Bereishis: Making Eretz Yisrael Our Spiritual Inheritance

As has been mentioned several times,5 the fundamental purpose of Rashi’s commentary on the Torah is to explain the simple meaning of the verse, phrase, or word he focuses on. In many places6 Rashi himself emphasizes that this is his objective. Nevertheless, his commentary also includes and alludes to “wondrous concepts” from all the other levels of interpretation of the Torah, as stated by Shelah.7 And his commentary includes even “the secrets of the Torah,” as reflected in the Alter Rebbe’s adage8 that Rashi’s commentary on the Chumash is “the wine of the Torah.”

If the above applies to Rashi’s commentary as a whole, it certainly applies to the first passage in his commentary,9 for often the fundamental thrust of a subject is alluded to at its beginning.10 Thus, it is understood that “the wine of the Torah” (and the instruction) that stems from this passage (being that it is the beginning of Rashi’s commentary on Scripture as a whole) addresses itself not solely to an individual insight, but rather to a concept of general scope that applies to the totality of the Torah and its mitzvos.

Rashi begins his commentary on the Torah as follows:11

Rabbi Yitzchak commented: “It would seem that the Torah should only have begun from ‘This month shall be for you,’12 for it is the first commandment given to Israel, the Jewish people. Why did G‑d begin the Torah with ‘In the beginning?’ Because of the message implied by the verse,13 ‘The strength of His works He related to His people, to give them the inheritance of nations.’

“If the nations of the world will tell Israel, ‘You are robbers, for you conquered the lands of seven nations,’ Israel will respond to their accusation, ‘The entire earth belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He; He created it and gave it to whomever He deemed proper. When He so desired He gave it to those nations, and when He so desired, He took it away from them and gave it to us.’ ”

The lesson (“the wine of the Torah”)14 to be derived from this teaching is clear:

A person need not be alarmed when confronted by opposition to the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos. Therefore, the Jewish people need not be troubled when the nations of the world approach them and argue that it is not necessary to fulfill the Torah’s commands, since (as they see it) those commandments run contrary to logic and justice (as was their complaint regarding the Jewish people’s conquest of Eretz Yisrael, which also was G‑d’s command). On the contrary, the Jewish people should strengthen their observance of the Torah and its mitzvos15 and respond to the nations by saying that the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos is G‑d’s will, and observing them fulfills G‑d’s desire. Therefore, the fact that mortal wisdom does not comprehend their value is of no consequence.

However, especially since this is Rashi’s opening commentary, it can be assumed that in addition to this general lesson, the individual points that Rashi includes contain guidance for us and, in this instance, guidance of a general nature.

One of the primary and fundamental elements of Rashi’s commentary is the prooftext that he cites, “The strength of His works He related to His people, to give them the inheritance of nations.” This verse serves as the basis for refuting the claims of the non-Jewish nations. Clearly, it provides a wide-ranging directive for a person’s Divine service. It is thus necessary to understand:

a) What is this directive?

b) What inference can be drawn from the wording “the strength of His works”? Seemingly, the intent is that the knowledge that all existence is the work of G‑d, that He created the world, leads to the realization that as such, He has the authority and the right to grant the Jewish people “the inheritance of nations.” What does the word “strength” come to teach us?

c) The Hebrew verb that Scripture most commonly employs to describe communication is אמר, “said” (as used several times in this Torah reading; indeed, in this very passage the Midrash later states, “Israel will say to them”). In other instances it uses the verbדיבר, “spoke,” or סיפר, “told.” The verbהגיד, “related,” is seldom employed. Why, then in this instance, does the prooftext verse cited by the Midrash and Rashi employ this rarely used term?

The above questions can be resolved by first explaining the spiritual dimension of Eretz Yisrael: The uniqueness of Eretz Yisrael is reflected in its description as “the land that… the eyes of G‑d, your L-rd, survey, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year,”16 i.e., G‑d’s providence is focused on Eretz Yisrael in a revealed manner (to a greater degree than on other lands).17 Even in regard to material matters, G‑d’s light is felt more cogently in Eretz Yisrael.

