statutes you don't understand. you've got to and I said there is one particular statute that we don't understand the reason for it qualifies as a hoax which has come to my attention is not being properly observed in the community and I said come to my attention that meant some of you will go out and eat at non-coosher restaurants at the diner and Saturday night I want you to know and I went through rael I said understand if you eat tuna fish at the diner you may be eating trafe you may be eating chicken filler to fill fill up the tuna fish. It tuna fish requires hashkah. If you eat the French fries at the at the diner, they're being cooked in grease. You don't know what they're being cooked in. So, I went through it very specifically. The place went crazy after the doing people came up to me and said, "Rabbi, rabbi, what are you talk Why are you telling talking about this for, you know, don't talk to us about this. Talk to us about lofty ideas. Talk to us about Judaism. What are you what are you tr All right so and and and it went crazy to a point that had never gotten crazy before. In other words, this was this was this really hit home. So the next shabas I got up and I gave what I call diner 2. That first speech was diner one. This is diner two. Diner two was the following. I said to them, first I went through some of the things that they had brought to me during that commotion which showed their cra, you know, ridiculousness. I said, "Some of you said to me, the rabbi's upset that he's not wasn't invited to the Italian restaurant." Um, I made up a couple, but this one I really got. This one I really got, and this is this is amazing to me. The rabbi said that it was not kosher. If he would have said it was trafe, then that means it's really tra. But he only said it's not kosher, so that's not really They were rolling in the aisle, laughing at themselves. And then I turned to them and I said something which I gave the shear before and I didn't remember to say this. It's important. I turned to them and I said, "I'm not telling you what to eat. I'm telling you to be honest with yourselves. If you go out tonight and eat in the diner, don't claim that you're keeping kosher. That's all. Recognize what the truth is. Recognize what is. And if you then want to go out and eat non-cosher food, go right ahead. That's your prerogative. That that sermon changed behavior because people came up to me said, "Rabba, you're right. We were we were and one person came up to me for example and said I I've been very lax when I take trips through Europe. I'm going to change my my approach. I'm going to be much more I'm going to be much more honest with what it is that I'm eating and and what it is that's kosher. Okay. So anyway, the hukim are not easy. They're not easy because they don't have reasons and they are easily attacked. Now let's take a look at some potential reasons for sirish and we're doing this with with the recognition that we're taking one position in an important debate which is can you search for reasons >> that's it that's what Rashi says that's Rash's point Rash's point is this is enough of a reason you you don't have to. The Ramban says no, you you have a right to explore. Well, not everyone agrees with that. There there's some people who say you have no right to examine hukim because if I take rashi literally, the whole point of a hook is that I'm loyal to the king without understanding the ho. If I'm trying to understand the ho, then I'm not showing loyalty to the king. The Ramban would disagree. The Ramban would say you can search for reasons as long as you recognize two things. Number one, the reason you come up with might not be the reason, right? In other words, you're just you're just using your intellect and and that's maybe not sufficient to understand. And number two, you will not make your observance of this ritual contingent upon that understanding. In other words, if someone comes up and says, you know, pigs were were were were not healthy to eat in those days, but now they're healthy to eat. So that was the reason we were told not to eat it and now it doesn't apply anymore. All right. No, you're not allowed to. It's in the Torah. It's commanded by you can search for reasons, but you have to accept it. >> Yes. >> Issue a caveat. You have to be careful. >> Uh does the issue a caveat? I'd have to look at I didn't see the Ramban doesn't issue a caveat. >> Does try to give reason, >> right? Yeah. The Ramban says you have a right to to search for reasons and in fact on the spot he gives a reason for Shatnes which is what we one of the kukim that's listed here and that is what the Torah is talking about and he says God created the world the way he created it. We not we have to we should not feel that we can always make it better by by doing combinations and this and that and we should respect the natural order. Yes. Because when someone asks a question from the audience, can you repeat the question? >> Okay, good question. When I being >> question because it's hard to understand. >> Okay. It's hard to understand the answer if you don't hear the question. Okay. Gotcha. Gotcha. Okay. Now, two more comments quickly. Yes. >> Isn't it one has learned I have learned that don't have Oh no. >> Because we're taking a position in the debate. The debate is are and and my argument would be