פרשת נשא - תורה מחשבה ומלחמה

the chieftains of Israel, the heads of ancestral houses, namely, the chieftains of the tribes, those who were in charge of enrollment, drew near

AND THEY BROUGHT THEIR OFFERING BEFORE THE ETERNAL. Since the wagons [which the princes brought] were for the purpose of the offerings [i.e., for transporting the Tabernacle, where offerings are made before G-d] they are also called “offering.” Similarly, And we have brought the Eternal’s offering, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, meaning “an offering” for the repairs of the Tabernacle. Now the princes thought that it would be impossible for the Levites to carry on their shoulders the boards of the Tabernacle and the sockets, which were very heavy, and therefore they brought the wagons of their own accord, for such is the way that all those who carry houses of kings and their palatial tents adopt, transporting them on wagons.We may also explain that the expression And they brought their offering before the Eternal, six wagons ‘tzov,’ means six large wagons bearing their offerings, and twelve oxen drawing the wagons. Thus they brought the wagons laden [with the offerings], and the oxen [drawing the wagons] before the Tabernacle. And G-d commanded Moses, Take all of it of them, and the wagons and the oxen which were not brought for offerings shall do the service of the Tent of Meeting. Afterwards the princes took their offerings down from the wagons and brought them before the Tabernacle, intending to offer them all up on that day since they had been given permission to offer them before Him, but G-d commanded, each prince on his day shall they bring their offerings. And because of this [i.e., since the wagons that the princes brought contained the animals that they intended to offer up] it was not necessary now that He should say to Moses “take it of them,” [as the original statement already implies G-d’s consent to the offerings as well]. And it is a linguistic expression [in the Sacred Language] to say “wagons” when referring to their contents, just like: those who eat ‘shulchan Izebel’ [literally: “Jezebel’s table,” which means “the food on Jezebel’s table”]. So also: for all ‘sha’ar ami’ do know [literally: for all “the gates of my people” do know, which means: “for all the people in the gates of my people do know”]. And [likewise we find] in the language of the Sages: “a hundred wagons of pitchers of wine and pitchers of oil, and of silver and golden vessels” [the meaning being “the amount of wine and oil and vessels that can be contained in a hundred wagons,” and not just wagons of pitchers of wine and oil]. It is possible that the word tzov [six wagons ‘tzov’] means “full,” and so also: ‘uvatzabim’ and upon mules, which means “in wagons full of people.” In that case six wagons ‘tzov’ [in the verse before us] means “six wagons laden full,” their load being the dedication-offerings which Scripture specifies further on.Now Scripture mentions the offerings of each of the princes individually and afterwards it includes them all in a general statement, saying, This was the dedication-offering of the altar, in the day when it was anointed, at the hands of the princes of Israel: twelve silver dishes, and Rashi wrote: “This teaches you that the vessels of the Sanctuary were exactly equal in weight [as specified in the verses: one silver dish, the weight whereof was a hundred and thirty shekels etc.]. If one weighed each one separately and then weighed them all together, it was neither more nor less [than the total should have been]. This is based on [the explanations of] Rabbi Moshe the Preacher.” But I cannot understand what they mean in saying this. If we are to consider this a miracle, what benefit is there in the occurrence of this miracle? And if this is the natural result with all weights, why should Scripture specifically mention it? In the Sifre the Rabbis have clearly said: “This is to teach you that the vessels of the Sanctuary were not like ordinary vessels. In the case of ordinary vessels, if one weighs each separately and then weighs them all together, the total is sometimes more or less [than it should have been] etc.” And there [in the Sifre] the Rabbis further said: “Rabbi Nathan says: If one were to weigh all the vessels of the Sanctuary together and then turn them into bullion, and again make vessels of it, they would be neither more nor less [than the original weight].” He means to say by this that [these vessels were made of] a very pure gold [or silver, as the case may be], so that even if one melted them down and turned them into bullion, they still remained at their original weight. This was not because a miracle happened to them, but because they were made of a very pure gold.The correct interpretation of the verse is that the Holy One, blessed be He, bestows honor upon those who fear Him, just as He said, for them that honor Me I will honor. Now all the princes brought this offering on the same day, because they all agreed to it simultaneously. But since it was impossible that one of them should not precede the others, He honored those who came first in [the position of] the standards to bring their offerings on the earlier days. He wanted, however, to mention them all by name and the details of their offerings, and to cite the day of each one, rather than honoring the first one by saying, This was the offering of Nachshon the son of Amminadab and then saying “and so did each of the princes offer on his day,” for that would have been a diminution of the honor of the others. Afterwards [i.e., after having