From Becoming to Being: Finding Meaning in Transition
Originally delivered at the ceremony commemorating the Shloshim (thirty-day mourning period) of my father, of blessed memory. I am now revisiting it as part of a series of reflections in anticipation of his first yahrzeit.
The Promise of "Yesh": 310 Worlds and Enduring Being
It is customary to complete the entire 6 orders of the Mishna after someone passes. The final Tractate in the entire Mishnayot is Uktzin.
At the conclusion of the Mishnah in Uktzin, we find:
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi stated, "The Holy One, blessed be He, will in the future bequeath to each righteous individual three hundred and ten worlds, as it is stated (Proverbs 8:21), 'To endow My loved ones with substance (yesh), and to fill their treasuries.'"
The numerical value of the word יש - yesh, in Hebrew, is 310.
It's important to note the Tosafot Yom Tov's observation that this statement doesn't appear to be a Mishnah in the traditional sense, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi was an Amora (a later sage), and it also seems from the Gemara in Perek Chelek that it's not a Mishnah. Nevertheless, the Rambam cites it in his Commentary on the Mishnah. The inclusion of a seemingly non-Mishnaic phrase at the end of the Mishnayot requires further examination.
The Tiferet Yisrael, quoting his father, explains the Mishnah:
After the Tanna (Mishnaic sage) completed explaining all the laws of the holy Torah in the Mishnah, he sealed it with a sacred conclusion, to reveal the reward hidden for those who fear God and contemplate His Name. He conveyed that the delight of the World to Come, reserved for them, will be 310 times all the pleasures of this world which they had to forgo for their engagement in Torah. My illustrious father, of blessed memory, explained that the number 310 is half of the total number of mitzvot that God commanded us. These are the 613 mitzvot explicit in the Torah, and an additional 7 Rabbinic mitzvot, totaling 620. This number represents the "crown of Torah." However, since it is written (Job 41:3), "Who has anticipated Me, that I should repay him?" – meaning that the Holy One, blessed be He, assists us in fulfilling His commandments – therefore, it is appropriate for a person to receive only half the reward, which is 310.
However, Rambam in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Masekhet Uktsin 3) has a different interpretation:
Know that when he completed all the laws of the holy Torah, he concluded with a statement speaking of reward. He means that if all types of pleasures of this world were gathered and multiplied 310 times, such would be the delight of every righteous person in the World to Come. However, the duration of that time is endless, for every soul that merits the World to Come will not perish. This is the meaning of "yesh" – meaning eternal existence (המציאות התמידי) that has no end, for yesh signifies existence and ein (אין) signifies non-existence. It is as if He said, "To My loved ones I will bequeath true existence." And there is no true existence except that which is eternal. Indeed, just as there is no comparison between that which has an end and that which has no end, so too there is no comparison between these pleasures that are with us and that [ultimate] delight. We have already explained a little of this in Tractate Sanhedrin.
Perhaps we can explain this in a somewhat similar manner, with a few preliminary points.
Shatnez and Tzitzit: Freedom and Responsibility at Life's End
In Parshat Ki Teitzei, we find two mitzvot juxtaposed, and the Gemara derives a connection between them due to their proximity:
"You shall not wear shatnez, wool and linen together." (Deuteronomy 22:11) "You shall make for yourself fringes (tzitzit) on the four corners of your garment with which you cover yourself." (Deuteronomy 22:12) (As Rashi comments: "You shall make for yourself fringes – even from forbidden mixtures, which is why the verse juxtaposes them" (Yevamot 4a)).
Indeed, we find an additional connection between both of these mitzvot regarding one who has passed from this world.
In Gemara Niddah 61b:
The Rabbis taught: A garment in which kilayim (forbidden mixtures) are found may not be sold to a gentile, nor may it be made into a saddle-pad for a donkey, but one may make shrouds from it for the deceased. Rav Yosef said: This indicates that mitzvot will be nullified in the future. Abaye said to him: Or if you prefer, Rav Dimi said: But Rabbi Mani said in the name of Rabbi Yanai: They taught this only for lamenting him, but for burying him, it is forbidden. He responded: Was it not stated concerning this that Rabbi Yochanan said: Even for burial? And Rabbi Yochanan is consistent with his own view, for Rabbi Yochanan said: What is the meaning of that which is written (Psalms 88:6), "Among the dead, free"? Once a person dies, he becomes free from mitzvot.
