The Israel
Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash
Chassidut
by Rav Itamar Eldar
Yeshivat Har Etzion
Parashat Lekh Lekha:
The Character of Avraham
The wondrous story of the father of
our nation, Avraham Avinu, may he rest in peace, begins when God addresses him
in an obscure and surprising manner, the Torah providing us with no background
for that address. Not only is the reason for God's turning to Avraham unclear;
the content of that appeal is also vague. Why must Avraham leave all that is
dear to him and the entire world to which he is connected? Where does God
intend to bring him? What is that "land that I will show you," and
why doesn't Avraham receive a more detailed explanation?
The
void left by Scripture is filled to the brink with the rich and exciting
stories of the Midrash regarding Avraham's path toward God as the
background and cause of God's turning toward him.
Avraham as Beginner and Innovator
Avraham Avinu, the son of an
idolater, is not driven by the power of tradition or the continuity of
heritage. He does not have a genealogical tree from which to suspend himself,
nor has a path been paved for him which all he has to do is follow. Avraham
starts from the beginning, all by himself and on his own:
There is one
who is righteous because of the merit of his fathers or because he is always
found among the righteous. The truth, however, is that one must pay no
attention to this. A righteous person who is the son of a righteous person must
pay no attention to the merit of his fathers, saying that the merit of his
fathers will be available to him, and so he need not exert himself in the
service of the Creator. He must pay no attention to this, but rather he must
greatly exert and reinforce himself in his service of the Blessed One. And a
righteous person who is not the son of a righteous person must not despair of
himself, saying that since he lacks the merit of his fathers to help him, he will
be unable to reach the service of the blessed Creator. He must not say this,
but rather he must serve God, may He be blessed, and one who comes to purify
himself is assisted by heaven. He must only keep in mind that God, may He be
blessed, does all this for him to help him. (No'am Elimelekh,[1] Lekh
Lekha)
R.
Elimelekh speaks here of the danger of degeneration on the one hand, and the
danger of despair on the other, both of which may result from the idea of
"the merit of one's fathers." What he says here is true about every
tradition and every familial or social dynasty that attaches importance to a
person's origins.
The
idea of "the merit of one's fathers" is liable to bring a person who
does not descend from noble ancestry to despair of trying to reach greatness.
R. Elimelekh reminds all of us that Avraham Avinu was the son of an
idolater,[2] but nevertheless, he merited to found a nation and reach perfect
recognition of God all on his own.
R.
Elimelekh, however, mentions the other side as well. "The merit of one's
father" cannot serve as an insurance policy for closeness to God. Even one
who is fortunate to have such merit must labor and toil in order to draw near
to Him. Inherited status acquired by virtue of being the son or grandson of a
distinguished person is liable to lead to degeneration and
self-renunciation.[3]
It
seems possible to expand this argument. All of Avraham's Torah came to him out
of nothingness. Before God ever revealed Himself to him, Avraham had already
established his belief in the Creator of the universe, based on his own
intelligence and understanding, and without tradition. The question arises:
Should we view this type of innovation and originality that is based on one's
personal understanding as a model for imitation with respect to our faith, our
study, and our way in life?
The
danger posed by innovation that has no direct and absolute connection to
tradition is clear and manifest to all, and there are good reasons to
distinguish between Avraham and us.
First of all, there exists an unfathomable gap between our spiritual
level and that of Avraham. Second,
Avraham's innovation can be seen as a necessary consequence of the absence of
any tradition. We, however, who have
been blessed with a tradition and heritage, have no need for or interest in
innovation.
R.
Nachman of Breslov, in quite bold fashion, encourages innovation and newness:
I heard from
someone that he had exhorted him to try and study his Torah and propose some
new insight in its regard (as he had admonished a number of his followers on
this matter). He said to him: "If you merit to understand my intention in
my Torah, good. But even if you are unable to do so, nevertheless it is very
good when one merits to propose a novel insight in Torah…. I myself also heard
from his holy mouth on a number of occasions that he strongly admonished that
one should produce new ideas in Torah, and he said that it was an exceedingly
great repair of the past. He said that even if one merits to come up with
[only] one novel idea, it is also very good, because it is an exceedingly great
repair. (Likutei Moharan Batra,[4] 105)
At
the beginning of the passage, R. Nachman turns to his disciple in an
after-the-fact tone, saying, "If you merit to understand my intention in
my Torah, good. But even if not, it is still good if you produce something new
on your own." At the end of the teaching, however, as his disciple R.
Natan testifies, there is a general admonition that we should endeavor with all
our might to be innovative in Torah.
The limits of
innovation, according to R. Nachman, as we shall see in the next passage, are
very wide:
He said:
Anyone who wishes to innovate in Torah may expound the Torah and innovate as
much as he wants whatever new idea that he merits to conceive in his mind. The
only condition is that he not issue a new ruling based on his expositions
founded on expository construction (derush) and esoteric resolution (sod).