listed them all separately] He included them all again in a general verse, in order to tell us that they were all equal before Him, blessed be He. And so did the Rabbis say in the Sifre: “Scripture tells us that just as they were all equal in the thought [of bringing these offerings] so were they all alike in merit. Twelve silver dishes — these were the same ones that they donated, and nothing which would have invalidated them occurred to them.”There is another explanation of this [chapter] in the interpretations of the Rabbis, namely that each of the princes intended to bring a dedication-offering to the altar which would be of the amount [specified in the verses, each one of them intending to bring the same offerings], but Nachshon [prince of the tribe of Judah] had a particular reason for [bringing] this number [of offerings], and each of the other princes thought of an independent reason. Thus the Rabbis said that Nachshon thought he would bring a ka’arath keseph (a silver dish), since the numerical value of its [Hebrew] letters is nine hundred thirty, corresponding to the years of the first man; and the weight thereof was a hundred and thirty shekels indicating the years when he [Adam] begot children [to maintain the existence of the world, i.e., when he begot Seth, from whom the world was founded] — and likewise the whole Midrash, as Rashi wrote it. Or [the offerings of each prince were,] according to another Midrash, [an allusion to] the tradition each tribe had from our father Jacob about all that would happen to it until the days of the Messiah. And so Nachshon [prince of the tribe of Judah] began by bringing his offerings with reference to royalty. The dish and the basin corresponded to the two kings who would be descended from him, who would rule over the sea and land, these being Solomon and the Messianic King. This was why Nachshon brought a ka’arah (silver round dish), to symbolize the ocean which covers the whole world and is like a [round] dish. [The weight of the dish was] a hundred and thirty shekels, since it was on the third day [of Creation] that the Holy One, blessed be He, gathered all seas together to one place and called them yamim, the numerical value of these letters being one hundred; and Solomon added one sea to the work of the Sanctuary, and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. Thus you have one hundred and thirty. One silver basin of seventy shekels corresponds to the world which is shaped like a sphere. The seventy shekels symbolize that they [Solomon and the Messiah] will rule over the seventy nations. Both of them full, for gifts will be brought to them from all peoples. ‘Soleth’ (fine flour) corresponds to these [two kings — as in the expression: the precious sons of Zion] ‘hamesulaim’ (who were comparable to) ‘fine’ gold. Mingled with oil — A good name is better than precious oil. Silver — as it is said, The tongue of the righteous is as choice silver. One golden pan of ten shekels, this corresponds to the ten generations from Peretz to David who were all righteous men full of good deeds, [as pleasant] as the odor of the incense. One young bullock — in allusion to Abraham; one ram — in allusion to Isaac; one he-lamb — in allusion to Jacob. One male of the goats for a sin-offering, to atone for the deed of Judah who brought Joseph’s coat to his father [dipped in the blood of a he-goat]. And for the sacrifice of peace-offerings, two oxen — alluding to David and Solomon, who began the royal line [of the House of David], and who were righteous men [during whose reigns] the kingdom was whole. Five rams, five he-goats, five he-lambs of the first year — in allusion to the fifteen monarchs from Rehoboam to Zedekiah, who were kings and sons of kings [and may be classified in three groups, just as the fifteen peace-offerings came in three groups], some completely righteous, some average, and some very wicked. This was what Nachshon thought [in bringing these offerings, which symbolized the history of his tribe].And Nethanel the son of Zuar [prince of the tribe of Issachar] also thought in his heart that he would bring a dedication-offering of this amount, but he had a different reason for it, bringing his offerings in allusion to the Torah, because the special merit of the tribe of Issachar was [in their knowledge] of the wisdom of the Torah. A silver dish — referring to the Torah which is called “bread,” as it is said, Come, eat of my bread, and it is said of the showbread, And thou shalt make the dishes thereof. And [the prince of the tribe of] Zebulun brought his offerings in relation to commerce, which he engaged in and exerted himself in, and [from the profits of which he maintained [through his generosity the Torah-studying tribe of] Issachar, with whom he [equally] shared the reward [for the studying of the Torah]. The [round] dish was symbolic of the ocean, since he [Zebulun] dwelled at the shores of the sea. Similarly the Rabbis found in that Midrash a special reason for the offering of each and every tribe and for the amount of the offerings [in accordance with the subsequent history of the tribe]. It is for this reason that Scripture treated them all equally, giving the details of each one separately as if the others had not been mentioned, after which it mentioned them all together, to hint that at the same moment it occurred to each of them to bring the dedication-offering, and none of them preceded the other either in thought or in the actual bringing of the offerings to the Tabernacle. It is because of this Scripture mentioned them all in identical words.

