Weekly Torah Portion Vayikra (The Calling of Moshe) Rabbi Yitzchak Breitowitz

Yeah, we know that the month of Nissan because of Pesak is is the month of GA that although it is one of the 13 principles of faith that Mashiach can come every day any time but Nissan is more mugal it's more set aside for redemption We were redeemed in Nissan and the future redemption is most auspiciously during the month of Nissan. So I wish all of us that we should be za uh to a true uh his scholars a true revelation of Hashem in this world the inner redemption outer redemption uh golus is not merely an external phenomenon. is primarily an internal estrangement from and therefore when we are worthy of having that inner connection then all the other external things will fall into place. Now um I I'm was in a bit of a quandry because on one hand I was asked to talk about Pes on the other hand we spoke a lot about Pesak when we looked at the paras of Shimosa B and Basha. So we actually did quite a few pesim but actually um I want to talk about the para but it's I have some very strong connections to pes where you're going to see that uh this will be connected to the and to the seder and the like. We're beginning the third khish. Uh the third khish say for vayikra leviticus uh kazal have a name for us. It is called koras kanim the law of the priesthood because there are so many details regarding the sacrificial rights and the like. For many people uh they don't like vayikra. They find it uh they find it either boring or too technical or too many details or they don't see the relevance of vayikra. uh to their uh to their spiritual life. But you know the medish actually tells us that when little children were introduced to Kish in the time of the so we would normally start them with gracious the very first that children were taught were the which is kind of overwhelming that you know 5-year-old is going to learn all of these details and the medish gives the reason that just as the corbanote are sources of purity and holiness little children not yet capable of sinning our sources of holiness. Therefore, let the holy occupy themselves with the holy. Uh so there's much to talk about in the holy of corbanos as an initial thought. All of us, many of you are probably familiar with a well-known uh disputation, a well-known argument between Rambam and Ramban as to what is the concept of corbanos because on one level it's very problematical. uh corbanos. You take animals, you slaughter them, you burn them. Uh the Torah describes it in very anthropomorphic human terms. They generate a pleasant fragrance. What barbecue? And Hashem smells the pleasant fragrance. You know, is Hashem, God forbid, a carnivore of of of some sort? Why would be interested in carbonos at all? Isn't the most important thing? our hearts and the way we worship him and our kabana in our fear of hashem reverence of hashem when I say fear and love of hashem what is the idea of corbanos so we do have a famous famous makus the raam in the not in the Mishna Torah not in his code of Jewish law but in the guide to the perplexed in the morb his philosophical work the raam actually says you know hashem doesn't really care about corbanos what are corbanos they mean nothing to aeshwaru but what happened was that In pagan religions, uh, sacrifice was a very big thing. There was pageantry and many many different types of ceremonies that inspired people that people really got into. And of course, uh, in in many of the pagan rituals, there was even, God forbid, human sacrifice. And God wants to wean us away from paganism by giving us knowledge of the true worship. But he couldn't just command us to go cold turkey. No pun intended there. you don't bring turkeys as corpanos. uh God could not command us to go cold turkey because we were too aduk we were too connected to all of these ceremonies. So instead of just saying no, I don't want it, Hashem said, okay, you have this weakness, you have this desire, as irrational as it is, I'll give you a framework by which you can indulge consistent with true worship and monotheism and belief in Hashem. So in the morbim the Rambam clearly states that corbanos are a concession to human weakness and the inability to achieve true spiritual communion with God based on the qualities of the soul. Now this is kind of consistent anyway with the Rambam's general philosophy of life that that looked at mental mental contemplation and meditation uh and kind of intellectual connection to the prime mover uh or the active intelligence that was considered to be the highest goal of a person. So a lot of the physical rituals were concessions. Now, Nakman's Ramban does raise a whole bunch of very very strong and powerful questions uh to the Rambam. Number one, he points out if the carbon were simply a concession to human imperfection, why would the Torah use the show that it is pleasant to Hashem? Right? What's so pleasant? God is simply letting us like like let your kid play with some games. you wouldn't necessarily get a pleasure from it. Moreover, a real powerful question is if indeed corbanos were a concession to the human attraction to idolatrous ritual, then now that we don't have the corbanos and we don't necessarily feel a strong need for the corbanos, why do we pray for the restoration of the beta mikdash and the restoration of the corban? We pray for it. And not only that, it's almost as if the Rambam was a split personality here because in his code, he lovingly codifies more than the only gives you the laws that apply today. The Rambam in the Mishna Torah gives you in laborious painstaking detail all of the laws of the carbanos because the Rambam says these laws are going to be restored when Mashiach comes. Now granted, there's a whole discussion in R cook's writings. Uh will they be animal offerings or vegetarian offerings? Even that is a pretty radical statement because it seems to be clearly animal offerings. But but Rafuk's issue has nothing to do with this because Rkook also