It may be understood from his words that even with respect to the works of the
Ari, of blessed memory, and other kabbalistic books, one may innovate in
accordance was his intellectual attainment, provided that he not derive any law
in this manner. (Sichot ha-Ran 267)
It
should be understood that from the perspective of R. Nachman – a chassid
and kabbalist – opening the world of kabbala to our own innovations, with the
sole proviso that one not issue practical halakhic rulings based on such
innovations, requires extraordinary daring and courage. For the whole essence
of kabbala is tradition and remaining linked to the master from whom one has
learned the esoteric lore.
Elsewhere,
R. Nachman gives sharper expression to the added value of innovation:
He once spoke
to me about innovating original concepts in the Torah. Speaking with wonder and
awe, he said: From where does one get a new concept? When one is worthy of
innovation, his original thoughts are really very wondrous and mysterious. From
where do they come? What may be understood from his words is that an original
concept is a revelation of God, who brings something from nothingness to
existence. For at first he did not know this idea at all. Only now does he take
and draw from the source of wisdom which is the aspect of nothingness, that is,
the infinite. In [each new idea], then, we see with the mind's eye the
revelation of the Creator, may He be blessed. (Sichot ha-Ran 245)
When
a person studies the words of Rashi and learns them by heart, he preserves that
which already exists. At the very most, if he is particularly creative, he may
succeed in fashioning something from something. But one who proposes a truly
innovative idea, argues R. Nachman, creates something from nothing. If one
merits producing new ideas out of nearness to God and awareness of His presence,
the new ideas assume the nature of revelation. Our participation along with the
Creator of the universe in the creation of the world finds expression not only
in plowing, sowing, and fulfilling the Divine command to multiply and be
fruitful. "He who renews every day constantly," asserts R. Nachman,
applies also to Torah, and in this respect we are with Him.
R.
Nachman's astonishing assertion seems to be based on the understanding that God
is present not only in the pages of the Gemara, nor even only in the souls of
the leaders of the Jewish people. His presence is found in each and every
individual.
"On Your
behalf my heart has said, Seek My countenance" (Tehilim 27:8).
Rashi explains: As your emissary. The essence of Godliness is in the heart, as
it is written: "God is the rock of my heart" (ibid. 73:26), as
we have explained elsewhere. Now, someone who is of "pure heart" (ibid.
24:4), as in "and my heart is hollow within me" (ibid. 109:22),
can know future events through that which his heart tells him. For these are
the words of God, literally. This is the meaning of "On you behalf my
heart has said, Seek My countenance." "On your behalf" – as Your
emissary, as above. For that which the heart says are the words of God, literally.
Understand this. (Likutei Moharan Kama 138)
We
are accustomed to say that new Torah insights arise in the heart of their
author. To this R. Nachman responds that indeed new Torah insights originate in
the heart. But this heart is the mouthpiece of God, who reveals Himself through
each and every person who studies Torah. Surely, the process of listening
requires clarification and refinement, but one must not refrain therefore from
the attempt. Failure to make the attempt under the pretext that we are
incapable and unworthy, that we are not Avraham Avinu, constitutes a trespass
of serving as God's "emissary" about which Rashi speaks in his
commentary to the verse cited at the beginning of the aforementioned teaching.
The heart implanted within us accepts upon itself the mission of serving as
God's mouthpiece, and we must not ignore this mission.
R.
Nachman goes even further, alluding that sometimes tradition can hinder a
person from arriving at a novel insight:
He said:
There are tzadikim who are great Torah authorities, fully versed in many
books and in the expositions of our Rabbis of blessed memory, and precisely
because of this they are unable to innovate in Torah, because they are so well
versed. For as soon as they begin to speak Torah, wishing to innovate, their great
fluency confuses them. They immediately begin to recite many assumptions and
many things that they know from books. Because of this, their words are
confused, and they cannot bring to light any fine new idea. He then gave as an
example a great Torah authority in his generation who could not speak Torah for
this very reason. It was understood from his words that someone who wishes to
innovate [in Torah] must restrict his mind, so that it not immediately run to
confuse him with multiple assumptions that are unnecessary for his new ideas.
He should pretend to be ignorant, and then he will be able to bring many new
ideas to light, in an orderly manner, step by step. (Sichot ha-Ran 267)
R. Nachman
refers here to tzadikim who are great Torah authorities, experts on many
books and the midrashic expositions of the Sages, but whose expertise is at
times a stumbling-block that prevents them from arriving at new insights. R.
Natan explains that his teacher means to say that in order to innovate, a
person must "pretend to be ignorant." R. Nachman, according to his
disciple, is referring here to a methodic process of detachment.
"Ignorance" is the aspect of Avraham Avinu who knew nothing, and was
therefore capable of innovation. In order to create something from nothing, a
person must first come to nothing, a state which demands that for a short
moment he forget everything that he had ever learned, the entire tradition and
all "assumptions."