In Menachot 41a:
"At that time, we certainly place it (i.e., tzitzit on the garment of the deceased) because of (Proverbs 17:5) 'He who mocks the poor affronts his Maker.'"
And in Gemara Berachot 18a:
Rabbi Chiyya and Rabbi Yonatan were walking in a cemetery. Rabbi Yonatan's tzitzit was dangling. Rabbi Chiyya said to him: Lift it up, so they (the deceased) won't say, "Tomorrow they are coming to join us, and now they are shaming us."
Summary of the Talmudic sources:
- Shatnez is permitted for use as burial shrouds; mitzvot are not binding after death.
- Tzitzit should be applied to shrouds. Burying without tzitzit is mocking the dead.
- The living should not display their tzitzit in a cemetery because it is mocking the deceased.
These sources present an apparent contradiction regarding "mocking the poor/dead" in relation to shatnez vs. tzitzit.
The Tosafot questions these contradictions.
Question 1: Why is it permissible to clothe the deceased in shatnez, and this is not considered "mocking the poor/dead"?
Maharal in Gur Aryeh (Bereishit 46:10) and Tiferet Yisrael answer that there is a difference between positive commandments (mitzvot aseh) and negative commandments (mitzvot lo ta'aseh).
Proof for this is what the Sages said (Berachot 18a) that one should not walk in a cemetery with his tzitzit dragging over the graves, for it is "mocking the poor/dead." Yet regarding kilayim (forbidden mixtures), the Sages said (Pesachim 40b) that it is permissible to make shrouds from them, and this is not "mocking the poor/dead." Rather, negative commandments are different, as there is no "mocking the poor/dead" since he (the deceased) is not commanded in mitzvot, and he does not lack the acquisition of the mitzva. But positive commandments are considered "mocking the poor/dead," even though the deceased is exempt from mitzvot – ultimately, he lacks the acquisition of the mitzva, and this point is fundamental. Even though the Tosafot explained it differently, this is fundamental and correct.
Question 2: If we indeed place tzitzit on the deceased (as suggested in Menachot 41a), why is it forbidden for the living to walk with exposed tzitzit in a cemetery, as it's considered 'mocking the poor/dead'?
The Tosafot in Berachot 18a asks:
And it is puzzling, for we say in Perek HaTechelet (Menachot 41a) "at that time, we certainly place it," meaning they put tzitzit on their garments because of "mocking the poor/dead." And it can be said that the meaning here is that they (the living) are shaming them (the deceased) in that the living are commanded, and the dead are not commanded, and "great is one who is commanded and performs" compared to one who is not.
From both the Maharal and Tosafot, we see a pattern that the prohibition against mocking the deceased relates to the fact that they no longer have the requirement and hence the ability to acquire new mitzvot.
It's necessary to understand why all the discussion about "mocking the poor/dead" is specifically in relation to the mitzva of tzitzit. (Although it is also mentioned in the Gemara concerning Torah scrolls and tefillin, all the incidents, details, and even decided Halachot in the Shulchan Aruch focus on tzitzit.)
Tzitzit and the Unfinished World
It seems we can explain this based on the words of the Meshech Chochmah in Parshat Shelach, regarding the mitzva of tzitzit:
Meshech Chochmah explains that the entirety of creation is called a garment.
And according to our prior premise, that creation is still unfinished, and the Creator, blessed be He, left it to the chosen ones (humanity) to complete it and bring it to perfection [perhaps a second intention is in their statement: "the northern wind is open." Understand this]. Therefore, the Creator aroused us with the mitzva of tzitzit, to teach that existence itself is a garment, which on both its sides still has threads that have not yet been woven. Therefore, it requires a "gdil" (braid) and a "anaf" (branch/thread), which is to teach that even in the actions a person performs by his free will in life and in good, and in walking in the ways of God, even in this, help from above sustains him, as they say, "If not for the Holy One, blessed be He, helping him," etc. And even in this, a part of God and His divine assistance is woven for one who awakens to purify himself. And you, son of man, prepare your heart not to follow the eye and the heart, and to bridle physical desires, and to cling to God. And in every part of creation, perform a mitzva that connects them to God, as they say in Torat Kohanim, "There is nothing in which there is no mitzva to the Omnipresent." And through this, all the springs of nature will draw boundless blessing according to divine providence, to the fullest extent, and creation will come to its true perfection according to God's intention. And you, son of man, if you weave creation, you will become a partner with God in the act of creation, as they say, "Whoever judges a true judgment," etc. And this is what they said (Sanhedrin 99b), "Whoever engages in Torah for its own sake, etc., it is as if he built palaces above and below, as it is stated, 'To plant the heavens and lay the foundations of the earth,' etc."
