Maharal On The Four Kingdoms Part 3 (Why There Are Specifically 4 Kingdoms and not 3 or 5)

This is a continuation of the post found here where I discussed the Maharal's take on why any amount of Kingdoms that take away from the Glory of G-D belong in the fabric of the world. Now we will discuss why there are specifically four kingdoms that take on this role.

Maharal:
Therefore, it is appropriate that there are [specifically] four kingdoms, because they take away from the honor of G-D and He is ONE (Devarim 6:4).

E-man:
The Maharal is going to explain why the number four is appropriate to be in opposition to the number one. He is trying to explain why the four kingdoms, the entities that take away or diminish the glory of G-D in this world, are specifically enumerated as four. Also, the Maharal is pointing out why the number four is the antithesis to the number one.

Maharal:
The middle (or center) is connected to the number one because there is only one exact center.

E-man:
Rav Hartman brings down another statement from the Maharal in Netzach Yisroel in the first chapter that helps clarify this idea. "All unity is in the middle (center) because the edges are separate (many), but there is only one center."

Maharal:
Therefore, there is only one Temple and only one Jerusalem and they are in the center of the world because the center was given as a keepsake for them.  So too, the Jewish people, that they are a singular (unique) nation, the land was given to them as a keepsake since it is singular (unique) because it is at the center of the world.

E-man:
The Maharal is saying that all these things are unique: The land of Israel, Jerusalem, the Temple and the Jewish people. They are all unique based on different ideas. The land of Israel is considered the center of the world (there are a million ways to explain this), Jerusalem is considered the center of Israel, and the Temple is considered the center of Jerusalem. The Jewish people are unique in a lot of ways, but suffice it to say that they are the only nation to have spoken with G-D.

Maharal:
The general idea is that anything that is singular (unique) is given, as a keepsake, the (character traits of the) center. Something that is removed from singularity (like complexity) is connected to four, this represents the four directions that travel away from the center. Therefore, there are four kingdoms (that rule in this world and diminish the glory of G-D in this world) that represent the four directions that travel away from the center.

E-man:
The Maharal is trying to explain that something that is unique in the world is connected to the number one. The number one relates to anything in the center. There is only one center of anything and that is the character trait of the number one. However, anything that is diverse (or complex), is connected to the number four, because it represents the four directions that lead away from the center. Therefore, anything that is many or diverse is connected to the number four. I know, it is confusing.

Maharal:
Therefore, we learn out from the words of תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ (unformed and void) about the four kingdoms because this language comes to teach us about the imperfection that exists in the creation [of the world]. It is from the deficit of the creation that these four kingdoms arose. [These four kingdoms] were designated for this, that their rule would take away from [the glory of] G-D to the extent that they would nullify His singularity (uniqueness) in the world.

E-man:
Rav Hartman explains this idea so that it is more readily understandable. The imperfection in the world is that the presence of G-D is not felt and it appears to be that the world was established and exists without G-D. Meaning, the four kingdoms serve to mask the presence of G-D. They allow for man to think there is no G-D and that the world runs on its own. Or, at the very least, the four kingdoms cause people to think that G-D is not the only powerful being.

Maharal:
With the destruction of the four kingdoms the verse says (Zechariah 14:9):

ט  וְהָיָה יְהוָה לְמֶלֶךְ, עַל-כָּל-הָאָרֶץ; בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, יִהְיֶה יְהוָה אֶחָד--וּשְׁמוֹ אֶחָד.

9 And the LORD shall be King over all the earth; in that day shall the LORD be One, and His name one.

But, as long as these four kingdoms rule the world the glory of G-D will not be revealed in His world.

E-man:
The point here is that the four kingdoms take away from the oneness of G-D. This means that G-D can not be revealed or understood while the four kingdoms are in control of the world. They mask G-D's presence because the glory of G-D is only realized when people see that G-D is the only all powerful one. However, with the existence of the four kingdoms, it appears that either G-D does not exist, or that He is not the only all powerful one.

Maharal:
Therefore, these four kingdoms come from the imperfection that exists in creation, for it is impossible that the world should be created complete (without imperfection), rather there must be a deficit. However, this imperfection does not stem from G-D, the creator of everything, rather it comes from the fact that the world is a creation. This is alluded to in the verse (Genesis 1:1-2):

א  בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.	1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
ב  וְהָאָרֶץ, הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ, וְחֹשֶׁךְ, עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם; וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים, מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם.	2 Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters.

The land is in the lower realm (the realm of physicality and therefore it is far from G-D), therefore it is הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ, וְחֹשֶׁךְ, עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם.  All of this refers to the imperfection that is connected to one thing (the creation). All of these names תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ [tell us] that the creation is not complete and they teach us about the imperfection that is inherent in the creation.

E-man:
Here the Maharal is just summing up. The point is that there is an imperfection in the world and it is hinted to in Breishis (Genesis). This imperfection does not stem from G-D, rather it comes from the mere fact that the creation is something that is created. The idea of being created means that there is an inherent imperfection in this creation. The Maharal also hints at a much deeper idea here. The idea that since something is physical it is therefore distant from G-D. The world is a physical place and therefore it is far away from G-D. This adds to the barrier between the world and G-D which leads to the ability of the four kingdoms to mask G-D's presence.

Maharal On The Four Kingdoms Part 2 (The Answer of Why There Are Four Kingdoms That Take Away From The Glory Of G-D)

In this last post (http://markset565.blogspot.com/2011/03/maharal-on-four-kingdoms-part-1.html) I discussed the opening question of the Maharal. Namely, "Why was the world created with the need to have the four kingdoms." In this post we will (begin to) discuss the reasons that the Maharal gives for the four kingdoms.

Maharal:
There [is a good]  explanation of this idea, that it is proper for the four kingdoms to be alluded to in the beginning of creation. These four kingdoms, that rule in this world, [exist] because it is impossible that the world, G-D's creation, be a creation without imperfection, rather we find with it a deficiency. This deficit is the four kingdoms because these four kingdoms reduce the honor of G-D in His world.

E-man:
I feel it is necessary to stop in the middle of this idea of the Maharal in order to explain an idea found all over the Maharal. In Rav Hartman's notes on the Maharal, he points out that this idea, anything created must have a deficiency, is explained in other books of the Maharal. (Netzach Yisroel and Chiddushei Aggados to Sanhedrin) There are two reasons why a created being must contain a deficiency when compared to G-D: 1) Since the creation is created by the hand of G-D, it is impossible that the creation be equal and similar to the creator. It must be that there is a lower level connection [of the created] to the creator. 2) Since the creation is created, before it was materialized  into existence there was a lack in its existence. Therefore, even after it is created, this deficit stays with it. (Basically, something that is created is inherently imperfect due to the fact that it needed to be created in the first place.)

Maharal:
From the fact that the world was created by G-D, it is proper that everything be under His command, since G-D created everything. Therefore, it is proper that everything was created to honor Him (lit. for his honor). However, once we see (understand) that the creation is from Him, it is impossible that [the creation] exist without imperfection.

E-man:
The Maharal can seem a little repetitive at times, but I think it is still important. He is explaining every aspect of this idea. One might think that any creation of G-D should reflect honor for G-D. However, since there is this imperfection in the creation, this idea is not immediately possible. If the world reflected honor for G-D immediately, there would be no lack and if there was no lack in the creation, it would be equal to G-D, which is impossible.

Maharal:
This deficit is not from G-D, because lacking and imperfection does not come from the action of the actor at all.

E-man:
Rav Hartman comes to explain this idea in a very clear way. The action (of creation) comes from G-D, but the imperfection of the creation does not come from G-D. For example, when a garment is missing a button one can ask, "Who made this garment?" However, one can't ask "Who made this lacking button." For those who love the Rambam, this idea is found there as well (The Guide for the Perplexed 3:10): "Therefore they say, without any qualification, nonexistence does not require any agent, an agent is required when something is produced."  

Maharal:
However, the imperfection is from the deficit of the world, since it is the created. From this (the created) stems forth the imperfection, which is the four kingdoms ruling in the world and taking away from the honor of G-D.

E-man:
Again, Rav Hartman points out that one imperfection leads to a second imperfection. This means that the idea of the world containing the imperfection of the four kingdoms leads to the further imperfection of the diminishment of G-D's honor in this world.

Maharal:
It is proper that this idea (that the imperfection in the world does not come from G-D) is alluded to in the beginning of the creation [of the world]. The idea behind creation is that it is proper that everything should be under the domain of G-D, like it says (in Tractate Yoma 38a), "Everything that G-D created, He created for His honor as it says in Yishaya (Isaiah 43: 7):

ז  כֹּל הַנִּקְרָא בִשְׁמִי, וְלִכְבוֹדִי בְּרָאתִיו:  יְצַרְתִּיו, אַף-עֲשִׂיתִיו.	7 Every one that is called by My name, and whom I have created for My glory, I have formed him, yea, I have made him.'

[This verse] means to say that since G-D created everything, it is certain that [He] created everything for His glory (honor). For, it is impossible that something comes from one thing and (that which comes from the one thing) is opposed to it (the original one thing) because, if this were so, then we would see this thing (the created being) opposed to itself. This idea (that something would be opposed to itself) is not feasible, rather everything is created for His honor. If this is true, how do we find the four kingdoms nullifying G-D's honor? It must be that there is an imperfection in the creation (the world) itself, that this deficit does not come from the actions of G-D, rather it is an inherent cause [in the creation].