The climate in which new ideas can grow is that of freedom and
liberty. In an atmosphere that echoes the Chatam Sofer's declaration that
"novelty is forbidden by Torah law," in the context he gave it, true
insight cannot blossom, says R. Nachman. We must once again emphasize that R. Nachman
set clear boundaries to innovative ideas – that one not decide the law for
himself on the basis of those ideas.[5]
Avraham, Cut
Off and Secluded
We have
noted that because Avraham Avinu had no traditions, he had to innovate
everything by himself until the moment that God revealed Himself to him. It
seems, however, that because Avraham was so deeply immersed in the mire of
idolatry in which he had been raised, it fell upon him to take a meaningful
advance step to sever himself from the world in which he lived:
"And the
Lord said to Avram, Go you out of your country, and from your kindred, and from
your father's home, to the land that I will show you; and I will make of you a
great nation, etc." And the uncertainties will be clarified later. For the
Rambam writes in the sixth chapter of Hilkhot De'ot (halakha 1)
as follows: "It is natural to be influenced, in sentiments and conduct, by
one's associates and fellow citizens. Hence, a person ought to associate with
the righteous and shun the wicked. If the inhabitants of one's country are
evil, he should leave for a place where the people are righteous. If all the
countries, etc., or if he is unable to leave, etc., he should live by himself
in seclusion. And if they do not allow him, etc., he should go to the wilderness,
as it is written: 'O that I were in the wilderness, in a lodging place of
wayfaring men.' (Yirmiya 9:1)." Now you will understand, "Go
you out of your country" – from your country to live among your kindred.
And when you see that they do not allow you to conduct yourself in a righteous
manner, distance yourself further also from your kindred and seclude yourself
in your father's home. And if you are unable to serve God while with them,
distance yourself even further from your father's home to a land that I will
show you. (Toledot Ya'akov Yosef[6], Lekh Lekha 1)
R.
Ya'akov Yosef of Polonnoye speaks of a process of seclusion that is at times
demanded of a person in order to allow him to draw near to God. There are no
bounds to the detachment demanded of him. A person must seek out the climate
and environment that will allow him to draw near to God, and when he finds it,
he must establish his residence there. "Go you out of your country, and
from your kindred, and from your father's house" – these are the
"stations" where Avraham must try and see whether they allow him to
make the desired change.
R.
Ya'akov Yosef describes appalling isolation, "O that I were in the
wilderness, in a lodging place of wayfaring men." A person
seeks a place where he can be himself, where he can live without war, where he
can feel at home. He sometimes fails to find such a place, and then he is like
someone lost on the road. "A lost Aramean was my father" (Devarim
26:5), says the Torah, which the Rashbam understands as referring to Avraham
Avinu.[7] Avraham set out on his journey as a lost Aramean from the house of
Terach. Avraham's detachment from all the culture and tradition of his youth
left him isolated, lost in the world, without a place and without a home.
Nonetheless, he never despaired of searching for his way and his belief.
According
to this, the call to Avraham of "Lekh lekha," is interpreted
as a Divine imperative. A person must be ready to pay the price of seclusion that
is at times demanded of him in the framework of his drawing near to God. He
must sever himself from the norms, from the way of life, from the organic
environment in which he grew up, and totally disregard his critics and those
who refer to him as strange and anomalous. We seem to be dealing with a
fundamental model that must be followed by anyone who wishes to enter into
Divine service. As R. Nachman states:
"Avraham
was one man" (Yechezkel 33:24). Avraham served God solely by way of
being one. For he thought to himself that he was the only person in the world,
not at all looking at the people of the world, who had turned from God and
impede him, nor at his father and the rest of those who impede him; just as if
he were the only person in the world. This is "Avraham was one." And
similarly, anyone who wishes to enter into the service of God can only enter by
way of this aspect that he should think that there is nobody in the world
except for him alone. He should not look at any person who impedes him, like
his father and mother, or his father-in-law, and wife and children, or the
like. [Nor should he look at] the impediments coming from other people, those
who mock and lead astray and prevent him from His service, may He be blessed.
He must not consider or look at them at all. He should only be the aspect of
"And Avraham was one" – as if he were the only person in the world,
as explained above. (Introduction to Likutei Moharan Tanina)
As
we saw earlier, here too the message is expanded far beyond the specific
situation of Avraham, for how many of those seeking to enter Divine service
come from idol-worshiping homes? Rather, R. Nachman wishes to prepare the way
and strengthen the hands of anyone who wishes to follow a new path that brings
him closer to God, and in the context of this journey, must stand up to the
opposition of those around him. This is true regarding converts who wish to
join the Jewish people and are compelled to abandon their religion and
sometimes even to slam the door behind them. It is true regarding those who
wish to rejoin the community of the faithful, those who observe Torah and mitzvot,
and are forced to leave their secular homes. It is true regarding those who
wish to leave the world of the mitnagedim and adopt Chassidut – a
situation faced by many Chassidic leaders, who were forced to help their new
followers defend themselves against the many attacks that they suffered, at
times at the hands of their families and communities. And in general, it is
true regarding anyone who wishes to be innovative with respect to religious
matters, and whose inventive and sometimes even irregular character raises
eyebrows.