Another matter, “vekorbano…” – what did the princes see that led them to present offerings in this manner? The Rabbis say: Even though each of them presented an identical offering, they offered it regarding significant matters, and each and every one presented according to his perspective. Naḥshon began and presented regarding the protocol of the monarchy, just as his father crowned him over his brothers, just as it says: “Judah, you, your brothers will acknowledge you…[your father's sons will prostrate themselves to you]. Judah is a lion cub…” (Genesis 49:8–9). Likewise it says: “For Judah prevailed over his brothers, as the prince would come from him” (I Chronicles 5:2). There was a tradition in the hand of the tribe of Judah, their Sages, and their prominent leaders, from Jacob our patriarch, regarding everything that is destined to befall each tribe until the messianic era. Likewise, there was a tradition in the hand of each and every tribe regarding what would befall it until the messianic era, from Jacob their father. “Vekorbano…” – he presented the dish and the basin corresponding to the kings of the house of David, who are destined to emerge from him, who ruled over the entire world, over the sea and over the land, e.g., Solomon and the messianic king. Solomon, from where is it derived? It is as it is written: “For he ruled over the entire region beyond the river, from Tifsaḥ to Gaza” (I Kings 5:4). Rav and Shmuel, one said Tifsaḥ is at one end of the world and Gaza is at the other end of the world. One said: They stand adjacent to one another; just as he ruled over Tifsaḥ and over Gaza, so he ruled over the entire world. And it says: “All the world sought the presence of Solomon, to hear his wisdom…. Each would bring his tribute…” (I Kings 10:24–25). From where is it derived that he ruled over the sea? It is as it is written: “Also the fleet of Hiram, which had carried gold from Ophir…” (I Kings 10:11). “For the king had a fleet of Tarshish at sea with the fleet of Hiram. Once every three years…” (I Kings 10:22). And it says: “I will set his hand upon the seas, his right on the rivers” (Psalms 89:26). The messianic king, from where is it derived? It is, as it is written: "He will rule from sea to sea, from the river to the ends of the land" (Psalms 72:8). Over the land, from where is it derived? It is as it is written: “And all the kings, all the nations will bow to him, will serve him” (Psalms 72:11). And it says: “And behold, among the clouds of the heavens…. To him was given dominion, [honor, and kingship, and all the peoples, nations, and languages would serve him]” (Daniel 7:13–14). “The stone that struck the image became a great mountain, and filled the entire earth” (Daniel 2:35). This is why he presented a dish, corresponding to the sea that surrounds the entire world and resembles a dish. Why was “its weight one hundred and thirty”? (Numbers 7:13). It is because when the Holy One blessed be He gathered all the waters to one place on the third day of the formation of the world, he called them seas, as it is stated: “And to the gathering of the waters, He called seas [yamim]” (Genesis 1:10). The numerical value of yamim is one hundred; yod, yod are twenty, mem, mem are eighty, that is one hundred. Solomon came and added a sea to the construction of the Temple in which the priests could immerse themselves, just as it says: “He crafted the sea, of cast metal, ten cubits from brim to brim, [circular around, and its height was five cubits; a thirty-cubit line would wrap around it]” (I Kings 7:23). Corresponding to those thirty cubits that was the circumference of the sea that Solomon crafted, he added thirty shekels to the weight of the dish corresponding to the sea of Solomon. That is one hundred and thirty shekels, the weight of the dish, corresponding to the seas and to the sea of Solomon. “One silver basin” (Numbers 7:13), it is corresponding to the world, that is shaped like an orb that is tossed from hand to hand. Why was its weight “seventy shekels”? (Numbers 7:13). It is because both of them ruled over seventy nations, which exist from one end of the world to the other end. From where is it derived that the sea is shaped in the form of a dish and the world is shaped like an orb? It is like that which we learned: The Rabbis say: Only one that has in its hand a staff, a bird, an orb, a dish, a sword, a crown, or a ring is forbidden. A staff, as it rules the entire world with it. A bird: “My hand has grasped the riches of the peoples like a nest” (Isaiah 10:14). An orb, as the world is shaped like an orb. Rabbi Yona said: Alexander of Macedonia, when he sought to ascend heavenward, he would rise and rise until he would see the world as an orb and the sea as a dish. That is why, when they draw him, it is with an orb in his hand. Should they draw him with a dish in his hand? He does not have dominion over the sea. But the Holy One blessed be He has dominion over the sea and has dominion over the land, recues at sea and rescues on land; that is why they brought a dish corresponding to the sea and a basin corresponding to the land. “Both of them full [of high quality flour]" (Numbers 7:13), as the nation brought tributes [menaḥot] to Solomon; likewise they are destined to bring it to the messianic king, just as it says: “[The kings of Tarshish and of the islands will bring tribute [minḥa]]; the kings of Sheba and Seva will offer gifts” (Psalms 72:10). “Full [mele’im]” means nothing other than gifts, just as it says: “And gave them all [vaymalum] to the king” (I Samuel 18:27). “High quality flour [solet]" (Numbers 7:13), just as it says: "valued [hamesulaim] like gold" (Lamentations 4:2). "Mixed with oil” (Numbers 7:13), just as it says: “A good name is better than fragrant oil” (Ecclesiastes 7:1), and it says: “Your name is like poured oil” (Song of Songs 1:3), as their good name would go forth throughout the world. Why were they of silver? It is just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20). “One gold ladle, ten shekels, [full of incense]” (Numbers 7:14), corresponding to the ten generations from Peretz to David, as it is stated: “These are the generations of Peretz: [Peretz begot Hetzron]; and Hetzron begot [Ram, and Ram begot Aminadav;] Aminadav begot Naḥshon, [and Naḥshon begot Salmon; Salmon begot Boaz, and Boaz begot Oved]; and Oved begot [Yishai], and Yishai begot David” (Ruth 4:18–22). “One…ladle,” as they were all like one hand, all full-fledged righteous men. That is, “full of incense” (Numbers 7:14), as their actions were pleasant like the fragrance of the incense. “One young bull” (Numbers 7:15), corresponding to Abraham, who was the primary progenitor, and who, in his regard, it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [and took a young bull]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” (Numbers 7:15), this is Isaac, as, in his regard it is stated: “He took the ram and he offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” (Numbers 7:15), corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is stated: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:16), corresponding to Judah, who brought Joseph’s fine tunic that he had immersed in the blood of the goat, as it is stated: “They slaughtered a goat [and they dipped the tunic in the blood]" (Genesis 37:31). Judah brought it to his father and said: “Identify this, please, is it your son’s tunic?” (Genesis 37:32). That is why it was meted to him with the same measure, as Tamar said to him: “Identify, please, whose signet, belt, [and staff are these?]” (Genesis 38:25). That is why sin offering is stated in this regard, as they brought it as atonement for him, because he brought anguish to his father. “And for the peace offering [hashelamim], two cattle” (Numbers 7:17) – these are David and Solomon, as they initiated the monarchy, as cattle [bakar] is nothing other than an expression of monarchy, just as it says: “Butter of cattle [bakar] and milk of sheep…” (Deuteronomy 32:14), and we translate it: Give them the plunder of their kings., because they were full-fledged righteous men, and in their days, Israel were flawless [mushlamim], and in the days of Solomon, the kingdom was complete [shelema], as it is stated: “Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord” (I Chronicles 29:23). The two of them built the Temple; David made the foundation, and Solomon built it. “Five rams, five goats, five sheep in their first year” (Numbers 7:17) – these are fifteen corresponding to the fifteen kings who were from Reḥavam until Zedekiah, king son of a king. Some were full-fledged righteous men, some were middling, and some were full-fledged wicked men. “This was the offering of Naḥshon son of Aminadav” (Numbers 7:17). When the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented his offering corresponding to the order of the patriarchs and the royal dynasty, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Naḥshon son of Aminadav.”

