Get Think Jewish Delivered to your Home or Office
HOME | CONTACT US | DONATE LoginLOGIN Ask the RabbiASK THE RABBI
Chabad.org - Torah, Judaism and Jewish Info Texts & Writings
 
Chabad.org » Learning & Values » Texts & Writings » Chassidic Texts » Crown Jewels » Shmos » Parshas Shmos
PrintSend this page to a friendShare thisSubscribe



Book Title Crown Jewels
From the talks of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
« Previous Next »

Parshas Shmos

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VI, p. 13ff.

I. The Talmud explains1 that the verse:2 “And they embit­tered their lives with mortar and bricks, and all [sorts of] work in the field, all their work...,” [reflects a sequence]. First, they compelled them to work with “mortar and bricks.” Afterwards, they were forced to do “all [sorts of] work in the field,” and ultimately,3 “all their work.”

The commentaries4 explain the Talmud’s intent as fol­lows: One might ask: Why does the verse single out “mortar and bricks”? Seemingly, these tasks are also included in “all their work.” Therefore the Talmud explains that “mortar and bricks” came first. It was the beginning of their “work in the field.” Therefore the verse mentions it (first and) as a separate category.

Every concept in the Torah is extremely precise. The fact that the work with “mortar and bricks” came first (and only afterwards came “all their work”) reflects more than chronological precedence. It was also the most significant and most difficult element of their enslavement. When describing the enslavement of the Jews in Egypt with a general statement, one would say that they performed work with “mortal and bricks.” Afterwards, as one begins to explain the various particulars, one would speak of their “work in the field.”

From this, we can conclude that even ultimately, when the Jews performed “all their work,” the core of their enslavement involved making bricks.5 This concept is also reflected in the ensuing phases of the narrative, for when Pharaoh desired to “make the work difficult for the men,”6 {— an event which took place in the final phases of the enslavement in Egypt, after Moshe and Aharon had already come to Pharaoh as G‑d’s emissaries and told him to release the people —} he sought to accomplish this, (not through any other type of work, but) through the task of making bricks. [He told his overseers] not to give the Jews any straw for the bricks, and yet to require them to produce the same quantity of bricks in the same given amount of time as they had previously.

Moreover, throughout the time of the enslavement, the Jews’ workday was primarily devoted to making bricks (although they also performed other tasks). This is understood from the interpretation the Midrash offers7 to the verse:8 “And the Egyptians made the children of Israel perform excruciating (lrpc) labor,” as lr vpc, “with a soft tongue,”9 [i.e., with deception]. Pharaoh himself took a basket and a rake and made bricks, and while performing this work, he told the Jewish people: “Work together with me today as a favor,” i.e., that they should follow his exam­ple and make bricks.10 [The Jews fell for his ploy, and] worked with him “with all their strength.” When night fell, Pharaoh had a reckoning made of the bricks and told the Jews: “Prepare this amount every day.”

Since every day, they had to prepare the same number of bricks that they had made on that first day when they had worked “with all their strength” for the entire day, it fol­lows that throughout the later time of their enslavement, the overwhelming majority of their time — indeed, it could almost be said their entire time11 — was spent making bricks.12 The other work which they performed was carried out during the few extra hours they had and at night.13

On this basis, we can appreciate why the Torah men­tions explicitly the Jews’ work “with bricks and mortar.” For even after they were compelled to perform “all their work,” their primary occupation was making bricks.

II. To explain why the fundamental aspect of the Jews’ en­slavement14 involved “mortar and bricks”: As stated on a different occasion at length,15 the explanation of the verse: “And Egypt enslaved the children of Israel... and they embittered their lives” [refers to the Jews’ spiritual vitality]. For the true vitality and the true energy of the Jewish peo­ple stems from holiness16 (from their G‑dly soul).17

The Egyptians desired [to subjugate this potential and] use it to build storage cities for Pharaoh. Instead of the Jews building a dwelling for G‑d, building “the city of our G‑d,”18 they were compelled by those “who cause them aggravation and distress”19 to use their holy powers to establish a dwelling for kelipah, “storage cities for Pharaoh.”

“One corresponds to the other.”20 “The city of our G‑d” is built from stone (just as a city is built from many houses, and the houses built from stone21 — for the fundamental strength of a house depends on the stones with which it is built).22 The cities of kelipah, by contrast (for kelipah copies holiness as a monkey mimics man23) [are built from bricks]. And thus the essential enslavement of the Jewish people involved making bricks (for “they used bricks in place of stones”24), the building blocks for the Egyptian cities.

