What is the difference between Shemi'ah, Asiyah and Ha'azanah?
1.
Rashi: Shemi'ah means acceptance; Asiyah - performance; and Ha'azanah - to listen and observe with great care.
2.
Ramban #1 (citing the Ibn Ezra): "Shamo'a Tishma" means to know the reasons for the Mitzvos; "v'ha'Yashar b'Einav, Ta'aseh" refers to the Mitzvos Aseh; and "v'Ha'azanta l'Mitzvosav" to the Mitzvos Lo Sa'aseh.
4)
Why did Hashem mention the plagues of Egypt here?
1.
Rashi (to Devarim 28:60): When Yisrael saw the unconventional plagues which struck Egypt, they were frightened that they would not suffer the same fate;
1
therefore Hashem assured them (here) that they had nothing to fear as long as they kept the Mitzvos, but warned them (there) that if they will not keep the Mitzvos, they will suffer the same fate.
2
2.
Ramban (citing the Ibn Ezra): Following the downfall of the Egyptians, this was the first miracle that took place in the desert, and was the reverse of the first of the ten plagues - since there Hashem made the sweet water bitter, whereas here, He made the bitter water sweet, It sent a message to Yisrael, that He has the ability to perform two opposite miracles; to encourage them to fear Him and not to turn against Him; and to love Him, since He would do good to them just as He had healed the water on their behalf.
3.
Rashbam: Hashem tested Yisrael by depriving them of water and subsequently healing it, He was showing them that, if they would adhere to the Mitzvos that He was teaching them, He would not plague
3
them in the way that He had plagued Egypt by turning their water into blood.
4.
Berachos 5a: The Torah is telling us that if someone studies Torah, all suffering will leave him.
4
Rabeinu Bachye points out that the Gematriya of the word 'Asher' ("[Kol ha'Machalah] Asher [Samti b'Mitzrayim Lo Asim Alecha]" - which is 501) is equivalent to that of the first letters of the ten plagues that were engraved on Moshe's stick ('Detzach Adash Be'achav').
Rashbam: Because "Machalah" refers to a lack of water, as in Shemos 23:25. See also Melachim II 2:21, where the Pasuk uses a similar expression of healing with regard to water.
If Hashem will not place the plagues of Egypt upon us, then what does "Ki Ani Hashem Rofe'echa" mean?
1.
Rashi #1: Hashem promises that He will not strike us with the plagues of Egypt; and that if and when He does, it is as if He had not - because whereas the plagues destroyed the Egyptians, He strikes Yisrael like a doctor operates on a patient - for his good, to enable him to survive and continue living.
1
2.
Rashi #2: Because, like a good doctor, I teach you Yisrael how to avoid the plagues of Egypt
2
- by performing the Mitzvos that I teach to you..
3.
Ramban #1: It means that, in the event that Yisrael are stricken with natural illnesses (refer to 15:26:2:3*), He is their doctor and will cure them.
3
4.
Ramban #2, Targum Yonasan, and Sanhedrin 101a: Hashem will not strike Yisrael with the plagues of Egypt, if they listen to Him ... ; but if they don't, and He strikes them, (then, if they do Teshuvah - Targum Yonasan), He is their doctor, and He will cure them.
4
5.
Seforno: "Ki Ani Hashem Rofe'echa" is another way of saying that all the Mitzvos serve as a cure for the soul, and that consequently, if, on the one hand, Yisrael will accept all the Mitzvos and stick to them, they will be spared all the plagues of the Egyptians, but that, on the other, if they will accept them initially and then discard them, they will be subject to all the plagues of the Egyptians and more.
5
Rashi: This is like a doctor who tells his patients that if they avoid eating certain foods, they will remain healthy. Hadar Zekenim - Eating Neveilos, vermin, and Tamei species, and contact with Temei'im, harm the body. Da'as Zekenim - And the Mitzvah is a cure, as in the Pasuk, "ul'Chol Besaro Marpei" (Mishlei 4:22).
Seforno: Similar to the warning that Beis-Din issue to a Ger when he converts. See Yevamos 47a.
6)
What is the novel idea in the Pasuk? If they indeed listen to Hashem, what reason would there be that they should get sick or die, that Hashem would need to heal them?
1.
Gur Aryeh: At times, illnesses come due to the alignment of the heavens;
1
and these too Hashem will not place upon them.
I.e., not as a punishment for sin, but rather a bad Mazal.
7)
How will we reconcile the current Pasuk, where Refu'ah applies to people, with the Pasuk in Parshas Metzora (Vayikra 14:48) where it applies to the illness?
1.
Riva: When the illness is external and visible, Refu'ah applies to it, but when the illness is internal and not visible, Refu'ah applies to the person.