E-man:
The Maharal is explaining to us why the four kingdoms must exist and why it must have been part of the plan of creation. However, the Maharal tells us something very interesting about the four kingdoms. Yes, the four kingdoms were part of the original plan of creation, but the deficit in creation they represent does not come from G-D. He proves this in a very clever way. If G-D creates something, it must be created for His honor. However, we see the four kingdoms take away from the honor of G-D. How could G-D have created the four kingdoms if everything He created was for His honor? It must be that G-D did not directly create the four kingdoms, rather since the world is a creation, it must contain inherent deficits. Why? The mere fact that the creation is a creation means it can not be perfect for the reasons we stated above.

The Maharal is able to explain why the four kings are part of the original plan of creation while also denying G-D's association with this imperfection laced into the fabric of creation. Personally, I think this maneuvering is pure genius if one can understand it. In essence, the Maharal associates the deficit in the world, manifested by the existence of the four kingdoms, with darkness (or the general lack of something). Just like the absence of light is not a creation or the missing button is not a creation, so too the existence of the four kingdoms is not a creation. Once this is understood it is impossible to say G-D created the four kingdoms, rather He created the world which automatically has to be imperfect. That imperfection was manifested as the four kingdoms. This, then, leads to the further imperfection of G-D's honor being nullified by these four kingdoms.

I hope that was clear enough. There are many more explanations that Rav Hartman brings down, either by himself or from other books written by the Maharal, but I can not provide an exhaustive list. Any questions that you might have, feel free to ask and I will try my best to answer.

Next time we discuss this, the Maharal talks about why there are specifically four kingdoms and not three or five.

Read the next part here.

Maharal On The Four Kingdoms Part 1 (The Question of Why Are There Four Kingdoms)

In the beginning of Ner Mitzva, the Maharal discusses the four kingdoms that are supposed to rule from the time of Israel's downfall (Approximately 586 BCE) and the coming of the Moshiach (Approximately ....... JUST KIDDING). I would like to go through the Maharal, slowly, and explain the different ideas discussed. (Here is a link if you would like to see the Maharal in Hebrew http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14191&st=&pgnum=7)

I am just going to use a translation from Mechon-Mamre for the verses from The book of Daniel (7:2-7):

ב  עָנֵה דָנִיֵּאל וְאָמַר, חָזֵה הֲוֵית בְּחֶזְוִי עִם-לֵילְיָא; וַאֲרוּ, אַרְבַּע רוּחֵי שְׁמַיָּא, מְגִיחָן, לְיַמָּא רַבָּא.	2 Daniel spoke and said: I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven broke forth upon the great sea.
ג  וְאַרְבַּע חֵיוָן רַבְרְבָן, סָלְקָן מִן-יַמָּא, שָׁנְיָן, דָּא מִן-דָּא.	3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
ד  קַדְמָיְתָא כְאַרְיֵה, וְגַפִּין דִּי-נְשַׁר לַהּ; חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי-מְּרִיטוּ גפיה (גַפַּהּ) וּנְטִילַת מִן-אַרְעָא, וְעַל-רַגְלַיִן כֶּאֱנָשׁ הֳקִימַת, וּלְבַב אֱנָשׁ, יְהִיב לַהּ.	4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings; I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon two feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
ה  וַאֲרוּ חֵיוָה אָחֳרִי תִנְיָנָה דָּמְיָה לְדֹב, וְלִשְׂטַר-חַד הֳקִמַת, וּתְלָת עִלְעִין בְּפֻמַּהּ, בֵּין שניה (שִׁנַּהּ); וְכֵן אָמְרִין לַהּ, קוּמִי אֲכֻלִי בְּשַׂר שַׂגִּיא.	5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth; and it was said thus unto it: 'Arise, devour much flesh.'
ו  בָּאתַר דְּנָה חָזֵה הֲוֵית, וַאֲרוּ אָחֳרִי כִּנְמַר, וְלַהּ גַּפִּין אַרְבַּע דִּי-עוֹף, עַל-גביה (גַּבַּהּ); וְאַרְבְּעָה רֵאשִׁין לְחֵיוְתָא, וְשָׁלְטָן יְהִיב לַהּ.	6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the sides of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
ז  בָּאתַר דְּנָה חָזֵה הֲוֵית בְּחֶזְוֵי לֵילְיָא, וַאֲרוּ חֵיוָה רביעיה (רְבִיעָאָה) דְּחִילָה וְאֵימְתָנִי וְתַקִּיפָא יַתִּירָה וְשִׁנַּיִן דִּי-פַרְזֶל לַהּ רַבְרְבָן, אָכְלָה וּמַדֱּקָה, וּשְׁאָרָא ברגליה (בְּרַגְלַהּ) רָפְסָה; וְהִיא מְשַׁנְּיָה, מִן-כָּל-חֵיוָתָא דִּי קדמיה (קָדָמַהּ), וְקַרְנַיִן עֲשַׂר, לַהּ.	7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth; it devoured and broke in pieces, and stamped the residue with its feet; and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.

These verses in sefer Daniel seem wild. What are they talking about? Many people explain that these are the verses that tell us about the four kingdoms that will rule between the time of the destruction of the first Temple and the coming of the Moshiach (Messiah). The Maharal uses these verses as a springboard into this discussion.

Maharal:
The question here is that, there is no doubt that these four kingdoms [referenced in the Book of Daniel] that G-D established in His world are not by chance, rather they are interwoven into the order of G-D's [plan] for His world. If so, why are there specifically four kingdoms? 

E-man:
The Maharal's question is twofold, as we will see shortly. He is stating the belief that everything that occurs in this world, at least on a large scale, is guided by G-D and is part of His plan for where the world is supposed to end up. However, the Maharal is asking, why did the world need to have the four kingdoms. In other words, why did G-d need there to be kingdoms that rule the world and, basically, guide the world that were not the Jewish people. Also, the Maharal wonders, why does there need to be specifically four kingdoms, why not 2 or 3?

Maharal:
Behold, you will find that at the time G-D created His world there was an allusion in the verses to these four kingdoms (Genesis 1:2):

ב  וְהָאָרֶץ, הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ, וְחֹשֶׁךְ, עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם; וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים, מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם.

2 Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters.

In Breishis Rabbah (2:4) we find:
Reish Lakish applied the verse to the kingdoms.  וְהָאָרֶץ, הָיְתָה תֹהוּ this refers to the kingdom of Babylon for it says in Jeremiah (4:23):

כג  רָאִיתִי, אֶת-הָאָרֶץ, וְהִנֵּה-תֹהוּ, וָבֹהוּ; וְאֶל-הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵין אוֹרָם.

23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

 וָבֹהוּ this refers to the kingdom of Mede for it says in Megilas Esther (6:14):

יד  עוֹדָם מְדַבְּרִים עִמּוֹ, וְסָרִיסֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ הִגִּיעוּ; וַיַּבְהִלוּ לְהָבִיא אֶת-הָמָן, אֶל-הַמִּשְׁתֶּה אֲשֶׁר-עָשְׂתָה אֶסְתֵּר.

14 While they were yet talking with him, came the king's chamberlains, and hastened to bring Haman unto the banquet that Esther had prepared.

(supposedly the Medrash is referring to  וַיַּבְהִלוּ)
וְחֹשֶׁךְ  this refers to the Greek kingdoms since they would darken (חֹשֶׁךְ)  the eyes of the Jews with their decrees. They (the Greeks) would say to them (the Jews), "Write on the horn of an ox that you (plural) do not have a portion in the G-D of Israel." עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם this refers to the wicked kingdom for it can not be measured like the deep. Just like the deep can not be measured, neither can the wicked ones. וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים, מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם. this refers to the spirit of the King Moshiach (Messiah). How (do we derive this)? (Based on) what is said in Yishaya (Isaiah) (11:2):

ב  וְנָחָה עָלָיו, רוּחַ יְהוָה--רוּחַ חָכְמָה וּבִינָה, רוּחַ עֵצָה וּגְבוּרָה, רוּחַ דַּעַת, וְיִרְאַת יְהוָה.

2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD.

In the merit of what will this spirit come? "מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם." In the merit of repentance that is compared to water, like it says in Eichah (Lamentations) ( 2:19):

יט  קוּמִי רֹנִּי בליל (בַלַּיְלָה), לְרֹאשׁ אַשְׁמֻרוֹת--שִׁפְכִי כַמַּיִם לִבֵּךְ, נֹכַח פְּנֵי אֲדֹנָי; שְׂאִי אֵלָיו כַּפַּיִךְ, עַל-נֶפֶשׁ עוֹלָלַיִךְ--הָעֲטוּפִים בְּרָעָב, בְּרֹאשׁ כָּל-חוּצוֹת.  {ס}

19 Arise, cry out in the night, at the beginning of the watches; pour out thy heart like water before the face of the Lord; lift up thy hands toward Him for the life of thy young children, that faint for hunger at the head of every street.'{S}

(End of Medrash Rabbah and the Maharal continues) Behold, you will find that when G-D created His world He [included in his plan] the order of the four kingdoms. If so, this leads us to ask, "Why [did He include the four kingdoms in his plan] and why is there this order that there should be four kingdoms."