"Avraham
was one in his world," but this did not deter him from proceeding
along his own path, even though this journey made him appear strange and
peculiar in the eyes of the entire world. Any person wishing to set out on a
spiritual quest must cast off the looks and the many obstacles that society and
the environment put in his way because of their lack of readiness to accept
change and innovation.[8]
Avraham Avinu is
the model and symbol of the ability to stand up to society, remain undeterred,
and fear no man. This is the way Avraham, according to the Sages, stood up to
his father, to society, and even to its leader – King Nimrod.
Sometimes this
ability can lead to a situation of isolation. A person frees himself from the
chains of society, but he remains alone. This solitude impacts upon a person's
ability to develop the capacity to listen to himself and remain faithful to his
roots.
This is what
God, may He be blessed, said to Avraham, hinting to every man in the world, Lekh
lekha. He exhorts a person to go to himself, for a person's essence, that
which is called "the I," is but the soul…. Similarly when people talk
to a person in the second person and say "you" (ata) or
"to you" (lekha), the primary intention is the soul which is a
person's essence, as is known. This is what the Torah admonishes a person, Lekh
lekha, go to yourself, that is, to the source of your soul. In all of your
going and traveling and all the roads you take in this world, have in mind to
go to yourself, that is, to the source of your soul, this being the essence of
the person being talked to, as explained above. (Likutei Halakhot[9], Shabbat
7)
R.
Natan, like many Chassidic thinkers, wishes to deepen the meaning of the
expression "Lekh lekha." "Lekha," according
to these thinkers, means "to yourself." Avraham is asked to abandon
everything in order to go and search out his roots, his essence. Avraham is
forced to sever himself from his environment in order to find his unique, inner
essence. From the moment that a person is ready to cut himself off from the
surrounding community and waive his sense of belonging, he turns inward and is
ready to listen to himself and expose his inner being.
According
to Chassidut, every individual is asked to be himself, to return to
himself, to listen to himself. Sometimes
this listening necessitates isolation, or at least seclusion. When the noise of
society is removed even for a short moment, a person can turn his ears to his
own desires, wishes and aspirations.
Listening to
the Voice of God
We
have noted that God's turning to Avraham lacks an introduction explaining why
He chose Avraham. The Ramban raises the following objection:
Now this
portion of Scripture is not completely elucidated. What reason was there that
the Holy One, blessed be He, should say to Avraham, "Leave your country,
and I will do you good in a completely unprecedented measure," without first
stating that Avraham worshipped God or that he was a righteous man, [and]
perfect? Or it should state as a reason for his leaving the country that the
very journey to another land constituted an act of seeking the nearness of God.
The custom of Scripture is to state: "Walk before Me, and hearken to My
voice, and I will do good unto you," as is the case with David and
Solomon, as well as throughout the Torah: "If you walk in My
statutes" (Vayikra 26:3); "And it shall come to pass, if you
shall hearken diligently unto the voice of the Lord your God" (Devarim 28:1).
And in the case of Yitzchak, it says: "For My servant Avraham's sake"
(Bereishit 26:24). But there is no reason for God to promise [Avraham a
reward merely] for his leaving the country. (Ramban, Commentary to Bereishit
12:2)
The
Ramban asks what are Avraham's praises that justify God's appeal to and
selection of him, for the Torah does not say about him, as it says about Noach,
that he was a righteous man, or the like.
The
Sefat Emet offers the following answer:
The Ramban
raised the objection that it says, "Go you," without previously
mentioning [the reason for God's] affection. According to the holy Zohar, this
itself is [Avraham's] praise that he heard the statement "Go you,"
uttered by God to all people at all times. As it is written: "Woe to those
who sleep in their caves." Yet Avraham Avinu, may he rest in peace, heard
and obeyed. And because of this [God's] utterance is called after him alone,
for nobody else but him heard it. This itself is certainly [his] praise, that
he was ready to hear [God's] utterance. (Sefat Emet[10], Lekh Lekha,
5632)
According
to the Sefat Emet, God's call to man echoes throughout the world. The
greatness of those who draw near to God lies not in His turning to them, but in
their ability to hear, to listen and thus to reveal that Godliness.