On this basis, we can understand why “mortar and bricks” is mentioned before the general term “all of their work” (as mentioned in sec. I). For the inner meaning of every act that a person performs is building. When he per­forms a positive act, whether a mitzvah or an activity which is neither commanded or forbidden, but is carried out “for the sake of heaven”25 or [in a manner which fulfills the charge:26] “Know Him in all your ways,” he adds a stone to the building of holiness. And when he performs an undesir­able act, he adds a brick to the building of kelipah. The different nature of the activities is expressed in the type of building, but there is a common factor shared by all the ac­tivities, they are all building. (Positive activities are building Jerusalem, while negative activities are building Tyre.)27

III. Within stones themselves, there are two categories: stones and bricks. Stones are created by G‑d, while bricks are fashioned by man.28 The work performed by the Jews in Egypt centered primarily (not on using stones, but) on making bricks.

What is the difference between stones and bricks? Stones are created by G‑d and allude to a high level of holi­ness.29 Therefore, at the outset, the Beis HaMikdash was to be built from stone,30 and Eretz Yisrael is praised31 as “a land whose stones are iron.”

Bricks, by contrast, refer to activities which are reshus, neither commanded nor forbidden,32 but whose outcome — whether holiness or the opposite — depends on man’s intention.

{For this reason, we find that the prohibition against prostrating oneself with outstretched hands and legs applies only on a stone floor, and not on a brick floor.33 For the prohibition was instituted so that an activity — prostration — which resembles an activity performed in the Beis HaMik­dash34 should not be performed outside of the Beis HaMikdash. Since bricks do not allude to any element of holiness, prostrating oneself on a brick floor does not resemble the service of prostration performed in the Beis HaMikdash.}

Indeed, bricks have (the potential [to be used] for) the opposite of holiness.35 Thus the Talmud, when speaking about designating a false divinity,36 gives as an example:37 “He erected a brick.”38 A similar concept is reflected in Rashi’s commentary39 [explaining why the Tower of Bavel was built with bricks]: “For there are no stones in Bavel, for it is a valley.” Since Bavel (and any valley40) is a low place, a place where the Divine light is concealed, a place of dark­ness, to the extent that the Torah applies the phrase:41 “He set me down in a dark place,” to the Babylonian Talmud.42 Therefore the level of stones which are created by Heaven is not relevant to Bavel.

IV. Based on the above, it is possible to explain why the ar­duous labor the Jews had to perform in Egypt concerned bricks and not stones. Since the purpose of their work was to build “storage cities for Pharaoh,” the very opposite of “the city of our G‑d,” the building could not be performed with stones which reflect the realm of holiness, but rather with bricks, which are appropriate for “cities for Pharaoh.”

This explanation is, however, insufficient. For, as explained above, the intent of the Egyptians was to use the power and vitality of holiness the Jews possessed to build the cities of kelipah, as indicated by the verse: “And Egypt enslaved the children of Israel... and they embittered their lives.43 Thus it would seem appropriate that they would have sought (and indeed, with greater intensity44) to use stones for their cities, for this would have enabled them to derive nurture from the holiness contained in the stones which are created by G‑d.45

We must therefore say that the opposite is true. Despite the great advantage possessed by stones, bricks must con­tain an even greater quality. And because of that greater quality, the Egyptians so anxiously endeavored to make the Jews work (as their highest priority and for the most time) with bricks. For their intent was to introduce into the realm of kelipah the high spiritual level associated with bricks.

V. On the surface, it is possible to explain that the advan­tage possessed by bricks over stone (which, because of this advantage, the Egyptians desired to have the “storage cities for Pharaoh” built from bricks) is that their level is lower.

