Shabbat as Part of Judaism’s Overall
Dialectic
Rabbi
Yaakov Bieler
Parashat
Emor, 5766
“Shabbat”
appears in every book of the Bible,[1]
and prior to Parshat Emor in VaYikra, where we read the
following,
VaYikra
23:3
Six
days you shall do creative activity, and on the seventh day “Shabbat
Shabbaton”, a holy convocation, all creative activity you shall not do. It
is Shabbat to HaShem in all of your dwellings,
we
have already been told about “Shabbat” several times:
Beraishit
2:3
And
God Blessed the seventh day and Sanctified it because in it He Rested
from all of His Creative Activity that God Created to do.
Shemot
16:23
And
he (Moshe) said to them: This is what HaShem has Spoken, “Shabbaton” (a
rest day), a holy “Shabbat” for HaShem tomorrow. What you want to bake,
bake (today) and what you want to cook, cook (today), and whatever is left over
(from the double portion of Manna that will fall on Fridays) put away for
yourselves as a safekeeping until the morning.
Shemot
20:8-11
Remember
the “Shabbat” day to keep it holy.
Six
days you will work and do all of your creative activity.
And
on the seventh day a “Shabbat” to the Lord your God, you shall not
do any creative activity, you, your son, your daughter, your male servant, your
female servant, and your animal and your sojourner that is in your gates.
Because
for six days did HaShem Make the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is
in it, and He Rested on the seventh day. For this reason HaShem Blessed
the day of the “Shabbat” and He Sanctified it.
Shemot
23:12
Six
days you will do your activities and on the seventh day you will rest, in
order that your ox and your donkey will rest and the son of your handmaiden and
the sojourner will rest.
Shemot
31:13-17
You
(Moshe) shall speak to the Jewish people saying: You will certainly observe My
“Shabbatot” because it is a sign between Me and between you for your
generations, to know that I am HaShem Who Sanctifies you.
And
you will observe “Shabbat” because it is holy to you; those who profane
it will surely die, because anyone who performs in it creative activity and that
soul will be cut off from the midst of its people.
Six
days will creative activity be done, and on the seventh day “Shabbat
Shabbaton” holy to HaShem. Whoever does creative activity on the day of
“Shabbat” will surely die.
And
the Children of Israel will observe the “Shabbat”, to do “Shabbat”
down through their generations, an eternal covenant.
Between
Me and the Children of Israel it is a sign forever, because in six days HaShem
Made the Heavens and the earth and on the seventh day He Rested.
Shemot
34:21
Six
days you shall work and on the seventh day you shall rest, you will rest
from ploughing and harvesting.
Shemot
35:2-3
Six
days will creative activity be done, and on the seventh day it will be to
you holy, “Shabbat Shabbaton” to HaShem. Whoever does creative activity
in it, will die.
You
shall not ignite a fire in all of your habitations on the day of
Shabbat.
VaYikra
19:3
An
individual should fear his mother and his father and My “Shabbatot” he
should observe, I am HaShem.
VaYikra
19:30
My
“Shabbatot” you shall observe, and My Tabernacle/Temple you shall fear, I
am HaShem.
While
it is conceivable that the reason for the many repetitions of this Mitzva is in
order to emphasize its centrality and importance in comparison with other
Mitzvot,[2]
some commentators attempt to attribute to each new iteration of “Shabbat”
a specific intent and emphasis, in order to avoid the impression of the
Tora containing simple superfluity.
Rabbi
S.R. Hirsch on VaYikra 23:3
…The
“Shabbat” law appears repeatedly in the Tora, and always with reference to a
different phase of Jewish life, to which indeed Shabbat forms the
fundamental institution. Thus we find:
a) the “Shabbat” of Creation
(Gen. 2:1);
b) the “Shabbat” of the Wilderness, in
connection with the struggle for existence, for obtaining food (Shem.
16:22);
c) the “Shabbat” of the Decalogue, as
evidence of the whole Jewish consciousness of God (Shem.