We
may learn about Avraham's capacity to hear and thus to reveal the Divinity
echoing in the world from the midrashim that come to fill the void in
the biblical account that was difficult for the Ramban:
"The
Lord said to Avram, Go you out of your country, etc." Rav Yitzchak
commenced his discourse with: "Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and
incline your ear; forget also your own people, and your father's house" (Tehilim
45:11). Said Rav Yitzchak: This may be compared to a man who was travelling
from place to place when he saw a building in flames. "Is it possible that
the palace lacks a person to look after it?" he wondered. The owner of the
building looked out and said: "I am the owner of the building."
Similarly, because Avraham Avinu said: "Is it conceivable that the world
is without a guide?" the Holy One, blessed be He, looked out and said to
him: "I am the Guide, the Sovereign of the Universe." (Bereishit
Rabba 39)
To
this midrash we may add what the Sages say about Avraham, that when he
was three years old, he looked up to the sky and saw the sun shining upon the
world and providing sustenance for all. This led him to the conclusion that the
sun is the master of the world, and he bowed down to it. Towards evening,
Avraham saw the sun setting, and in its place shone the moon and the stars.
From this Avraham concluded that if the sun relinquishes its place because of
the moon and the stars, then surely they must be the masters of the world, and
he bowed down to them. When the morning dawned, he was once again surprised to
discover that his new masters – the moon and the stars – gave up their place
for the sun that had already been pushed aside from rule. Avraham inferred from
this that neither the sun nor the moon and the stars are the masters of the
world; they are merely servants, over whom stands the true Master who causes
the sun to rise in the morning and to set in the evening.
Avraham
Avinu reflected upon the nature of creation and felt that a guiding hand stands
behind it. Nature hides the voice of God that renews the work of creation every
day, constantly. The regularity of the laws of nature and the ability to
foresee how nature will operate are liable to cast a heavy shadow upon God's
ten utterances and His word that stand eternally in Heaven. As the holy Zohar
states, this regularity puts man to sleep, and so God's call does not find a
receptive ear.
The
burning palace constitutes recognition that "someone is home" and
that we are not dealing with a world that is dark and dead. Avraham's
greatness, according to these midrashim, lay in his ability to reflect
upon nature and its laws and sense that something is missing. The capacity to
understand that behind the natural order of the universe there must be a
guiding and directing hand, one that operates in the framework of the natural
order as well as outside of it.
Also in the Midrash:
"He saw a building in flames, [and] began to ask: 'Is it possible that the
palace lacks a person to look after it?' The owner of the building looked out,
etc." This means that when Avraham began to reflect upon the changes that
occurred in the world in the generation of the flood and in the generation of
the dispersion, he stirred his heart to understand who created them. The Holy
One, blessed be He, answered: The portion of Ya'akov is not like them. For it
is the way of the nations of the world that when they see a change in the
running [of the world], then they begin to repent from their ways, and want to
understand. But when the world runs according to the natural order, then nobody
pays any attention to understand. For they do not believe about God, may He be
blessed, that the natural order is in His hand at every moment, and that
without Him there would be nothing. But the portion of Ya'akov is not like
them, for He is the creator of everything. That is to say, Israel believes that
were it not for the fact that God, may He be blessed, bears the world, it would
not exist for a moment. Thus, when Avraham Avinu, may he rest in peace, wished
to apprehend his Creator by way of changes in nature, the Holy One, blessed be
He, said to him: Go you, that is, [go] to the portion of Ya'akov; recognize the
greatness of God, may He be blessed, even through the natural order. (Mei
ha-Shilo'ach,[11] Lekh Lekha)
The
Ishbitzer, author of the Mei Shilo'ach, offers a different
interpretation of the "burning palace." According to him, the burning
palace symbolizes the miraculous manner in which God governs the world as
reflected in the generations of the flood and the dispersion that preceded
Avraham. Avraham heard the voice of God reverberating not in the world's order,
but in the miraculous way in which He governs it, and this brought him to
recognize God in the manner of a non-Jew.
God's
answer to Avraham was "Go you… to the land that I will show you."
There you will learn that God governs the world not only by way of miracles,
but also through nature.[12] The virtue that we attributed to Avraham as a
precondition for God's command, was given to him, according to the Ishbitzer,
only after he responded to that command.
The Sefat
Emet talks about listening to the inner voice that
reverberates at all times throughout the world. In contrast to the Ishbitzer,
the Sefat Emet seems to sharpen Avraham's contemplation of the
natural world in which the constant call of Lekh lekha is concealed. So
too in the following passage:
And in the Midrash:
"He saw a building in flames, etc." I heard from my grandfather, my
revered teacher, of blessed memory: The word doleket, "in
flames," is like dalakta (Bereishit 31:36), "you have
hotly pursued." He saw the entire world drawn to one point, etc. And thus
in the holy Zohar, as stated above, that his entire existence, renunciation,
and conjunction to what is above so that everything comes to the true point
comes from God, may He be blessed, who gives life to all. (Sefat Emet, Lekh
Lekha 5632)
Everything is
drawn to and strives for that inner point. Avraham Avinu looks out upon the
natural world and sees how it constantly moves upwards, how it pursues its
source without interruption, how it is driven by its inner call of Lekh
lekha. And this call, argues the Sefat Emet, was heard loudly by
Avraham Avinu. The very moment that he heard the call, it turned into a call
that had been directed at him.
