Ha’azinu
האזינו השמים ואדברה ותשמע הארץ אמרי פי. יערף כמטר לקחי תזל כטל אמרתי
וגו'. כי שם ה' אקרא הבו גדל לאלקינו. הצור תמים פעלו כי כל דרכיו משפט אל
אמונה ואין עול צדיק וישר הוא. שחת לו לא בניו מומם דור עקש ופתלתל (לא, א- ה)
Give ear, O heavens, and I shall speak, and the earth shall hear the utterances of my mouth. Let my teaching drip down like rain, let my utterance flow like the dew… When I call out the Name of Hashem, ascribe greatness to our G-d. The Rock – His activity is perfect, for all of His ways are just; a faithful G-d, who performs no perversity – He is righteous and upright. He corrupts himself – not G-d; unto His children – it is their blemish, a crooked and perverse generation.
There are a multitude of questions that can be raised about this passage (some of which are mentioned by the Alshich): 1) The term “give ear” implies addressing someone near, while “hear” implies someone at a distance. Why are these terms employed regarding the heavens and the earth, respectively? 2) The term “speak” has a harsh connotation, while “utterance” is milder. Again, why are they used respectively for the heavens and the earth? 3) Why are the heavens addressed directly, while the earth is referenced indirectly? 4) Why does Moshe only mention his mouth in regard to the earth? 5) The heavens are instructed to give ear and then Moshe will begin addressing them. The earth, in contrast, will immediately hear its message upon Moshe’s speaking. Why the difference? 6) What relevance does the verse of יערוף have to this context? 7) Why is it that in regards to לקחי, the term מטר, which, as Rashi explains, implies precipitation which is partially detrimental, is used, whereas, regarding אמרתי, the term טל, which is purely beneficial, is used? 8) How does the verse 'ה שם כי fit in? 9) Why does that verse switch from the Name of ה"הוי, which implies the Attribute of Mercy, to that of אלקינו, Justice? 10) What does לאלקינו גדל הבו mean? Indeed, the Talmud* sees in this a source for the practice of זימון, but of what relevance is that to our context? 11) Why is Hashem described here as הצור ?12 (Is it necessary for Moshe to inform us that Hashem’s deeds are perfect? Could I think otherwise?
To digress, the latter two questions could be resolved in the follow manner: The Rambam writes that actions which do not accomplish something of benefit are insignificant.** As such, a number of thinkers*** question how we are to consider Hashem’s act of Creation. The world was created so that Man would be righteous and earn reward. Yet, history has seen entire generations which have been annihilated due to their utter failure. Would that not render the human experiment a failed project? It would seem illogical to classify Hashem’s actions as such. The answer, really, is quite simple, and is already formulated by the Ralbag.**** A farmer sows his field despite knowing that most of the output – the chaff and the like – will be discarded. The small kernels of grain which will come from it make it all worthwhile. Similarly, Creation’s fulfillment lies in the few righteous who emerge; all the rest is necessary dross. This lends more meaning to the biblical metaphor עשב כמו רשעים בפרח, when the wicked bloom like grass, עד עדי להשמדם, it is to utterly annihilate them.***** Just as leaves surround a fruit to assist in its development and, upon completing their function, are divested from the tree, so do the wicked serve a temporal function in prompting the righteous to draw closer to Hashem, after which they are destroyed. As such, the above verse could be interpreted as follows: פעלו תמים הצור, Hashem, the great צייר, artist of the world, His act of creation is a perfect one, i.e., the destruction that it contains is not an indication of failure. How so? משפט דרכיו כל כי, for all of His ways are just, i.e., eventually, the evil in the world runs its course and receives its comeuppance.
