Taryag Mitzvos – Part 3: How Goodly are your Tents

Welcome back for Part 3 of Taryag Mitzvos. Let us briefly review the previous parts.

In Part 1 we discussed that from the perspective of HKBH there is only one primary mitzvah and this is the mitzvah of Emunah (or Yichud Hashem) – to believe in Him. Of course, one can only profess to believe in an Entity if there are alternatives. As such, the mitzva has to have a negative side which is not to believe in any possible alternative.

These are the two primary mitzvos of Anochi Hashem Elokecha and Lo Yihiyeh Lecha elohim Acherim.

All the rest of the positive mitzvos are manifestations of Anochi Hashem and all the rest of the negative mitzvos are manifestations of Lo Yihiyeh Lecha.

In Part 2 we discussed that these two basic elements are represented in the words of Krias Shema: Hashem Elokenu (Anochi Hashem) and Hashem Echad (Lo Yihiyeh Lecha). We went further to say that even just the two words, Hashem Echad, can represent the two elements. Hashem is to believe in Hashem (Anochi) and Echad is to believe only in Hashem (Lo Yihiyeh Lecha). We went on to say that these two elements are represented both in the techeiles and white of the tzitzis and in the Zachor and Shamor of Shabbos.

We can now review the list of positive/negative characters:

Emunah – Yichud Hashem
Anochi Hashem	Lo Yihiyeh Lecha
Positive mitzvos	Negative mitzvos
Aseh Tov	Sur MeRah
Hashem E-loheinu	Hashem Echad
Hashem	Echad
Techeilet	White
Zachor	Shamor
Weekday	Shabbos

Can we add to this list? (Please, no!)

Well, call me cruel (I’ve heard worse), but I am not dismissing the audience just yet.

Thus far we have extracted our two elements (Anochi and Lo Yihiyeh Lecha) from the expression Hashem Elokenu-Hashem Echad and then claimed we can extract these elements just from the phrase Hashem Echad. In this stage, we will suggest that perhaps we can extract the two elements merely from Hashem (i.e., Y-H-V-H). This means that the first half of the shem, Y-H, will represent Anochi and the second half, V-H, will represent Lo Yihiyeh Lecha.

I will only very briefly elaborate on this idea by saying that the term “KaH” (Y-H) represents Bracha which is the positive aspect and comes from doing positive mitzvos and V-H represents Kelala which is the negative aspect and comes from transgressing negative mitzvos. This is more relevant to the upcoming final segment (Part 4) so I will cut it short now and explain it in more detail in Part 4. I am only mentioning it as a stepping-stone to the next step and this is – you guessed it – to extract the two elements merely from the first half of the shem, i.e., the two letters Yud and Heh.

It’s time to get a bit personal. Here goes:

In Part 1, we analyzed the statement of Rabbi Chananya ben Akashya (Makkos 23b) that G‑d wished to confer merit upon the Jewish people and, accordingly, He loaded us up with all kinds of virtue-heavy mitzvos and an inexhaustible program of Torah study and, as such, we are never lacking for scoring opportunities. We may not help but notice that this system seems to bypass a significant portion of the population (possibly the majority): those of the female persuasion.

Cherchez la femme!

Evidently, women have a very meager connection to the positive mitzvos. Indeed, there are but three positive mitzvos that are designated specifically for women (Challah, Nidah, and Neros) and two forms of obligatory korbanos. They are required to partake in matzo and marror on Pesach, kiddush on Friday nights, havdalah, birkat hamazon and mezuzah. (The issue of tefillah is a bit complicated.) They are also obligated in the Rabbinical mitzvos of megillah, Chanuka lights, four cups of wine on Pesach, and brachos. After these, the pickings are slim since women are exempt from many positive mitzvos and from Torah study, and are removed, although not really exempt, from many mitzvos that involve commerce, agriculture and warfare since they do not normally engage in these things.