WHEN THOU GOEST FORTH TO BATTLE AGAINST THINE ENEMIES, AND SEEST HORSES, AND CHARIOTS etc. This is a new commandment which he now declared to them as they came into battles. The purport of the verse, For the Eternal your G-d is He that goeth with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you is to admonish them against becoming faint-hearted and that they should not fear their enemies. He states that they are not to rely in this matter on their own strength, thinking in their hearts. We are mighty men, and valiant men for the war, but instead they are to turn their hearts only to G-d and rely on His help, thinking that He delighteth not in the strength of the horse, and He taketh no pleasure in the legs of a man, for The Eternal taketh pleasure in them that fear Him, in those that wait for His mercy. He states to fight for you against your enemies meaning that He will make them fall before you by the sword. He states to save you meaning that they will be spared in battle and that not a man among them will be missing, for it would be possible that they vanquish their enemies and that many of them, too, would die, as is the way of battles. Therefore Joshua cried out when about thirty and six men fell in [the battle of] Ai, for in His commandatory war not one hair of their heads should have fallen to the ground, for the battle is the Eternal’s. Now the priest who serves G-d is to admonish [the warriors] to fear Him, and give them assurance [of His help]. The officers, however, speak in the customary way of the world, lest he die in the battle, for in the normal course of events even some people of the group of the victors die. He commanded that these three categories [of people] return because one’s heart is on his [new] house, vineyard, and wife and he will [be the first to] flee.

