Hirsch on Animal Logic and Human Morality

Bereishit 3:1 “Now the serpent was more cunning than any animal of the field that G-d had made, and it said to the woman: Even if G-d has said so, are you [really] not to eat from all the trees of the garden?”

The difference between man and animal is the touchstone of human morality. The logic of an animal persuaded the first man to deviate from the path of duty; today this same animal logic still serves as midwife to all human sin. The story of the first sin is the story of all subsequent sins.

The animals are truly כֵּאלֹהִים יֹדְעֵי טוֹב וָרָע, like angels, knowing good and evil (Bereishit 3:5). They are endowed with instinct, and this instinct is the voice of G-d, the Will of G-d as it applies to them.   Whatever animals do is in accordance with their instinct; they can act only in accordance with their instinct.  For animals, this instinct is Divine guidance operating within them. What animals do in accordance with their instinct is good, and any act from which their instinct restrains them is bad. Animals cannot err; they have only one nature, whose call they must heed.

Not so in the case of man. He is to opt for the good and shun evil out of his own free will and sense of duty. Even when he gives his physical nature its due, he must do so not because of the allure of his senses, but out of a sense of duty. Even when he takes physical pleasure, he must act in moral freedom. Man must never be an animal. Therefore, he has within him Divine forces besides physical drives. His physical nature must of necessity be opposed to the good and attracted to evil; only thus will he choose the good and shun evil – not because of the urging of his senses, but in spite of it.  Through the freedom of his Divine nature, he is to fulfill his lofty Divine calling. For this reason, the voice of G-d does not speak from within him, but to him, telling him what is good and what is evil. G-d’s voice meets resistance from man’s physical nature, as long as this nature remains independent and without guidance. G-d’s voice that whispers within man – the innate conscience, whose messenger is the sense of shame – serves only to warn man, in general terms, to do good and shun evil. Precisely which acts are good and which evil – this he can learn only from the mouth of G-d speaking to him from outside himself. 

The animal merely develops its physical nature, to which its intelligence is completely subservient. Man however was not placed in Paradise to satisfy his physical nature with the delights offered there. He was placed in Paradise laavoda u’leshamra, to serve G-d there and to build His world. This service is man’s task, and only for its sake was he permitted to partake of the fruits of Paradise.

The individual nature of the animal is the basis on which it assesses everything, because the animal was created only for itself. Man, however, was created to glorify G-d and to build His world. He must gladly sacrifice his individual nature to this higher calling. He must learn what is good and what is evil, not in accordance with his individual nature, but in accordance with his lofty calling. For this reason, the tree was appealing to his senses, and its fruit was enticing to him. Everything in his individual nature told him: “This is good.” But G-d’s Word to him forbade him to eat of the fruit of this tree and told him that to do so would be evil. This was the rule by which man was to differentiate between good and evil; this was the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  Our Sages, too, see in G-d’s Word to man the revelation of all of man’s duties.

At this point, man encountered animal logic in the form of its cleverest representative: the serpent. Even the cleverest of animals is incapable of understanding how man can possibly forgo a pleasure that becomes available to him.

3:1 אַף כִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהִים “Even if G-d has said so” The dialogue begins with the conversation in full swing. Man has already explained that he must refrain from eating because G-d has commanded him to refrain. “Even if G-d has said so, does that mean that you must really obey? Is not the urge within you also the voice of G-d? If it were indeed bad for you to partake of this fruit, why did G-d make the fruit so appealing and arouse within you the desire to eat it? Isn’t He thus clearly telling you that you and this pleasure were made for each other? Isn’t this voice His earlier and clearer voice? Would G-d create such delights and cause you to desire them – only to forbid them to you?”

Thus spoke the serpent, and thus animal logic still speaks to us today – in straightforward terms or in philosophical guise – whenever an express command from G-d prohibits us from partaking of a pleasure. As the serpent did then, so animal logic today employs exaggeration. Little is prohibited and much is permitted, yet animal logical sees only prohibitions, and presents G-d’s moral law as the enemy of all sensual pleasure.

 

Torah is teaching us that the true knowledge and wisdom only comes from G-d, the loud voice of the revelation on Mount Sinai in the midst of fire, thunder and lightning, and the quiet voice of consciousness within the listening heart, lev shomea.  As the wisest of man king Shlomo concluded in Kohelet: The end of the matter, everything having been heard, fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the entire man.