E-Man:
The Maharal makes sure to point out that the four kingdoms idea is not just his own thought, rather it comes straight down from previous generations. It is an idea that is found throughout Jewish thought and believed to be true. I think the Maharal does this to strengthen the need for an explanation. If this was just something he made up then others could say, "Who says there are four kingdoms?" It could be called false just like people are weary of Gematria (using numbers to equate things). However, now that we have a Medrash from Reish Lakish (one of the foremost scholars in the Talmud) such claims would be deemed unworthy challenges.

Next time I discuss this Maharal, we will be going into the idea of why the four kingdoms are necessary and why there needs to be four of them.

For the next part see here.

What Does On the Eighth Day Really Mean?

Unfortunately, the hour is late, I have studied much and now I am about to write about a topic that deserves much more time. However, I want to share this idea with you that I came up with, so what can I do. Maybe next year I will go more in depth.

This week's parsha, Shemini, starts off with a very ambiguous phrase (Vayikra 9:1):

א  וַיְהִי, בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי, קָרָא מֹשֶׁה, לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו--וּלְזִקְנֵי, יִשְׂרָאֵל.

1 And it came to pass on the eighth day, that Moses called Aaron and his sons, and the elders of Israel;

All of the commentators scramble to try and figure out what eighth day the Torah is talking about. Rashi says (ibid):

ויהי ביום השמיני: שמיני למלואים, הוא ראש חודש ניסן, שהוקם המשכן בו ביום ונטל עשר עטרות השנויות בסדר עולם (פרק ז)
It was on the Eighth Day: The eighth day of the inauguration (of Aharon and his sons into the priesthood), this was the beginning of the month of Nissan, for the Mishkan (tabernacle) was built on that day and (that day) took ten crowns that are listed in Seder Olam.

Ibn Ezra says (ibid):
ויהי ביום השמיני -היה נראה לנו כי ביום השמיני שמיני לניסן, כי המשכן הוקם באחד לחדש,
And it was on the eighth day: It appears to us that the eighth day is the eighth day of Nissan, because the Mishkan (tabernacle) was built on the first of the month.

In the The Sifra (ibid) it says:
ויהי ביום. השמיני קרא . זה אחד מן הכתובים שצריך
לדרוש . נאמר כאן ויהי ביום ה שמיני ונאמר להלן ויהי
ביומ הש ל י ש י . אין אנו יודעים אם שלישי לשבת אם שלישי למנין
כשהוא אומר כי ביום השלישי ירד ה׳ לעיני כל העם על הר סיני ויה•
ביום השלישי בהיות הב קר הוה אומר שלישי למ נ י ן . וכאן נאמרו
ויהי.ביום השמיני אין אנו יודעים אם שמיני למנין אם שמיני לחדש
כשהוא אומר כי שבעת ימים ימלא את ידכם הוה אומר שמיני
למנין ולא שמיני לחדש :
And it was on the eighth day: This is one of the verses that needs to be expounded upon. It says here "And it was on the eighth day" and it says later on "And it was on the third day." We don't know if this refers to the third day of the week, or the third from counting [from an event]. For when [the Torah] says "On the third day G-D went down, [seen by] the eyes of the entire nation, on Mount Sinai or "And it was on the third day in the morning" it is referring to the third day counting [from some event]. And here it says "And it was on the eighth day" and we don't know if it is the eighth day counting [from the building of the Mishkan] or if it is the eighth day of the month. For when it says "For seven days you will fill your hands" it is talking about Eight days counting [from some event] and not the eighth of the month.

Also, it must be pointed out, as stated by the Torah viMitzva commenting on this Midrash, Chazal were of the opinion that the Mishkan (tabernacle) was erected on the 23 of Adar. For, if they held the Mishkan was erected on the first of Nissan, there is no difference between the eigth of the month of Nissan and the eighth day from the building of the Mishkan, they are the same day.

My point here is to show that this verse is very ambiguous and the true meaning seems to be hidden. However, I think that the meaning of this verse is very deep and in order to fully understand it we must first look at a Maharal and the Gemara in Tractate Megila (10b), first the Gemara:


And it came to pass on the eighth day, and it has been taught, ‘On that day there was joy before the Holy One, blessed be He, as on the day when heaven and earth were created. For it is written, And it came to pass [wa-yehi] on the eighth day, and it is written in the other place, And there was [wa-yehi] one day’?

What is the reason this day is connected to the creation of the world? It is simply because G-D did not complete the creation of the world until this point. What do I mean by that? Adam sinned and was banished from the Garden of Eden at twilight of the sixth day. The seventh day came and G-D's connection to Adam was diminished, which led to G-D's connection to the world becoming diminished. It was not until the erection of the Mishkan and the appointment of Aharon and his son's that G-D now had this close connection to the world.

The Maharal tells us about the unique connection that the tribe of Levi, specifically the Kohanim, have with G-D and how it is only through this connection that G-D really connects to the world. In Ner Mitzva, while talking about the 4 kingdoms that rule in this world before the Moshiach (Messiah) comes, the Maharal explains this idea in depth, I will summarize.

Basically, the world is made up of many different entities and is, therefore, unable to communicate with G-D because G-D is singular. (I am not going to go into this concept right now) However, there is one nation that is able to communicate with G-D and that is because they encompass and embody the idea of singularity. However, even this nation (The Jewish people) are unable to communicate and connect with G-D. It is only through the tribe of Levi that the Jewish people are able to connect to G-D, that is why they work in the Temple. The multiplicity of the world is able to be unified through the Jewish people, who are able to be unified even further into the tribe of Levi, who are able to be unified even further by the Kohanim. Through the Kohanim, the world is able to, once again, communicate with G-D in the Temple. (The whole idea of singularity is a long discussion, just think of it as purity. The world is, essentially, purified through the Kohanim.)

Once we realize this idea, the meaning of "The Eighth day" is clear. It is the "Eighth Day" of creation. The day had arrived, finally, where G-D enabled man to reach the level of communication with Him that was intended for Adam before the sin. That is why this Parsha starts off with Aharon being inaugurated into the Priesthood. This is why the Gemara in Megilah connects this verse to the creation of the world, because this was the final chapter in creation, the creation of a people that can connect to G-D and, through this people (the Jewish people), connect the rest of the world to G-D. For, this is what the Maharal tells us, the Jewish people are the prism that connects G-D to the rest of the world. (Granted, the Kohanim are the prism that connect the Jewish people to G-D, but the Kohanim are part of the Jewish people.)

You Need To Earn What You Were Promised

There is an idea in this week's Parsha, Devarim, which exemplifies what Sefer (book) Devarim is coming to teach us. The idea can be found here (Devarim 1:8)

ח. רְאֵה נָתַתִּי לִפְנֵיכֶם אֶת הָאָרֶץ בֹּאוּ וּרְשׁוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְ־הֹוָ־ה לַאֲבֹתֵיכֶם לְאַבְרָהָם לְיִצְחָק
וּלְיַעֲקֹב לָתֵת לָהֶם וּלְזַרְעָם אַחֲרֵיהֶם:

8. See, I have set the land before you; come and possess the land which the Lord swore to your forefathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them and their descendants after them. 

At first glance, it seems like this pasuk is solely telling the Jewish people to go take the land that G-D promised to our forefathers. However, the Maharal in the introduction to his book "Tiferes Yisroel" reveals how we are to actually read this pasuk by telling us what the phrase נָתַתִּי לִפְנֵיכֶם (set the land before you) really means. He says (here):

"This is the Torah that Moshe PLACED BEFORE the children of Israel (Devarim: 4:44)" (The Maharal says), this verse means that the Torah is an object that is sitting (there), anyone who wants to merit it (learn it) should merit it. This is why the verse does not say "This is the Torah that Moshe gave to the children of Israel," but rather "PLACED BEFORE the children of Israel" because it is like something that is sitting there before them, ALL who want to merit (to take this object) go and take it.

The Maharal makes a very interesting point based on the language of the verse. There is a difference between something that is given and something that is placed before. The Maharal is saying that the Torah is something that, if someone wants it, they have to go and get it. They can not expect to just be given this item placed before them.

Here too, in our verse, the Torah tells us that G-D made a promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. That promise was to give them the land of Canaan, Eretz Yisroel. However, the Torah is telling us that even though the land was rightfully under the ownership of the children of Israel, it was only placed before them. What does this mean? The Maharal tells us, placed before means that it is up to the person to put the effort in and go take that object which is placed before them. G-D was not going to give the Jewish people the land of Israel unless they were willing to earn it.

This is a very appropriate introduction to the book of Devarim. Devarim is dedicated to Moshe telling the people of Israel that they must follow the commandments and do what is right, for if they do not they will lose everything. The idea is clear, one must earn that which was promised to them. We, the Jewish people, can not sit back and expect everything to come to our laps, we must go out and earn what we get. The Maharal shows that Torah knowledge is only acquired through effort and hard work based on the verse in (Ibid 4:44). Our verse, however, talks about livelihood and dwelling places. One must work hard to earn their livelihood and thereby G-D will grant them what they deserve.

There is a trend in this generation, the sense of entitlement. Everyone thinks they are entitled to this and that without any hard work. This is not true of all, but a trend that is, sadly, growing. Hopefully people will start to realize that everything must be earned and nothing comes without effort. Someone who just sits back and does not earn what he gets does not deserve what he gets. May we all be motivated to work hard in Torah and in our livelihood.