20:8);
d) “Shabbat” in its effect on humane
and social life (Shem. 23:12);
e) the sanctity of “Shabbat” in its
relationship to the Temple (Shem. 31:13 ff.; 35:2
ff.)
R.
Hirsch’s explanation for the Tora’s repetition of the Mitzva of “Shabbat” is
intriguing on at least two counts. Firstly, he contends that Shabbat is
“the fundamental institution of Jewish life.” This premise is reflected
in earlier comments that R. Hirsch makes regarding the double portion of Manna
that fell in the desert on “Erev Shabbat”, in order to compensate for Manna’s
not being found at the outskirts of the encampment on “Shabbat” itself. The commentator wishes to explain why
HaShem Wished that the people “stay at home” on “Shabbat”, rather than go out to
gather food as they had to do on the other days of the
week.
Rabbi
S.R. Hirsch on Shemot 16:23
…In
inhibiting his activity—“Shabbaton”[3]—the
Jew is first of all to show his submission to God in his activity in seeking
his livelihood (gathering the Manna was the means by which the Jews acquired
their requisite food during the 40 years of wandering in the desert, hence how
they sought their “livelihood” during that period of time)—that first and
mightiest incitement to conquer the world,[4]
and just as the “Shabbat” of God impresses the seal of God’s Creation on the
world,[5]
so does the “Shabbat” of man impress the seal of the authority of God on
Man’s efforts at creation.[6]
With “Shabbat”, man places himself and his work in the service of God[7]…
According
to R. Hirsch, the reason why “Shabbat” is the fundamental institution of Jewish
life independent of the specific conditions in which Jews find themselves down
through the ages, is because its observance in terms of the willing cessation by
a Jew of the pursuit of his livelihood[8]
demonstrates an individual’s devotion to and sacrifice for God playing a more
central role in his life than any consideration of personal advancement or
fulfillment.
The
centrality of sacrifice and self-discipline as a means by which one indicates
the degree to which he is beholden to God and His Tora, is a theme that R. J.B.
Soloveitchik, ZaTzaL, often invoked in his writing. However, he sees the
cessation of pro-active creative activity as only one side of a two-sided coin
with regard to God’s Expectations of man:
R. J.B. Soloveitchik, “Catharsis” in Tradition, 17:2,
1978.
…What
is heroism in the Halacha?
…One
must perform the dialectical[9]
movement. The Halachic catharsis expresses itself in paradoxical movement in
two opposite directions—in surging forward boldly and retreating humbly. Man’s
heroic experience is a polar, antithetic one. Man drives forward, only to
retreat and to reverse, subsequently, the direction of his movement.
The
Tora wants man who is bold and adventurous in his quest for opportunities, to
act heroically, and at the final moment, when it appears that victory is within
reach, to stop short, turn around and retreat. At the most exalted moment of
triumph and fulfillment, man must forego the ecstasy of victory and take defeat
at his own hands…
…”U’Malu
Et HaAretz VeKivshuha” (and fill the earth and conquer it). Man was called upon
to defy opposition on the part of nature and to march to victory. Biblical man
is out to subdue his environment. Yet when conquest is within man’s reach and
the road to realization has been cleared of all hindrances, man-victor, who
needs only to reach out and grab everything that his heart has desired, must
change his course and begin to withdraw. When victory is near, man must
invite defeat and surrender the spoils that he had quested for so long. The
movement is dialectical: the forward marching ends in retreat, which in turn
leads to a resumption of the forward march…
According
to the Rav’s formulation in his essay “Catharsis”, it is just as important for a
person to resume his activities following a periodic withdrawal from them, as is
mandated by the observance of “Shabbat”, as it is to withdraw from them in the
first place. As inappropriate as it would be for a Jew not to observe Shabbat at
all, it would also be improper for him to approach every day as if it was
“Shabbat”. R. Soloveitchik maintains that complete submission to God resulting
in failure to engage in the world of the work-week would be as injurious to the
dialectic that God Envisions for man as would be an immersion in creative
activity that leaves no room for acknowledgement of God’s Place in one’s life.