(49) They said to Moses: Your servants took a census of the men of war in our charge, and it was discovered that not one man is missing from us, and no one was killed. This is a very rare occurrence, even when the enemy is caught unawares, and even for armies far better trained and organized than the Israelites. (50) Therefore, we have brought the offering of the Lord: Any man among us who found a gold ornament in the Midyanite camp, a bangle or a bracelet, a ring, an earring, or a girdle, to atone for our souls before the Lord. As a thanks offering to God for the miraculous deliverance of all the soldiers, we have brought an atonement for our souls.

THY SERVANTS HAVE TAKEN THE SUM OF THE MEN OF WAR THAT ARE UNDER OUR CHARGE, AND THERE LACKETH NOT ONE MAN OF US. [The meaning of this is]: “G-d has wrought a great salvation through us, for not one of all those men of war that were under our charge died, or was wounded by the sword so that he would be missing from the host; and therefore we want to bring the Eternal’s offering [to Him] Who saved us, to give before Him the atonement for our souls because He redeemed [us] from death, and in war from the power of the sword.” And our Rabbis have interpreted [the verse as follows]: “And there lacketh not one man — [going off] to commit a sin.” That is to say, they were continually under our charge, and not a single one of our brothers who were in the host went off to another place to commit a sin.” And Moses said to them: “If so, what is this offering for?” They replied, “To make atonement for our souls — sinful “thoughts of the heart.”

That is that He commanded us to appoint a priest that rebukes the people with the rebukes [needed for a] war and recalls whoever is not fit to fight - whether from weakness [or because] his thoughts will be on a matter that will lead to a lack of courage in war - and these are the three things explained by Scripture. And they then go to war. And this priest is called, the anointed one for war - and he says the words of the rebuke that are written in the Torah; and he adds [other] statements that arouse the hearts to war and lead them to endanger themselves to help God's religion, to serve Him, to observe His commandments and to take vengeance on the foolish ones that ruin the propriety of the states. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, "And it shall be, when you have come near to the war, that the priest shall approach, etc." (Deuteronomy 20:2). And afterwards, he commands to announce the procedure of the troops - that the weak-hearted ones, and all who have built a new house and have not inaugurated it, or planted a vineyard and have not eaten of it or betrothed a woman and not married her, return [home] - as is explained by the language of Scripture. And they said in the Gemara (Sotah 43a), "The priest speaks and the officer amplifies [it]." And all of this - meaning to say, the rebuke of the anointed one of war and the announcement in the war camp - is an obligation in an optional war. And the law of rebukes is during it; but they said that in a commanded war, there is nothing of this - not the rebukes and not the announcement, as is explained in the eighth [chapter] of Sotah. And the regulations of this commandment are explained there. (See Parashat Shoftim; Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 7.)

To whom does the phrase 'Is there a man who is afraid or faint-hearted?' refer? The phrase should be interpreted simply, as applying to a person whose heart is not brave enough to stand in the throes of battle.Once a soldier enters the throes of battle, he should rely on the Hope of Israel and their Savior in times of need. He should realize that he is fighting for the sake of the oneness of God's Name. Therefore, he should place his soul in his hand and not show fright or fear.He should not worry about his wife or children. On the contrary, he should wipe their memory from his heart, removing all thoughts from his mind except the war.Anyone who begins to feel anxious and worry in the midst of battle to the point where he frightens himself violates a negative commandment, as it is written (Deuteronomy 20:3 : 'Do not be faint-hearted. Do not be afraid. Do not panic and do not break ranks before them.'Furthermore, he is responsible for the blood of the entire Jewish nation. If he is not valiant, if he does not wage war with all his heart and soul, it is considered as if he shed the blood of the entire people, as ibid. 20:8 states: 'Let him go home, lest he demoralize the hearts of his brethren like his own.' Similarly, the prophetic tradition explicitly states: 'Cursed be he who does God's work deceitfully. Cursed be he who withholds his sword from blood.' Jeremiah 48:10In contrast, anyone who fights with his entire heart, without fear, with the intention of sanctifying God's name alone, can be assured that he will find no harm, nor will bad overtake him. He will be granted a proper family in Israel and gather merit for himself and his children forever. He will also merit eternal life in the world to come as I Samuel 25:28-29 states: 'God will certainly make my lord a faithful house, for my lord fights the wars of God and evil will not be found with you... and my lord's soul will be bound in a bond of life with God.'