admits even under any reading that there will be the corbanos, but maybe reverence to life means there won't be animal offerings. that that's a side that's a separate issue of some importance but that does not deny the transcendental importance of the of the corban and once again the Rambam himself dabbins musf right today musf he dabbins musf ask asking hashem please let us bring the corbanos uh that you commanded us in the Torah now because of this the ramban offers an alternative hypothesis and the ramban says corbanos are greatly beloved by the Almighty, but not because of their intrinsic objective value, but because of the transformative effect it has on the worshipper. That when the worshipper uh sins or or or feels that they have not lived up to their potential, they should feel as if their life is no longer worthy. They are only living by the grace of God. and all of the all of the um activities all of the steps that are happening to the animal the slitting of the neck and the running of the blood etc and the burning of the fats the person should have a mental image there but for the grace of God's eye and that causes a person to be submissive causes a person to be humble it generates within a person feelings of awe and reverence and self-nullification to the presence of God and that is what gives God pleasure. It is not the meats. God doesn't care about the meat but the fact that these symbolic gestures change change me. Uh and therefore the Ramban points out that the is really a metaphorical expression. doesn't mean God finds the smell of burning meat to be pleasant, but rather God finds the corban to be pleasant when it is something that symbolically transforms the worshipper into someone that is humble and grateful and appreciative of the life that Hashem has given him and resolves to try to be a better person through the processes of choua and the like. that gives Hashem a now uh now some have said now again the question on the Rambam is a pretty good question because why did the Rambam Davin Musf basically we could pose it that way like what did the Rambam think uh this morning if he were to dab in Musf tomorrow like you know what am I praying for the restoration of Kbanas so there is a theory this is a much larger issue I don't want to address that there are really two rampups uh I mean one I mean one person but he has two modalities ities. There is the Rambam that is the rationalist philosopher whose arguments are rooted in the logical structures of Aristotle and then there is the Rambam that is the committed and in the Rambam is addressing an audience of Jews who may not be so religiously committed but they were philosophically knowledgeable. This is the guide to the perplexed. Who are the perplexed? who are theim theim were people who were not necessarily but they were people who were conversing with philosophy and a lot of what they saw in so-called revealed religion didn't make sense to them. So the Rambam had to give them rationalistic explanations that made sense and were palatable to people who were not yet initiated in so to speak the mysteries of the Torah. In other words, put it another way, the Rambam gave reasons that he himself would have believed are inadequate, but he thought they would perhaps satisfy the preliminary uh inquiry until they could reach a higher ma. Again, this is that whole interesting question about uh whether we would adopt such a methodology. But going back to the Ramban that the value of carban is because of the symbolic transformation of the worshipper. I think we have a very interesting point in the prophetic books of Yeshay and the like. You know the reform movement uh likes to character liked to characterize itself. I'm not sure if they still use the moniker as the prophetic religion. Right? I don't know if you've come across that phrase but it was a very common phrase they used to use. We are the religion of the prophets. Where do they get that? They get that from the fact that there are quite a few passages among the Nim in which God seems to knock corbanos. God says, "Lem, why do I need your corbanos? Who needs your corbanos? You live immoral lives. You oppress the poor. You You don't take care of the widow and the orphan. You pervert justice. Do you think Hashem wants a carbon?" if you live an immoral life. So the reformed movement kind of looked at Corbonote as ritualistic religion and they said, "Oh, the prophets are always poo pooing ritualistic religion and they're emphasizing social justice. Therefore, our religion is the religion of the prophets rather than the religion of the priest." But what's interesting is that when the prophets do knock ritual, the ritual they always knock is corba. meaning to say you don't find that God says who wants your shabas who wants your kashras because normally we don't make that argument normally we say well listen it's regrettable that you oppress the widow and the orphan and you're dishonest in business that's very bad but we're not going to tell you oh you're dishonest in business go eat who needs your we basically say you know you're doing something very very bad but you still do something good the only time you actually find this linkage that if you're not living a moral life, God doesn't want anything to do with your mitzvah is you don't find it by shabas. You don't find it by you. You don't find it by right when a ni ever say, "Oh, you're dishonest in business. Forget about mikvah. You know, that's not not that's not what we said." But the answer is very very simple. Corbanot are very different than everything else. You know, everything else, Hashem wants us to keep Shabbat. Hashem wants us to keep kosher. Corbanote only have a value because they transform you and they change you and they elevate you into a better person. If you bring a corban and then you go out and you cheat and you go out and you lie and you go out you behave immorally then how are you viewing corbanote? You're not viewing corbanote as a method of a vehicle of