How Different Were the Rambam and the Maharal

The Rambam (Maimonides) is known as the Paradigm of rationalistic Judaism. Whenever someone wants to show how rational Judaism is they often find themselves quoting the Rambam. On the other hand, the Maharal is the champion of the non-rationalistic (mystic) approach to Judaism. One will often hear a Gemora, that sounds absurd, explained allegorically due to the Maharal's approach. Also, the fact that Maharal believed in Astrology, demons and other mystical creatures and devices, while the Rambam denied their reality, separates these two great thinkers. However, after reading the Rambam's "Introduction to the Chapter of Chelek" I see that these two Torah giants, that are on the opposite sides of the rational vs non-rational argument, had a very similar approach to understanding Aggadita in the Gemora.

First let's hear what Maharal says (found here):

Be'eir haGolah #4 (p 51), translation R' Mordechai Becher, posted to
V15n9 by RGSeif:

Now you will see that most of the words of the Sages were in the form of metaphor and the analogies of the wise... unless they state that a particular story is not a metaphor, it should be assumed that it is a metaphor. The matters of great depth were generally expressed by the Sages using metaphors, and should be understood as metaphors unless they are explicitly indicated to be taken literally. And therefore one should not be surprised to find matters in the words of the Sages that appear to be illogical and distant from the mind. (Berachot 61a:The evil inclination looks like a fly)

So the Maharal explains Aggadita Gemoras, as a general rule, as allegories and metaphors. This is what one would expect from a non-rationalist, because he is trying to show how the Sages were never wrong. Therefore, anything they say that can be misconstrued or misinterpreted as the Sages being wrong is changed into an allegory in order to show they had a deeper meaning and thereby they are saved the embarrassment of being proven inept. However, wouldn't we assume that a rationalistic approach would be to assume that the Sages made incorrect statements?

This does, in fact, seem to be the view of the Rambam and his son, Rav Avraham. From Rav Avraham's Essay on Aggadita (Found Here):

To begin with, let me point out that if a person puts forward a certain theory without offering proof, expecting people to accept it at face value just because they respect him, he is sadly mistaken; his approach flies in the face of both the Torah and common sense. It goes against common sense, because he wants people to believe something without evaluating and investigating whether it squares with the facts. And it runs counter to the Torah, because it goes against the truth and is unethical. The Torah [tells us not to curry favor with anyone], saying [to a judge], "Do not give special consideration to the poor, nor show respect to the great" (Leviticus 19:15). And it says also, "Do not give anyone special consideration when rendering judgment" (Deuteronomy 1:17). And there is no difference between a person who believes an idea without supporting evidence and one who trusts a person's statement simply because he respects him and holds that it must be true since it comes from a great scholar. This does not prove that the statement is true.
Accordingly, we are not required to endorse all the theories of the Sages of the Talmud on medicine, physics, and astronomy in every respect just because we know the authors to be outstanding personalities and eminent scholars in all facets of the Torah. Of course, when it comes to Torah knowledge, the scholarship of the Sages is unsurpassed, and it is their responsibility to teach it to us, as it says, "You must keep the Torah as they interpret it for you" (Deuteronomy 17:11), but this does not necessarily apply to all other branches of knowledge. You can see that even the Sages themselves when faced with an issue that could not be proven by debate and logical arguments, said, "I swear, that even if Joshua b. Nun had said it, I would not have obeyed him!" (Berachot 24b)3Which means, "I would not believe him although he was a prophet, since he cannot prove his point by the talmudical rules of logical argument."
Let me offer you one conclusive proof that no one will refute. It is this: We find that the Sages themselves said that the opinions expressed in the Gemara with regard to general medicine are not borne out, like for instance when the Gemara says that wearing a "preserving stone" is a safeguard against miscarriage, or other things mentioned in tractate Shabbat. They tested these remedies and found them not to have any therapeutic value.

 Also, the Rambam himself speaks of the Sage's ability to make mistakes in scientific matters. He says (The Guide for the perplexed 3:14 found here):

You must, however, not expect that everything our Sages say respecting astronomical matters should agree with observation, for mathematics were not fully developed in those days: and their statements were not based on the authority of the Prophets, but on the knowledge which they either themselves possessed or derived from contemporary men of science.

So we see that Rav Avraham and his father, the Rambam, admit that the Sages could err in non-Torah related areas. However, this does not mean that we are supposed to understand their Aggadita Gemoras (non-halachic) in a literal fashion. For Rav Avraham also says in his introduction (Essay on Aggadita):

It is important to understand that the homiletic expositions and stories in the Talmud have underlying meanings that are shrouded in secrecy, and most of the commentators did not even attempt to probe their deeper meaning.

.... If you follow my guidelines in understanding the aggadic teachings of the Sages, you will come to grasp their deeper meaning, and, as a result, you will not make light of them or deny that they are true. Neither will you fall into the trap of thinking that the miracles that happened to the Sages are as momentous as those that happened to Moses and Israel at the parting of the Red Sea, or as remarkable as the parting of the Jordan for Elisha and Elijah. Such misconceptions arise when you take the derash (i.e., homiletic interpretations) literally and accept only the surface meaning of the text. But there is abundant evidence to show that the aggadic tales and teachings, aside from their plain meaning, have profound hidden significance.

The Rambam also discusses this idea in a few places. First, the Rambam says later on in the same chapter of The Guide quoted above (3:14):

But I will not on that account denounce what they say correctly in accordance with real fact, as untrue or accidentally true. On the contrary, whenever the words of a person can be interpreted in such a manner that they agree with fully established facts, it is the duty of every educated and honest man to do so.

The Rambam is pointing out here that in every instance that we CAN interpret the Sages to be in congruence with the facts, we should. This idea is even more explicitly discussed in the Rambam's introduction to Perek Chelek (The 10th chapter of Mishnayos Sanhedrin and Talmud Yerushalmi and the 11th chapter in Talmud bavli). The Rambam discusses three groups of people that interpret the Sages words on Aggadita (non-Halachic discussions):

What you need to know, with regard to matters pertaining to the words of the Sages (May they be remembered for blessings), is that there are three groups of people (who interpret their words).

1) The first group, and it is the majority of what I have seen [in the sense] that I have seen their books or I have heard about what they say from others, [is made up of people] that interpret the Sages based on their simple reading and they do not believe the sages have a hidden meaning in any way. [The people in this group believe] that the impossible things the Sages say are obligatory for existence. Indeed, these people [interpret the sages this way] because they do not understand the Sciences and they are far from understanding [deeper meanings]. There are none among them that are men of integrity that can realize this by themselves (that some of the words of the sages are similes and therefore the message is the main point and not the simple meaning) and there is no one that points this out to them. The [people of this first group] hold that the Sages, may they be remembered for blessings, with all their righteous and sweet words only intended what could be understood according to their (the people of this first group) knowledge, which is the simple (vulgar) reading. [They believe this] even though some [of the Sages words (understood according to the simple meaning)] lead to slander against the Sages and they (the words) appear to be far from intelligent [so much so that] if they were read and explained according to their simple and vulgar meaning to a regular person, even more so to a wise person, the [regular person or wise person] would be in wonderment of how [anyone could think this] and they would say, "How could it be that there is a man in the world that thinks like this?!?! Also, [how could it be] that anyone thinks this is an acceptable belief and even more so that it is a proper belief?"

This is the group (the First group) that has a lack in knowledge that troubles themselves with their foolishness because they honor and glorify the Sages, according to their(this First group) understanding, [but really] they denigrate the [Sages] without understanding them. By the life of G-D (A serious exclamation)! This group destroys the beauty of the Torah and darkens its radiance and they are assigning to the Torah of G-D the opposite of what it is intended to be. For G-D said regarding the Perfect Torah (Devarim 4:6), "[The nations of the world] shall hear all of these decrees and say 'Surely this is a wise and discerning people, a great nation!'" However, this group tells over the literal words (not according to the allegory and true meaning) of our Sages, may they be remembered for blessings, that when other nations hear these words they say, "Only a nation of fools and rascals that is a puny nation [would say this]."

The majority of the time this is what is occurring with the interpreters [from this group]: They are explaining and making known to the greater nation [ideas] which they do not know (causing them to distort these ideas of the Sages). Who would grant [the people from this group], since they do not know or understand, that they should be silent[, that would be Wise for them]. In the same manner that it says [in Iyov 13:5,] "Who would grant that you fall utterly silent; that would be a wise thing for you!" Or they should say, "We do not understand the intentions of the Sages in this case, and we do not know how to explain it." However, they think that they understand it and try to make known and explain it to the nation according to their weak mental [abilities]- they do not explain what the Sages actually said. They preach at the head of the nation [their understanding of] tractate Brachos and Perek Chelek and other things according to the literal understanding, word for word. (Translation and elucidation provided by me, E-man)

I will translate the rest later, but for our point I think it is clear what the Rambam is saying. We must understand the words of the Sages, when they seem contrary to the truth, in an allegorical and metaphorical way when possible. The Sages, in Aggadita, were trying to teach us deeper meanings and the simple reading of their words is worthless. Not just worthless, but detrimental! The Rambam insists that we understand the words of the Sages in a deeper way and not make them seem unintelligent.

This view of the Rambam seems to make him almost in the camp of the Maharal. Both believe that the words of the Sages have a deeper meaning and excluding that deeper meaning is an incorrect way to learn Aggadita. The only thing that separates the Rambam and Maharal is to what extent the Rabbis sayings were to be made into allegories. The Rambam and his son, as we have shown above, believe that the Sages were incorrect in believing in the power of astrology and other mystical types of things. However, the Maharal believes that astrology and other mystical things, like Sheidim, do actually exist.