(12) Rabbi Yose said: Let the property of your fellow be as precious unto you as your own; Make yourself fit to study Torah for it will not be yours by inheritance; And let all your actions be for [the sake of] the name of heaven.

(1) That all of one's intentions be for the sake of Heaven. And there is one paragraph in it. If it is impossible for him to study without sleeping in the afternoon, he should sleep. Gloss: And when he wakes from his sleep, he does not need to recite the blessing, "My Lord, the soul..." (Beit Yosef). And some say that he should read, "May the pleasantness..." before he sleeps (Kol Bo). [And this is] so long as he does not make it long; as it is forbidden to sleep during the day more than the sleep of a horse, which is sixty breaths. And even in this little, his intent should not be for the pleasure of his body, but rather to strengthen his body for the service of God, may He be blessed. And likewise with anything that is pleasant for him in this world, his intent should not be for his pleasure, but rather for the service of the Creator, may He be blessed; as it is written (Proverbs 3:6), "In all of your ways, know Him." And the Sages said, "Let all of your actions be for the sake of Heaven." As even optional things – such as eating, drinking, walking, sitting, getting up, sexual relations and conversation – all of them should be for the service of your Creator or for something that enables serving Him. For even if one was thirsty or hungry – if he ate or drank for his pleasure, it is not praiseworthy. Rather he should intend to eat and drink for his sustenance, to serve his Creator. And likewise even to sit in the council of the righteous, to stand in the place of the saintly and to go in the path of the straight – if he does it for his own pleasure and to fulfill his desire, it is not praiseworthy; only when he does it for the sake of Heaven. And likewise with laying down: There is no need to say that at a time when he is able to be in involved with Torah study or with commandments, he should not entice himself with sleep to enjoy himself. Rather even at a time when he is weary and needs to sleep in order to rest from his weariness – if he does [so] for the pleasure of his body, it is not praiseworthy. Rather he should intend to give sleep to his eyes and rest to his body for the requirements of health, so that his mind not get jumbled during Torah study on account of sleep deprivation. And likewise with sexual relations: Even at the time [prescribed] by the Torah, if he does [it] for the pleasure of his body, it is disgraceful. And even if his intent is in order that he will [produce] children that will serve him and take his place, it is not praiseworthy. Rather he should intend that he will [produce] children for the service of his Creator; or he should intend to fulfill the commandment of the [prescribed] time, like someone who is paying his debt. And likewise with conversation: Even to recount words of wisdom, his intent must be for the service of the Creator or for something that leads to serving Him. The principle of the matter [is that] one is obligated to put his eyes and his heart to his ways and evaluate all of his actions on the scales of his intellect: So when he sees something that will bring him to serving the Creator, may He be blessed, he should do it. But if not, he should not do it. And one who acts like this will be serving his Creator constantly.