the following that all the reasons we'll come up with are valuable are valuable whether they are really the reason for the nonetheless all the lessons are valuable. So, I'm potentially learning valuable lessons from from but it's dangerous and you have to be careful and you have to accept those two caveats. You have to accept that you may not come up whatever you come up with may be totally wrong and you're not going to make your observance contingent on your understanding. If you accept >> you can't have sharpness there's no reason. So that's it. There's no reason >> well that okay not a lot of people are not willing to accept that a lot the point is and so the Ramban gives a reason now does he say it's definitely the reason no does it is the is the message that he is learning from worthwhile which is we have to respect the natural order of the world it's a worthwhile message yeah >> last comment then we got to move on >> that shness only refers refers to women and wool and not other plants and animals. >> So that's a weakness. Okay, I'll repeat that. Uh the problem with the Ramban's explanation of shot is it only applies to will and linen. If you were not to respect the order, you shouldn't be able to put wool and you know other things together. So the answer is that's a weakness in the Raman's explanation. Right? If someone adds to that, would that be? >> If you add to that, you are not right. The answer would be the following. You are not allowed to add to that. The the rabbis are allowed to create fences around it and add add laws. But they cannot say that the laws they're creating are the 614th commandment of the Torah. In other words, we have to recognize that the rabbis had the right across time to create gdorim to create fences around existing law. The only way to do that is to create more law. >> And the other comment is that I have once and we are so careful with and what will >> well the answer it's a good point. The point it's a very important point we're careful we've accepted kautus across the board in the observant community but a lot of us don't observe shots and uh in fact it was years ago there was one person in New York who really it was a little man on the east side >> right or whatever and you had to go to him to check your whether you have sat okay let's go on >> is Will and Could wool and linen be just a prototype? >> Could wool and linen be a prototype? No. That's again what we're saying is that that's the Torah law. And now is it a prototype in terms of our understanding meaning this you're don't mix these and recognize by not mixing these that you're supposed to respect the natural world. Yeah. So that okay. So in that way it's a prototype but it's not a prototype that says wool and linen don't mix so don't mix uh rayon and nylon I mean whatever. Okay. All right. Now let's go to page three. So against some of your objections we're going to try to understand sishna. All right. So the first answer that is given the first approach is the rambom. The Rambam basically says that the sishta is the culmination of an already existing pattern. He says if you take a look at the kba note he says the kba note that were taken or given for serious sins were not offered on the temp in the temple. They were offered outside the temple. Right? And he talks about what those serious what are those gdole therefore he and what was the concept? The concept was that these acts were so ownorous that I'm going to offer this sacrifice outside the ba miktod. I'm going to say I I have I want to have no part of what this represents. I want to atone and and it gets eaten up completely by the fire those particular kat uh coronat and therefore what I'm doing is I'm treating it I'm saying I reject I reject my behavior I reject what happened there's no place in the bdash and if that's the case says the ram it's not a large step to say that when you are confessing all of the sins sins of all of the people on the holiest day of the year. What are you going to do with that animal? You're not going to put it on the misbel. You're going to send it far away. You're going to basically reject it entirely. And therefore, this is the culmination of a pattern that exists within the carbonote. Certain carbon are called they are a pleasing savor to those are the ones that are offered within the bash. These are not and therefore they're offered outside and that symbolism is extremely important. That's the Rama. Turn to the next page. A much more cont. I'm sorry. >> I didn't what you said. >> I didn't outside, >> right? >> Even further. >> Correct. Even further. Correct. Correct. Even further or what? And therefore, the seosel is just a a continuation of that pattern and a culmination of that pattern. All right. Now, sent Thank you. Sent section number B on page four. Uh more contemporary, not totally contemporary, 1700's commentary. Um, >> what? Um, >> no, no, no, no. I'm trying to remember. Uh, no, it's not Rottenberg. I I'll remember I'll remember it, but I don't remember it now. Okay. Basically says the following. If you look in the Torah, there's a Puk that says, They will no longer if they follow this law, these laws, they will no longer offer carbonote particularly goats, right? To the gods that they're taking on. So what was what what's happening? says the in the time of of the Torah, people were