Therefore, the Maharal and Rambam agree on most things in the Gemora, when the Sages say something that seems untenable, we must try to understand the deeper meaning in their words. Where the Maharal and Rambam seem to differ is, basically, their own views on certain laws of science. The Maharal believed in Mysticism and, therefore, did not need to make the Sages words into allegory only type of Gemoras, whereas, the Rambam would have to make these Gemoras into allegories or individual opinions of Sages.

However, whether you are a rationalist like the Rambam or a mystic like the Maharal, it seems like no one would condone a simple literalistic interpretation of the untenable Gemoras unless it is IMPOSSIBLE to explain otherwise. Only then is one to claim, according to the Rambam, that this Gemora is a Daas Yachid (individual opinion that we do not hold like). The Maharal says that the words of the Sages should be understood as metaphors "unless they state that a particular story is not a metaphor." Showing that there are practically no Aggadita Gemoras that one can assume are literal. The Rambam also says (In Perek Chelek while dealing with the third group, the right way to understand the Sages), "Everything the Sages say that are impossible we should understand them as speaking through the language of puzzles and parables."

However, there are some Gemora's that the Rambam finds impossible to explain as parables and is willing to agree that there are a few beliefs found in the Sages that are false. However, he explains that these beliefs are not communal beliefs by the Sages. When there are beliefs that the Sages have that contradict logic and reality AND they are impossible to relate through allegories or metaphors THEN the Rambam ascribes those beliefs to a minority opinion in the Sages. As the Rambam says in his letter on astrology (found here):

I know that you may search and find sayings of some individual sages in the Talmud and Midrashim whose words appear to maintain that at the moment of a man's birth, the stars will cause such and such to happen to him. Do not regard this as a difficulty, for it is not fitting for a man to abandon the prevailing law and raise once again the counterarguments and replies (that preceded its enactment). Similarly it is not proper to abandon matters of reason that have already been verified by proofs, shake loose of them, and depend on the words of a single one of the sages from whom possibly the matter was hidden. Or there may be an allusion in those words; or they may have been said with a view to the times and the business before him. (You surely know how many of the verses of the holy Law are not to be taken literally. Since it is known through proofs of reason that it is impossible for the thing to be literally so, the translator [of the Aramaic Targum] rendered it in a form that reason will abide. ) A man should never cast his reason behind him, for the eyes are set in front, not in back...

What we see from here is that the Rambam seems almost identical to the Maharal in his understanding of difficult statements by the Sages. It seems that whether you are a rationalist or a non-rationalist, the simple meanings of the Sages does not reveal a real difficulty in the Sages as a whole. As a whole, the Sages were never wrong, according to the Rambam and the Maharal. However, there were some Sages that, individually, were incorrect in their understanding of some sciences. This would also explain why the Rambam and his son seem to ascribe misinformation to the Sages. They mean that there are som INDIVIDUAL Sages that err and believe in the power of astrology and other mystical things.

As stated above, it seems like the Rambam and Maharal do not differ in HOW to read the Gemora. Rather they argue on scientific fact. The Maharal believes in mysticism and, therefore, believes the Sages also believed in mysticism and finds no reason to relate these teachings of the Sages as allegories. The Rambam disagrees about mysticism and, therefore, he DOES relate these statements of the Sages as allegories.

Why Did Moshe Use a Copper Snake

In this week's parsha, Chukas, Bnei Yisroel complain about their "rotten bread" and G-D sends a plague of venomous snakes. After many people in Israel died from the snakes' bites they came to Moshe and begged him to pray to G-D in order that the plague should end. However, G-D said that Moshe needed to make a snake and put it on a pole and whoever was bitten should look at it and they would live. This whole episode can be seen in Bamidbar 21:5-9. The intriguing part about this story is that although G-D only asked Moshe to make a snake and put it on a pole, Moshe made a COPPER snake and put it on a pole. In Chapter 21:8-9:

ח. וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה עֲשֵׂה לְךָ שָׂרָף וְשִׂים אֹתוֹ עַל נֵס וְהָיָה כָּל הַנָּשׁוּךְ וְרָאָה אֹתוֹ וָחָי:

8. The Lord said to Moses, "Make yourself a serpent and put it on a pole, and let whoever is bitten look at it and live.

ט. וַיַּעַשׂ מֹשֶׁה נְחַשׁ נְחֹשֶׁת וַיְשִׂמֵהוּ עַל הַנֵּס וְהָיָה אִם נָשַׁךְ הַנָּחָשׁ אֶת אִישׁ וְהִבִּיט אֶל נְחַשׁ הַנְּחֹשֶׁת וָחָי:

9. Moses made a copper snake and put it on a pole, and whenever a snake bit a man, he would gaze upon the copper snake and live.

Also, G-D commanded Moshe to make a שָׂרָף (Saraph) and Moshe made a נְחַשׁ (Nachash). What is the significance of this difference and does it have anything to do with the fact that Moshe made the serpent out of copper and thereby the verse says נְחַשׁ נְחֹשֶׁת?

The Ramban in Bamidbar 21:9 answers this question by giving an idea similar to homeopathic medicine, that G-D made it that the thing that causes the sickness can also heal it and that is why Moshe uses this similar language. Also, G-D wanted to show that He is the one that causes life and death and that is why He used that which caused the sickness to also cure that sickness, to show that it is all up to G-D.

The Maharal on Rashi verse 8 acknowledges the position of the Ramban, that the copper snake had a real medicinal activity, however, he disagrees and says that the medicinal properties of the copper snake were complete miracles without a reason. There was nothing scientific about it, it was a miracle plain and simple. What really cured the Jewish people, according to the Maharal, was the fact that the Jews would pray harder once they saw the snake on the pole and they looked heavenward.

The Maharal on Rashi in verse 9 explains why Moshe used a copper snake (נְחַשׁ נְחֹשֶׁת) instead of a snake(שָׂרָף). Rashi said:

נחש נחשת: לא נאמר לו לעשותו של נחשת, אלא אמר משה הקב"ה קוראו נחש, ואני אעשנו של נחושת, לשון נופל על לשון:

a copper snake: He was not told to make it of copper, but Moses said,"The Holy One, blessed is He, called it a snake (נָחָשׁ), so I will make it of copper, (נְחשֶׁת), one term similar to the other term. — [Mid. Gen. Rabbah 19:31:8]

The Maharal uses a very well established idea found throughout his writings and the writings of others, like Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch. The reason Moshe felt it was appropriate to make the snake out of copper was because of the similarities of the words נָחָשׁ (snake) and נְחשֶׁת (copper). The Maharal explains that the essence of an object is described by its name in lashon hakodesh (Hebrew). Therefore, since these two words are spelled so similarly they are connected on a very deep level. An example of this is the word הב (give) and the word אהבה (love). These two words are interconnected in the following way, אהבה has at its core the word הב because love is really expressed by the fact that the person that loves someone wants to give the person that is the object of their love everything. This is a big idea found throughout the Maharal, words that are similar are related on a deep level.

This idea, as mentioned previously, is also found throughout the writings of Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch. He points out that the root נחשׁ can represent several things: Foretell, using hidden tricks, snake, metal chain, copper and bottom. So what can we learn from these different meanings of the root נחשׁ, what was Moshe trying to teach us by using a copper snake?

I think that Moshe was trying to add his own message to this cure that G-D was handing over to the Jewish people. Moshe was telling the Jewish people that they should use the experience from the desert to foretell what was to come in the future. When the Jews challenge G-D and do not have faith in Him then that leads them to plague and death. The snake was on a tall poll in the sight of everyone showing them that there is no hidden trick here and that this cure is straight from G-D. Ultimately, if one did not look up to the snake and pray to G-D for salvation they would end up at the bottom, a bad place.

G-D commanded Moshe to make a snake for everyone to look up and realize that G-D is behind the plague. They then would realize that they must pray to G-D and the would know He is in charge of everything. However, Moshe added the copper aspect of the snake to teach the Jewish people that not only must we realize that this plague is from G-D and that we must learn a lesson from this situation, also we must see that it is not a trick and if you fail to realize these things then you will not succeed in anything. Let us never forget this message that Moshe sent to the Jewish people and hopefully we will all be successful.