trans ethical transformation. You're using corbanote as a bribery system. How did a pagan look at a corban? You know, in the let's say in the pagan religions, Greek, Roman, right? These ancient these ancient religions, the concept that the gods cared about morality was a totally bizarre notion. If you if you know any of the Greek myths, I mean Zeus and all of these fellows and were hardly paragonss of morality routinely murdering, raping, whatever it was. Uh so now I'm not saying that all Greeks were immoral. I mean Irish title developed theories of morality, but they were not based on religion. They were not based on pleasing the gods. The gods did not care about moral behavior. We often forget that uh Judaism one of the great unique contributions of Judaism was the linkage of religion and morality that that was an unknown connection. There were religious people in the ancient world no pagans and there were moral people in the ancient world but morality did not stem from any notion of obedience to God. Uh Judaism created the linkage that's why it is called ethical monotheism. There are two there, ethical and monotheism. Now, uh, so therefore, here's the concept. So, how did a pagan view a corban? A pagan viewed a corban the same way a store owner in the Bronx viewed mafia protection right. You pay off the gods so they will either help you or at a minimum they won't bother you. So, here's the concept. If I bring a corban and I live an unethical life, then I'm viewing the corban as a way of bribing God. So, not only is it not a mitzvah, it becomes an it becomes a deeply offensive statement that the Almighty can be bribed by gifts. And that is why the prophets knock because corbonote are not something God intrinsically desires. Even like the Ramban corbanotes are vehicles of self transformation. When they fail to be those vehicles of transformation, they become bribes. And when they become bribes, they become sinful because you're making statements about God that are coarse and and and insulting and humiliating. Well, whatever humiliating would mean go with respect to God. But the concept is, you know, you're you're making a certain assertion about God that is deeply inconsistent with the essence of the creator. And that is why the insincere and that is why says in the book of Mish the book of Proverbs to it's a very very well-known verse that the Gamarra quotes a number of times. The corban of an evil person who does not do chuva is a toa is an abomination in the eyes of God. It's not simply a zero. It's an abomination because you're using it with a theology of bribery and that is very offensive to the law. Okay. But the main point I want to talk about is something that's even before the carbon and it's actually you know you may think of it as a very minor point but in the Torah nothing is ever minor and this small point will actually lead to some I think a very relevant message about Pes that's coming up the very first words of the isra Moshe God called to Moshe and that means calling him my name. Hey Moshe, Hashem love and Hashem spoke to him. May oel mo from the Mishkan which had just been constructed. Remember today was the day that the Mishkan was completed. So this is actually we can actually celebrate is although this is also the day that none of you die in a few weeks. This is the day of the dedication of the Mishk. Now the question is this. Throughout the Torah when Hashem speaks to Moshe, we have a stock language that's always used Moshe. God speaks to Moshe. It never says God first calls him and then speaks to him. God just speaks to him. So the question that asks is why does this begin with the words? What is the significance of a elos? So on this relatively small point there is a mahlo rashi and the raan. Right? So the first mak was raam and raan. This is a mlo rashi and raan. Rashi says that although the Torah only says it once, this is what is called a binan. A bin means it's a generalization. Meaning every single time Hashem spoke to Moshe, he always prefaced it by calling his name. The Torah didn't repeat it every time because we learn from this place to everywhere else. So Rashi simply explains that this is when I want to talk to you let's say you're you're I don't just start talking rather I first call out your name so you know who I'm talking to and then I start talking Rashi learns does the very same thing before every time Hashem spoke to Moshe he always calls his name first as you find by the right Hashem says to Abra Abra [Music] I am here. I am ready. Same thing with Moshe. Mosha Moshe Moshe says he and then Hashem speaks. So according to Rashi, there is nothing unique about this occurrence. This this is simply where the Torah records that always calls Moshe by name. In the say an interesting thought. They say that Moshe was so humble that if he would have heard God's voice without being told Hashem was talking to him, he would have assumed it was somebody else. Oh, you're not talking to me. You know, must be somebody else. Therefore, Hashem had to say you're the person I'm talking to. And then Moshe would be would be Makab. This is what they say. In fact, as you know, there is uh the word in the the alf of is very very small. the small olive, the miniature olive and uh therefore without the olive uh it would be read by if God happened to come by very casual. That's the lion that's used when hashem speaks to bum as if I'm just passing you by and speaking casually. So the swarm tell us that when hashem told Mosheren to write down the word vayikra Moshe didn't want to write down that hashem directly spoke to him. He wanted to use the same casual lashon that was used with bum. So God made a compromise with him allowing him to write the right the olive in a small in a small way. But okay, that's how Rashi learns. Now Ramban uh doesn't like Rashi's explanation because if this is intended to be a generalization that whenever God speaks to Moshe, he always calls him by name first, then the logic of that would be that