By Yochanan Gordon
Chazal in Midrash Tanchuma, Sh’mos, famously asserted, “Nisaveh Hakadosh Baruch Hu lihiyos lo dirah batachtonim,” G-d desired a dwelling place in the lowest realms of existence. The Lubavitcher Rebbe would analyze this statement many times and would add that the word tachton doesn’t just mean on earth as opposed to in the heavens, rather it would mean in the most ungodly realm within that designation of tachton.
There is a famous interpretation of the story of Adam and Chava eating from the Tree of Knowledge that has been put forth by Rabbi Manis Friedman who suggested that there is a lot more to the story buried within the text. Adam and Chava are commanded by G-d nine hours after He created them: From all of the trees in the Garden of Eden you can partake, but from the fruits of the Tree of Knowledge you may not eat from at risk of death. Adam and Chava eat from the Tree of Knowledge; G-d confronts Adam and he blames it on Chava who fed it to him. He then confronts Chava who blames it on the snake. G-d then punishes Adam to have to earn a living by the sweat of his brow, Chava with the pain of childbirth, and the snake with having to slither on its stomach.
It begs a few questions: Is G-d so unimpressive and ineffective that just one hour into the creation of mankind the one commandment He gave Adam and Chava was defied? When G-d spoke to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai the entire nation died and had to be brought back to life and here Adam can just defy the word of G-d outright, nine hours after he was created? Adam is tempted by a fig tree? He didn’t even have an evil inclination? He wasn’t traumatized by his mother or influenced by bad friends in a bad neighborhood? How does any of this make sense? And do you think Adam will be deterred by the risk of death? He was nine hours old, and even if he was fully mature at that point, do you think he had a survival instinct nine hours into his life? What kind of mixed message does it send Adam to say, “Don’t eat from the Tree of Knowledge, because the day you eat from it you will die.” What do you mean? There is a day that I will eat from it? It doesn’t say if you will eat from it, rather it says because the day you eat from it you will die.
Adam is so corrupt that when confronted by G-d he immediately blames Chava? Nine hours into his life and he already can’t be honest? That doesn’t say much for the human race. And then Chava blames the snake? This is weird! And then the consequences: by the sweat of your brow, you will eat bread. Woah! That wasn’t the deal! The deal was the day you eat from it you will die. Instead, He tells him first you will suffer and then you’ll die. It’s like the old bumper sticker: “First life stinks then you die.”
Where did Adam and Chava’s souls descend from? The story goes, there were two souls in heaven, a male and female soul, who were charged by G-d to be sent into a lower world of mortality with the mission of elevating it into an abode for G-d. They woke up in the Garden of Eden, were told about the trees that they were permitted to eat from and the one tree that they were prohibited to partake of, and Adam said to himself, “What is there to elevate if there are all of these kosher trees and one unkosher one?” Chava said, “It isn’t at all confusing. G-d wants us to eat from the one tree that He commanded us not to eat from because we were charged to elevate a mortal world, and we are as yet not in that mortal world.” Adam countered that G-d had placed them precisely where they were and therefore, He probably wanted them there. Chava said, “That isn’t the way it works. G-d takes you to where your mission is and you have to volunteer and cross the threshold into where that mission begins, but whether you cross into it or not is up to you.” Adam said, “You know, it makes a lot of sense.” So, they ate from the tree.
G-d confronts Adam and says, “You ate from the tree I told you not to eat from.” We assume that G-d is shouting at them, but that is only one interpretation and isn’t necessarily so. In fact, G-d was amazed that Adam intuited His will that they eat from the tree and asked him how he knew that was what He really wanted them to do? Adam said, “I didn’t know, Chava knew.” So, G-d turned to Chava seeking to discover how she knew His true will despite being told the opposite and she said, “I actually knew it from the snake who said, ‘The day you eat from the fruit of the tree you will be like G-d who knows good and evil.’ When I heard good and evil I understood that was a realm that required fixing.” Hearing that, G-d was pleased. He said, “That’s great! That is exactly what I meant when I said it isn’t good for man to be alone because Adam on his own would never have eaten from the fruit of the tree of knowledge.” G-d then asked them if they were really up to the challenge, reiterating to them the downside of entering the space they were about to go to. They said if that is where you need us to go then that is where we will go. G-d too expressed the fact that it wasn’t what He necessarily wanted but stressed that it was needed in order to rectify reality. Although we are used to referring to this act as a sin, the truth is that the word cheit means a step down and Adam and Eve took a giant step down for G-d but it definitely wasn’t a sin and that’s why G-d was not angry with them.