Clearly, Rabbi Chananya ben Akashya’s uplifting homily does not endow the women with the full range of benefits. Could it be, as some feminists assert, that G-d is interested in a discriminatory system of virtue in an effort to bar women from Olam Habah?

I believe that most of us would consider such a notion patently ridiculous. Moreover, this assertion can hold true only if one believes that men and women are two distinct competing species of human-kind who manage to cohabitate when the conditions for such happen to be favorable. Furthermore, such an opinion relies on the assumption that G-d ‘Himself’ can be characterized as male in a biological sense. (See Shmos 15:3 and Rashi.)

Ironically, these (mis)conceptions are promoted mostly by those who consider themselves as liberal and egalitarian. Remember the old bumper sticker: “When G-d created man, She was only kidding!”?

The “chauvinistic” chareidim believe otherwise.

To review the question, I am asking that if, like Rabi Chananya ben Akashya, the purpose of such an extensive list of mitzvos is to give us maximal opportunity to merit Olam Habah, why are women “short-changed” and denied a large share of this opportunity? (Note – I am not asking, as the gemara in Berachos 17a asks, how do women merit Olam Habah if they have so few obligations? - but rather, why is it that they were not given as much opportunity as were the men?)

Numerous rabbinical scholars explain that men were created to civilize this world by engaging in industry, production, commerce, mastering the sciences, and, when necessary, warfare. To this end, it was necessary for Hashem to imbue man with fierce and passionate drives to motivate him to reach his full potential. These drives generally fall into three categories of lust: lust for wealth (kinah ­- envy), lust for physical pleasure (taavah - craving), and lust for glory and fame (kavod - honor).

Although these drives cause man to succeed in life, they are simultaneously tremendous obstacles for self-discipline and for forging a path to HKBH. To compensate for this shortcoming, Hashem gave us [men] a full spectrum of “channels” to Him in the hope that every man will find at least one that can suit him.

Conversely, women were not meant to be the instigators of all the above achievements and, therefore, there was no need for Hashem to instill in women these lustful drives at the same scale as men. As such, their conduit to G-d is not laden with obstacles to the same degree; hence, they have no need for such a full range of mitzvos.

While this explanation seems to adequately explain why it is not necessary that women should be as burdened as the men, it still falls somewhat short of explaining why they are held back from performing many of the mitzvos and getting reward. Of course, based on the response of the gemara in Berachos that I (parenthetically) alluded to earlier - that women merit Gan Eden by means of supporting, encouraging and enabling their menfolk to study and perform mitzvos - it follows that women are actually not excluded from any mitzvos, but rather, can be active participants in a supporting role. Still this avenue entails being fully dependent on the achievements of the men who, to be fair, do not always get the job done; and so I ask, why is it that women do not have their own access to these channels?

Perhaps, the rudiments of the Maharsha and the trend of our discussion can satisfy this question, as well.

Many readers may be familiar with the following discourse since it is a very popular generic “vordt” that is frequently presented at sheva berachos celebrations:

The gemara in Sota 17a states:

Man (Ish - איש) and Woman (Isha - אשה) - if they are worthy, G-d is with them; if they are unworthy, a fire (אש) consumes them.

Rashi explains that the Hebrew spelling of the word ish (man) is Aleph-Yud-Shin. The Hebrew spelling of the word isha (woman) is Aleph-Shin-Heh. They are essentially the same root, except that the man has a Yud and the woman has a Heh. The Hebrew letters Yud and Heh comprise an abbreviated version of Hashem’s name (KaH).

When man and woman are worthy, i.e., they conduct their relationship according to the Will of Hashem, they sustain G‑d’s presence between them and the letters Yud and Heh of Hashem’s name that He contributes to their essence is preserved and, in turn, preserves them.

If they are unworthy, He withdraws His presence and thereby withdraws the Yud that is His contribution to man and the Heh that is His contribution to woman. In both cases, the resulting essence are the Hebrew letters Aleph and Shin which spell out the Hebrew word esh אש (fire) to indicate that their relationship will transform into a fire of rage and consume them.