that should have been recorded the first time Hashem spoke to Moshe. Like why here? This is like the 20th time Hashem spoke to Moshe. Say it the first time and that'll carry over, but why put it in the 20th time? So because of this Ramban says this is a unique once-time thing that normally Hashem didn't call Moshe by name but here he did and that is because Moshe needed permission and to understand this you need to look at the end of the book of okay becausera is right after the end of the book of it says the Mishkan was put up and it says that a cloud of glory surrounded did the Mishkan and within the Mishkan was the fire of the divine presence. The Mishkan was filled with fire. No, the divine fire and it was surrounded by a cloud of glory. And what does the puss say? The puss says, "Lo yo Moshe Moshe could not enter the Mishkan because the Mishkan was filled with the divine glory. That's what it does. Moshe could not enter. So Moshe is the permission that Hashem gave to Moshe to enter the Mishan to converse with God. But says the Raban once that permission was given that was a per that was like you know getting a permanent ID. Moshe was then given permission to go to the Mishkan to talk to God. But he needed the initial permission because the hash took place. So to summarize in just the two-word formulas, Rashi understands is that every time God spoke to Moshe, there was the calling of a name. The Ramban learns this was a one-time nit rishut. That's the Ramban's language. that there was it was necessary for there to be permission based on the idea. In fact, you find the same parallel by Hari itself. If you remember the Rambaman draws a parallel between the Mishkan and Mount Si because Bahari as well, the cloud of glory descended and Hashem called to Moshe to enter the cloud. One cannot enter the place of the without and therefore Moshe is giving Moshe. So the way you have to parse it is this Mosha is outside of the Mishka he hears God's voice giving him permission to enter. Now then it says when God gave him all the commandments that is after he's in the Mishka right so two different things is outside Moshe he goes in then Hashem a love okay this is how Ramban understands it so uh you know you look at this and this is a seems to be a technical makus that doesn't necessarily seem to have big implications beyond the understanding of the verses which by itself is actually important. One should never consider that to be unimportant. But the question is, is there a larger issue at stake here? And the answer actually seems to be yes. And in fact, the two explanations, Rashi's explanation and Raban's explanation really expose a kind of polarity or a dichotomy in a vote. And that is we know that in a hashem, the life of a Jew, there is uh the concept of uh action And there is the concept of inner state inner state of of thought and feeling and and the like. On one hand we have a Torah which is very very very specific. Right? We have a very detailed structure and these are very important the 613 mitzvah. On the other hands we also have a great emphasis on a person cultivating a unique relationship with God based on abbas hashem and hashem. We have what is called fonius external behaviors and we have what is called panemas internal religious states. Optimally these should work in tandem but they often do not. There is in as one tries to cultivate an inner sense of spirituality there is sometimes I'll use a fancy word there is some English word there is sometimes what you might call an antinomian tendency. An antinomian tendency means a tendency that hahic detail is not that important when it interferes with the development of religious awareness and consciousness. So let's say a person I'll give I'll give you a simple example coming up with PES. Let's say you've been cleaning uh for PES very very hard and by the time the first seder comes Monday nights uh you're dead tired you're dead you just want to go to sleep you really and if you go through a seder it's going to be superficial it's going to be without feeling it's going to be without enthusiasm. So what if you say the following? What if you say, you know, any sader I do tonight is going to be a real waste of time. So I'll tell you what, I'll have a good night's sleep, go early to sleep, and a week later or even a day later, I will make the greatest seder you will ever imagine. I'll be filled with love of God and reverence for Hashem and and there'll be community and togetherness. Now that would be an absurdity because I mean one could make the argument theoretically if the most important thing is my heart if the most important thing is my feeling if the most important thing is my emotion then what's the difference if I do the seder tonight or tomorrow night now I you know I used this example years ago in a class in foot and uh I was using it as a reductive at absurd how absurd it would be to make the seder the wrong day So a woman actually said, "Oh yeah, yeah, we did that. We couldn't one year we couldn't get the family till after Pesak." So we decided to make the seder after Pes. It was a real great seder. Everybody was together. But you know, but you understand that although it's it's a nice thing to bring family together, you know that that's although I don't know how kosher the seder was anyway, but but it's a nice thing to bring people together, but you can't say you're fulfilling Hashem's commandments this way. or keshma keshma at least for the men keshma has to be recited by a certain time of day in the morning so let's say I don't remember what time is but let's say it's 9:00 a.m. Now let's say a person at 9:00 a.m. really tired, he can't have kabana. So a person might think, you know, why why should I give Hashem a superficial schma without thinking I'll get up at 12:00, 1:00 and then I'll give them a beautiful schma. This is what I mean by an anti-nomeian tendency. the person sometimes sometimes there's a certain tendency that people who are deeply deeply spiritual people