A
support for the dialectical approach that the Rav suggests can be found in the
Midrash Halacha on the Ten Commandments in Shemot:
Mechilta
D’Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai on Shemot 20:9 (cited
in R. Menachem Kasher, Tora Shleima, Parshat Yitro, p. 69, and further
explicated in the addendum to that volume, p. 242 ff.)
“Six
days you will work”[10]—Rebbe[11]
says: This is another decree (i.e., Divine Directive, Mitzva). Just as
Israel
is commanded regarding the positive Commandment of “Shabbat”[12],
so too it is commanded with respect to “Melacha” (i.e., that there is a
positive Commandment to engage in creative activity when it is not “Shabbat”).
Returning
to R. Hirsch’s original comments on VaYikra 23:3, the second intriguing
aspect of his approach is the suggestion that “Shabbat”, while remaining
central and fundamental to Judaism, nevertheless takes on different
connotations during different periods of the Jewish experience: a)
Creation, b) the struggle for food in the wilderness, c) the
receiving of the Tora at Sinai, d) as part of the general social contract
that informs Jewish social interactions, and e) in relationship with the
Temple. Assuming that R. Hirsch is
correct in his categorizations, it would be reasonable to assume that in each of
these periods, one might have thought that “Shabbat” would not be applicable had
the Tora not specifically stated otherwise. Perhaps one might have thought that
the desert conditions that brought into question where food and drink would be
obtained entailed “Pikuach Nefesh” (the endangerment of life) and therefore
perhaps certain aspects of
“Shabbat” would be deferred until more normal conditions would be
encountered. As for receiving the
Tora at Sinai, it was important to emphasize how “Shabbat” takes its place among
the first five[13]
of the Ten Commandments, Mitzvot that stress man’s relationship with HaShem. Yet
when the rules mainly governing interpersonal relationships are set forth,
“Shabbat” is again mentioned, leading us to reflect upon the social aspects of
this observance, i.e., allowing slaves to rest, deemphasizing once a week the
pursuit of material possessions, allowing people to come together to share
prayer, study, food and good fellowship, etc. The
But
R. Hirsch does not appear to include all of the instances where “Shabbat” is
mentioned in the Tora within his categorization scheme. Perhaps VaYikra 19:3 can
be accounted for as part of a reformulation of the Ten Commandments in alternate
form and order,[14]
therefore paralleling “Shabbat” of the Decalogue. However, explaining the
“unique phase of Jewish life” suggested by Shemot 34:21 where Shabbat is
mentioned in the middle of the other holy days,[15]
and VaYikra 23:3 where it is listed first with respect to other holy days,[16]
appears to be more challenging. It is possible that the experience of “Shabbat”
prior to the institution of additional holy days, such as the Pilgrimage
Festivals of “Pesach”, “Shavuot” and “Sukkot” as well as the “Yamim Noraim”
(days of awe) which also call for the cessation of “Melacha” at least to some
degree,[17]
was unique, and the manner in which Jews approach “Shabbat” becomes altered once
other days of the year are also designated for the cessation of the pursuit of
one’s livelihood. Furthermore, the symbolism of “Shabbat” which originally
exclusively represented our acknowledgement of God’s Completion of Creation,
changes with the evolution of the Jewish people and its history—in the version
of the Ten Commandments recorded in Shemot 20:10 “Shabbat” is associated with
the theme of God Resting is invoked, while Devarim 5:14 emphasizes “Shabbat”’s
reflecting the lessons learned from the enslavement in Egypt. Could the Tora’s
invocation of “Shabbat” within the context of other Jewish holy days in Shemot
34 and VaYikra 23 emphasize the differences and similarities intrinsic to these
respective days, i.e., the common denominator between them is a commitment to
sacrificially set aside personal pursuit of livelihood and self-advancement in
order to demonstrate and reflect upon our devotion to God, even as the focus of
our contemplation during these
various days are different spiritual themes—our creaturehood in light of God’s
Creation (“Shabbat”), God’s Intervention in Jewish history (“Moadim”), and the
necessity for us to reflect upon our merits and demerits and strive to improve
our level of Mitzva performance and relationship to the Divine (“Yamim
Noraim”)?