Another explanation that I just realized, thanks to the commentors D and Anon, can go like this:

The terms נחשׁ (snake) and נְחשֶׁת (copper) are interconnected in the following manner. נחשׁ means snake, however, it is also used to refer to the evil inclination (Bava Basra 16a and many other places). Therefore, copper was used as the remedy for the evil inclination because of its ability to tame and overcome the evil inclination. Where do we see this? Rashi (Shemos 38:8):

from the mirrors of the women who had set up the legions: Heb. בְּמַרְאֹתהַצֹבְאֹת Israelite women owned mirrors, which they would look into when they adorned themselves. Even these [mirrors] they did not hold back from bringing as a contribution toward the Mishkan, but Moses rejected them because they were made for temptation [i.e., to inspire lustful thoughts]. The Holy One, blessed is He, said to him, “Accept [them], for these are more precious to Me than anything because through them the women set up many legions [i.e., through the children they gave birth to] in Egypt.” When their husbands were weary from back-breaking labor, they [the women] would go and bring them food and drink and give them to eat. Then they [the women] would take the mirrors and each one would see herself with her husband in the mirror, and she would seduce him with words, saying, “I am more beautiful than you.” And in this way they aroused their husbands desire and would copulate with them, conceiving and giving birth there, as it is said: “Under the apple tree I aroused you” (Song 8:5). This is [the meaning of] what is בְּמַרְאֹתהַצֹבְאֹת [lit., the mirrors of those who set up legions]. From these [the mirrors], the washstand was made, because its purpose was to make peace between a man and his wife. [How so?] By giving a drink from the water that was in it [the washstand] to [a woman] whose husband had warned her [not to stay in private with a certain man] and she secluded herself [with him anyway. The water would test her and either destroy her or prove her innocence. See Num. 5:11-31]. You should know that they were actually mirrors, because it is said: “The copper of the waving was seventy talents… From that he made…” (Exod. 38:29, 30), but the washstand and its base were not mentioned there [among the things produced from the seventy talents. Thus,] you have learned that the copper of the washstand was not of the copper of the waving. So did Rabbi Tanchuma expound [on the matter] (Midrash Tanchuma, Pekudei 9; Num. Rabbah 9:14). And so did Onkelos render: בְּמֶחְזְיַתנְשַׁיָא [“the mirrors of the women”], which is the Aramaic translation of מַרְאוֹת, mirrors in French. So we find in Isaiah (3:23) וְהַגִּלְיֹנִים (sic), which we render: וּמַחְזְיָתָא, and the mirrors.

So we see that the women used COPPER mirrors to channel the evil inclination to be used for something good. Therefore, Moshe was telling Bnei Yisroel that we need to channel the evil inclination, represented by snakes, into something good, represented by the copper. Thereby we can see the connection between נחשׁ and נְחשֶׁת. The נחשׁ (evil inclination) can be used to create something very good נְחשֶׁת (representing good deeds) if we channel it in the correct way.

Giving Meaning to the Red Heifer

In this week's parsha, Chukas (Chukat), we have the mysterious commandment of the Parah Aduma (Red Heifer). This is what makes the name of the Parsha, Chukas, so appropriate. A Chok is a commandment that we do not know the reason for and is, in fact, something that the true reason is unknowable. This is why Rashi tells us on the second pasuk of this week's parsha (Bamidbar 19:2):

זאת חקת התורה: לפי שהשטן ואומות העולם מונין את ישראל לומר מה המצוה הזאת ומה טעם יש בה, לפיכך כתב בה חקה, גזירה היא מלפני ואין לך רשות להרהר אחריה:

This is the statute of the Torah: Because Satan (The Yetzer Hora: Etan's addition) and the nations of the world taunt Israel, saying, “ What is this commandment, and what purpose does it have?” Therefore, the Torah uses the term “statute.” I have decreed it; You have no right to challenge it. — [Yoma 67b]

Even though we are told that the commandment of the Para Aduma (Red heifer) can not be challenged based on human logic, that does not mean we can't learn valuable ideas from it. In fact, some of the most fundamental ideas found in Judaism can be understood through a proper dissection of the Para Aduma commandment. So, let's dissect the commandment (Bamidbar 19:2):

ב. זֹאת חֻקַּת הַתּוֹרָה אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְ־הֹוָ־ה לֵאמֹר דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ פָרָה אֲדֻמָּה תְּמִימָה אֲשֶׁר אֵין בָּהּ מוּם אֲשֶׁר לֹא
עָלָה עָלֶיהָ עֹל:

2. This is the statute of the Torah which the Lord commanded, saying, Speak to the children of Israel and have them take for you a perfectly red unblemished cow, upon which no yoke was laid.

The question here is why should it be a Red Heifer that is perfect in it's redness(As Rashi tells us on this pasuk), it should have no physical blemishes and it should never have done any physical labor? I think that these details and their proper understanding can help us relate and give meaning to the commandment of the Red Heifer.

First, let's understand how the commandment of the Red Heifer works. As stated in Bamidbar 19, the ashes of the Red Heifer are combined with water and are used when a person comes in contact with a dead body. This person that comes in contact with a dead body becomes impure and needs to be sprinkled with the ashes of the Para Aduma in order to become ritually pure again. So the idea we should think about is, "How is a Para Aduma connected to a dead person?"

First, let us deal with the Hebrew word Para (פָרָה). Para here means cow, however, Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch tells us that words that are spelled the same, although they have different meanings, have similar concepts behind them. The word Para can also mean to flourish or produce progeny. How interesting that something that symbolizes proliferation and life would be used to purify someone that became impure through death.

Next, we have the words Aduma Temimah (אֲדֻמָּה תְּמִימָה) from the word Adam. Here it means perfectly red, however, the word Aduma can mean healthy or, as the first man was named, it can refer to man. However, it must be perfectly red because if it has two black hairs then it can no longer be called a Para Aduma because it is noticeably no longer a Red Heifer. Thus, we have the proliferating or healthy man found in the words of Para Aduma, according to Rav Hirsch.

The requirement that there be no Mum (מוּם) is for all korbanos. However, here we can take special notice of it because this is, indeed, not a korban. The Para Aduma is used to make water that will endow another with spiritual purity. Therefore, the Para itself must represent a state of being that the person wants to reach, no blemishes.

The last phrase in this pasuk tells us a great deal about this commandment. The phrase "upon which no yoke was laid" (אֲשֶׁר לֹא עָלָה עָלֶיהָ עֹל) hints to us the spiritual power of this commandment. What is the significance of the fact that this cow has never been put to work? For this, we have an excellent Maharal in Tiferes Yisroel in chapter one. He tells us:

"At the end of Tractate Kiddushin (82B) it says: 'We learned in a Braisa, Rebbe Shimon the son of Rebbe Elazar said, 'In all my days I never saw a deer that dried figs in the field, a lion that transported packages, or a fox that was a shopkeeper, rather these animals all get their livelihood without aggravation. However, these animals were only created to serve me (man), and I was created to serve G-D. So, just like these animals were created to serve me and have a livelihood without aggravation so too I, who am created to serve G-D, how much more so that I should have a livelihood without aggravation. Alas, I have made my actions disgusting and deprived myself of my livelihood for it says in Jeremiah (5:25) {Your sins have overturned these.}' This is the end of the Gemorah in Kiddushin. Behold, the Gemorah is explaining that the actions and work that man does for his livelihood are not because of man's greatness, rather these actions are because of his lack of perfection."

The Maharal uses the Gemorah in Kiddushin to teach us a very valuable lesson, man has to work because of his fall from grace. Working is due to a lack of perfection and holiness in a man. Therefore, we can understand that a Red Heifer that works has lost this spiritual and symbolic perfection. This is why a Red Heifer can not have ever had a yolk on its back, because this is a spiritual impurity. The Red Heifer must symbolize spiritual purity in order to purify a person who has come in contact with a dead person.

Now we can put all the pieces together and understand the meaning of the Red Heifer, at least on some level. So the "perfectly red unblemished cow, upon which no yoke was laid" represents a proliferating or healthy man that has no spiritual blemishes and receives his sustenance without work. This represents what man was supposed to be before the sin of Adam eating the forbidden fruit! Thus, the point of the Red Heifer is to help us focus on what man was originally supposed to accomplish. What was that? The Maharal tells us that this is nothing other than the commandments from G-D. Originally, man was not supposed to die or work, rather man was supposed to follow G-D's commandments and everything else would be taken care of. However, once man "made his ways disgusting" as the Gemorah says, G-D made man work and die because man was unable to handle the responsibility of no death and no work. As the saying goes, "Idle hands do the devils work" and no hands are more idle than those who do not die or work.

However, what does this have to do with Bnei Yisroel? Why do they have to be constantly reminded that the only reason they had to come in contact with a dead person was because of Adam's sin? For this we turn to Rav Kook. He says (Kook, Midbar HaShur on Noach):

"At Mount Sinai, Israel reached the level of Adam before the Sin. Humanity would once again have enjoyed immortality, were it not for the subsequent sin of the Golden Calf (Talmud Bavli Avodah Zara 5a)."

This is why Bnei Yisroel must always be reminded of Adam's sin, because it was their's as well! Had they not sinned then we would again be living indefinitely. There would be no spiritual impurity from the dead. However, the Para Aduma is there as a reminder that we must constantly be watching ourselves and not give into sin. The disgusting actions that we perform like greed, lust, etc... must be curbed by our love and fear of G-D.

This enigmatic commandment can have great meaning to us if we concentrate on what it represents. Man was supposed to live forever and walk in the ways of G-D. By using the Para Aduma we are reminded that this IS still our ultimate goal, but the ease at which it was supposed to be attained has been altered. This was because of misdeeds and sin. Hopefully, we will all have the strength to overcome our base desires and focus on the idea of the Para Aduma, Man is supposed to live and follow in G-D's ways. However, the most important thing to realize about this commandment is that it applies to everyone. Every single person experiences death. There is not a single person that has not experienced death in some shape or form. Therefore, this commandment also teaches us that everyone is on the same level. No one has a pass. No matter how "great" you are, how rich you are, how many people listen to your words, you are just as responsible as everyone else. There is no pointing to someone else, everyone needs to be purified by the waters of the Para Aduma.

Maharal- How One Removes Themselves From The World to Come

While researching a little bit about what "Sefarim Chitzonim" means in the Gemorah on Sanhedrin 100B I came across a great explanation by the Maharal in the 15th perek of Tiferes Yisroel. Also, I was shocked at what I found Rav Moshe Shapiro, the Rav of Rabbi Hartman (he wrote the notes in the newest Maharals), says. First let us hear what the Maharal says.