worshiping goats, sadders, sat tyr. All right? And and basically this was worming its way into the Jewish God knew it would worm its way into the Jewish behavior. And therefore, what what did he say? Take a goat which these people worship. Treat it with contempt. Show them that you were rejecting the god that they are bow bowing down to. And that becomes a seazel becomes a recognition that we have to reject. We're rejecting that which which we have to reject. Now this is very important because again I think it it carries a muscale for us even though we don't worship goats and that is we have to be sensitive to the things of the environment around us. that are antithetical to what we believe. And sometimes those things are very tempting and sometimes those things are not as clear as a worshipped goat. Particularly in our time where the outside world is invading our lives in such a powerful way, so much more than 10 years ago, 15 every year. It's it's it's more and more and more and more. And it's invading not only our lives, but our children's lives. And we there's a there's a dance that we have done throughout history and that is how have we related to the outside world? On the one hand, have we accepted things from the outside world into our tradition? The answer is yes. Right? Filterfish isn't in the Torah. Chalant isn't in the Torah. Things these were things that we picked up were created whatever but from our environment. However, at the same time, we had to be vigilant enough to reject that which we could not accept and that it would have been easier to say as some will reject the outside society entirely. You can't learn anything from them. You know, it's all all shus. It's a lot harder to say there's value. the rap with Talmud says if someone tells you there'sma in the goim and the non-Jews have wisdom believe him right there there are aspects of the outside world that could potentially be worthwhile for us but we have to be vigilant enough to push out those things like this seir that any say that has to do with the dipping of the blood of y's coat in the blood. >> Does anybody say it has to do with the dipping of the blood, Yoseph's coat in the blood? I did not encounter that in my studies, but it could be. They I wouldn't be surprised if someone comes up with that as well. What? What? Sorry. >> It's this is a kat. >> Is it a is a carban kat a because of the sale of Yoseph? Um I don't I think you there's I I seem to remember there's something about that. I seem to remember there's something about that. So good. Last comment for now. Yes. >> It's interesting that throughout the generation but the whole change, >> right? So you would think therefore that if we were going to take this approach literally that we would change and send out a Maserati to the desert. All right. All right. So because now we worship other things. It's a good point. It's a good point. It's a limitation to this explanation. Yes. >> Meckllinburg. >> Meckllinburgg. That thank you. Right. Right. the first person who spoke against reform >> reformed Judaism, >> right? It fits in with what what we're saying because he's saying you have to reject elements of the outside culture. Thank you very much. Wonderful. Thank you. Okay. Next, the Abravenel going back now to the era of the Rishonim. Going back to the Spanish commentary, the famous Spanish commentary Ravenel, he says as follows. I'm part the bottom of page four bottom of page four and into page five etc etc. Therefore, they're supposed to be alike as much. And what you're doing is you're saying our goal, the lot that has given to us is Yakov. It enters the the temple. It's it's and the goral that God gave to Asov, right? Goral means lots. So, we were drawing lots is is that the Asov is not part of not part of that. But you find that very strange because Jacob and were completely unlike each other. >> Well, that's the point. They were it the point is we don't know when when you say they were unlike each other. It's very possible that they looked alike. It's very possible they were the same height. I mean, someone once said you can go through the entire Torah and not know what color Mosha's eyes were, right? Because the Torah doesn't give you that information. So, what we're saying is they were both twins. They were both from the same mother. both from the same father and they went totally different paths and and that and the the rabbanel says that that's we should see ourselves and our lot as different from the lots of those around us and in our world today in the United Nations for example it's very clear right so that that and by the way to go to take it a step further and I I'm we're going to run out of time if I'm not careful careful. Um, Asov to Kazal was the symbol of Rome. All right. Now, if you've ever visited Rome, Rome to the rabbis symbolized the outside power, right? The external the external power that was antithetical. They said if someone tells you very beautiful statement if someone tells you that Jerusalem and Rome are both standing don't believe him. If someone tells you that Jerusalem and Rome are both destroyed, don't believe him. Someone tells you that Jerusalem is existent and Rome is destroyed, believe it. If someone tells you that Rome is existent and Jerusalem is destroyed, did it? They are so antithetical that they cannot be in the same