Hirsch on Knowledge of Good and Bad

Bereishit 2:9 וַיַּצְמַח יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים מִן הָאֲדָמָה כָּל עֵץ נֶחְמָד לְמַרְאֶה וְטוֹב לְמַאֲכָל וְעֵץ הַחַיִּים בְּתוֹךְ הַגָּן וְעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע

And the Lord God caused to sprout from the ground every tree pleasant to see and good to eat, and the Tree of Life in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.

There are those who presume that only by partaking of the fruit of the וְעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע was man enabled to know good and evil; but as long as he had not yet eaten from the tree, he could not distinguish between good and evil. And so do some of our philosophers teach: until partaking of this fruit, man know only theoretical differentiation - truth from falsehood; but the concept of “good” and “bad”, which belong to the realm of practical reason, were utterly foreign to him.

This interpretation however does not appear to be correct. Freedom of choice distinguishes man as man; hence, man would not be worthy of his name, without the concept of good and its opposite. Had man been unaware of the concept of good and evil, G-d would not have assigned him a prohibition; and once man had violated the prohibition, G-d could not have held him responsible and punished him. Yet man was assigned a prohibition, and he was subjected to punishment. It must be, then, that he possessed a sense of duty, and could distinguish between forbidden and permitted – and this is none other than the knowledge of good and evil, knowledge that belongs to the realm of practical reason, not to the realm of theoretical reason.

It appears then that the וְעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע derives its name al shem sofo, according to its subsequent role in the final result: Through this tree, knowledge of good and evil will be acted upon and decided; through its fruit, man will choose what is good or bad in his sight.

The earth can become a paradise – only under one condition: that we call “good” only that which G-d calls “good”, and “bad” only that which G-d calls “bad”. We must not distinguish good from bad according to the judgment of our senses. If we accept the judgment of our senses, the gates of Paradise will be closed to us, and only by long, roundabout routes will man return thereto.

 Moreover, it appears that this tree derives its name also al shem thilato, according to its initial role in shaping man’s knowledge of good and evil. For this tree taught man what is good or bad for him, and how he should distinguish good from bad. As we shall see later, this tree appealed to man’s taste, imagination, and contemplative mind. His taste, imagination, and his mind drew man to this tree and tempted him to eat of its fruit. Nevertheless, G-d forbade man to eat of the fruit of this tree. In other words, partaking of this fruit was defined as being bad for man. This tree then was to remind man of that teaching on whose observance man’s whole eminence depends. A person’s senses, imagination and intelligence may tell him that a certain thing is very good; nevertheless, it may conflict with his higher calling, and if he partakes of it, this may be an offense deemed by G-d as deserving of death. From this tree we learn that in judging what is good or evil, man should not rely on his own senses, his own imagination, or his own intelligence; rather he should obey the revealed Will of G-d and follow the lead of His wisdom. Only then will he fulfill his purpose on earth and be worthy of having the world shaped into a paradise for him.

 

Hellenism and Judaism, and the curse of slavery

Great insights from Rav Hirsch commentary on Chumash - it's November and I am still on parsha Noah, but the depth is worth the delay! 