that are attuned to wanting to connect to God feel that the halic system is a hindrance to that connection because it's insistence on all sorts of details that don't seem to connect to a larger spiritual picture the person feels that's taking me away from the goal and therefor Therefore, there's what you call an antinomian tendency. There's an impatience. And yet, we know that's a fundamental mistake because Hashem defines the terms of our relationship. Hashem created the structure of the world. That the exact performance of Torah and mitzvah is what brings his light into the world. You know, we don't realize this, but in the cabalistic description of things, when I don't do a mitzvah, it's not simply I didn't do a mitzvah, I committed a sin. I committed a holocaust. I destroyed spiritual worlds. I prevented the light of God permeating all of the levels of creation. There is a cosmic I mean it's hard to even understand. There is a cosmic devastation that is going on. I'm blocking the divine light and the other way around. The other way around which is just the positive. A person does a mitzvah. person enables the light of God to find its says to find its dwelling place in this world. You bring joy to the totality of creation. Again, both the Tanya and the Nep I'll talk about those two books in a moment because uh it's instructive to talk about those two books uh make the point that you know I don't want to be too heavily cabalistic but I've just mentioned one one one point in in in Cabala the light of God coming from the ultimate enso the totality of God's messios is filtered through five worlds five worlds uh First it goes through what's called Adam Kadmon, the primeval man, which is really a a spiritual realm. And then the world of Atsilus, the world of emanation, and the world of Bria, the world of creation, the world of Ysira, the world of formation. And this physical world is the world of Assa. Five worlds. Now there are five levels of the human soul. Three levels within or pani inner light and two levels outside surrounding me or hamach. The three levels the nephesh is the animal soul that sustains biological function. The ruach is the capacity of imagination and emotion. The nishama is the godly intellectual soul that can perceive God through the mind and then outside of me surrounding me connecting me to God is said to be the and the the unique connection to God. Now all I'm going to do is give you words here. I'm not going to explain any of this because I I am not a great expert in this either. But the basic idea is the five levels of the soul connect to the five spiritual worlds that God's light gets diffused right they correspond to the right going from higher to lower to higher right corresponds to nephesh uh uh corresponds to ruak Right? In other words, you line up the low to high, low to high, they match up. And that means that the human being actually controls through our Torah and our mitzvah the divine light that permeates the world. Now, in a sense, God has limited himself in the sense, of course, it's a self-imposed limitation. So, self-imposed limitations are not limitations on divine omnipotence. They are choices that God made that God's light is dependent on our releasing that light into the into the world. So that is why uh the antinomian response is totally incorrect although we understand it from a psychological standpoint meaning you know not dripping toilet paper around shabas doesn't spiritually inspire me not turning on the light you know I don't feel holier by doing well okay that may may be the case may not be the case but the touchstone of closeness to God is not necessarily your individual subjective feelings God created a spiritual ual universe in which every level of your soul correlates to these different worlds. In fact, by the way, both the five levels of the soul and the five worlds correlate to the shame havaya, the four-letter name of God yud. Ah, you'll ask me how can five correlate to four? The answer is because the letter yud also has a little uh point on top of the y, right? So the show is and then the is the heart and the and then the he is the olam of bria and the nish and then the vav is the olam of and the ru and the final hey is the olam of assa and the ne right so it actually correlates that way that god essence is correlated with these worlds and correlated within the sha. So there is for many people maybe for most of us at various times a conflict between the spiritual striving of kurvasim and the need to punct punctiliously keep all of these details where I don't always perceive exactly what their ultimate spiritual value is. a big big conflict. So in many ways stereotypically this is a stereotype. This is not actually not not totally accurate at all. This was part of the bone of contention between and in the very early years of because was a movement that was designed to stress something that was a bit lacking. That is palemius. The notion of inner feeling. Not to do mitzvah mechanically. Not to do mitzvah by as the balatanya quotes the zor. Love of god and fear of god are the wings that bring your mitzvah to shay. Otherwise your mitzvah are just like rocks that are sinking on earth. They don't go anywhere. Right? Andus was designed to create now again I can't say they invented it in that sense but they were emphasizing and teaching over and over again the need for panemius and that of course is true you need panemius but the danger of palemius lies in its antinomianism in which panemius can give a person impatience with detail of that is why it is no accident that The alterbi not only wrote the which is a safer that stresses pineas but he also wrote the great shor in fact this was a little unique. In fact the balan was a little unique because in much of early the emphasis the emphasis of pmius was so strong that there were tendencies daring late you know not keeping etc. The balatana recognized this and And he understood that you have to couple pim with doing your actions exactly