Revelations

When Rabbi Sholom Ber of Lubavitch had his fourth or fifth birthday,[57] he visited his grandfather, the Tzemach Tzedek, on the Shabbos of the Torah portion Vayeira, in order to receive his grandfather's birthday blessing.

Upon entering his grandfather's room the child began to cry. When his grandfather asked him why he was crying, he answered that he had learned in cheder that G-d appeared to Avraham. He was crying because he could not understand why G-d appeared to Avraham but does not appear to us.

The Tzemach Tzedek responded: "When a Jew, a tzaddik, at the age of 99 decides that he should circumcise himself, he is deserving that G-d should appear to him."[58]

We must understand the following: "G-d appeared to Avraham" is mentioned twice in the previous Torah portion of Lech Lecha.[59] Why, then, the child's tears for G-d's appearance to Avraham and not appearing to him in relation to the verse in Vayeira and not to the earlier verses in Lech Lecha -- why didn't G-d's appearance there bring the child to tears?

We may answer quite simply that the child came to receive his birthday blessings on the Shabbos of his birthday, the Shabbos of Vayeira. Consequently, he asked his grandfather about that which he had just learned in Vayeira that G-d appeared to Avraham, giving rise to the question and tears of why G-d does not appear to him as well.

But the question still remains why the Tzemach Tzedek only responded to the question regarding why G-d appeared to Avraham in Vayeira and ignored the fact that G-d had also appeared to Avraham -- for completely different reasons, and even before he circumcised himself -- twice previously?

The Baal HaTurim[60] writes that the G-d's revelation to Avraham (in Vayeira) was in the merit of performing the mitzvah of circumcision.

We may then say that the complaint and cry of the child was that he, as well, has the very same merit of circumcision -- why doesn't G-d reveal Himself to him. To which the Tzemach Tzedek answered: That Avraham's circumcision possessed a far superior quality, inasmuch as he performed it at the age of ninety-nine.

This answer, however, is fraught with difficulty: Rashi[61] explains that G-d's appearance to Avraham was not merely a reward for his circumcision, but also to visit him while he was ill. Since Rashi created his commentary on the Torah also for a five-year-old, it follows that the child's question was also in accordance with Rashi's commentary.

Moreover, Sholom Ber, as a most precocious child, surely knew of the tremendous quality possessed by Avraham; most certainly he understood that Avraham's circumcision at ninety-nine was incomparably greater than an eight-day-olds circumcision. So, even according to the Baal HaTurim who posits that G-d's revelation was in merit of Avraham's circumcision, there would not be a comparison in the child's mind between his circumcision and Avraham's.

The answer is as follows. In point of fact, the child's lament resulted from his knowledge of Rashi's commentary -- that G-d visited Avraham because he was ill:

Without Rashi's commentary the child wouldn't have even thought to compare himself to Avraham -- that G-d should appear to him as well. However, asked the child, as Rashi explains that G-d's revelation to Avraham resulted not so much from Avraham's great qualities, but because a kind G-d performed an act of kindness, then why shouldn't He -- in His kindness -- appear to him as well.

[This also explains why there was no question -- nor any explanation given -- regarding G-d's two revelations to Avraham mentioned in the previous section of Lech Lecha: Those revelations directly related to Avraham's sterling qualities.]

The Tzemach Tzedek answered this question by saying to his grandson: "When a Jew, a tzaddik, at the age of 99 decides that he should circumcise himself, he is deserving that G-d should appear to him."

In effect, the Tzemach Tzedek told his grandchild that although G-d's appearance to Avraham was not so much a result of Avraham's qualities, but because of G-d's kindness, nevertheless, one must be worthy of this revelation -- one must be a fit vessel and receptacle to receive this degree of revelation.

How does one become "a fit vessel and receptacle"? By firmly resolving that no matter how lofty one's spiritual level, he always aspires to rise ever higher -- "a Jew, a tzaddik, at the age of 99 decides that he should circumcise (i.e., further elevate and refine) himself."[62]

Based on Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XX, pp. 61-64.

Signs and Traits

The Gemara states:[63] "This nation [the Jewish people] possesses three signs -- they are merciful, bashful, and benevolent. ... 'Benevolent', as the verse states,[64] 'For I know that he [Avraham] will command his children and household that they hew G-d's path of acting righteously and justly."

In Talmud Yerushalmi[65] and in various Midrashim[66] we find this thought stated slightly differently: "G-d gave Israel three gifts -- mercifulness, bashfulness and benevolence."