As is well known, “The Holy One, blessed be He, de­sired that He (blessed be He)46 have a dwelling in the lower realms.”47 As the Alter Rebbe (whose yahrzeit falls on Teves 2448) emphasizes,49 this refers to [our material world], for “there is no lower level below it.” Thus the lower the level that becomes a dwelling for G‑d, the deeper and more con­summate is the fulfillment of His will and intent. Thus building “the city of G‑d” with bricks, which are on a lower level, fulfills G‑d’s intent more than building it with stones.50

To cite a parallel: The Beis HaMikdash possesses an advantage over the Sanctuary which accompanied the Jews in the desert. The Sanctuary was a temporary dwelling for G‑d,51 and was built primarily from (boards of) cedar, i.e., from the plant kingdom. The Beis HaMikdash, by contrast, is G‑d’s permanent dwelling52 and it was built from stone,53 inanimate matter, which is lower54 than plants.55

In truth, however, this explanation is not sufficient. If this was the higher quality that bricks possess (and thus it would be fitting to build “the city of our G‑d” from bricks to fulfill G‑d’s intent for a dwelling in the lower worlds in a more consummate manner), the Egyptians (seeking to use the highest potentials the realm of holiness possesses for the purposes of kelipah) should have desired that the build­ing of the cities for Pharaoh, the cities of kelipah, be performed only (by Jews) using bricks. It does not seem appropriate, however, for them to have forced the Jews to make bricks.

The fact that the Egyptians did compel the Jews to per­form that activity — indeed, the fundamental element of their enslavement was directed toward that end56 — indi­cates that making bricks expresses the ultimate advantage [of a Jew’s service]. (And for that reason, the Egyptians compelled the Jews to make the bricks for Pharaoh’s cities, so that they could derive nurture from the elevated effect produced by that activity.)

VI. The elevated quality which is brought out by making bricks can be understood through the preface of a more detailed explanation of the difference between the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash stated above. [As men­tioned,] the Sanctuary was made primarily from plants, while the Beis HaMikdash was built from stone.

Were it true that the Sanctuary did not include inani­mate matter at all, one could say simply that it had not brought about a dwelling in the lower worlds. [For G‑d’s dwelling would not have encompassed] the realm of inani­mate matter, the lowest rung possible (and that would not be achieved until the building of the Beis HaMikdash). In truth, however, the Sanctuary also included inanimate matter, for the floor of the Sanctuary was from earth. And the earth was an integral element of the Sanctuary as a whole; it also contributed to the indwelling of G‑d’s Pres­ence, as evident from the verse:57 “And the priest will take from the earth on the floor of the Sanctuary.”

As such, since G‑dliness was drawn down to the lowest levels possible in the Sanctuary, why was the Sanctuary built from the plant kingdom instead of inanimate matter as was the Beis HaMikdash?


« Previous
Next »