according to because God calibrated a spiritual universe to work exactly in a certain way. You know uh the truth of the matter is used to say that everything in the world we can learn from. You know if there's modern technology we have to ask ourselves what does it teach me about Torah? So, think about uh a long complicated email address, right? Let's say you have an email address that has 25 characters and let's say you got 24 of them right, but the last uh letter was wrong, right? So, the message isn't going to get there. So, you're going to say to yourself, you know, I got 24 out of 25 right. Why can't the message get there? The answer is it got to be exempt. If Keshma's 9:00, you're not going to be yay. If it's 9:01, I'm only a minute late. Right? That's the idea that the is very exact even if we don't understand it from our own spiritual vantage point. So let me just mention that you know the the vilon who of course was the great great god who was uh the head of the misnam in those years. So the villagon had a disciple many disciples but his main uh most prominent disciple was Rafaim of Alajim who later started the world's famous yeshiva of allegian that was considered to be the mother of the yeshivas in Europe the great yeshivir all these great great yeshivas and raim had a different gishad towards than his own rebi which is very interesting was a bit militant against he excommunicated hated them. You know, he did different things. Uh was very consiliatory, but he wrote a a a safer in which he does not criticize. But uh he wrote a safer called which was published after his death literally means the soul of it's a pun because he was but it also means the soul of life. So it's a double meaning. Nephesh also means a monument. this was a monumental different things and uh there he emphasizes again and again using the same cababalistic sorum that supreas did the importance of doing the action even if you don't have all of the notes and the like and uh it's been said people said like is a very difficult s there a lot of kabala but many say that and are two swarms that are in dialogue with each other. This is actually a very very interesting concept that books talk to each other. We we look we we normally think of people talking to each other but books also talk to each other. Meaning to say that the Tanya brought into the world many many revolutionary and important ideas. But what happens is that ideas are sometimes misunderstood, taken out of context, taken too far in one direction. So we have counter books that kind of emphasize the other perspective but that's also incomplete because you need both books together meaning to say there is a concept that books are often dialoguing because one book will emphasize certain very very important ideas and then you need another book that emphasizes other important ideas just to give you an example. So although the nephe is considered to be the response to I will tell you himself to the surprise of many of his very much liked and he said you know and you should learn both of them together because together they create the picture of everything. In fact, the rebi even claimed okay this people question the rebi even claimed that was influenced by the in fact that in beta he departed from the vilmagon somewhat uh in some of the some of his ideas about symptoms uh and and the like. So it's very very fascinating. That's why I think you know we have such a polarizing mindset that we read these forum and we assume there's total makus. That's not the way it works. Really what it works is certain swarm emphasize certain fundamental aspects but if those aspects are taken in isolation there could be negative effects so you need other to emphasize other aspects but that could also be a problem you go too much there so you need to correct it right there's a constant pendulum and a push and a shove even in Tanakh it's that way you know in Tanakh books talk to each other so for example both cohelles and talk about the idea the problem of righteous people suffering. Where is the justice of Hashem? But they have different approaches. They have different approaches. Cohelas kind of approaches it uh through a sense of anguish and pain and tries to approach it through atonement and the like you know there different because the idea is that truth is not singular. Meaning you say tr the the truth of God is infinite because God is infinite. Therefore there are many many facets that reflect pieces of reality you know about but in particular they tell a story to illustrate uh how and should relate to each other that there was a rich father-in-law who promised to support each of his uh sons-in-law to learn Torah for many years and his commitment was that one son-in-law would get a fleshic meal every day and son-in-law would get a milk meal. Apparently, they couldn't eat together at the same time. And the sons-in-law were constantly bickering. Who is more esteemed? You know, kosher cheese, kosher meat, all all of it is expensive. So eventually what happened was the father-in-law got bankrupt. He lost his fortune. So he couldn't afford milk or flesh, but he could afford potatoes. But in order to keep his promise, one got potatoes cooked in a fleshic pot and one got potatoes cooked in a milk pot. Now they were still arguing who's more important. One was saying, "Oh, I'm more important. I get fleshic potatoes." And the other one says, "I'm more important. I get milk potatoes." So the father-in-law said, you know, when one was getting meat and one was getting blitzes, you could maybe argue, you know, who's more important. But now it's potatoes and potatoes. It's just a different of flavoring different flavoring. So you don't nothing to fight over. So some say you know in the olden days were and were misn so we had real real arguments. Today you know we have uh flavored potatoes. We have misnflavored potatoes. Learn from msnagdam. Miss nagdam learned from we all incorporate hopefully. Now that's not to say there aren't