In order to understand the Maharal's ideas, we must first translate part of the first mishna in perek hachelek of Sanhedrin. It says,

"Every member of Israel has a portion in the World to Come, as it is written 'For your nation has all righteous people forever they will inherit the land. They are the shoots of My saplings, My handiwork to glorify (Me).' (However,)these are the people that do not have a share in the world to come: Someone who says that the revival of the dead is not from the Torah; Someone who says the Torah is not from Heaven; and one who is an Apikores. Rabbi Akiva says, even someone who reads from 'Sefarim Chitzonim' and someone who recites verses of the Torah over wounds in order to heal them."

I am not going to go into what an Apikores is, however, I want to discuss what the Maharal says about Rabbi Akiva's additions to this Mishna. The Maharal says,

"Rebbe Akiva was trying to point out that it is not only these first three people, that completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come, that do not enter the world to come, but even someone who veers to the right or left of the path to the world to come. This that Rebbe Akiva said that 'Even one that reads from Sefarim Chitzonim or recites a verse over his wound loses his portion' is because Sefarim Chitzonim remove a person from the truthful Torah, that the Torah teaches the true and proper path. However, these Sefarim Chitzonim teach worthless ideas. These worthless ideas remove a person from the world to come, specifically from the world of intelligence, completely. This is because when a person reads from these Sefarim Chitzonim, that are full of worthlessness, this removes a person from the path to the world to come. Therefore, (if a person removes himself or herself from the path to the world to come) they will not receive the world to come."

The Maharal is telling us some basic principles. The first three types of people that are mentioned in the Mishna, the denier of the revival of the dead, the denier that Torah is from heaven and the Apikores are all people that completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come. Therefore, since they have removed themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come, they will be unable to enter the world to come. Why it is that these three people remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come is spoken about by the Maharal earlier in this perek.

With this in mind we can now venture forth and discuss why someone who does not remove themselves completely from having the ability to enter the world to come will still be unable to enter the world to come. According to Rebbe Akiva, the Maharal says that these two types of people, the reader of Sefarim Chitzonim and the reciter of verses over wounds, do not completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come. However, they do not follow the path that will lead them to the world to come. Therefore, since they do not follow the path that will lead them to the world to come, they will not enter the world to come.

The idea the Maharal is pointing out here is that Rebbe Akiva is of the opinion that Jews need to earn the world to come, whereas the Tanna of the Mishna seems to say only that Jews can lose their world to come. A person who removes himself, or herself from having the ability to enter the world to come is a person that knowingly rejects the existence of the world to come. That is why The denier of the revival of the dead, the denier of the Torah being from heaven and the Apikores are rejected from the world to come, because they deny the existence of the world to come. Therefore, if you deny the existence of the world to come, you no longer have the ability to enter the world to come.

However, a person that reads Sefarim Chitzonim or recites verses from the Torah over wounds to heal them do not deny the existence of the world to come. This is where the argument between Rebbe Akiva and the Tanna of the Mishna comes into play. The Tanna of the Mishna believes that all Jews automatically enter the world to come, no work is required. Therefore, even someone who wastes their time with falsehoods, like the Sefarim Chitzonim, can still enter the world to come. Rebbe Akiva rejects this idea. He is of the opinion that even though every Jew has a portion in the world to come, they must earn it. Therefore, if they waste their time on flasehoods, they will not enter the world to come since they have not earned it.

The Maharal continues and explains why it is that someone who recites a verse over a wound has no share in the world to come. He says,

"By a person that recites a verse over a wound, he or she is using the Torah for something that is the opposite of the Torah, since he or she is using the Torah as medicine for the body. It is the opposite use since the Torah is abstract (spiritual, intelligence) and this person is using it for something physical. This person is removing the grandeur of the Torah that is abstract (spiritual, intelligence) since he or she is using it for physicality which is the opposite of the Torah. We have already said that the Torah itself is the world to come, like is known to the ones who understand and the wise ones, therefore, when a person veers away from the abstract (spiritual, intelligence) Torah, that is the world to come, then he or she will lose their entrance into the world to come. These two things, reading from Sefarim Chitzonim and reciting a verse over a wound are the two ways of veering away from the Torah either right or left. This is because one who reads Sefarim Chitzonim does not consider the Torah of any value, for if this person considered the Torah of any value they would not waste their time with these books that are full of nothingness and worthlessness. However, one who recites verses from the Torah over his or her wounds does the exact opposite of this. This verse reciter values the Torah, however, this person thinks that the Torah should even be used as medicine to heal wounds."

The two ways to veer from the path to enter the world to come are 1)to not value the Torah enough and 2)to think that the Torah has application even to physical matters such as healing a wound. However, what are the real problems that are divulged through this understanding? Rabbi Hartman quotes an idea he heard from Rav Moshe Shapiro. He says,

"Here we are dealing with the disgraces of adding or subtracting. Someone who reads Seforim Chitzonim does not give enough credence to the Torah, therefore there is the disgrace of subtracting (value from the Torah). However, when someone recites a verse from the Torah over a wound he or she thinks the Torah can do everything, even things pertaining to physicality. This is the disgrace of adding to the (value of the Torah). Veering to the right or left means disgracing the Torah by either adding (right) or subtracting (left)."

The lesson here is that we have to understand the place of the Torah. Adding or subtracting to the use of the Torah takes away from the value of the Torah. To say something like, "the Torah can heal a wound" is absolutely ridiculous and diminishes the value of the Torah. However, saying that there is no value to the Torah is wrong as well. What is important is to find the balance and realize the place for the Torah. Therefore, one can enter the world to come through the Torah.

As a side point, it seems like we are saying that Sefarim Chitzonim are books that are read instead of the Torah according to the Maharal. However, Philosophy, Science, Mathematics, and any other type of book that helps one understand the Torah seems like it would be fine. The only problem is a book that will lead one to discount the Torah. Perhaps this means that one who reads books that bring a person to reject the Torah has no share in the world to come according to the Maharal.

Maharal On How to Find the Truth

In the Maharal's Sefer Tiferes Yisroel (perek 16) he discusses how to ascertain proofs as to why it must be that the Torah is from heaven. These proofs are not empirical, but they follow a logical approach to the matter. His opening remarks resemble his sentiments that have been shown in previous posts about philosophers. He says,

"There are men that posses examining hearts that only follow their own wisdom, these are the wise men of the nations that are called philosophers. They want to use their wisdom to figure out the truth of how the world and its nature works. However, their understanding is far (from the truth) they do not know or understand (the truth) since they are searching in the dark. For if they are going to figure out (the truth), they first need to admit to this basic principle, that the Torah is from heaven. Then they will move out from the shadows and the darkness (and in to the light). This core idea that the Torah is from heaven removes a mans dirty and disgusting clothes (metaphor for incorrect ideas) and purifies his thoughts. Once this happens he or she will be able to be certain about their decisive proof that the Torah must be from heaven. "

The Maharal is not discounting the philosophers wisdom in any way, In fact, he refers to these people as wise men from the nations. The point of the Maharal is much deeper than mere knowledge. His point is that man can never know the truth without first setting up basic principles. Just like man can not figure out physics without first understanding the force of gravity, so too man can not understand the true nature of the world without first realizing that the Torah and the wisdom contained within it comes from heaven.

The idea here is that man without a guiding set of principles will not be able to find out the truth. Think of it in this sense, if man is put on earth without any guidance, how does he then figure out reality? How does man invent mathematics, art, language and all the other subjects? This leads us to believe that there is a higher being that all knowledge stems forth from. Therefore, once we realize that the Torah is from heaven, it is possible for the guiding principles of the Torah to be expounded upon by philosophers. Man's own knowledge is unable to figure out the truth without guidance, but with a basic principle that guides man's knowledge, then man is able to figure out all truths that exist in the world.

Maharal Explains How Miracles Can Occur

In this previous post, the Maharal discusses why it is that miracles can happen in the physical world. Here, he continues.

"Just like there is an order and laws for the natural world so too there is an order to miracles. This is because miracles are in the world through the connection that exists between the physical world and the spiritual world. This connection has an order that it follows and this is why miracles only last for a short time and are not eternal. This is why when we talk about G-D giving the maan to the Jewish people it does not violate the order of existence. Just like it is proper that the world follows nature and its physics, so too it is proper that, for the Jewish people that are connected to the spiritual world, there occurs miracles with an order.

There is an order for miracles that comes from G-D and there is never anything contained within miracles that change G-D's creation. This is because everything has an order that was given to it from G-D. This is the mistake that the philosophers made since they do not know about this idea. If they knew about this idea then they would be able to answer up all their questions even according to their own beliefs that the world follows the order that G-D created for it. Just like this idea, that the world was created with an order that was created by G-D, so too miracles have an order that was created by G-D and this does not lead to a change in the order of the world. This is because just like there is an intelligent order to nature, so too there is an intelligent order to things that are not found within nature.

The miracles, that are not found within nature, do not cause a change at all. Just like it is proper that things should exist in the world through natural forces, so too it is proper that things should exist in the world trough spiritual forces. If this is true, then that means that things that are natural and things that are unnatural are one subject. However, since things that are not natural are not understood they are said to be outside of the order of the world. This is not true at all, rather just like nature has a natural force guiding it so too unnatural things have a supernatural (spiritual) force guided them."