PrintSend this page to a friendShare thisSubscribe
FOOTNOTES
1. Sotah 11b.
2. Shmos 1:14.
3. See Shmos Rabbah 1:11; see all the Chidushei Aggados of the Maharsha to Sotah, loc. cit., who interprets the Talmudic passage in this manner.
4. See the Chidushei Aggados, loc. cit.
5. As Rashi states in his commentary to Shmos 24:10: “The Jews were enslaved in making bricks.”
6. Shmos 5a.
7. Bamidbar Rabbah 15:20; Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Bahaaloscha, sec. 13; Tan­chuma, Buber edition, sec. 23; see also Shmos Rabbah, ch. 1.
8. Shmos 1:13.
9. See also Sotah 11b.
10. See ibid. 11a.
11. We cannot say that they spent the entire day making bricks. For during a portion of the day, they built the cities for Pharaoh.* [It can, however, be said that building the cities] is also included in the work “with mortar and bricks.” (See the Maharsha, loc. cit., who states that “in the beginning, they built cities for him.” [In that vein, the phrase “with mortar and bricks”] can be interpreted “with mortar” — to make bricks — and “with bricks” — to build cities from them.
The Ramban (in his commentary to Shmos 1:11) and the Or HaChayim (in his commentary to Shmos 1:14) state that building the cities is not included in the work “with bricks and mortar.” They explain that, at the outset, the Jews began building cities, and only afterwards, were they forced to make bricks. [Despite their interpretation,] the simple meaning of the Talmudic and Midrashic passages indicates that [brick-making was their first and primary task], as explained above. See the Or HaChayim (in his commentary to Shmos 1:11) who states “According to their interpretation, one must say that words [of deception] (lr vpc) preceded the imposition of taskmasters.”
* It cannot be said that the Jews built the cities after nightfall, because:
a) Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Vayeitzei, sec. 9, states that “the work in the field” was performed “after they returned to their homes in the evening.”
b) According to this, building the cities (“one of the primary tasks performed by the Jewish people”) is not at all mentioned in the verse “And they embit­tered their lives” (it is merely included as a secondary factor in “all their work”).
12. See Shmos Rabbah 1:12 [which states that the Egyptians told the Jews]: “If you go to sleep in your homes... you will not complete your quota.”
13. Bereishis Rabbah 27:2; Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Vayeitzei, sec. 9.
14. This refers to the enslavement of the Jewish people in Egypt in an actual physical sense, and the spiritual exile and exodus from Egypt which every person must undergo, for “Each and every day, a person is obligated to see himself as if he left Egypt today” (Tanya, ch. 47, note the explanation there).
15. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II, p. 848ff.
16. For with regard to the Torah and its mitzvos, it is said (daily liturgy, evening service): “For they are our lives.” See Kuntres U’Mayon, Discourse 7. See also the maamar entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu in the series of maamarim of that name from the year 5672 (ch. 2), which states: “For this reason, the type of activities in which a person is involved is very significant. For in each and every activity which a person performs, he introduces G‑dly power.” See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, p. 848, note 22.
17. See Tanya, chs. 9 and 12, et al.
18. Cf. Tehillim 48:2. Note the interpretation in the notes of the Tzemach Tzedek to the verse.
19. Bereishis Rabbah 16:4 states that all the gentile powers who cause the Jews aggravation (ohrhmn) are called Egypt (ohrmn).
20. [“The realm of unholiness corresponds to the realm of holiness” (Zohar, Vol. III, p. 47b, interpreting Koheles 7:14).]
21. See secs. 2 and 3 of the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar BiTziyon 5691, and sec. 3 of the maamar entitled Or LiArba Asor 5700, et al.
22. See Sefer HaYetzirah (the conclusion of ch. 4) which states: “Two stones build two houses....” Note also Negaim 12:2.
For this reason the Beis HaMikdash, the consummate expression of “the city of our G‑d,” Jerusalem, was built primarily of stone, as will be explained in secs. 5 and 8.
23. Zohar, Vol. II, p. 148b; Yahel Or, p. 358, which quotes our Sages’ comment (Midrash HaGadol), to Bereishis 5:3, [that between giving birth to Cain and Hevel and giving birth to Shes,] Adam fathered monkey-like creatures.
24. Cf. Bereishis 11:3. See Shaar HaPesukim, the beginning of Parshas Shmos, and Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos on the verse.
25. Avos 2:12.
26. Mishlei 3:6. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, pp. 907, 932.
27. See Rashi, Bereishis 25:23, based on Megillah 6a, and see also Zohar, Vol. II, pp. 236a, 240a, [which explain that building Jerusalem leads to the destruction of Tyre (Caesaria, according to some commentaries), and conversely, building Tyre leads uWj to the destruction of Jerusalem].
28. See Torah Or, p. 77c; Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos, p. 72c ff.; See also the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar cited above, sec. VII.
29. See the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar; Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos, and Torah Or, loc. cit.,
30. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 1:8.
31. Devarim 8:9.
32. See Torah Or, loc. cit.
33. Magen Avraham, Orach Chayim 131:20.
34. Rashi, Megillah 22b, entry lo osra. The Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Avodas Kochavim 6:6ff (note the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh), in contrast, explains that the prohibition was instituted because it was a pagan practice. Even accord­ing to this interpretation, it is possible to explain that the pagans adopted this method of worship because it was one of the services in the Beis HaMik­dash.