[1] In addition to the reference in
Parshat Emor, “Shabbat” is also mentioned in BaMidbar 15:32-36;
28:9; and Devarim 5:12-15. But it could be contended that BaMidbar 15, the story
of the wood gatherer on “Shabbat” does not involve new aspects of the Mitvza,
but rather an illustration of its application and enforcement., BaMidbar 28
describes the type of special sacrifice offered in the Tabernacle/Temple each
“Shabbat”, but does not address the manner in which Shabbat is to be observed in
general. And as for Devarim 5, this is no more than a relatively faithful
restatement of the Ten Commandments. Although with respect to “Shabbat”, the
reason given for the Mitzva in Devarim differs from the version in Shemot 20
(the reason in Shemot is that we rest in order to emulate God’s Resting
following Creation; the reason in Devarim is to remind the Jews of their plight
when they were slaves in Egypt), nevertheless, from a practical point of view,
nothing new in terms of the manner in which “Shabbat” is to be observed appears
to be conveyed. Consequently, we could argue that the passage in Emor is the
last when a new form of the Mitzva to observe “Shabbat” is being presented by
the Tora.
[2] Tosafot on Kiddushin 70b, d.h.
“Kashim Geirim” notes that the Tora states in 24 (alternate readings substitute
36 or 46 for this number) places that one is not to oppress “Geirim”
(sojourners). From such repeated insistence it can be inferred that observing
such a Mitzva is simultaneously important and challenging—if it were so easy to
comply with this directive, why does it have to be revisited again and again? A
similar conclusion could be reached regarding the observance of
Shabbat.
[3] R. Hirsch’s focusing upon the term
“Shabbaton” is given particular resonance in light of RaMBaN’s comments on
VaYikra 23:24, partially cited in fn. 8 below, where the medieval commentator
defines this word as representing the positive Commandment that is fulfilled on
“Shabbat” by not doing “Melacha”.
[4] R. Hirsch’s terminology with regard
to man’s mandate to conquer the world stems from one of the blessings Bestowed
by God upon Adam and Chava:
Beraishit
1:28
And God Blessed them and He Said to
them: Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and conquer it, and
rule over the fish of the sea and over the bird of the air and over every living
thing that moves on the earth.
Although following the Flood, man
is given permission to rule over animal life to the point where even their
consumption as food becomes possible:
(Beraishit 9:3
Every moving thing that lives, it
will be food for you, like the green grass I have Given to you
everything),
at the time of Beraishit
Rabbi S.R. Hirsch on Beraishit
1:28
“Kivshuha” (and conquer it) is
property: the mastering, appropriating and transforming the earth and its
products for human purposes (short of treating animal life as food). This
acquirement of property is a preliminary necessity for the preceding tasks of
home and society which require it as the means for accomplishing them. This
makes the acquisition of property itself into a moral duty. But as this
preliminary duty is mentioned last (“Peru” [be fruitful] = marriage; “Revu”
[multiply] = children, family; “Milu” [fill] = society) it gives it its
limitation as having a moral meaning and importance only if it is devoted to the
preceding purposes; only if fortune is sought and acquired to found family and
further the needs of social work. But not if the order is reversed and one looks
upon marriage and society as the means to acquire property and riches.
[5] By God Deciding that the Creation
was completed, and therefore an entire “day” was set aside during which no
further creation of aspects of the universe would occur, He Demonstrates that
rather than simply Setting into motion the forces of Nature, He Maintains
control over them to the extent that He Decides when to initiate their
functioning and the consequent progress of Creation, and when to call a halt to
them.
[6] Rather than man deciding when to
engage in his own creative acts, which serve as a microcosm of God’s Creating
the universe, he defers to God’s Schedule and Commandments, also calling a
weekly halt to his activities.