Rabbi Hananya, deputy of the priests, would say: Anyone who takes words of Torah to heart is no longer troubled by thoughts of destruction, thoughts of hunger, foolish thoughts, lustful thoughts, thoughts of temptation, thoughts of another man’s wife, thoughts of meaningless things, or thoughts of human burden. So it was written in the book of Psalms by King David (Psalms 19:9), “The precepts of the Eternal are true, bringing joy to the heart. The commandments of the Eternal are clear, illuminating the eyes.” But anyone who does not take words of Torah to heart is troubled by thoughts of destruction, thoughts of hunger, foolish thoughts, lustful thoughts, thoughts of temptation, thoughts of another man’s wife, thoughts of meaningless things, and thoughts of human burden. So it was written in Deuteronomy (28:46–48) by Moses our teacher, “They will be a sign and a proof against you and your offspring for all time. Because you would not serve the Eternal your God with joy and gladness over the abundance of everything. You will have to serve, in hunger and in thirst, naked and lacking everything.” “In hunger.” How so? (When a person wishes) to eat even barley bread, but has nothing, and then his enemies come and ask him for wheat bread and fatty meat. “In thirst.” How so? When a person wishes he could drink just a drop of vinegar, or beer, but has nothing, and then his enemies come and ask him for the finest wine in the land. “Naked.” How so? When a person wants to wear a wool or linen shirt, but has nothing, and then his enemies come and ask him for the finest silk in the land. “Lacking everything.” Without a candle, without a knife, and without a table. Another interpretation of “lacking everything”: Without vinegar and without salt. For this is a curse that people often give: May there be no vinegar or salt in your house! He would also say (with regard to Song of Songs 1:6): “Do not look at me, for I am blackened, scorched by the sun.” These are all the Jewish girls who cast off the yolk of the Holy Blessed One, and accepted human kingship upon themselves. [The verse continues:] “My mother’s children were angry with me.” This is Moses, who killed the Egyptian, as it says (Exodus 2:11–12), “Sometime after that, when Moses had grown older, he went out among his brothers and saw what they were enduring…and he turned this way and that, and saw that there was no one there.” What do we learn from “there was no one there”? This teaches that Moses brought the question before the council of angels who serve God, and asked them: Shall I kill this man? They said to him: Yes, kill him. And did Moses kill him with a sword? No, he killed him with words, as it says (Exodus 2:14), “Are you saying you will kill me, just as you killed the Egyptian?” This teaches that Moses killed him by saying the [Ineffable] Name of God. (Another interpretation of) “My mother’s children are angry with me”: this is Moses, who fled to Midian, as it says (Exodus 2:15,17), “Pharaoh heard what happened, and sought to kill Moses, and Moses fled from Pharaoh. He arrived in the land of Midian, and sat down by a well…And some shepherds came and tried to drive [Jethro’s daughters] away. And Moses got up and saved them, and gave water to their flocks.” Then Moses came and sat among them to render judgment. He said: The general practice in the world is for men to fill the buckets and women to give water to the animals. Here, women draw the water and men give the water to the animals. There is a perversion of justice in this place! (They are guilty by law, and have become guilty through this incident.) Some say that the whole time Moses was standing near the mouth of the well, the water was bubbling up to meet him, and when he left, the water went back down. Then Moses said: Woe is me! For I have left my people and come to live among these heathens. Another interpretation of “My mother’s children are angry with me”: This is Israel, who made the Golden Calf. At first, they said (Exodus 24:7), “Everything the Eternal has said, we will do and we will understand.” And then they went back and said (Exodus 32:4), “These are your gods, Israel!” Another interpretation of “My mother’s children are angry with me”: These are the spies, who slandered the land and caused Israel to die in the desert, as it says (Numbers 14:29), “In this desert your carcasses will fall.” “They made me guard the vineyards” (Song of Songs 1:6). The Holy Blessed One said: Who is it that caused Me to favor the heathens? Israel! (For while) the heathens live well, [Israel] are oppressed, scorned, and scattered about. Another interpretation of “They made me guard the vineyards”: This is Israel, who were exiled to Babylon. And prophets rose among them and told them to separate their donations and tithes. The people said to them: We were exiled because we did not separate our donations and tithes, and now you tell us we should separate them? [And that is why it says, “They made me guard the vineyards.”]

All the lands that he conquers belong to him. He may apportion them to his servants and soldiers as he desires and keep the remainder for himself. In all these matters, the judgement he makes is binding.In all matters, his deeds shall be for the sake of heaven. His purpose and intent shall be to elevate the true faith and fill the world with justice, destroying the power of the wicked and waging the wars of God. For the entire purpose of appointing a king is to execute justice and wage wars as I Samuel 8:20 states: 'Our king shall judge us, go out before us, and wage our wars.'

(15) The resolution of all three problems centers around one principle: attainment of true love and fear of G-d is easy in one respect and difficult in another. First I shall define the sense in which something is termed "easy" or "difficult" by saying that "easy" is taken to signify the attainment of something for which there is a natural inclination, and, "difficult," the opposite, that is, the attainment of something for which there is no natural inclination. Just as throwing a stone down is very easy because a stone has a natural downwards orientation, and throwing a stone up, very difficult, because it does not have an upwards orientation but the very opposite — in the same way it will be seen that love and fear of G-d is easy in one respect and difficult in another. And in this way the nature of the love of G-d will be explained, as will that of the fear of G-d, though this requires a lengthy explanation.