Returning to our observations on the passage in question: 13) Why does the verse begin in the singular, פעלו, and conclude in the plural, דרכיו ?14 (As above, is it really necessary to be taught that Hashem’s ways are just? 15) And again, why the switch from לו שחת in the singular to מומם in the plural? 16) Seemingly, the terms הוא וישר צדיק are contradictory. צדיק implies just in judgement (as per Rosh HaShanah 17b, in which a contradiction is posed between דרכיו בכל' ה צדיק and וחסיד ******מעשיו בכל(, while ישר implies going beyond the letter of the law (as per והטוב הישר ועשית,******* which the Sages interpret as referring to compromise, and the interpretation of ********ישרים ישבו as the source for the extensive preparation of the pious for prayer********).*********
I would digress once more, that the last bunch of questions can be resolved with the following. A passage in Rosh HaShanah ********** discusses the frequency with which man is judged, with the Sages opining that it occurs once a year, on Rosh HaShanah. In accordance with whose opinion, then, do we pray on a daily basis? That of R. Yose, who holds that man is judged daily. Tosafos to the passage wonders, though, how the other sages understood the function of our daily prayers. It would seem to me that this can be resolved with an idea inspired by the Mayan Ganim.*********** He questions why Avraham confronted Hashem with the charge that he would destroy the few supposed righteous in Sodom along with its wicked majority. Isn’t that – as Rambam************ spells out – how Hashem runs his justice, by looking at the majority of a population? The answer (as we discussed at length in Ki Seitzei) is that if the communal judgement is found wanting, the righteous among them receive a second, personal judgement to allow them to escape the communal one.************* While one may assume that once the individual righteous are judged favorably the rest of the world is allowed to piggyback along with them – this is not so, as we will explain.
We can thus suggest that the judgement on Rosh HaShanah is for the collective alone. The individual one occurs daily, and it is to influence it that our prayers are directed.
Now, regarding the judgement of the righteous, one cannot ask why Hashem goes through the process of first trying them together with the rest of the world and then separately. Since He seeks the success of humanity, an attempt must be made at using the merit of the righteous to salvage the world. Only if that fails, does He isolate the righteous for their own betterment.
Hence, the verse says לו שחת in the singular, that the wicked destroys himself by separating himself from the rest of the community. The individual righteous does not – his isolation is to save him from the waywardness of the collective. Thus, מומם, it is their detriment, not his.
There is another gemara.*************** Mishlei states: ארץ יעמיד במשפט מלך, A king through justice will establish the land, יהרסנה תרומות ואיש, while a man of donations will destroy it.**************** This refers to a judge. If he resembles a king is his self-sufficiency, he will be successful in establishing a just land; but if he resembles a kohen in his dependence upon others, he will destroy it. Rashi understands the issue at hand as the judge’s proficiency in the law; if his ignorance forces him to routinely rely upon others, he will be unsuccessful. Tosafos, though, takes it as his financial status; if he must resort to donations from others in order to make ends meet, he will be unsuccessful.
It would therefore seem expedient to interpret the verse in a completely different manner. As the expression goes, רבנן מלכי מאן, the sages are described as royalty. Why is it במשפט מלך, that the scholar is included in the national judgement if he will anyway be isolated for an individual one? Because ארץ יעמיד, so that an attempt can be made at saving the world.*****************
__________________________
* Berachos 45a. ** Moreh HaNevuchim 3:25.*** See Akeidas Yitzchak, Vayikra, 58; Shelah, Toldos Adam, Beis Dovid, 247. **** Cited in Akeidas Yitzchak; see Milchamos Hashem, 3. ***** Tehillim 92:8. ****** Ibid., 145:17. ******* Devarim 6:18. ******** Tehillim 140:14. ********* Berachos 32b. ********** Considering the contradicton in our verse, it seems strange that Rosh HaShanah 17b only poses it from a verse in Tehillim. *********** 16a. ************ R. Reuven Mizrachi (1675-1740), Va’yeira. ************* Hilchos Teshuvah 3:1-2. ************** With this we can resolve a problem raised by Tosafos. Rosh HaShanah 17b raises a contradicton: Tehillim (62:13) states החסד' ה ולך, unto you Hashem is the kindness, implying that He goes beyond what man deserves, תשלם אתה כי כמעשהו לאיש, for You pay man in accordance with his deed, implying that man only gets what he deserves. The Gemara answers that initally, Hashem operates with exact justce. However, if the world will not survive on those terms, He adds compassion to the mix. Tosafos is disturbed by the incongruence of this resoluton with the order in the verse. The answer, I believe, is that Hashem’s kindness prompts a second, personal judgement for the righteous, in which they are tried on their own merit, apart from that of the rest of the world in the event that it is found wantng. *************** Sanhedrin 7b. **************** 29:4. ***************** [The author does not return to addressing his many inital questons.]