[7] Although in a finite sense,
observing Shabbat only incorporates adherence to God’s Directives with respect
to activities which a person might engage in during the 24+ hour period between
Friday evening and Saturday night, R. Hirsch suggests that it symbolizes man’s
acceptance of God’s Authority during his activities during the other 6 days of
the week as well. Consequently, it becomes the most overarching statement of
man’s readiness to subject himself to God’s Law and
Will.
[8] It is interesting that R. Hirsch
understands the significance of “Shabbat” with regard to what he considers its
centrality in Jewish life from the negative rather than positive perspective,
i.e., more important than the positive aspects of “Shabbat” observance, e.g.,
“Kiddush”, “Seuda” (festive meals), “Zemirot” (songs of praise), “Neirot”
(candles), “Tefilla” (prayer) etc., is the prohibition against performing
creative activity. And although the considerable sacrifice entailed in desisting
from one’s profession or occupation for an entire day each week is certainly
obvious, from another perspective a case could be made that “Mitzvot Aseh”
(positive Commandments) trump “Mitzvot Lo Ta’aseh” (negative Commandments) in
terms of their respective spiritual significance. One commentator makes such a
claim in his presentation of the Commandment of Shabbat:
RaMBaN on Shemot
20:8
…It is also true that the attribute
of “Zachor” (remembering; this is the language that is used in the first version
of the Ten Commandments in Shemot 20:8) is represented by a positive Commandment
(“remembering” suggests positive pro-action rather than avoidance of
objectionable action implied by “guard against”) and issues forth from the
emotion of love extending to the attribute of mercy, for he who does his
master’s command is beloved of him and his master shows him mercy. But the
attribute of “Shamor” (observing, Devarim 5:12) is represented by a negative
Commandment, which extends to the attribute of justice and issues forth from the
emotion of fear, for he who guards himself from doing anything which does not
please his master does do out of fear of him. It is for this reason that a
positive Commandment is greater than a negative Commandment, just as love is
greater than fear, for he who fulfills and observes the will of his master with
his body and his possessions is greater than he who guards himself from doing
that which is not pleasing to him. This is why the Rabbis have said (Shabbat
132b, etc.) that a positive Commandment overrides a negative Commandment (when
both are inherent in the same action—a classic example discussed in Yevamot 4b
is the reason why the Commandment of not wearing “Sha’atnez” [mixtures of wool
and linen] is placed immediately next to the Command to wear “Tzitzit” [Devarim
22:12-13]. The Talmud suggests that the juxtaposition [“Semichut HaParshiot”] of
these two Commandments comes to teach that in the event that one has a linen
four-cornered garment and woolen fringes, one can attach the fringes to the
garment despite the prohibition against “Sha’atnez” since the positive
Commandment of wearing “Tzitzit” overpowers the negative Commandment of avoiding
“Sha’atnez”)…
Extending RaMBaN’s understanding of
the spiritual significance of positive as opposed to negative Commandments to
the Mitzva of “Shabbat”, one would then conclude that it is not the avoidance of
“Melacha”, i.e., the negative aspect of “Shabbat”, that is key, but rather all
of the positive actions that are associated with “Shabbat” that contain
“Shabbat”’s true spiritual meaning.
Perhaps R. Hirsch would respond
that the negative Commandment of “Shamor” that is associated with “Shabbat” is
intrinsically different from other negative Commandments designed to separate a
Jew from particular objects or activities. Whereas one could contend that
non-Kosher foods might have something about them that is at least metaphysically
objectionable, and that the act of stealing another’s property is inherently an
evil act, performing “Melacha” in the pursuit of one’s livelihood is not only
devoid of such negative connotations, but is even a “Mitzva”, i.e., a
religiously positive act, most of the time—the Tora’s statements to the effect
that “Six days you shall work, perform creative activity” (see the verses
dealing with “Shabbat” cited at the beginning of this essay) could be viewed not
only as the granting of permission to engage in productive labor, but as a
Commandment to do so! Therefore when one is told to cease doing “Melacha” on
“Shabbat”, it is not so much to separate from something evil, as to create the
context whereby the positive Commandments of “Shabbat” can be performed that
much more fully and meaningfully. Furthermore, not performing “Melacha” on
“Shabbat” is viewed by RaMBaN as being interdicted by both a negative as well as
a positive Commandment.