world. All right. Now that's a a powerful statement. Now what's happening here is therefore what? Excuse me. >> Isn't there isn't it not something arbitrary? >> Yes. So in other words in this explanation God has given the look the truth is we are products both of goralot and our own efforts right in other words we were born many of us Jewish that so fact is I could have been born not Jewish would I have chosen to be would I so there the goral is there and and that'll bring us to the next to the next point But here what he's saying is I want to differentiate between you and them and that differentiation on a national level is very important. So these are these are critical messages I think that emerge. They may not be the reason for the sir Laz. Go ahead. What is the what are the main reasons that you can give against what the Arabs say that the Torah doesn't mean Abraham. It need I mean um >> all right that's a whole different topic. That's a whole different topic. I can't I just don't have the time to to get into it. Maybe we'll talk it in a future time, but okay. Now, let's go to the last next to last one that I'm bringing and that's of Shim Shan Rafael Hirs down at the bottom of the page who also had dealt with the reform community and fought it and and changes in liturgy was a brilliant brilliant man. He he says he offers what I would have thought is the most logical explanation which is two similar goats standing before the temple. One goes one way, one goes another way. What does it symbolize? It symbolizes every one of us. We all stand at the tent of the temple at the door of the temple and we have a choice. Am I going to go this way or am I going to go that way? And therefore the gorillot seeing that and seeing the totally different uh pathways that take place teaches us that we have choice that our lives are like that. We have to recognize that we are kipper and roshana. We have to recognize the things that are outside our control, but we also have to recognize the things that are within our control. But now I want to get and we're going to skip number four because that would take much too much time. We're going to go to number six to page six. All right. Here here we're we're encountering what I think is is a perhaps the most fascinating of the of the issue approaches that we've taken and and probably the mo and definitely the most difficult. The Ibanzra uh a an early commentary on the text basically does something very interesting apparently does it sometimes within his text. He says, "I want you to know that the real reason or the one real reason for the Sierak is so controversial, so explosive that I'm not going to tell it to you outright, but read if you look at page six, the top of the page, Shimo, if you um take a look at the word ael in the Torah and you you understand its placement or or whatever, you will understand its secret and the secret of its name. And then he goes on and says the following. And you can almost see him uh smiling when he does this. I will reveal it a piece of it to you. Bes are 33 years old, you will understand this reason. >> What the That's it, right? So what's he talking about? So along comes the Ramban who is not exactly a contemporary but basically from the same time frame as Benzra and they often talk dialogue and he starts off and he says the following rebel ru the Ebenezra was smart enough to cover something up Hal and I will be the tailbearer that reveals his secret. And what's his secret? If you count 33 from the first mention of the word aoel, you end up on with that statement we had before. They will not offer to theim anymore. That puk that I quoted for you before. So if you count 30, that's what he meant by 33. You have to count 33kim from the first mention of the word aazel. You'll end up at that pos. But then he then the Raman says something very interesting. He says he instead of interpreting the puk as we did as was done before which is we're that's a rejection of this the the the this worship. He says he quotes a medish that says all right the pik is down below on page number six etc. He quotes a madress and the medish says the following. Therefore, they they would give they were told to give which literally means bribery to samakipurim. You were supposed to give the devil. Let's say you're supposed to offer to the devil on your kipper as bribery that he should not sway you, shouldn't put you. What? What is going on? This is exactly what we were trying to say we we're not going to accept, right? Which is that the sea zel is an offer to another god or to another force. And the ram elaborates on yum kipper. Look at the underlined section on page 7 number four. the Holy One, blessed be, he commanded us, we send to go to the wilderness, to the force that rules in desolate places. Now, once he says that, he then twists and turns to say, wait, I you really have to understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying that we're offering a carbon to the devil. I'm saying that God commanded us to recognize that force, right? and to offer something to that force on yum kipper. >> Now, how can we understand that? I I >> theor I think the she said the eight are har and we're going to take that further. What is being said here? And uh if you look at the English at the bottom of page seven, it's a section actually a selection