The Rambam,[67] in quoting this statement, changes the order of these traits by stating: "The signs of the Jewish people, the holy nation [are] 'bashful, merciful and benevolent.'" Why does the Rambam mention "bashful" before "merciful" when the primary sources have "merciful" preceding "bashful"?

When the Gemara states "This nation possesses three signs" rather than "three traits" and the like, it indicates that the emphasis is not on the qualities of the traits themselves, rather on how they serve as signs regarding another matter. Since all three traits are signs of one singular matter, it follows that all these traits emanate from one primary and singular quality.

In contrast, the statement that "G-d gave Israel three gifts" emphasizes the individual qualities of these traits. It follows, then, that each of these traits possesses a singular quality and merit; otherwise they would really be but one trait divided into three components

Accordingly, we can conduct ourselves with "mercifulness, bashfulness and benevolence" in one of two manners:

Ordinarily, these three traits are interdependent, one leading to the other: e.g., he who possesses a bashful and tender nature will be merciful; in turn, this will prompt him to act benevolently to those in need.

At times, however, these three traits are not intertwined -- one may act benevolently out of altruism, rather than out of compassion. For ultimately, "mercifulness, bashfulness and benevolence" are three distinct traits, for which reason each can well exist without the other.

This, then, is the difference between the statements as found in our Gemara, Talmud Bavli, and in Talmud Yerushalmi: The Yerushalmi stresses how each of these traits is a singular and unique quality and gift, for the Yerushalmi refers to three distinct and individual character traits.

According to the Bavli, however, they are "three signs" that denotes a lone trait. Consequently, these "signs" and qualities will emerge sequentially -- bashfulness precedes and leads to mercy, which in turn precedes and leads to benevolence.

Accordingly, we understand why the Rambam changes the order of these traits and mentions "bashful" before "merciful." By so doing, he emphasizes that we are speaking of "signs" that follow each other in a causal and sequential order, "bashful" leading to "merciful," leading to "benevolent," as explained above.

Moreover, the above order guarantees that these traits serve as true "signs" of the Jewish people:

One may act benevolently not out of compassion for the other -- the Jewish sign -- but because he wants be able to boast about his good deeds, or he wants to be honored and the like. So, too, compassion may result from egocentricity -- since he sees himself as all-important, he takes "pity" on lesser beings.

We may also understand the Rambam's order on an even deeper level. As mentioned above, these three signs serve as an indication of the central and essential quality of the Jew. What is this quality? It is the Jews' feeling of total self-abnegation before G-d and the realization that his entire purpose of existence is to serve G-d.

The Rambam therefore opens with the trait of "bashfulness," as this characteristic denotes the qualities of tenderness, gentleness and an absence of a haughty demeanor -- the quality of nullification of self -- in a patently revealed manner. This, therefore, is the first and primary sign of the Jew.

This sign reaches its full and complete state when the person's attribute of self-nullification permeates his entire being. As a consequence, this guarantees that the individual's acts of mercy and kindness are not a result of ego, but rather a result of his humility and self-effacement.

Our Gemara, on the other hand, prefaces "merciful" to "bashful," so as forewarn any "ego trip" that may result from a person's admirable actions. For when one's pity is aroused for another, the one who takes pity may think of himself as "better" than the person he pities.

The Gemara therefore has "bashful" following "merciful," to insinuate that specifically after feeling "sorry" for another, it is necessary to arouse within oneself a feeling of "bashfulness" and humility, so that one not be filled with pride, but with the essential Jewish quality of nullity and humility.

Based on Likkutei Sichos Vol. XXX, pp. 61-66

   

Notes:

57. (Back to text) Born on Chaf Cheshvan, 5621.

58. (Back to text) See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I, Vayeira; Vol. V, Chaf Cheshvan; ibid. p. 321; Vol. XV, Vayeira-Chaf Cheshvan. See also HaYom Yom p. 103.

59. (Back to text) 12:7, 17:1.

60. (Back to text) Beginning of Vayeira. See also Seforno and other commentaries. See also Bereishis Rabbah and commentaries, as well as Zohar, Vol. I, p. 88b ff.

61. (Back to text) Beginning of Vayeira.

62. (Back to text) See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I, p. 25ff.; Vol. V, p.87ff.; p. 321ff.

63. (Back to text) Yevamos 79a.

64. (Back to text) Vayeira 18:19

65. (Back to text) Kiddushin 4:1.

66. (Back to text) Devarim Rabbah 3:4; Midrash Tehillim, Mizmor 1 and Mizmor 17; Midrash Shmuel, ch. 28.

67. (Back to text) Hilchos Isurei Bi'ah, 19:17.