Both the
Ishbitzer and the Sefat Emet aim for the place where a person hears the
call of Lekh lekha in the natural world. Whereas for the Sefat Emet
the capacity to hear the call causes God to turn to that person – it was
through that capacity to hear that Avraham merited God's calling out to him: Lekh
lekha – for the Ishbetzer it is a consequence of that appeal. From the
moment that Avraham heard the call and followed it, he merited the capacity
that is characteristic of "the portion of Ya'akov" to hear and see
how God reveals Himself in the natural world.
Once again we
seem to be dealing with something that is meant to serve us as a model and
archetype. Sometimes we are inclined to see God's deeds and be impressed by
them only when we see "changes," as the Ishbitzer puts it, when the
world veers from its natural order, when something happens that cannot be
attributed to the natural and orderly framework operating in the world. Both
the Ishbitzer and the Sefat Emet, each in his own way, direct a person
to deeper attentiveness, one that allows him to wake up in the morning and see
the sun shining, to go to sleep when it sets, and to feel God's revelation and
actions. To see each and every movement in the world, every situation, every
change, and feel that they are all part of the harmonic song of God's turning
to man with the Divine command of Lekh lekha.
The world is not
neutral, nor is it alien to man. It turns to him each and every moment,
inviting him to go on, to advance and to search. Avraham Avinu was attentive to
this call, whether in the presence of changing circumstances, or in the
presence of routine reality. In the end it is this attentiveness that brought
Avraham to go.
"To the
land that I will show you" – Surrender
The biblical commentaries deal with the question why
didn't God reveal to Avraham the destination of his journey?[13]
When
we reflect upon the plain meaning of the biblical passage, it seems that even
after Avraham entered the land of Canaan, he was still unaware that he had
reached his destination. Let us consider the verses:
And Avram took
Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they
had gathered, and the souls that they had acquired in Charan: and they went
forth to go to the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came. And
Avram passed through the land to the place of Shekhem unto the terebinth of
More. And the Canaanite was then in the land. (Bereishit 12:5-6)
Avraham arrives
in the land and heads southward along "the patriarchal highway." The term used by Scripture is vaya'avor,
"and he passed." This is the only time that Scripture uses this term
to describe Avraham's journeys. From now on we find "And he
journeyed" (vayasa), "and he went down" (vayered),
"and he went up" (vaya'al), "and he camped" (vaye'ehal),
"and he went" (vayelekh), and the like.
The term vaya'avor
seems to be instructive regarding Avraham's intentions – to pass through the
land. Avraham had entered the land of Cana'an, having no idea that this was the
land about which God had spoken. Thus, he plans to continue his journey and
pass through the land until God tells him to stop. And indeed when he reaches
Shekhem, God stops him, and reveals to him as follows:
And the Lord
appeared to Avram, and said: To your seed will I give this land; and there he
built an altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him. (verse 7)
Avraham was
headed towards an undetermined destination. It was a journey into the unknown.
He goes and goes, hoping for the moment that God would tell him to stop.
Why this way?
Why didn't God reveal the destination? Why did Avraham have to proceed with
such uncertainty?
Rashi and the
Midrash [ask]: "Why did He not immediately reveal, etc." It is
obvious that this itself is the aspect of Eretz Israel – to renounce all
feelings and desires, [to devote oneself] entirely to the will of God, may He
be blessed, as it is written: "Go you out of your country, etc." That
is, to cast off all external adhesions in order to see the will [of God], may
He be blessed, and then His will is revealed to the person. The rule is that a
person's desire should always be only to hear and receive… This is
"Hearken, O daughter, and consider" (Tehilim 45:11), that a
person should always be in the state of seeing, looking and listening, to
receive what is beyond his comprehension by way of renouncing his mind and
knowledge. (Sefat Emet, Lekh Lekha 5632)
The Sefat
Emet describes the psychological state that is necessary for a journey of
this sort: "to renounce all feelings and desires… to cast off all external
adhesions in order to see the will of God, may He be blessed."
This is the
basic state that must accompany a person who sets out for days without knowing
where he is headed and how long he will on the road, hoping that he will hear
the word of God. Avraham, answering the challenge that God had set before him,
succeeds in total self-effacement and being totally in the position of
"only to hear and receive."
The Sefat
Emet understands that in our daily lives we seek control. We have a need to
feel that we are holding the reins. The older we get the less we are prepared
to go as sheep after the shepherd. We wish to plan, to organize ourselves
accordingly, to set goals and strive to achieve them. "To the land that I
will show you" demands of Avraham that he overcome this instinct. A person
is generally prepared to make concessions in life, but he wants to know for
what he is making those concessions and where he is headed. Not so Avraham!