This is not the story in the conventional sense in the manner that we were taught to view it. However, instead of painting G-d as a vengeful G-d looking down from on high to see who He can smite for transgressing His will, it portrays Him as a vulnerable G-d with deep appreciation for the risks that Adam and Chava were willing to undergo on His behalf. Another Jewish experience that was turned on its head after many years of being viewed in a much more unpalatable manner was the month of Elul, which for very long had a reputation of dread and fire and brimstone in earshot of the month of Tishrei and the days of awe and judgment. The Alter Rebbe of Chabad portrayed the month in a much friendlier manner with the teaching that Ani ledodi v’dodi li comprises the word Elul, which describes a relationship between lovers. The Rebbe goes on to describe an analogy of a King who leaves his palace to venture out into the field, giving an opportunity for all those who would normally not have access to Him to be greeted by Him jovially outside of His regular, intimidating environs. In fact, the month of Elul, in the maamar of the Alter Rebbe is described as a month influenced by the thirteen attributes of mercy that emanate into the world. Just this year, for the first time, I heard an insight into what brought G-d out of His palace and into the field, which kind of furthers this description of G-d’s vulnerability. In the months of Tammuz and Av Jerusalem was besieged and the Temples ultimately destroyed. So comes the month of Elul and G-d, without a home to reside in, ventures into the field seeking a home where he can make His residence.
I was thinking that the word Bereishis, which is the parashah that we start to read from again at the end of Tishrei after the month of holidays that we are on the threshold of, comprises the words rosh bayis, which means the head of the house or perhaps the beginning of His residence. The message that was coming to me within all of this is that G-d’s Temples were destroyed and he was left homeless but ultimately he sought residence within the hearts of his people as the verse states, “And build for me a Temple and I will dwell among you,” which our sages teach “I will dwell among you rather than in the Temple,” implying that the residence that G-d seeks is in each of our hearts.
With the arrival of Sukkos after Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur we too leave our permanent homes and dwell vulnerably in flimsy huts in which we hold the four species, waving them in all of the directions. The Chasidic masters teach this is meant to draw down and internalize the enveloping light of G-d within ourselves, in a sense inviting G-d in His transcendence into the temple within each of us that was constructed throughout the month of Tishrei and in response to the destruction of His temples in the month of Av. Like the reframing of the story of the sin of the fruit of the tree of good and evil, looking at it instead as an act of selflessness of Adam and Chava to do G-d’s bidding in creating a dwelling place for the Divine in an ungodly world, ultimately the dwelling place of G-d, which for a total of 820 years was housed in the two Batei Mikdash until they were destroyed, giving way for a dimensionless temple built within the hearts of the Jewish people. The destruction of the Temple was a tragic event, no doubt, which was precipitated by what our sages identify as certain imperfections that banished G-d’s glory from within our midst, which we mourn and cry over. However, the Chasidic decorum see the siege of Jerusalem as the beginning of a prophecy that removes the glory from within a defined space and expands it throughout all of the world, as the verse states, prazos teishev Yerushalayim and the Gemara says, “In the future the borders of Eretz Yisrael will expand to permeate the entire world.”
In the parshios that we are currently reading, the Torah begins narrating the demise of Moshe Rabbeinu and tapping Yehoshua as his successor. Famously, at the end of parashas Vezos Habrachah, which we read on Simchas Torah, which is the culmination of the holidays of Tishrei, the Torah writes, “Lo yada ish es kevuraso ad hayom hazeh,” meaning, there is no evidence of Moshe Rabbeinu’s burial. We know that he passed away because he was commanded up the mountain by G-d, and the Torah identifies pretty specifically the place of his burial. However, I was thinking, although I am the furthest thing from a grammarian, the term kevuraso to describe a lack of knowledge regarding Moshe’s burial place does not seem appropriate. I might have said, makom kevuraso shel Moshe. Why kevuraso? Chazal say, “Kasha siluko shel tzaddikim k’sreifas beis Elokeinu,” which means the removal of tzaddikim is as difficult, or perhaps according to another version, even more difficult and disorienting for our world, as the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. Yet, the sefer Meor Einayim, written by Rav Nochum Chernobyler and the Komarna in Heichal Haberacha record an idea on the words, “V’lo yada ish es kevuraso,” meaning his burial place is elusive because he’s buried in the heart of each individual of Klal Yisrael. This means that despite the disorientation that the removal of tzaddikim causes in this world and despite the fact that Moshe was mourned for thirty days, Moshe’s impact on the world and the way he related to each individual of Klal Yisrael did not wane because he was interred in every single heart.
We believe that Moshiach is going to come, and G-d will present us with a third physical Temple but that Temple, which our sages teach will be greater and far more impressive than its precursors, will only be a physical manifestation of the Temple that exists in our hearts and our minds. In fact, in the Kabbalah seforim, especially in the works of the Arizal, the mitzvah of sounding the shofar on Rosh Hashanah is for the purpose of building Chava from the rib of Adam while Adam Harishon is awake as opposed to asleep. Building Chava is the embodiment of malchus. Our objective on Rosh Hashanah in order to counteract the prosecution of the Eigel Hazahav, which is the reason why we blow a ram’s horn rather than that of a cow as well as the reason that the High Priest does the service in the Holy of Holies in white garments rather than with gold garments, is in order to build the side of malchus, which is Knesses Yisrael, all the while that Adam is awake. Building malchus with Adam awake is a yichud of Ha-vayah and Elokim, as we say at the pinnacle of Neilah, “Ha-vayah hu ha’Elokim,” which is yichud dodim ani ledodi v’dodi li at one and the same time, which is Moshiach and Beis HaMikdash, which we should merit to see with our physical eyes soon in our days. n
Yochanan Gordon can be reached at ygordon5t@gmail.com. Read more of Yochanan’s articles at 5TJT.com.