Bereishit 9:18  וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי נֹחַ הַיֹּצְאִים מִן הַתֵּבָה שֵׁם וְחָם וָיָפֶת וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן
And the sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth; and Ham he was the father of Canaan.
The name שֵׁם denotes spiritual or intellectual abilities, and חָם denotes inflamed sensual excitement, while יָפֶת denotes the emotions and the imagination, which are attracted by beauty.
If history shows us diverse nations endowed with disparate qualities – nations endowed with intellectual ability or emotional refinement beside nations in which burning sensuality seems to predominate – we should not, as a result, despair of mankind’s future.  We should believe with deep faith that all different races of mankind were created for one human ideal and are driving toward one goal: Isaiah 11:9 for the land shall be full of knowledge of the Lord as water covers the sea bed. כִּי
מָלְאָה הָאָרֶץ דֵּעָה אֶת9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness, and he told his two brothers outside. 9:23 And Shem and Japheth took the garment, and they placed [it] on both of their shoulders, and they walked backwards, and they covered their father's nakedness, and their faces were turned backwards, so that they did not see their father's nakedness.
The idea of respect for parents: the young generation must stand reverently at the grave of the generation that preceded it. It must take a garment and cover the nakedness, the weakness, of its forebears, and at the same time receive from them their spiritual legacy, so as to build its own future.
The character of Cham has no right to exist and has no future.  Uncontrolled "hot" sensuality which has no respect for spiritual values, is incapable of ruling and is unable to preserve its freedom. It is inherently barren, without vigor, unproductive; it bears in itself its own ruin.
9:25 וַיֹּאמֶר אָרוּר כְּנָעַן עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו And he (Noah) said, "Cursed be Canaan; he shall be a slave among slaves to his brethren."
Connection between Canaan's character and the fate of an עבד, slave. Canaan is ארור, cursed, by very nature; for the future is reserved only for those who are pure of heart, not for those who are coarse and uncivilized. The same applies in social and national life, in relationships between people and between nation.  Only those who can control and restrain themselves can gain and retain their freedom. Unrestrained desire leads to slavery. He who at all times controls his passions will not be led astray by bribes or enticements. He is not captivated by money, and his hands are not bound in golden chains. He may be destroyed and die, but he will never become a slave. This applies to individuals as well as to nations.
9:26 And he said, "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem, and may Canaan be a slave to them.
Shem as opposite to Cham / Canaan, who represents crude, brazen desire, whereas G-d of Shem not only created heaven and earth, but is still the ruler of every created thing.  Recognition of G-d of Shem will grow and spread and conquer all hearts, and all material forces will ultimately submit to it.
9:27 יַפְתְּ אֱלֹהִים לְיֶפֶת וְיִשְׁכֹּן בְּאָהֳלֵי שֵׁם וִיהִי כְנַעַן עֶבֶד לָמוֹ May God expand Japheth, and may He dwell in the tents of Shem, and may Canaan be a slave to them."
The name יַפְתְּ Yaphet comes from the root that means "open", it denotes emotional openness to external impressions and influences: he will open the hearts. G-d will open the hearts to Yaphet; He will give him influence over the human heart.
In his work "Hellenism and Judaism" Rav Hirsch expounds on this idea: Blessings to Shem and Yaphet, curse to Canaan.  Shem represents the intellect, he assigns everything a name and is able to conceptualize. In contrast to him is Cham, the height of burning sensuality. Yaphet is in the middle. He represents the meeting point of intellect and sensuality - emotion, sentiment.
On the curse to Canaan, eved avadim, Rav Hirsch comments: Lust leads to slavery, not to freedom.  Freedom, חרות , is found only where the law of morality reigns supreme over all. Man can attain freedom, only if the law of morality is engraved (חרות) upon his heart. Lust is the breeding ground of slavery; Cham begets avadim; and where lust is at its peak, as in the case of Canaan, it begets avdei avadim.
Cham too has gods, but they are gods of brute force, powers that express their "godliness" in the subjugation of man and in shattering of his might. Man can only tremble before them.
Cham coming to serve Shem through the mediation of Yaphet.  Beauty and refinement of culture is the vestibule that leads to the teachings of Shem. Noah's vision: the hearts will be opened to the beauty of Yaphet.
From Shem man will learn to make his home a dwelling for the Shechinah; from Shem he will learn to rectify his life, and the Shechinah will again dwell with man.  By submitting to Shem, Canaan, too, will have the privilege of fulfilling his Divine mission.
May Yaphet dwell in the tents of Shem - this maybe about one personality, one soul, hosting and welcoming the other within it, the mature and kind personality hosting the other sensual and beautiful life force within itself. 

Hirsch on Inclination

I love it how Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch derives these deep and original insights from the meaning of the words, analyzing the detailed data to come to the high ideas. This is his commentary on Bereishit 6:5, right before the flood: וַיַּרְא יְהֹוָה כִּי רַבָּה רָעַת הָאָדָם בָּאָרֶץ וְכָל יֵצֶר מַחְשְׁבֹת לִבּוֹ רַק רַע כָּל הַיּוֹם And the Lord saw that the evil of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of his heart was only evil all the time.

It is unfortunate that יצר is so often translated as “drive” or “impulse”, as though there were a force in man that urges and impels him to do evil.  This is the source of that bleak view which is one of the basic concepts of a large “religion”: the dogma of the power of evil which holds man in its power and from which he can be saved only by virtue of a certain belief. Thus the word יצר is twisted into a cord of falsehood by which mankind is bound and gagged. Yet nothing could be further from this view than the very word יצר.