(16) I will say, then, that a man possesses two faculties, one of which is upwards-oriented and naturally inclined in that direction, and the other downwards-oriented and inclining in that direction. And, as in the case of all things, as we have written above, each one of these can very easily attain what it is naturally inclined towards. The upper-oriented faculty is the faculty of intellect, which aspires to intellective percepts and which loves and desires them. For love in all things is imaging something pleasing to a certain faculty, which, when being imaged, stimulates the aspirational faculty toward the attainment of the object of that faculty, and which, when being attained, causes its faculty to rejoice in the attainment of that which is distinctly its own. For example, one who loves food, first images its taste and its pleasantness to the palate. This image catalyzes a yearning and a desire, a desire for the attainment by the sense of that which it senses. And when the latter is attained the sense rejoices in having attained the distinct object of its desire. In the same way, the intellective faculty, whose objects are in the realm of intellect — when it images these objects in a general way, it is aroused to attain them in detail and in perfection. And when they are developed within it, it rejoices in them in the very quintessence of joy — for the stronger the faculty, and the more perfect the object, the greater the enjoyment. And since the intellective faculty of man is the strongest of all his faculties, and its objects the most perfect, it follows that it must rejoice more greatly in its attainments than all of the other faculties in theirs. And the objects of this faculty being those of intellect and excellence, it follows that the more excellent the object, the greater the resultant joy. The intellect, then, will love and desire to cleave to the L-rd in the greatest possible intimacy; that is, to contemplate His ways and wonders and what may be inferred from them. And when it reflects upon these it will rejoice in the quintessence of joy, having attained its most perfect possible object. It follows, too, from this that the intellect will be drawn after His mitzvoth with a strong yearning. For the intellect always selects what is worthy and flees what is vile, and this by virtue of the nature of the thing in itself [apart from considerations of consequences]. And the intellect sees it as binding and as most gratifying to abide by the will of this perfect Commander — even without taking into consideration the fact that the mitzvah is desirable in itself and the transgression repugnant (the Torah not commanding the one and forbidding the other if it were not so). Even without this consideration the intellect sees it as mandatory to abide by His will. As if we were to picture to ourselves a perfect man in the isles of the sea, whom we knew to be wiser than all men, including King Solomon, and so perfect in all of the virtues as to allow of no additional perfection, and this perfection being impressed upon us each day by what reaches us of his writings and sayings — there is no doubt that all healthy-souled men would be moved by their intellects to follow his will, even without giving thought to considerations of reward and punishment. And there is no doubt that to the extent of the former's perfection the good man would be drawn after him. It follows, then, that if one is found to be infinitely perfect — as the Holy One Blessed be He — the intellect should be infinitely drawn after Him. Add to this what is axiomatic to intellect — that whatever the Torah commands is desirable and whatever it forbids, repugnant, whether or not the intellect perceives the reason for its being so; and the intellect always selects the desirable and flees the repugnant. The intellect, then, by virtue of its very nature, loves the L-rd, aspires to His mitzvoth, and flees all that the Holy One Blessed be He has forbidden as one flees a serpent. One who serves the L-rd after this fashion, not out of love of reward or fear of punishment, serves the L-rd out of love, and reward will inevitably follow. In this respect, it is very easy to attain true love and fear of G-d, one's nature inclining naturally towards it.

(17) I have already written that ease of attainment is a function of a natural inclination for the object to be attained. It is in this respect that Moses says: "And now, O Israel, what does the L-rd your G-d ask of you? — only to fear…" That is, He is not asking something overburdensome of you, something beyond your nature; to the contrary, you have a natural inclination for it and will rejoice in its attainment. The reason most men do not attain it is the extreme difficulty it presents in a different respect, the antagonism to it of the lower-oriented faculty of man, whose natural inclination is opposite that of the intellect — namely, the imagination. This faculty is constantly oriented towards the lusts that man shares in common with the animals, and the senses are far more subservient to it than they are to the intellect. This, for three reasons: first, because of their similar natures, the imagination and the sense all being corporeal faculties, while the intellect is a distinct, non-corporeal entity, and all things are attracted to their like — second, because those imaged objects under the dominion of imagination are tangible and visible, whereas the objects of the intellect are intangible and invisible — and, third, because of the precedence of the dominion of imagination in time. One's imagination rules his senses from the time he is born, his intellect not doing so until he attains the age of reason. This is the intent of our sages' statement (Medrash Hagadol Bereshith 4:7): "The evil inclination precedes the good by thirteen years, as it is written (Bereshith 4:7): 'At the door [of life] lies sin.'" The senses, then, meet a similar fate as those foolish men who are ruled for many years by a foolish king. His reign, from long habit, becomes so natural to them that they will be averse to the leadership of a more perfect monarch. And this is the intent of King Solomon's analogy (Ecclesiastes 4:13, 15, 16): "Better the poor, wise child than the old, foolish king, who can no longer care for himself… I have seen all of life that transpires under the sun with the second child, that stood up after him. There is no end to all the people — to all whom he came before; the later ones, too, will not rejoice in him." The explanation is as follows: Because the people have become accustomed to the rule of the first, the fool, they will not rejoice in the rule of the wise child, which is more perfect than that of the first. The same is true with imagination and intellect relative to the senses. Because the dominion of the imagination over the senses and the awakening faculty preceded the dominion of the intellect over them, therefore, its reign is more pleasing to most people than that of the intellect, though the latter is superior. And, with the ascendancy of imagination and the senses, intellect sinks and is lost, as an infant captured by the gentiles. It does not rejoice in its unique objects and is not awakened to them. It is in this respect that love and fear of the L-rd are difficult for most people.