Furthermore, since “the eyes of G‑d, your L-rd, survey” it, inherently (i.e., but for the fact that man has free choice to act contrary to G‑d’s will), evil and the opposite of holiness have no place in Eretz Yisrael, for G‑d is “of pure eyes, incapable of seeing evil.”18

The spiritual counterpart of Eretz Yisrael in a person’s service of His Creator is a state of perfection in the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos, which in turn elicits the revelation of G‑dliness and negates evil. This concept is alluded to in the very name Eretz Yisrael. Our Sages stated,19 “Why was it called eretz, ‘the land’? Because ratztah, ‘it desired,’ to carry out the will of its Creator.” Similarly, the name Yisrael reflects a connection to the Torah (and its mitzvos), for as is well known,20ישראל, Yisrael, is an acronym formed from the initial letters of the words of the phrase יש ששים רבוא אותיות לתורה, “The Torah contains 600,000 letters.” (In the Torah – through the various combinations of these letters – all the mitzvos are explained.)

On the physical plane, Eretz Yisrael was first apportioned to Shem21 and his descendants, and only afterwards conquered by the Canaanites.22 In order to restore it to its rightful owners and transform it (from being the land of Canaan) to the Land of Israel, it was necessary to conquer it from the seven nations. Similarly, on the spiritual plane, in addition to the general concept that there exists a spiritual counterpart to Eretz Yisrael in our Divine service, there is also a spiritual counterpart to the conquest of Eretz Yisrael.

By way of explanation: In addition to carrying out one’s Divine service in observing the Torah and its mitzvos (the spiritual parallel of Eretz Yisrael), every person is commanded to conduct his daily life so that “all your deeds be for the sake of Heaven”23 and so that he will “know Him in all your ways.”24 G‑d must be served not only through prayer, the study of the Torah, and the fulfillment of the mitzvos, but also through all the mundane activities and deeds that a person performs throughout the twenty-four hours of the day, i.e., even through activities performed for the purpose of satisfying his physical needs and for his material benefit.

Such Divine service is to be carried out in the loftiest manner possible,25 to the extent that all one’s physical activities be subsumed in and unified with G‑dliness. The very existence of these physical activities is to be transformed into holiness, to the extent that one does not feel their material dimensions at all. Moreover, this reorientation in outlook should come about not only due to the light of holiness shining within the person as a result of the person being entirely dedicated and committed to G‑dliness, “knowing G‑d” – which implies connection and bonding26 – but also because the physical entity itself has been transformed into a manifestation of holiness.

{The theme of conquest should also be expressed not only in serving G‑d while in the midst of involvement with material matters, but also – from time to time – by “stealing” from the time designated for eating, drinking, sleeping, and the like, and “conquering” them for the sake of studying the Torah and observing its mitzvos.}

This is the counterpart of conquering Eretz Yisrael in one’s spiritual service: conquering the worldly modes of conduct from the prevailing norms of the nations at large and transforming them into Eretz Yisrael. Even the very physical being of the world (those aspects that are not associated with a mitzvah) is to be conquered and transformed into holiness.27

The above explanation enables one to appreciate the adage with which the Rebbeim28 would respond to several Jews who approached them asking for permission and blessing when they wished to make aliyah to Eretz Yisrael, “Make Eretz Yisrael here.” The intent of the Rebbeim was not only that these individuals create an environment of Eretz Yisrael in their present location in a spiritual sense, through performing and observing the Torah and its mitzvos, but also that they carry out the spiritual counterpart of the conquest of Eretz Yisrael, transforming (conquering) the very physical existence of the lands “here,” in the Diaspora, into Eretz Yisrael. (This is implied by the word “make.”) Even involvement with one’s own affairs and physical necessities is to be carried out in a manner that reflects how he is “performing the will of the Omnipresent,”29 revealing G‑d’s light and desire in matters whose entire existence (their “place”) bespeaks physicality.

The conquest of Eretz Yisrael by the Jewish people following the Exodus serves as a paradigm for every individual Jew’s challenge to conquer his personal Eretz Yisrael. The journey of the Jewish people to conquer Eretz Yisrael was delayed by the sin of the spies.30 The spies argued that it is impossible to conquer Eretz Yisrael, claiming that the Canaanite nations “are stronger than us.”31Moreover, our Sages32 interpret the spies’ use of the word ממנו, ordinarily translated as “than us,” as implying “than Him.” The spies were saying, “It is as if the Master cannot remove His possessions from there,” i.e., that G‑d could not, as it were, conquer Eretz Yisrael and remove the other nations from it.