Typically, the homily ends here and the speaker goes on to hurriedly wrap up his speech and convey his blessings to the newlywed couple before the non-dairy frozen dessert completely melts into oblivion. But, for us chareidim, it may be a tad bit too soon to relax and enjoy the dessert. The discourse continues (I heard this from Rav Elya Svei, ZT”L at a sheva brachos):

Why exactly is it that, of the two special divine letters, the man is bequeathed the Yud and the woman is bequeathed the Heh?

For this we must study a passage in masechet Menachot 29b:

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi asked of Rabbi Ami: What is the meaning of the pasuk (Yeshaya 26:4), בטחו בה' עדי עד כי בי-ה ה' צור עולמים  

Have trust in G‑d for all Eternity for with Ya-H (the abbreviated name of G‑d that consists of a Yud and a Heh) G‑d has formed worlds…?

This concurs with the drasha of Rabbi Yehuda bar Rav Iloyi who expounded, “These are the two worlds that the Holy One created – Olam Hazeh and Olam Haba – one of which was created with the letter Heh (ה) and the other was created with the letter Yud (י); but I still cannot determine if the World to Come was created with a Yud and the present world was created with a Heh or vice-versa. When we find the pasuk (Breishis 2:4), These are the products of the heavens and the earth (i.e., this world) in the course of their creation (b’hibaraam) … and we expound “Do not read the word as b’hibaraam (in the course of their creation), but rather b’Heh baraam (with the letter Heh they were created)” I now understand that it is the present world that was created with the Heh and, consequently, the World to Come is created with the Yud.

And why was the present world created with a Heh? Because this world resembles a three-sided structure (i.e., a structure with a roof but with less than four walls that is not fully enclosed) that whoever wishes to exit may do so…and why is the World to Come created with a Yud? To symbolize that the righteous who inhabit it are few in number (as the letter Yud is the smallest of all Hebrew letters)…

Thus far, we understand that the letter Yud is symbolic of the Olam Habah and that the letter Heh is symbolic of Olam Hazeh. Now, let us note a passage in masechet Bava Metzia 59a:

And Rav said: All those who follow the counsel of their wives will eventually fall into Gehinnom as is written…Said Rav Pappa to Abaye: Is there not a popular adage, “If your wife is petite, [it is advisable to] bend over to whisper to her [to seek her opinion]”? This is not contradictory! This statement [of Rav] is regarding [outside] worldly matters, this statement [of Rav Pappa] is regarding household matters. Another version: This statement [of Rav] is regarding heavenly matters, this statement [of Rav Pappa] is regarding present-world matters.

If we consider the second version of the gemara’s solution, we can perceive a deeper reason why HKBH created mankind in two genders, male and female. (Of course, this is necessary for biological reasons, but the question is why such divergent personalities?)

Man (note - in this segment, I am being gender neutral referring to both male and female combined with the term “man” – this includes pronouns such as “he” and “him” or “his” and it holds true for the next six paragraphs) must simultaneously manage his status in two worlds – Olam Hazeh and Olam Haba.

His (and her) mission in Olam Hazeh is to maintain and enhance [quality of] life for himself and others. He does not need to actively acquire life or a life sustaining world as they are both already here. His job is to preserve this world and the life it supports. In short, his mission in regard to this world is a passive one of shemira (guarding or preserving) as is signified by the white of the tzitzis. In this world, Lo Yihiyeh dominates – do not do what is destructive to your existence.

Additionally, he (and she) has a second mission – to make use of this Olam Hazeh and his allotment of life to create and build an afterlife, an Olam Haba. This World to Come must be created and life therein must be earned. This is the zechira and assiya that is signified by the techeiles in the tzitzis that indicates that there is something active that must be done. This is dominated by Anochi – I am G-d who extricated you from the Land of Egypt to be your G-d. Come close to Me and prolong (immortalize) your existence.