8)
Why does the Torah use the double expression, "Im Shamo'a Tishma"?
1.
Rashi (to Devarim 15:5): 'If you will heed (Hashem's voice) when you have little, He will enable you to heed it when you have plenty.'
1
2.
Seforno: Because it is referring to the 'Chok u'Mishpat' that Hashem gave them at Marah,
2
and that Yisrael will go in Hashem's ways from now on.
3.
Rosh #1 (in Ki Savo Devarim 28:1): 'If you will listen to (Divrei Torah) in this world, you will listen to Divrei Torah in the world to come.'
4.
Rosh #2 (in Devarim 28:1): 'If you will heed your Rebbi, in the end you will teach others.'
5.
Berachos 40a #1: (Only) if you listened (to the Torah) will you continue to listen, otherwise not.
6.
Berachos 40a #2: If you listened to (observed) the old you will listen to the new;
3
but if you turn your heart away (from the old), you will not
7.
Mechilta: 'If you will keep one Mitzvah, you will keep many Mitzvos.'
4
Berachos 40a: As opposed to the world, in which empty vessels can receive, but not full ones; in Hashem's world, full ones can receive, but not empty ones. As the Pasuk writes, "Yaheiv Chochmesa l'Chakimin" (Daniel 2:21).
As the Mishnah states (Avos 4:2), 'Mitzvah Goreres Mitzvah.'
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
9)
Rashi writes: "'Shamo'a Tishma' - ... They should accept [the Mitzvos] upon themselves; 'Ta'aseh' - in action; 'V'Ha'azanta' - Incline your ears to observe them carefully; 'Chukav' - Matters that are solely the King's decree, without any reason, and the Yetzer ha'Ra incites us regarding them...." How can each of these explanations be matched with the language the Pasuk uses; a) to accept the voice (Kol) of Hashem; b) to act in the way that is upright (Yashar) in His Eyes;" c) to carefully perform the Mitzvos; d) and to guard the Chukim?
1.
Gur Aryeh:a. The Torah often uses the verb li'Shmo'a (lit. to hear) with the meaning 'to accept;'
1
therefore the term "Kol" is relevant here. b. The adjective "Yashar" applies to deeds; as in, 'that is a Yashar (correct and just) thing to do.' c. Careful observance of the details of the Mitzvos requires careful listening to learn their Halachos. d. Because the accuser incites us not to observe the Chukim, they require extra guarding so that we not transgress them.
2
This is called "being Shomer the decree of the king" (as in Koheles 8:2).
Rashi writes: "'Chukav' - Matters that are solely the King's decree, without any reason... such as [the prohibitions of] wearing Kil'ayim (Sha'atnez), eating pork, [the Mitzvah of] Parah Adumah, and the like." But if there is no reason, then why did Hashem command us to observe them?
1.
Maharal (Tif'eres Yisrael Ch. 8, p. 29): Although these Mitzvos do not have a reason in the natural (Tiv'i) sense, they are the order that Hashem set, in His wisdom, as the Chukim that apply for Torah living. Despite that a person does not understand why it should be so, the Torah was given to purify him, and to enable him to connect to this transcendent (Sichli) order.
1
Furthermore, although the reasons for the Chukim are not revealed to or known by all, they were known to Moshe and to the Chachamim - each at his own level.
2
Maharal writes at length (loc. cit., Ch. 6 - 8) on the topic of the reasons for the Mitzvos - that they do not have natural reasons, but rather they have a transcendent order (Seder Sichli). It seems that we should explain as follows - We ought not interpret the Torah in terms of our present sphere - the life of physicality that we are used to. Rather, the Torah is in accordance with a higher sphere. For example, Chazal teach (Makos 23b) that the 248 positive commandments correspond to the 248 human limbs (i.e. bones, see Mishnah Ohalos 1:8); and the 365 negative commandments to the 365 days of the solar year. Hence, Chazal teach us that the Mitzvos were given to purify man. Maharal (ibid. Ch. 7, p. 26) offers the following parable about the observance of Mitzvos. A farmer plants a seed, which grows and produces the unique leaves and produce dictated by the seed's specific type. Had it been the seed's nature to produce fruits of a different form, there would be nothing intrinsically wrong with that - just that the nature of this particular seed is to produce specifically its type. In the same way, the Divine Nefesh that Hashem placed within us, is actualized by specifically these Mitzvos. That means, that we should not look for reasons in the Mitzvos that are inherent in the deeds themselves. (E.g., there is no inherent difference between the meaning of an act of Shechitah performed on the front of the neck, or on the back of the neck.) Rather, the Mitzvos were given as Hashem deemed fitting for man, in terms of his higher order. Maharal seemingly addresses our question - What benefit is there in the Mitzvos for which we do not understand the reason; what effect do these Mitzvos have on a person? He answers that by virtue of the act of the Mitzvah itself, even without [knowing] its reason, a person links in to the higher order, from which the Mitzvos emanate. That explains the Chukim - the Sichli order which was pre-set for man. (EK)
Gur Aryeh (to Vayikra 26:3): The reasons for the Chukim cannot be fully comprehended; yet we can understand a little bit of them. For example, see Maharal (Derech Chayim p. 301, to Avos 6:7) - A certain aspect of understanding Parah Adumah was attained only by R' Eliezer, based on the Sechel that Hashem granted him as his Chelek [in Torah]; see there.