According to this, it is very well understood that the mitzva of tzitzit indicates the work that a person must complete and perform – "unfinished business." However, when a person departs, the mitzva of tzitzit is no longer relevant to them, for "their days of service are complete." This is why specifically Tzitzit is the realm where we encounter "mocking the poor." Because the deceased are no longer tasked with partnering in the completion of creation. Their threads are no longer unfinished. Let’s take this idea a step further.
Static "Being" vs. Dynamic "Becoming": Lessons from the Desert Dead and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi
Bava Batra 73b:
And Rabbah bar bar Hana said: One time, we were walking in the desert, and a certain Arab joined us… And he said to me: Come, I will show you the dead of the wilderness. We went, and I saw them, and they looked as if they were intoxicated (or "bloated"). They were lying on their backs. And the knee of one of them was raised, and the Arab went under his knee riding a camel, with his spear raised, and he did not touch him. I broke off a single corner of techelet (blue thread) from one of them, and we could not proceed (וְלָא הֲוָה מִסְתַּגִּי לַן). He said to me: Perhaps you took something from them? Return it, for it is a tradition that whoever takes anything from them cannot proceed. I went and returned it, and then we were able to proceed. When I came before the Rabbis, they said to me: Every "Abba" (father) is a donkey, and every "Bar bar Hana" is a fool! For what Halachic purpose did you do this? To know if it's like Beit Shammai or Beit Hillel? You should have counted the threads and counted the knots.
Refer to the Tosafot on why the dead were dressed in tzitzit. The Maharsha innovates that this was a garment entirely of techelet (blue), belonging to Korach or one of his congregation. As Rashi (Numbers 16:1, quoting Tanchuma) relates, Korach and his followers challenged Moses by asking if a garment entirely of techelet (blue) was exempt from tzitzit, mocking the idea that a single blue thread could exempt a regular garment, but a fully blue one would still require it. This challenge itself hints at the notion of a 'complete' garment that seemingly needs no further additions. The Maharsha continues to interpret it according to his method.
But according to our approach, we can say:
Korach belonged to a world of tikkun (rectification/perfection), a world of the future, as we find in the Arizal that in the future, Korach will be the Kohen Gadol (High Priest). Therefore, in a garment entirely of techelet – from the root tachlit (תכלית), meaning completion or purpose – there is no need for tzitzit, because all creation is already perfected. "Met" (מת, dead) comes from the root tam (תם), meaning complete and finished. Rabbah bar bar Hana saw the dead of the wilderness and yearned for a world of tikkun and the future. Therefore, he took from that corner, but from then on, "he could not proceed" (lo mistagei lei), meaning he could not move forward. For when there is nothing left to complete, one becomes in a state of standing (עומד), not walking (הולך). A state of completion is paradoxical with progression. Therefore, he had to return it. But the Rabbis told him that he should have counted the threads and the knots. The simple meaning seems to be that the dead of the wilderness sinned and lost their share in the World to Come, but you, Rabbah bar bar Hana, performed mitzvot and raised students and children who follow your path of Torah. Through this, even after death, you continue to "walk" (i.e., progress). And the threads and knots allude to the 613 mitzvot. But the world of the present is one of action, of unfinished threads to weave.
Similarly, in Ketubot 77b, regarding the story of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi and the Angel of Death:
When he was about to die, they said to the Angel of Death: Go, fulfill his wish. He went and appeared to him. He said to him: Show me my place. He said to him: By your life. He said to him: Give me your knife, lest you frighten me on the way. He gave it to him. When he arrived there, he (the Angel) lifted him up and showed him. He (Rabbi Yehoshua) jumped and fell to the other side. He (the Angel) grabbed him by the corner of his garment. He (Rabbi Yehoshua) said to him: I swear that I will not return. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: If he (the Angel) can be absolved of the oath – let him return. If not – let him not return. He (the Angel) said to him: Give me back my knife. He (Rabbi Yehoshua) would not give it to him. A Divine Voice came forth and said to him: Give it back to him, for it is needed for creatures. Elijah announced before him: Clear the way for Bar Levi! Clear the way for Bar Levi!