On the surface this is difficult to comprehend: Initially, when chosen by Moshe, the spies were virtuous.33 How could they afterwards have denied G‑d’s power? How could such a polar reorientation of their outlook have occurred? Moreover, even while sinning they referred to G‑d as “the Master”. How, then, could they not have had faith in His power to conquer Eretz Yisrael?

To resolve the above questions as they pertain to our spiritual service: The spies questioned the possibility of conquering Eretz Yisrael – i.e., the possibility of serving G‑d through conquering physical matters and transforming them into holiness – to the extent that physical matters in and of themselves be of no import whatsoever. The spies thought that this was simply not possible. Their argument was that G‑d created the body and the material environment in which we live. He commanded us in His Torah,34 “And you shall guard your lives carefully,” i.e., that one must preserve his health. And Torah law prescribes (in Rambam’s words)35 that “The health and wholeness of the body are among the paths of (the service of)36 G‑d.” Moreover, there is a well-known teaching of the Baal Shem Tov37 on the verse,38 “When you see the donkey of one who hates you lying under its burden, would you refrain from helping him?! You must certainly help him” – that the body must be helped, not broken. And (there is also a well-known adage of the Maggid of Mezritch),39 “When a small hole develops in the body, a large hole develops in the soul.” Furthermore (we are instructed by our Sages40), “Do not rely on miracles,” implying that G‑d established the nature of the world in a manner that requires a person to consider it substantial and to ascribe to it significance. This being the case, physical entities are G‑d’s mediums, and involvement in them is also G‑d’s will. How, then, can the G‑dly soul, even though it is an actual part of G‑d from Above,41 conquer physicality, deny its existence, and regard physical matters as matters of holiness? Seemingly, this is the opposite of the nature with which G‑d endowed the world.

Moreover, since G‑d created the nature of the world in a manner in which it possesses a degree of intrinsic importance and significance, it would appear that this is precisely the nature of material existence that G‑d desired. If so, how is it possible to draw down spirituality and holiness into such existence? Seemingly, the nature of the world is not capable of incorporating such influences within itself.

True, G‑d is capable of doing anything He desires. Nevertheless, since He limited Himself, as it were, when He established the rules of nature, He seemingly set bounds on His own power. Thus, the spies thought that even though He is “the Master,” He “cannot remove His possessions.” To cite a parallel, our Sages relate42 that after G‑d took an oath, He could not, as it were, alter it.43 Therefore, the spies argued, the Jews should remain in the desert and serve G‑d by carrying out the Torah and its mitzvos there (but not by undertaking the service of conquering Eretz Yisrael).

The spies’ assertion (that the Jews should remain in the desert) was predicated on the same argument: the desert is not a place of human habitation,44 crops cannot be sown there,45 there is no water, etc.46 The spiritual counterpart of the desert is a time and a situation where man do not need to (according to the ordinary pattern of the world) involve himself in mundane physical activity and promote a pattern of stable and settled life.

This was the spies’ claim: the service of G‑d should solely involve the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos. This is possible in the desert,47 in a situation where one is unencumbered by the need to occupy himself with providing even his basic physical necessities.48In contrast, when one enters “the lands of the nations,” i.e., when confronted with situations in which ordinary physical realities and norms prevail, since those realities and norms are G‑d’s “possessions,” i.e., structured according to His will, it is impossible to entirely subjugate them to the power of holiness and nullify their material orientation.

In truth, however, the spies were operating under a grave misconception, for the ultimate intent of the creation of material existence, as well as the ultimate intent of G‑d’s commandment that man occupy himself with it, is to draw down holiness into it and thereby fulfill G‑d’s desire for a dwelling in the lowest of realms.49

The entire raison d’être of physical existence is to satisfy G‑d’s desire to transform the lower realms (i.e., material existence) into a dwelling for Himself. In that vein our Sages50interpret the word בראשית as ב׳ראשית, “there are two ‘firsts,’” and explain that all existence was created “for the sake of the Torah, which is called ‘first,’ and for the sake of the Jewish people, who are called ‘first.’ ”

(Since this is G‑d’s ultimate intent,) all existence is actually a medium for the light of holiness. Therefore, not only can the Jewish people conquer the lands of nations and transform them into Eretz Yisrael; they are obligated to do so. For, as explained above, through such efforts (to a greater degree than by carrying out their Divine service in matters that are inherently holy) they satisfy G‑d’s desire to make the lowest of realms – the lowest possible form of existence – into a dwelling for G‑d.