from one of my books. Commitment to chuva, positive behavioral change is doomed to failure without a recognition of the power of evil and sin. You've got to admit, you've got to admit the temptation. You've got to recognize the strength. You got to recognize the power of what's attracting you elsewhere. And in particular, you have to recognize the power of the Yateshara. You're if you go through Yom Kipper denying it, denying the fact that sometimes you're jealous, denying the fact that sometimes you you get upset for nothing, denying denying denying, what's going to happen is you're going to do it again. You're you're not taking care of it. You have to recognize the pull. You have and therefore what the Ramban is saying is you you you're giving a nod if if you will to the strength of the Yateser horror or to the strength of evil on Yom Kipper and you're recognizing that you have by now what do you do take a look at something very interesting turn to the next page and this and with this we'll we'll close the the mandrish says something very interesting on one of the sukim and bracious The end of creation. The end of creation story before Shabas says God saw everything he made to meote and beholding wasn't just to but it's to me. So what does that mean? What what is the whole question of Kim to what does it mean? God saw it was good. If he saw it was he knew it would be good before he made it. It doesn't have to see that it's good after I build something, I'll see it's good after I make it. But so the Ramban will say that every time it says, what it's saying is that God is moving from a position of creating to sustaining. He's reached a point in the creational process where it is where he wants it to be and he's now sustaining it. And says the Ramban, if he were to withdraw his presence for any for a moment, we would revert back to the to vavu that preceded creation, we would re revert back. And this is people's explanation for the concept of hes. Rav salvich talks about this. But what does the medish say is to mood? Take a look. Ra. All right. Ravan, the son of Shu, the son of Nakman, said in the same of Shu, the son of Nman. So in other words, his father. All right. And what did he say? Heer the extravara is very good. Why? He goes on to say if that we would have theoras we wouldn't build we wouldn't we wouldn't have lust and we wouldn't get married we wouldn't have children in other words thehara is not inherently bad theorhara is a force in our existence that can lead us to bad. can lead us to bad. But we're not created with anything that is inherently bad that can't be changed. And what what we're being told is take the force of the Yates or apply it to good. You know, if you if you were the kind of person who wants to have power, you can either become a dictator or you can become a great leader, right? It depends how you apply that. Yates are horror for power. All of jealous all of these things turn it around. Apply it to something that is useful. Apply it to something that is positive and the Yates are horror becomes to me. So that's the last piece I would share with you before any questions and that is this is another possibility that on yum kipper we're giving a nod through the through the se lazel to the power of the negative. We're recognizing its power. We're admitting its power and then we're making a commitment to take that strength and use it for good. We wrap the inhale. What does it remind us of? >> Right. >> Okay. >> Give a place in to represent the >> right. Good. >> Very good. Very good. All right. What you're doing is you're recognizing that this has power and we're putting it to use in the in the in in the villain. Well done. Okay. Um, yes. >> Just of interest, the god Pan was a god of the shepherds and there is actually an alter to pan and banas. The Arabs couldn't say pe so they called it banas. Oh, >> but actually even Peter Pan is derived. So they were So in other words, okay, the god Pan was is worship was worshiped a little bit by the the Arabs, it would seem, but it's because it created the B the name Bas. Yeah. Hold on. >> Yeah. Yeah, I hear you. Okay. >> Why would you think that Har would be the force that would cause somebody to build a house? I think what what he's saying is that that these these things are things that could be used for good or for bad. In other words, I I could be I could have an edifice complex and I could believe that I want to build. I'm a builder. I'm going to build. You know the poazi mandias where a guy is looking at the the author is looking at something that's falling into dust and the recognition that I bu builders Rav Salveik says builders are frowned on in the Torah. Cayenne was a builder. Planters are found are are raised. Planting is different than building. Building is placing my mark on creation. I want to make I want to do planting is I'm going to use creation to continue to so there. There you go. In other words, these are things that can go either way. Use them for the right reason. Last. Yes. >> Take the girls 70, right? And seven roll. And what we're supposed to do is >> Oh, very nice. Okay. Gimatri and and Aal representing the word of world the natural world and we're going above that. >> Okay. Excellent. All right everybody. All right. A good year. Please God. A p a peace. A year of peace and wholeness. Please God.