RaMBaN on VaYikra
That it will be a day of cessation
of “Melacha” to rest in it. And the Rabbis interpret (Shabbat 24a) “’Shabbaton’
is a positive Commandment.” And
behold a person who performs “Melacha” on “Yom Tov” transgresses a negative
Commandment as well as fails to fulfill a positive Commandment. And one who
rests on it fulfills a positive Commandment…
Although RaMBaN is commenting above
on a verse that deals with “Rosh HaShana”, his citation of Shabbat 24a, combined
with the term “Shabbaton” appearing in verses that concern “Shabbat” rather than
“Yom Tov” (see Shemot 16:23; 31:15; 35:2) allow one to understand resting on
“Shabbat” as also the fulfillment of both types of Commandments. Whenever a
Mitzva manifests itself in both positive and negative forms, it is an indication
of its centrality and significance.
Naturally there is an element of
paradox when one conceptualizes the absence of action as not only compliance
with instructions to desist from action, but also as a “positive fulfillment” of
some kind. With respect to “Shabbat”, we confront an instance of a “Mitzvat
Aseh” that is accomplished by doing nothing! Nevertheless, such a definition
allows us to avoid pitting the prohibition against doing Melacha against the
obligation to make Kiddush, light candles, etc. and rather see it as a complete
entity in itself, encompassing both positive and negative elements
simultaneously.
[9] “dialectic”—…the method of logic
used by Hegel and adapted by Marx to his materialist philosophy; it is based on
the concept of the contradiction of opposites (thesis and antithesis) and their
continual resolution using dialectic. (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the
American Language, College Edition, The World Publishing Co., Cleveland, 1966,
p. 404.)
[10] In his addendum essay, “Sheishet
Yamim Ta’avod” (Tora Shleima, Parshat Yitro, Section 14, p. 142) R. Kasher
suggests that the reason why Rebbe interpreted “Six days you shall work” in this
manner is because it is otherwise difficult to account for the repetition of
this phrase 8 different times: Shemot 16:26; 20:9-10; 23:12; 31:15; 34:21; 35:2;
VaYikra 23:3; Devarim 5:13. It’s one thing to repeat the Commandment of
“Shabbat” but why stress so many times the idea of working for six days, unless
this too is a Commandment.
[11] A reference to R. Yehuda HaNasi,
editor of the Mishna.
[12] This would appear to be a reference
to the positive aspect of the act of desisting from “Melacha”, i.e.,
“Shabbaton”, discussed by RaMBaN, and cited in fn. 8
above.
[13] 1) Belief in God; 2) Prohibition
against idolatry; 3) Prohibition against taking God’s Name in vein; 4)
Remembering Shabbat; 5) Respecting parents.
[14]
Shemot 20; Devarim 5
VaYikra 19
1) Belief in God
19:2
2) Prohibition against idolatry
19:4
3) Prohibition against taking God’s Name in vein
4) Remembering/Observing “Shabbat”
19:3
5) Respecting parents
19:3
6) Do not murder
19:16
7) Do not engage in sexual immorality
19:20, 29
8) Do not steal
19:11
9) Do not testify falsely
10) Do not covet
19:18(?)
[16] VaYikra 23:3
“Shabbat”
23:5 ff.
“Pesach”
23:27 ff. “Yom
HaKippurim”
23:34 ff.
“Sukkot”
[17] Although most “Melacha” is
prohibited on these days, the prohibition is not as all-inclusive as on Shabbat.
With the exception of “Yom HaKippurim” when the restrictions are identical to
those of Shabbat, activities that are deemed necessary for “Ochel Nefesh” (lit.
consumption of the soul; certain actions involved in food preparation) as well
as carrying from one domain to another or within a public domain, and
transferring fire, are permitted.