any fights. There are plenty of fights. But the fights today are not about ideas. The fights today are about politics. Who controls what building? Who gets what money? So even the fighting has descended. There used to be there used to be fighting over principles, over ideas, over hashka. Now it's you know whatever now it's just uh if there is fighting which you know we would wish there would not be it tends to be over politics and and and control and other things. Okay. So let's go back now to the because I want to tie it in and then get back to PES these two ideas the need to keep with all of its and the need to cultivate a pimot of a hashem and that may be at the root of the two perspectives that Rashi and Ramban are offering. Let's first start with the Ramban. The Ramban understands tell Moshe is that before Moshe could enter the divine presence, he needs permission. That establishes the idea that as much as you yearn to connect to God, you must do it on God's terms, not yours. Hashem defines and describes how you connect him. And therefore from the Ramban we can see the importance of following the rules. Even if you don't think it makes sense to you, even if one feels that this halic ritual does not enhance my spirituality, you want to approach Hashem, you need Hashem's permission. And the Torah is the permission that Hashem gives us for how and when we are to approach him. Right? So I think the Ramban's idea is emphasizing the idea again that's in the as well the importance of the even if you don't have necessarily the greatest because a relationship to God requires Hashem gives you the permission you know um Harvey Cox was a um I think he's not I'm sure he's not alive anymore he was a Protestant professor of theology at Harvard and he wrote a book about religion in America, wrote a number of books. So in his book uh he interviews different people and he interviews a a certain woman Sheila who didn't believe in organized religion and Sheila made the point that she believes in God but she doesn't like organized religion. So she made a religion of her own that she calls Sheilaism which is you know she relates to God the way she feels that she wants to relate to God. So somebody once pointed out you know that uh sometimes if her name would have been Judy uh she would have said she relates to God through Judism and that's sometimes how we define it as well. I I know I know you know I know how to relate to God and I'll relate to God in my own way. Tilatraud says God makes the rules. Now as important as that is as the Babata says there's a downside to it because when a person is too connected to the rules and details of Allah what sometimes happens is it becomes a mechanical wrote process and this already goes back to the said that Hashem doesn't want that people are just doing commandments out of blind habits. It becomes mechanical without feeling. You're so busy with the trees that you don't see the forest of where you're supposed to go. Again, the zor that quotes that without your mitzvos don't have wings. A very beautiful expression. They are the wings that bring your mitzvah to heaven. So you see the pendulum here, meaning to say focusing on the may sometimes take away the cultivation of an inner love and fear for Hashem, but focusing on the inner may sometimes compromise the detail. So this I would suggest if the Ramban by Natash is emphasizing you want to serve God, you got to follow his rules. Rashi's point of brings out the other perspective because what is a creation? What is a name? A name is expressive of a person's individuality. A name is what separates me out. I'm in a crowd. Of course, if you have a lot of people with the same name, you have a problem. But putting that aside, if I'm in a crowd, the name is a process of individuation. You know that that's why the Arizal says that the name that parents give their child at a Brit is actually a prophecy from God identifying this the parents I don't know this consciously but the parents are identifying the spiritual root of this child's nish that is why although we are allowed to change a name but we do so with a certain amount of reluctance because there was a certain degree in In fact, I was at a bridge once where, you could argue about this holically, where the grandfather was honored to name his grandson, but the grandfather didn't like the name that his daughter chose because she wanted it after his father, I think. So, when it was time to announce the name, the grandfather just substituted the name he wanted. So I still remember I remember hearing this crying from the woman saying ah you know uh and the r the rv actually passins I was just an observer the rub actually passins if this is the name that has been proclaimed at the bris even if it was an unauthorized change wasn't even what the parents wanted this is hashem's will okay putting you could argue with that because a week later I was at another bris with the same rabbi and But what happened was the the person who was calling the name didn't hear it right and he announced the wrong name and then the rabbi said, "Well, if he didn't hear it right, that doesn't count." So, it's interesting an interesting distinction between an intentional or maybe maybe the rabbi got so much flack from the first time that he decided he wasn't going to do that again. I'm not sure. I I never got an official reconciliation of the the difference. But I I mama saw these two cases a week apart uh with the same I myself never confronted that problem. I don't know what I would would do exactly but okay. Uh but anyway uh a name is your kak your uniqueness. So when we talk about God calls us by our name that means Hashem says yeah there is a Torah that we all have to keep. There are mitzvah that we all have a commonality in our commitment. But Hashem also wants to foster a unique connection with you in which you bring out your co your personality, your creativity, your feeling, your because unlike the mitzvot which are kind of uniform for