The Maharal seems to be explaining a very rational approach to mysticism. Just like science has shown that there are forces that can be explained through physics so too there are forces that can be explained through spirituality. The principle that is being worked with here is that just like the forces that are natural have an order that is always true like gravity and the like, so too the spiritual powers have an order that is always true. This allows for miracles to occur, but prevents change in the world.

The Maharal believes that the reason the rationalists do not believe in miracles is because a miracles dictates that there must be a change in the world. If a supernatural event happens, like water changing into blood, then that means the natural order of the world is changed. Therefore, according to the rationalists that the Maharal is speaking about, it is impossible for miracles to occur because it is impossible that the natural order of the world be changed.

The idea that a change in the natural order of the world is impossible is very logical. Even the Maharal agrees that this is an impossibility. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as nature and we would never be able to rely on the consistency of the world. However, if spiritual forces exist with their own nature, then miracles could occur without changing the natural order of the world. The way I understand the Maharal is in the following manner: a man cannot fly through natural forces, however, if a spiritual force came along then the man could fly. There is still gravity pulling the man down, however, there is a spiritual force that lifts him up. This would not destroy the nature of the world because the spiritual force is only temporary and fleeting and it only occurs when the spiritual order dictates that at this moment this man should fly. Also, miracles can only occur for the Jewish people because they are the connection, according to the Maharal, between the spiritual world and the physical world.

The Maharal is pointing out a misunderstanding. The philosophers believed that in order for miracles to occur nature must be changed. They also believed that nature never changes and therefore that means that miracles are impossible. However, the Maharal tells us that miracles can occur without changing nature. The misunderstanding here is that the philosophers don't realize that there are two types of forces; spiritual and physical. The actions of the spiritual forces do not negate the physical forces, but rather they work in harmony with each other. In light of this, miracles can be understood. Miracles do not change nature, they work through different forces other than nature. Also, the only way they can work is through the Jewish people since they are the people that connect the spiritual world to the physical world.

Maharal Against Philosophers Continued

In this previous post I translated and discussed the beginning of the Maharal's discussion about what he thought about philosophers. I translated the beginning of his second introduction to Gevuros Hashem. Now I will continue to translate it and discuss his ideas.

"There are those from the believers of Israel that try to explain the wonders and miracles that happen in this world with their minds and their knowledge. The reason they use their own knowledge to explain the miracles is because the miracles do not make sense to them according to their understanding of the natural world. This inability to comprehend miracles through their own knowledge causes them to explain the miracles in a way that I (the Maharal) will mention. Still, these people do deserve credit in some respect, because they do not say that there is a lack in the doer (G-D) of the miracles, because this is not the case at all. Only, according to their minds and knowledge they think that it is not proper that the true actor (G-D), that created an order among the creations in that they are created correctly and truthfully, should change the basis for existence. That these Jewish philosophers say that if He would change the nature of the world then nothing that He created would be stable. This is all to their merit (the Jewish philosophers)."

The Maharal begins his disproof of the Jewish philosophers with respect. This shows just how great the Maharal was and how righteous he was. A man that can start a disproof with such nice words and pleasing language has amazing characteristics. He gives credit to the philosophers for using their knowledge, not to disprove G-D's existence, but rather to incorporate G-D's existence and actions into their lives. This is the proper way to act, if your knowledge and G-D's existence conflict with one another, you change your knowledge in order that you can also believe in G-D's existence.

The Maharal continues:
"However, in another aspect there is no merit to them, excluding the reason that their explanations are not correct according to intelligence and knowledge since their proofs and evidence are not correct and their congregation strays from the truth and correct path. They confuse the text (of the Bible) and give explanations for the occurrence of the miracles, that they come to teach us about the actions of G-D. This is why we call them signs and proofs, because they are signs and proofs for the actions of G-D, the awesome one. This reason is without merit and weakens the signs and proofs (of G-D) because the core reason why G-D brought the miracles to Earth was to reinforce our belief in Him."

The Maharal here is telling us where the philosophers got it wrong. It seems like he is explaining the philosophers as believing in an allegorical explanation of the text of the Bible. This diminishes the greatness of G-D because it takes away from His power. Also, this idea completely removes the idea of why G-D brought the miracles to Earth, to reveal His power on Earth. It is interesting to note that the Maharal seems to only go against philosophers that believe in an allegorical explantion of the miracles.

The Maharal continues:
"Now, returning to our original intent for mentioning the philosophers that we have not properly addressed, that we need to know how to answer a heretic. This is referring to the philosophers that say that everything comes from the intelligent order that emanates from the eternality of the world. This means that nothing deviates from this natural order and everything has its nature that it is accustomed to follow. The problem is that since everything comes from this intelligent order and is obligated to follow this nature because of the eternality of the world and cannot veer from this nature, this idea disallows any change in the world that would violate the intelligent order. This means that even a fly's wing cannot be elongated! The reason for this is that since the world has a certain nature that it follows because of the obligation that is found to exist within the world, if any change would come to the world on account of miracles then there would be a change in the order and nature of the world. According to this philosopher's knowledge we never find a change in nature because of the inherent obligation that exists within the order of the world. Therefore, the signs and proofs that change nature are not possible because everything needs to follow the obligatory order without any additions, negations or changes. On the main idea of his words (the Jewish philosopher), that the world is obligatory and therefore it must be that the world has no beginning making it eternal, will be answered in its place."

Here the Maharal is disclosing the general theory of Aristotle on the creation and existence of the world. I am not sure which Jewish philosopher that the Maharal is referring to. Perhaps he understands this as the Rambam's point of view. However, perhaps it is someone else. Either way, the Maharal is revealing which view he believes is incompatible with miracles.

The Maharal continues:
"Furthermore, according to the philosopher, how can it be that anything can come from anything? Nature dictates that anything can not come from anything, but rather only one thing can come from a specific thing. If this is true, then how could blood come from water? Behold, we can bring a proof from a type of object related to another object that is not in its type that the natural actions of something act according to its nature and its customs that are in the natural world, but its spiritual actions act according to its spirituality. There is a difference between them (the natural actions vs the spiritual actions). Natural actions occur in time and therefore every natural action needs to occur in a certain amount of time. However, an action that is not from nature does not need to occur in time. This difference is because of the fact that nature uses physical power and all physical power needs to occur in a certain amount of time. However, spiritual actions occur without taking up time, because these actions do not use physical power and therefore do not take up time. Therefore, in one moment the water was changed into blood since it was an act of G-D's will and His will changed the physicality and the spirituality in one moment. This is not a natural action that it occurred in time and that it needed to be prepared physically, but rather it was the word of G-D and the heavens did this action, with the breath of His mouth all of his legions acted. This was a spiritual act that did not require any physical preparation. Therefore, there should be no question of "But not all physical material is prepared to accept the form (of any other physical material) and therefore it would need preparation, so how was the water able to turn into blood?" This is not a question to one that understands this idea because physical material only needs preparation to accept another form if we are dealing with nature."

The Maharal is explaining how he views the nature of miracles. The problem exists that nature does not allow for miracles, however, miracles actually occur. How can this be? He explains that a physical medium, like water, does not need to be able to physically turn into blood. Although, through nature this is an impossibility, through spiritual intervention this occurs. Spiritual intervention occurs outside of time and this is how water is able to turn into blood. In this manner, G-D changes the physical properties of water through spiritual means and not physical means.

The Maharal continues:
"Philosophers, who go after nature, disregard the miracles because of this (that through nature one form can not accept another form). This we (the Maharal) admit, that through nature the miracles are impossible. However, through the spiritual actions all the miracles are possible. This is because the lower world that is governed by nature also has a connection to the world that is governed by spirituality and it is from this connection that miracles occur. This causes miracles to occur through what connects this world and the spiritual world. Therefore, miracles only occur through the Jewish people like we will explain later. All of this is because of the connection that the Jewish people have with the spiritual world and therefore miracles occur for them."

Here the Maharal discusses a major idea in his works, the Jewish people are the connection between the physical world and the spiritual world. As the connection between these two worlds the Jewish people are the conduits which are able to accept the miracles that G-D performs. Miracles can only occur through spirituality and therefore only the people that are connected to the spiritual world can attain this miracles. Therefore, it makes sense, according to the Maharal, that the Jewish people are able to receive miracles.

The Maharal continues:
"Now, this that we said 'How is it possible that we can form something from anything else, because it is impossible through nature,' is possible not through nature (it is possible through spiritual acts). Also, when we said that the world's existence is obligatory, it is from G-D. If its path is not according to the order of nature then this thing is a change from the order only according to His will. We therefore say that everything goes according to G-D's will."

The philosophy of the Maharal seems to be that G-D's will is the obligatory nature of the world. Only His will can guide the nature of the world. This is in contrast to the philosophers that believe that the natural order of the world is the obligatory nature of the world.

The Maharal continues:
"Even according to the knowledge of the one who believes in the eternality of the world and that everything goes according to the obligatory order, even though this idea is definitely wrong, according to his own knowledge he is wrong. This is because anyone who says that the miracles come from G-D is unable to say that they come from the intelligent order (and this is in fact what the Jewish philosophers try to do)."

Here the Maharal points out the inconsistencies within the ideas of Jewish philosophers that believe in the eternality of the world. If you say that miracles come from G-D it is impossible to believe that the natural order is the obligatory order of the world since miracles are in stark contrast to this idea. Miracles require one to believe that G-D's will is the only obligatory order of the world otherwise, miracles would be impossible.

Read the next part here.