To begin with, the root יצר does not denote “forcing” but “shaping”.  But the form יֵצֶר is not an active form, but a passive form; it denotes not that which does the shaping, but that which has been shaped. Clearly the יֵצֶר is to יוצר as the work is to one who forms it: וְיֵצֶר אָמַר לְיֹצְרוֹ and the impulse say to the One Who formed it (Isaiah 29:16). The יֵצֶר is subordinate to יוצר - כְּחֹמֶר ביד הַיֹּצֵר like clay in hands of potter. And יֵצֶר מַחְשְׁבֹת לִבּוֹ are the formations, the designs of our thoughts.

Man’s intellect is a חושב מחשבות – like the weaver, who weaves חושב מַעֲשֶׂה.  The raw material is turned over to the intellect; all qualities – good or evil – are entrusted to it, like clay in the potter’s hands. The intellect is to combine them and mold them into shapes, צורות – i.e. our thoughts and ideals. These צורות are the הלב יֵצֶר מַחְשְׁבֹת, the designs woven by the intellect.

We can shape the material entrusted to us into any form we wish. But at the same time, G-d has given us the patterns we are expected to follow. If we follow that pattern, then everything is good. The חושב (weaver) must have every type of thread, every color, at his disposal. He cannot dispense with any of them. Used in its proper place and in the prescribed manner, everything is good.

It is true that a person is drawn after יֵצֶר לִבּוֹ, the designs of his heart. His mind fashions an idea, and he imagines what he can achieve; this idea then spurs him on to achieve his goal. But it is he himself who forms this יֵצֶר. If he forms a good idea, then he aspires toward the good; if not, then the opposite is true.  יֵצֶר is the literal equivalent of the Greek word idea: a formation or picture. 

 

Hirsch on Personification

Bereishit 6:6 וַיִּנָּחֶם יְהֹוָה כִּי עָשָׂה אֶת הָאָדָם בָּאָרֶץ וַיִּתְעַצֵּב אֶל לִבּוֹ Then G-d was caused to alter His decision, that He had made man on earth, and He grieved in His heart.

Rav Hirsch comments that His heart, lev Elokim, symbolizes the deep love between G-d and man.  G-d’s heart, as it were, wished to rejoice in the thriving of mankind on earth, but He is compelled to forgo the joy of His heart.  Man’s continued existence would bring evil upon the earth; hence “G-d was caused to alter His decision”.  But His heart remained unchanged; His heart desired man’s continued existence, and He was grieved that He had to renounce this.

Scholars have philosophized about the anthropomorphic expressions in Scripture, in order to keep us far from ascribing to G-d material features. This gives rise to the danger that the Personality of G-d will become increasingly blurred and indistinct to our perception.  Had that been the Torah’s intention, it could easily have avoided such expressions. Rather the second danger (that of blurring the Creator’s Personality) is greater than the first (that of anthropomorphizing the Creator). 

The anthropomorphic expressions in this section uphold tow of the fundamental principles of our faith: the freedom of G-d and the freedom of man. Scripture says 6:5 “When G-d saw…” Man’s wickedness was not a matter of necessity.  G-d had to see it before He knew it.  This expression confirms the freedom of man. And the fate that overtook mankind was not the result of physical causality. G-d considered the matter before rendering His decision, and the decision grieved Him. All this affirms the Personality and freedom of G-d and preserves the purity of faith.  This is also the view of the Ravid, the distinctively Jewish thinker: Belief in the Personality of G-d is more important than the speculation of those who reject the attribution of material features to G-d.

Bereishit 8:21 וַיָּרַח יְהֹוָה אֶת רֵיחַ הַנִּיחֹחַ וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל לִבּוֹ And the Lord smelled the pleasant aroma (from the offering on the altar), and the Lord said to Himself, "I will no longer curse the earth because of man, for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth, and I will no longer smite all living things as I have done.

It is easy for scholars to blur the concept of G-d and turn it into a transcendental, metaphysical concept.  It is a person’s duty, however, to believe with perfect faith in the Personality of G-d and in His close relationship to every man. This belief is more important than any speculation on transcendental concepts, such as the eternity and incorporeality of G-d, for these concepts are as detached from the morality of our lives as are algebraic codes.