Perhaps the 'corner of the garment' (karna de'glimei) alludes to the concept of tzitzit which are placed on the corner of the garment. The Angel of Death grabbed him by the corner of the garment and prevented him from ‘progressing’ because on the other side there are no more threads left to weave. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi swore that he would not return because he understood that his time to die had naturally arrived, and he did not want the transition to be through the Angel of Death. But in truth, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi on the other side, like every other person, underwent a transition process from "becoming" (להתהוות) and progressing, to "being" (להיות). This may be what is alluded to by להנחיל אוהבי יש. The righteous merit a state of completion of their designated task on this world and transition to a state of ‘being’. Existence. Yesh.
The end of the Mishna is the beginning of a new phase of the Talmud. R’ Yehoshua ben Levi belonged in this liminal space of transition between the Tannaim and Amoraim. One door closing, another opening up. He was also the figure who willingly transitioned on his own terms from a life of becoming to a new existence of being. It is therefore fitting to complete the Mishna with him specifically, and with this quote about the future ‘existence’.
"Ishi" vs. "Baali": The Nuance of Intimate Connection
Hosea 2:18:
"And it shall be on that day, says the Lord, you will call Me 'Ishi' (my husband), and no longer call Me 'Baali' (my master)." "And I will remove the names of the Ba'alim from her mouth, and they shall no longer be mentioned by their names."
See Radak (and Ibn Ezra):
"And it shall be on that day, says the Lord, you will call Me 'Ishi'." Meaning, you will call Me "man," for the husband of a woman is called ish, like "Elkanah her husband" (1 Samuel 1:8). And the congregation of Israel is likened to a married woman. And Ba'al is a shared name, for they used to call idols Ba'al. Therefore, He said, "and no longer call Me 'Baali'" in order to remove the name of the Ba'alim from her mouth, and they shall no longer be mentioned by their names.
And our Rabbis, of blessed memory, explained in Gemara Ketubot 71b: Rabbi Yochanan said: "Like a bride in her father-in-law's house, and not like a bride in her father's house." Rashi also cites this interpretation.
Can it be that these two interpretations are one and the same?
The idea of worshiping Ba'al refers to power and might, as ba'al means a lord, thus one is worshiping one who was thought to have the ability to act, serving one who could punish or provide for him. However, the worship of God (Hashem) is because of Who He is, not because of what He does.
And when God's Name is not complete (i.e., not fully recognized), it results in many people worshiping God as if they were worshiping Ba'al. But when the Redemption comes, and the Name (Havaya) will be complete, where the Name Havaya (י'ה'ו'ה) signifies pure being and existence (הויה ומציאות) and not merely some attribute or power. Then the relationship will be in the aspect of Ishi and not Baali. A state we will enjoy when we merit the ultimate redemption.
And this concept is like the bride in her father-in-law's house. For in her father's house, while still betrothed, the bride strives to prove her loyalty, beauty, and abilities. But after a period in her father-in-law's house, after the marriage, the essence is simply being together (הויה ביחד).
This is the concept of completion and perfection, not of building and acting. Only being.
The Acrostic of "Ish": Kaddish and Ultimate "Yesh"
It appears this is alluded to in what we say in Kaddish: Amein Yehei Shmei Rabbah (אָמֵן יְהֵא שְׁמֵהּ רַבָּא), whose acronym is Ish (איש). Tosafot in a few places (see Tosafot in Berachot 3a) famously cites the idea that Yehei shmei rabbah means the named of יה will become extended and complete into יהו’’ה, thus the acrostic is Ish, because Ish represents the essence of G-d’s being.
And perhaps, by way of hint, this is the idea of “אוהבי יש” (My lovers have substance/being). These words are also the letters of Ish (איש), corresponding to Amein Yehei Shmei Rabbah. When a person departs from this world, every righteous individual, every Jew who performs mitzvot, undergoes a transition to the aspect of Yesh (יש) – Being (הויה) – “bound in the bond of the source of all life,” in a world of tikkun (perfection). A world of pure existence like the essence of G-d Himself.
And all that one earned, inquired, and perfected in this world yields fruits in the World to Come, without the need to do anything further.
Comments
Post a Comment