The claim of the nations of the world mentioned in Rashi’s commentary is an extension of the claim of the spies. When a person studies the Torah, prays, and performs mitzvos but does not involve himself in worldly activities, the nations of the world may concede that a person could feel G‑dly light and holiness. However, in parallel, the nations maintain that when one is involved in worldly activities it is not possible to be occupied in Divine service. In such situations, they say, one must follow the prevailing norms of the world at large. Therefore, the nations tell the Jewish people, “You are robbers, for you conquered the lands of seven nations,” i.e., in material matters (the lands of seven nations) one should not introduce holiness and the service of G‑d. These worldly matters, they argue, have their own norms and nature, which were established according to G‑d’s will, to refer back to the wording of the Midrash, “When He so desired, He gave it to those nations.”

On the contrary, such worldly norms appear to deserve precedence over the Torah and its mitzvos,51 as reflected in the order of the Torah itself: The Torah begins with the creation of the world and the natural order that characterizes it. Only afterwards, (and indeed, after more than an entire book of the Torah,) does it relate the first of the mitzvos, “This month shall be for you....”

Nevertheless, the entire claim of the nations is erroneous, for as previously stated, G‑d’s ultimate intent and desire for material existence were solely that it be transformed into a “dwelling for Him in the lower realms.”

On this basis, it is possible to understand the emphasis on the word “strength” in the verse “The strength of His works He related (הגיד) to His people.”

In order to refute the claims and arguments of the nations of the world, it is not sufficient to know that all existence is “His works.” On the contrary, this is the very foundation of the nations’ claim: Since all material existence is G‑d’s works, if one seeks to employ it for holiness, then it follows that “You are robbers, for you conquered the lands of seven nations,” i.e., the Jewish people are acting in direct opposition to the world’s natural form of existence by entering into an area that is not their domain.

In order to counter that argument, one must realize that “the strength” – the inner intent and motivating purpose52 – of “His works” was “related to His people.”

The verse employs the verb הגיד, “related,” and not אמר, “told,” because הגיד connotes “conveyed.”53G‑d conveyed and transmitted the strength – the inner motivating force of His works – to His people. This is what enables the Divine service of the Jewish people to transform G‑d’s “works” – material existence –
into holiness. In this way He granted them “the inheritance of nations.”

Based on the above the protracted wording of Rashi’s rhetorical question can be clearly understood: “It would seem that the Torah should have begun with ‘This month shall be for you,’ for it was the first commandment given to Israel. Why did G‑d begin the Torah with ‘In the beginning?’ ” The elaboration appears superfluous. Seemingly, Rashi should have said: “The Torah began with ‘In the beginning’ rather than with ‘This month shall be for you’ because….”

However, Rashi was emphasizing that the world was created by G‑d with a material nature that appears to be more closely related to that of the nations of the world. (True, the ultimate intent and purpose of all existence are the Torah and its mitzvos, and they are – like “the first commandment” – given solely to the Jewish people.) Nevertheless, outwardly, the material nature of existence features prominently, so that (toil and) conquest is necessary to refute the claim of the nations of the world, who assert that “… the Torah should have begun with ‘This month shall be for you,’ ” i.e., the Torah should concern itself only with matters that are spiritual, not with the material dimensions of existence.

A Jew can respond to and refute this argument by explaining that the Torah (which is the “strength” and purpose of G‑d’s works) begins with “In the beginning.” This indicates that the Torah’s ultimate intent is to negate the possibility that “His works” – material existence – conceal “His strength,” the motivating intent behind all creation.

Therefore, the Torah begins with “His works,” the account of Creation, to relate – and thereby draw down and reveal – “the strength of His works,” the power and purpose motivating all existence, which is to draw down G‑dliness into material existence.

Adapted from a sichah delivered on Shabbos Parshas Bereishis, 5731 [1970] (Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 10, p. 1ff.)