The gemara in Berachos 61a states that initially the first Man was a man and woman fused together. One reason for this is that the Torah tells us that Man was created in G‑d’s image. This can be understood in a physical sense that just as Hashem is One and is neither distinctly male nor female but a (The) complete indivisible all-encompassing Being, the original Man was also a single complete physical being.

However, Man cannot be G‑d and Man cannot be One (capital "O"), Man is merely “one”. He who is One (HKBH) can think all thoughts, utter all words, hear all sounds, and be all places as One. He who is “one” (Man) can think one thought, utter one word, hear one sound, and be in only one place at any one time. Likewise, he can only focus his efforts on one goal at any given time. Yet, he has two missions or, as is the trend of this series, one complementary two-fold mission.

This two-fold mission is a bit too heavy for “one” Man to handle. G-d understands this and proclaims, “It is not good for Man to be by himself, I shall make for him a complement (ezer) who will be opposite him (kenegdo).”

Evidently, a two-fused-into-one being can only exist in G‑d’s realm where Anochi and Lo Yihiyeh are One and Zachor and Shamor are One (and, I suppose, white and techeiles are One) but not in this world where everything is merely “one”. Consequently, as with everything else we discussed, G‑d has to break down the intact entity into two sub-units and so He does. He makes “one” Man into two people: male and female – ish and isha.

Although they both have the same attributes of humans – intelligence, power of speech, free will, emotions, and consciously guided activities – they are designated for two distinct, yet complementary, purposes.

To the woman, the isha אש[ה], Hashem contributes the Heh, the Lo Yihiyeh Lecha. This is to signify that her primary function is to manage the shamor, the preservation of the integrity of this world. To the man, the ish א[י]ש, He contributes the Yud, the Anochi. This is to signify that his primary purpose is to enact the zachor and assiya, to create and acquire a share of the Eternal world.

True, both man and woman are cautioned to observe all the negative mitzvos. Nevertheless, man’s job is to distance himself from material involvement as if every day is Yom Kippur. Ideally, he should strive to live a life like Rabi Shimon bar Yochai who spent 13 years in a cave with no clothes, no gadgets, no women, and the barest minimum of food. In such a setting, negative commandments are a moot point as there is barely any opportunity to sin. He should focus on Torah study and the active performance of positive mitzvos. (Of course, he needs to get married.)

The woman has no such stipulation to engulf herself in “holiness”. She is entitled to and, as I am saying, expected to, spend the bulk of her time facing the challenges of the material world. Indeed, just as the woman is distanced, i.e., “out of proximity”, from the positive mitzvos, the man is meant to be distanced (out of proximity) from the negative mitzvos.

Thus we note that the complementary relationship between man and woman cannot be simply stated that he is the scholar (and/or breadwinner) and that she is the homemaker (and/or breadwinner), whereupon they combine their talents and mix and match their responsibilities to form a viable team. Rather, they are, each one, specifically groomed to specialize in a different phase of our two-phased objective. Hence, the gemara states that if they are worthy, they will complement each other (ezer); but if they are unworthy, they will instead become opponents (kenegdo).

Just as an army has ground forces and air forces and sea forces that do not oppose each other, but rather, complement each other, and that is what enables the army to succeed, so too, a man/woman union has Olam Hazeh forces and Olam Haba forces that are meant to complement each other and not oppose each other. It is only in this way that they can succeed as an integrated whole. It is obvious that the ground forces have no need for planes and the air forces have no need for tanks.

Woman, in her role as the complement (ezer) of Man, has no need for tzitzis, tefillin, minyanim and public Torah reading, sukka and lulav, etc., as they in no way assist her to accomplish her part of the joint mission. If a woman feels incomplete without assuming an active role in these activities, it is most likely because she is not successfully involved in a complementary relationship with her male counterpart (or does not have one). 

In such a situation, where Man does not live up to the obligations that are signified by the Yud and/or Woman does not preserve the integrity of the Heh, G‑d withdraws His deposit, the Yud and Heh, and goes Home. The couple has failed at their joint mission of creating and earning a World to Come. The alternative world is a world of fire.