Avraham is asked to give up, to abandon everything, to destroy his life's
project, without being presented with anything in exchange – only to obey God's
command. This is total renunciation that fashions in Avraham a position of
Divine service that involves constant expectation to hear the voice of God and
unceasing preparedness to waive everything for the sake of His will.
The matter is
presented differently in the following passage:
"To the
land that I will show you." The rule is that when a person is in doubt
whether or not to do something, he should think whether he has clarity of mind,
in which case he should do it. This is [the meaning of] "that I will show
you," in the sense of clarity of mind. (Kedushat ha-Levi,[14] Lekh
Lekha)
R.
Levi Yitzchak wishes to examine the aforementioned situation from Avraham's
human perspective. For this purpose he tries to ignore, or perhaps more
correctly put, "to convert" the explicit revelation in the form of
vision and speech into an inner experience of clarity and brightness.
Avraham goes on
his way, looking all around and asking himself: Is this the land? Is this my
place? Is it here that I must stake my tent? And he receives no answer!
How will Avraham
decide? What tools should he use? How will he know whether or not he was right
in his decision?
R. Levi Yitzchak
proposes an amazing yardstick: Clarity of mind. According to him, this is the
meaning of "that I will show you." There exists an inner sense, an
intuition, a voice coming from the innermost parts of the soul that directs a
person and provides him with clearness of mind.
R. Levi Yitzchak
teaches us that when a person must come to a decision, he should examine which
of the alternatives offers him clarity, when does the fog clear and the person
sense that the picture is clearing up. It seems that R. Levi Yitzchak's novel
contribution is not his offering of a tool, for clarity of mind is a gift that
we all merit and value. His great novelty is his identification of that clarity
with "that I will show you." The conversion, about which we spoke
above, of an external revelation by way of speech and vision, as described in
the verses, into an inner voice and psychological state, may on the one hand
weaken God's word to Avraham in Shekhem that this is the land that He had
promised to show him, but on the other hand it immeasurably intensifies the
psychological state and inner experience about which R. Levi Yitzchak spoke,
granting it Divine authority.
Clarity of mind
and inner awareness, to use the wording of Rav Kook, are not merely
psychological phenomena. We are talking about a moment during which the voice
of God reverberates in a person, drawing him near and providing him with
direction – "that I will show you." Who shows us by way of that
clarity and by way of that recognition the land towards which we are asked to
go? It is God. The "that I will show you" may perhaps have come to
Avraham by way of revelation and the spoken word that provided him with clarity
and awareness. But the voice of God comes to each one of us in a different
manner, the end of which is also clarity and inner awareness.
Both the Sefat
Emet and the Kedushat ha-Levi demand of us and propose before us a
psychological state of attentiveness. In the case of the Sefat Emet we
are dealing with total self-effacement, that allows a person to turn outwards
and wait for the various ways by which God's will becomes revealed and guides
man. This can be the Torah, Halakha, a rabbi, or any other guidance that
directs man to the Divine will.
The Kedushat
ha-Levi turns us inwards to ourselves, this too in the framework of seeking
out the voice of God. We are dealing with the attempt to reach the clarity,
purity of thought and inner awareness that beats within us.
In the end,
Avraham teaches us the path to the promised land.
It begins with
the readiness to renounce, to leave, and stand alone before the entire world –
in your solitude, with yourself.
It continues
with listening to the call echoing through the world to go, to move, and to
search, a call that appears in miracles and in nature.
And it ends with
a person's readiness to surrender himself to God's direction which promises him
that if he loosens the reins for a moment and is prepared for "Draw me, we
will run after You" (Shir ha-Shirim 1:4) - he will merit personal
salvation: "To your seed will I give this land"!
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Each time we encounter a new
thinker, we will provide basic biographical information about him. When no such
information is provided, it means that we already encountered him in an earlier
lecture.
R.
Elimelekh of Lyzhansk (1717-1787), disciple of Dov Baer the maggid of
Mezhirech (distinguished disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov), and main disseminator
of Chassidut in Galicia and Poland. He is famous for kvitlach and
for prayer before prayer. His books include: Tzetel Katan, No'am
Elimelekh, and Or Elimelekh.
[2] R. Yehuda ha-Levi had tried
to integrate Avraham Avinu into the long chain of bearers of the "Divine
essence" that began with Adam. He reconciled the inclusion of Terach,
Nachor and others in this chain with the help of the idea of kernel and shell
and the idea of potential "Divine essence" that does not come to
expression. Thus, even an evil person can be a "carrier" of that
kernel. R. Elimelekh, however, and, as we shall see below, others as well,
emphasizes the novelty and originality in Avraham's drawing near to God on his
own, and without the help of tradition. This becomes especially clear in light
of the command received by Avraham to leave his country, his kindred, and the
house of his father, as we shall see below.