everybody, theat and theat are the cultivation of my unique connection with So what you see what is so so nice here is you see from what starts off as a very technical argument between Rashi and Raman turns into versus it turns into versus PMIS it's actually versus is not the right word because the is how both perspectives are needed in our session. So now let's conclude with a little application to pes itself. On one hand pes is of course the season of freedom. When we think of the word freedom, we think of autonomy, spontaneity, creativity, individuality, to be my own person, to express my feelings, my emotions, my thoughts. That is what it means to be liberated. And yet you find that side by side with the liberation of PES is the notion of submission to Akadesh's will. You know it's no accident that we actually start counting the omare on PES itself. Now what is Omiraasa Omare is the linkage by counting days between the holiday of freedom and the holiday of submission. because there's a recognition that true freedom lies in the submission to the will of God. Uh there's a beautiful quote from Tagorei. Tagorei is an what was a non-Jewish Indian poet from India who won the Nobel Prize I think in the 1920s been a long time already. And he has a beautiful metaphor and it's not about Judaism obviously just it's about life and he says and maybe this is the best way of putting this dichotomy. He says, "A human soul is like a violin string and the violin string is capable of producing beautiful music." But paradoxically, the music within can be expressed only when the string is tied down on the violin b. If it's totally free, free that string and put it on the table. It's free. It's unencumbered. it will not be able to produce the music within. And that Tagori says is the metaphor of the human striving. That freedom to be able to bring out all of the greatness and all of the goodness within a person requires a measure of submission. So we say accepting the yoke of heaven. Now the truth of the matter is one could give numerous secular analogies. You know, if you ever listen to a jazz musician, they do improvisations, they do riffs, right? So, I'm a I'm a 10-year-old kid and I just want to be able to take a trombone. Why do I have to practice scales? Why do I have to do all this stuff? I just want to come up and just blow the horn. But the answer is before you have the creativity to do everything, you have to submit to the discipline. Same thing with artists, right? You got these abstract just as does whatever he does. Uh Jackson P all the all these guys of course some of them actually you think maybe they maybe they talk did just kick the can over you know over the the canvas. But the point is that even improvisation, creativity, you know, free uh freeforall requires discipline and technique and you can't just go to the level of freedom without going to the level of submission. And I just want to point out yet another connection. You know, it's very very interesting that among Ashkinazim at least the first after we, you know, the first course of the seder after we eat the mat and the morar is a hard-boiled egg. It's it's not a den, but it's customary. Ashenazim eat a hard-boiled egg. And one of the reasons for the hard-boiled egg is because um an egg is what you give a mourner aut because it's oh and it reminds a person that there's a cycle of time. You go from bad types to good types and you're a why are you the first night of Pes it's a happy time right the answer is that's right because the first night of Pes the first day of Pes is the same day of the week as the night above. So precisely at the happiness of the seder we remember the and we are saddened and the egg gives us So here I want to suggest a homalytical thought which I didn't see any source for but I think you know may have some truth and that is it is an interesting setup that on the night of our redemption or the day of our redemption is the day that God is. So here's the thought. The first day night of Pes, the first day of Pes is the only day where freedom is not yet linked to submission to Torah because we don't start counting the Omr until the second day. So maybe the lesson is when you have freedom that's not linked to submission, you will get you will get destruction. So in a sense one might argue that eating the egg is the substitute for not counting the except for counting the uh the first the first night in which these things have to be have to be connected. Okay. So um what you see is again I think a generally important idea that even the technical details of the Torah can often be utilized to teach us a lot about how we approach Odessa Hashem. And as they say uh I know that I know these some people learn Tanya heard that I know for sure. uh but uh again as I say these are books that even the even the Rebi said are that could be learned together profitably and I think generally one way to understand so-called in Israel is really a simple question of emphasizing multiple perspectives in order to ensure that one idea doesn't go too far in a certain direction so there's a constant push and pull and tug between different ideas in which we need all of them. We need all of them, but each idea by itself could pull you too much in one one particular direction. So anyway, I want to wish you all avion and a seder of of true liberation. Uh one final point about I'll tell you a final thought. This is from the ishitzer who is saddaki. Uh and the isser says the thing about an egg is that birds are unique because they're effectively born twice unlike mammals that are just born once. Uh a chicken is first the egg is first laid and then the egg is hatched. So there's a two-step birth process in a bird and that's a rees that the Jews underwent a two-step birth process. was the laying of the egg and matra is the hatching of the egg. So therefore we have to remember that even in without the we were not truly born yet. We did not yet come into we just still have good good and Good job.