{[To cite a parallel: The prohibition of sacrificing on] a monument (which is mentioned before the prohibition of prostrating oneself on a stone floor in the Rambam) was “cherished by the Patriarchs” (Sifri, Devarim 16:22), [but was forbidden afterwards because it was adopted by the pagans]. It is possi­ble to explain that because it was cherished by the Patriarchs, it was adopted by the pagans (see Rashi, Devarim, loc. cit.; note also Or HaTorah, Vayeitzei, p. 198ff.).
It must, however, be noted that the Beis HaMikdash (where there was a stone floor) was built many years after the commandment against prostrating oneself on a stone floor was given.
35. See Pardes Shaar Erchi HaKinnuim, erech leveinah; (quoted in Or HaTorah, Shmos, p. 24, the maamar entitled Zos Chanukas 5640, the conclusion of ch. 14; see also the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar, sec. 17) which states that “A brick is from the side of impurity.”
36. [In a larger sense, this relates to all transgression, for when a person commits] even a minor transgression of a Rabbinic command, he becomes separate from the oneness and unity [of G‑d], just as through the actual worship of false divinities. (see Tanya, chs. 24-25).
37. See Avodah Zarah 46a (see also Sotah 47a, although in some printings it was eliminated by the censor [which states that one of Yehoshua ben Parchia’s students, presumably Yeshu of Nazareth, erected a brick and bowed down to it]).
Note also [the interpretation of] Eichah 3:38: “From the mouth of the Most High will not issue forth evil.”
38. See Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos, loc. cit.
39. To Bereishis 11:3.
40. Note Sisrei Torah to the Zohar, Vol. I, p. 75a, and our Sages’ statement (Eruvin 6a): “He found a bika, and established a fence,” [which interprets bika, the term interpreted here as valley, as open place”]. See also the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar, sec. 17, which interprets bika as referring to a place where there has been a rupture and there is separation.
41. Eichah 3:6.
42. [In its original, the sichah quotes the citation] as it appears in many sources within the maamarim of the Rebbeim. The concept is cited with this same wording in the Shaloh, Beis Chochmah (p. 16b) and Beis HaGadol (p. 36a). Sanhedrin 24a (quoted in the Shaloh, Shaar HaGadol (p. 35b) communicates the same concept using slightly different wording.
43. [Trans. Note: The italics, in the original text, emphasize that the Egyptians appreciated the holiness of the Jewish people and sought to derive nurture from that potential as mentioned in sec. II and the sources cited there.]
44. Compare to Tanya, Iggeres HaTeshuvah, the conclusion of ch. 6.
45. To cite a parallel: In his Shulchan Aruch, Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:3, the Alter Rebbe writes that before a wicked person turns to G‑d in teshuvah, the Torah and mitzvos he observes generate increased vitality in the realm of kelipah.
46. This parenthetic addition would frequently be made by the Rebbe Rashab. The intent is explained in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XIX, p. 27ff.
47. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Nasso, sec. 16; see also Bamidbar Rabbah 13:6.
48. Which in the year of his passing, 5573, fell on Motzo’ei Shabbos, Parshas Shmos.
49. Tanya, ch. 36.
50. See Menachos 82a which states that “Any sacrifice that is obligatory may only be brought from non-sacred [animals].” [Animals which are consecrated — and thus holier — are not fit to be used.]
51. See Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:16(3) which applies the verse (II Shmuel 7:6): “And I traveled in a tent,” to the Sanctuary. (See also Torah Or, Parshas Vayi­gash.)
52. See Shir HaShirim Rabbah, loc. cit., which applies the verse (Tehillim 132:14): “This is My resting place forever” to the Beis HaMikdash. (See also Torah Or, loc. cit.)
53. Indeed, it is forbidden to build with wood which projects outward in the Beis HaMikdash {Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 1:9 (this view is also accepted by the Raavad, see the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh) and Sefer HaChinuch, mitzvah 492, as cited in Torah Or, loc. cit.}.
54. The reason why the Beis HaMikdash was built with stones and not with bricks — although they are lower — is explained in note 95.
55. See the explanations in Torah Or, loc. cit., Toras Chayim, the maamar entitled Vayigash, sec. 8, and in the Siddur, p. 21b.
In Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 99d, and in Maamarei Admur HaZakein, Hana­chos R. Pinchas, p. 81, similar concepts are used to explain the advantage possessed by the Sanctuary of Shiloh over the Sanctuary in the desert. For in Shiloh, the walls were made of stone.*

* The standard text of Likkutei Torah states “curtains,” but that is a printing error as noted by the Rebbe Rashab printed at the back of Likkutei Torah.

56. As reflected in the sources mentioned in note 7.
57. Bamidbar 5:17.

From the talks of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson   More articles...  |   RSS Listing of Newest Articles by this Author
From the talks of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson; translated by Eli Touger

The content on this page is copyrighted by the author, publisher and/or Chabad.org, and is produced by Chabad.org. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with the copyright policy.
 


Shmos
Parshas Shmos
Parshas Beshallach
Parshas Yisro
Parshas Pekudei

Search Crown Jewels
 


Crown Jewels
  Selected from the Rebbe`s voluminous Likkutei Sichot, these "Crown Jewels" expound the most profound of Chasidic concepts, presented according to the Torah portions in which they originally appeared.

Sichos in English
 
Published and © Copyright by:
Sichos In English
788 Eastern Parkway
Brooklyn, NY 11213
718.778.5436
Email Us