[3] R. Elimelekh belongs to the
third generation to the Ba'al Shem Tov, founder of Chassidut. It was
during his time that Chassidut divided into many branches. This
statement of R. Elimelekh may be understood as a warning regarding the
degeneration of Chassidut as a result of its turning into a tradition
void of novelty and innovation. (At a later date, R. Nachman of Breslov openly
criticized this phenomenon.)
[4] R. Nachman of Breslov
(1772-1811), great-grandson of the Ba'al Shem Tov (through his daughter Edel
and his granddaughter Feige), founder of Chassidut Breslov.
[5] It would be a mistake to view
R. Nachman, in light of what is stated here, as a pluralist regarding beliefs
and opinions. Anyone familiar with R. Nachman's attitude to all sorts of views
and beliefs, even those coming from within the Torah world, knows that R.
Nachman is one of the last people who can be called a "pluralist." R.
Nachman encourages novelty and creativity, but this does not diminish the value
of criticism, of oneself and of others. Criticism, however, must always relate
to the substance of the matter, and not to the fact that a certain idea is
novel and untraditional, for according to R. Nachman, novelty is not only not a
fault, but even a virtue. In any event, we are dealing with an exceedingly
daring position, which in and of itself can explain the controversy that
erupted around R. Nachman.
[6] R. Ya'akov Yosef of Polonneye
(d. 1784), one of the most important disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov, who had
great regard for his student. His books include: Toledot Ya'akov Yosef, Ben
Porat Yosef, Tzofnat Pa'ane'ach, Ketonet Pasim.
[7] Chazal, in the midrashim
that we read in the Pesach Haggada, understood that the passage refers
to Ya'akov, primarily on account of the words, "and he went down to
Egypt," from which it follows that the Aramean is Lavan who sought to
destroy (oved) my father (avi), i.e., Ya'akov. This
interpretation is very problematic, for the term "oved"
appears to describe the state of the Aramean, rather than the action performed
by him. Moreover, why should Lavan be mentioned in the historical overview that
a person recites when he brings his first-fruits? Therefore, the Rashbam
proposed that the Aramean is Avraham, who was "lost" (oved) at
the outset of his spiritual journey. "And he went down to Egypt" can
be understood as a description of the later history of the seed of "my
father," Avraham. It is fitting that the historical overview should open
with Avraham, founder of the Jewish nation.
[8] R. Nachman himself personally
experienced society's opposition to innovation. He writes as follows: "How
would it be possible for them not to disagree with me, since I follow a new
path, that no man has ever taken…. Even though it is a very old path,
nevertheless it is entirely new" (Chayyei Moharan 392).
[9] R. Natan Sternharz of Neirov
(1780-1845), distinguished disciple and scribe of R. Natan. Author of Likutei
Halakhot, Kitzur Likutei Moharan, Likutei Tefilot, Likutei
Etzot, Shemot ha-Tzadikim, Yemei Moharanach, Alim
li-Terufa.
[10] R. Yehuda Arye Leib of Gur
(1847-1905), grandson of R. Yitzchak Meir Alter, author of Chiddushei ha-Rim
(took over the leadership from R. Chanokh Henikh of Alexander, because R.
Yehuda Arye Leib's father, son of R. Yitzchak Meir Alter, had died during the
latter's lifetime. His work: Sefat Emet.
[11] R. Mordechai Yosef Leiner of
Izbica (1801-1854), disciple of R. Simcha Bunim of Przysucha, regarded as the
brightest member of R. Simcha Bunim's circle. He became a follower of R.
Simcha, together with the Kotzker Rebbi. His descendants founded Chassidut Radzyn.
His work: Mei ha-Shilo'ach.
[12] It is interesting to note
that in later history as well, going to Eretz Israel marked the transition from
miraculous governance to natural governance. This was true in the transition
from the generation of the wilderness, who ate of the heavenly manna, to the
generation of the conquest, who were required to plow, sow, and reap, in order
to eat of their own produce, given to them in a natural framework. They had to
recognize, however, that it was not their power and the might of their hands
that got them that wealth, "for by every word that proceeds out of the
mouth of the Lord does man live" "and you shall eat, and be satiated,
and bless."
[13] Avraham Avinu knew that the
land of Cana'an had been the destination of his father, Terach, as is stated at
the end of Parashat Noach.
[14] R. Levi Yitzchak of
Berditchov (1740-1810), disciple of the maggid of Mezhirech (distinguished
disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov), and also disciple of R. Shmuel Shmelke of
Nicholsburg, who was himself a disciple of the maggid. R. Levi Yitzchak
is known for his love for the Jewish people and his pleading of their cause.
His book: Kedushat Levi.
(Translated by David Strauss)