Everything that connects a person to his surroundings, and particularly to the creature near to him, is here included in the term לב. Just as we say of G-d that His is רחומ, חנון, and so forth, so can all these attributes be included in and expressed by the term לב.  This corresponds completely to what was said in 6:6 וַיִּתְעַצֵּב אֶל לִבּוֹ, where G-d grieved concerning His “heart”; that is to say, He renounced with sorrow all the good that His mercy and love wished mankind to attain.  So, too, here, the whole complex of Divine mercy and love pleaded for the preservation of the world and of man.

Hirsch on Independent Life

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch on independent life without G-d

Bereishit 4:16 וַיֵּצֵא קַיִן מִלִּפְנֵי יְהֹוָה וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּאֶרֶץ נוֹד קִדְמַת עֵדֶן

And Cain went forth from before the Lord, and he dwelt in the land of the wanderers, to the east of Eden.

According to our Sages (Bereishit Rabbah 22:28) Kayin not only left the place of G-d’s Presence, but abandoned the whole relationship with G-d and turned his back on G-d’s Word.  Banished from man and earth, he sought to build for himself an independent life. Although man was banished from Paradise, he still stood לפני הי, before Him.  Kayin, however, because of his crime and subsequent behavior, left this relationship and went fort הי מִלִּפְנֵי.

Earlier it says that Shechinah departed from man, to the west.  In this verse, Kayin withdraws to the east, קִדְמַת עֵדֶן, in ever-increasing alienation from G-d.  This was man’s first attempt to establish his life on the basis of his own strength – without G-d.

Hirsch on Sensuality

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch Commentary on Chumash, book of Bereishit. 

 

Bereishit 4:6 And G-d said to Kayin: Why are you so distressed and why is your countenance fallen?

4:7 הֲלוֹא אִם תֵּיטִיב שְׂאֵת וְאִם לֹא תֵיטִיב לַפֶּתַח חַטָּאת רֹבֵץ וְאֵלֶיךָ תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ וְאַתָּה תִּמְשָׁל בּוֹ
Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, at the entrance, sin is lying, and to you is its longing, but you can rule over it.

When we examine all the verses in which רֹבֵץ occurs in connection with an animal, we do not find even one instance where this verb means “to lie in wait”.  Throughout Scripture, without exception, the רֹבֵץ rests in peace and tranquility, in quiet repose and security.  Similarly תְּשׁוּקָה does not denote the passion of hostility; rather, it always denotes exalted yearning, the devoted longing of love, אֲנִי לְדוֹדִי וְעָלַי תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ, “I belong to my beloved, and his desire is for me (Shir Ha-Shirim 7:11), sings the Song of Songs. 

It is true that חַטָּאת, sensuality, appears here as masculine: רֹבֵץ. Do not underestimate its power.  It does have the power to rule over you.  Nevertheless, it lies quietly at the door, and will not enter by itself, uninvited.  If, however, you invite it in to sit at your table, it will feel at home with you and become your master.  But if you do not awaken sensuality, it lies quietly at the door.  What is more, its whole desire is that you should master it and guide it. G-d created the power of sensuality, not so that it should control you, but so that you should control it.  You are not to suppress it or kill it; rather, תִּמְשָׁל בּוֹ, rule over it and guide it.  That is its whole purpose and mission. When you master your sensuality, it achieves its purpose.  That is why “its longing is toward you.”

Sensuality’s desire to attain its purpose through subordination to man is expressed by Sages in a beautiful saying: יורד ומתעה ועולה ומרגיז (Bava Batra 16a) Sensuality is sent down by G-d to tempt human beings; and when they have yielded to its temptations, it ascends and complains before G-d.  For it did not tempt them so that they should succumb to it, but in order that they should overcome and master it in freedom.  This same view is expressed by rabbi Shimon in midrash Bereishit Rabbah (22:6) “If sensuality comes to entice you to sin, delight it with the words of Torah, as the Scripture says: “With your controlled sensuality you preserve peace”.  And if you do so, I will credit you as though you had created both worlds.  For שלום is written here not once but twice.  And if you should say that this is beyond your power, Scripture says ‘its longing is to be mastered by you’”.

 

Hirsch on The Name

Commentary of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsh on Chumash – Bereishit 2:4

Bereishit 2:4 אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ בְּהִבָּרְאָם בְּיוֹם עֲשׂוֹת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם

 These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, on the day that Hashem G-d made earth and heaven.

The Name expresses the secret of G-d’s essence – and this will always remain unfathomable to us; nevertheless, we must try to grasp the meaning of His Name as far as possible.