11)
Rashi writes: "'[All of the sickness that I emplaced upon Egypt,] I shall not place upon you' - And [even] if I do place it, it is as if it was not emplaced... 'Because I am Hashem, your Healer.'" How does this solve the apparent contradiction - will sickness be placed upon them, or not?
1.
Gur Aryeh: [If we indeed accept and observe the Mitzvos, as outlined above, Bnei Yisrael will not have any sickness to begin with. However,] "There is no righteous man on the Earth, who [only] does good, and does not sin" (Koheles 7:20)! Whereupon, Hashem will then rebuke him for his sin (with a certain malady) -- but then Hashem will heal him.
12)
Rashi writes: "Now according to its simple meaning, '... for I am Hashem, Your Healer (Rofe'echa)' - Who teaches you this Torah and these Mitzvos, in order that you be saved from [the maladies that would come as the consequence to their transgression]. Just like a doctor says to a person, 'Do not eat this particular food, lest it bring you to such-and-such an illness!'" How then should we translate the Pasuk?
1.
Gur Aryeh: To this explanation, "Rofe'echa is not a verb (I am healing you) but rather a title (I am your Doctor). A doctor is called such, even when he is not actively healing, but rather teaching the patient how to preserve his own health, so that he will not get sick in the first place.
1
[That is what Hashem does for us by teaching us the Torah and Mitzvos.]
Gur Aryeh: But then Rashi concludes, "... as the verse states, 'It will be medicine for your flesh...' (Mishlei 3:8)" - which implies that the Torah is compared to active healing? Rashi brings this verse as a Kal va'Chomer - if Torah can heal a person of illness, certainly it will cause him not to become sick in the first place.
13)
Rashi writes: "'... I am Hashem, your Healer (Rofe'echa),' Who teaches you this Torah and these Mitzvos... just like a doctor says to a person, 'Do not eat this particular food....'" In the preceding question, we explained that in Rashi's view, "Rofe'echa" means "a doctor" - who need not actively engage in healing, but rather teaches the patient how not to become sick. Yet the Mechilta does understand "Rofe'echa" to mean active healing (citing the Pasuk "l'Chol Besaro Marpei" - Mishlei 4:22; also see Ramban here)?
1.
Gur Aryeh #1: The Mechilta learns this verse in two segments; a. "All of the sickness that I emplaced upon Egypt" - which were supernatural Makos - "I shall not place upon you;" b. .. for behold, "I am Hashem, your Healer" - i.e. even from natural maladies such as "Tzinim u'Pachim"
1
that a person brings upon himself, Hashem heals you.
2.
Gur Aryeh #2:a. "I am Hashem, your Healer," in the present - through the Giving of the Torah, when Hashem would heal all of their ailments and disabilities, b. so certainly "all of the sicknesses... I shall not place upon you," in the future.
3.
Maharal (Derush l'Shabbos Ha'Gadol (at end of Hagadah, p. 222)): A person who lived through a plague, but did not himself become sick, is not considered 'healed' of that plague.
2
Bnei Yisrael were deemed to have been "sick" due to the Makos in Egypt, such that when Hashem saved them, they were now considered fully 'healed' of them. See Maharal further.
3
Bava Metzia 107b: "Everything is in the hands of Heaven except for cold blasts" (i.e., Hashem places it in man's responsibility to preserve his health during winter).
Maharal, in context, is describing how all four reasons for bringing a Korban Todah and praising Hashem, applied to Bnei Yisrael as they left Egypt - one of which is someone who was sick and was healed. Maharal does not interpret our entire Pasuk, nor does he cite the Mechilta. Seemingly, he would interpret our Pasuk as follows; a. "All of the sicknesses... I shall not place upon you," in the future, because; b. "I am Hashem, your Healer," in the past - in Egypt. Also refer to Shemos 6:6:3:9 and 13:18:0.4:1 . (EK)
