We discussed Thursday the first two of the Rambam's 13 Ikarim and then tried to understand a little bit that the yesod rishon teaches us not only that the Ribbono Shel Olam is the Borei Olam, not only that the Ribbono Shel Olam brought the world into existence and has the ability and the prerogative to void that at any moment he would want, rachmana litzlan, but rather what it means is בו קיום מציאותם וממנו נמשך להם הקיום that we only exist again through Hakadosh Baruch Hu as we tried to delineate very very carefully. And we said that's what the Rav and others point out, that the Rambam in the Yad also very carefully and consciously uses the lashon hoveh of mamtzi kol nimtza, that the Rambam doesn't talk about Hakadosh Baruch Hu as himtzi kol nimtza in the past, but rather mamtzi kol nimtza in the present. Now, Rav Chaim Volozhiner discusses this in Nefesh HaChaim as well and Rav Chaim Volozhiner explains that be'emes when we say in Birkas Kri'as Shema every day המחדש בטובו בכל יום תמיד מעשה בראשית, so he says obviously the lashon of bechol yom is not davka. Bechol yom means every every moment and then we quote the pasuk right כאמור לעושה אורים גדולים כי לעולם חסדו. So why are we quoting the pasuk? For Rav Chaim Volozhiner says because the pasuk is in the present tense, le'oseh orim gedolim, right, not vaya'as, not lemish'asa orim gedolim, but rather לעושה אורים גדולים כי לעולם חסדו. Now, it's very interesting the les man de'palig, right, les man de'palig, right? Birkas Kri'as Shema are introduced to elaborate each of the three brachos of Birkas Kri'as Shema to elaborate on each of the three parshiyos of Kri'as Shema. Most Rishonim are of the opinion that you can say them without Kri'as Shema and the Teshuvos HaRashba which the Beis Yosef quotes, that in that sense the lashon Birkas Kri'as Shema is a little misleading in that sense because lemaiseh you can say Birkas Kri'as Shema without Kri'as Shema, right, which is which is what we're doing if you davened bein hashmashos because you're not being mekayem Kri'as Shema at that point or for that matter if as the mishna says in the first perek in Maseches Brachos, if you're saying Birkas Kri'as Shema after gimmel sha'os bayom, right, it's clear from the mishna that even if you missed סוף זמן קריאת שמע you can still say Birkas Kri'as Shema. So even according to these shittas, it's true that you can say them independent of Kri'as Shema, yet there's no question that Chazal intended them lechatchila to be said with Kri'as Shema and as a commentary on Kri'as Shema. Just derech agav from the Rambam it's mashma at the end of perek alef from Hilchos Kri'as Shema that you never ever say Birkas Kri'as Shema without Kri'as Shema. Ay, but isn't it meforash, isn't it meforash in the mishna that you can say Birkas Kri'as Shema after gimmel sha'os bayom? And doesn't so isn't that meforash? So the teretz is, but if you look in the Rambam, the Rambam is, the Rambam writes that when you're saying Birkas Kri'as Shema after gimmel sha'os bayom, so the shittas HaRambam happens to be not like the Rav Hai Gaon that you can say Birkas Kri'as Shema all day. Shulchan Aruch paskens like the Rav Hai Gaon that you can only say Birkas Kri'as Shema until sof zman tfilah. You don't have all day, only until sof zman tfilah. The Rambam happens to hold that you can say them all day. Either way though the Rambam says that you do say them with Kriyas Shma, even though you're not going to be mikayem the mitzvah of ודברת בם בשכבך ובקומך at that point, but אף על פי כן you're still supposed to say it with Kriyas Shma. So the Rambam never has the birkas Kriyas Shma without Kriyas Shma. According to the Rambam, even if you're saying birkas Kriyas Shma לאחר ג' שעות ביום, you must say it with Kriyas Shma itself. How is that possible? To take a lulav today, to light a ner Chanukah today is meaningless. A mitzvah chutz lizmano is nothing. So the teretz is: bamdeh dvarim amurim all other mitzvos, right? But you have mitzvos that have to do with yirah, with ahavah, yichud Hashem. So again, you can't be mikayem Kriyas Shma now. You can't even be mechaven for the d'oraysa of Kriyas Shma now, it'll be baal tosif, but when you say the parsha it's still a cheftza of קבלת עול מלכות שמים. You shake a lulav now, it's nothing. Even if you're not mechaven l'shem mitzvah, it's stam nothing. Ma she'ein kein, you say the parsha of Kriyas Shma now, so שמע ישראל ה' אלהינו ה' אחד is a cheftza of קבלת עול מלכות שמים בזמנו שלא בזמנו. Again, you can't be mechaven for the mitzvah of Kriyas Shma, that would be baal tosif, but it remains a cheftza of קבלת עול מלכות שמים. So according to the Rambam you never ever have birkas Kriyas Shma. The Rambam disagrees with that famous Teshuvos HaRashba that birkas Kriyas Shma, there's nothing imprecise about that lashon, because you never ever have them without Kriyas Shma itself. But even according to the Rashba, so the Rashba certainly agrees that optimally they're supposed to be said in conjunction with Kriyas Shma, and that's because each of the three brachos are mechuvon, each one is mechuvon keneged each of the three parshiyos of Kriyas Shma, right? So that being the case, it's quite clear that the bracha of יוצר אור ובורא חשך is against, is keneged parsha rishona. It's an elaboration of the first parsha of Kriyas Shma, right? So that's obvious in the sense that clearly the whole thrust of the bracha Yotzer Or in paraphrase of the pasuk in Yeshaya of יוצר אור ובורא חשך עשה שלום ובורא את הכל, it says that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is the creator of everything, right? Meaning that Hashem echad, not that there's רחמנא ליצלן שתי רשויות or anything of the sort, but rather no, the Ribono Shel Olam is יוצר אור ובורא חשך עשה שלום ובורא את הכל, right? So it's clear that this bracha is elaborating the principle of yichud Hashem. So that's why it's fascinating to see that in this bracha we say not once but twice, right? Both in the beginning of the bracha by Ha'meir la'aretz as well as at the end of the bracha המחדש בטובו בכל יום תמיד מעשה בראשית, again, which Rav Elchanan says refers and expresses this yesod again of ממנו נמשך להם הקיום ובו קיום מציאותם. Not that Hakadosh Baruch Hu in the past brought the world into existence, but the world again exists through Hakadosh Baruch Hu every moment. So that's part of yichud Hashem, that's part of what we're saying again in shorthand when we say ה' אלהינו ה' אחד and it's what we elaborate through the vehicle of the bracha of Yotzer Or. That's also l'chora why, I think we've discussed this on other occasions, why the Rambam in Perek Bais of Hilchos De'os, when the Rambam talks about ga'avah, so the Rambam quotes a Gemara in Sotah, she'yeish gasos, but the way the Rambam has the Gemara, so the Gemara says that kol hamisga'eh is kofer b'ikar. If a person is a baal ga'avah, so he's a kofer b'ikar. Not k'ilu kofer b'ikar, but mamash kofer b'ikar. Mamash kofer b'ikar. It's an astounding Rambam, an absolutely amazing Rambam. So how is that possible? How is that possible? So the answer is that a person is misga'eh, again we know what all the symptoms of ga'avah are. But what's the definition, what's the essence of ga'avah? So the definition, the essence of ga'avah, so Rav Sachz z'tl used to say that we think a person's a baal ga'avah when he thinks he's so great at something and he really isn't, right? So he thinks he's the best at something and he isn't. He thinks he knows gantz Shas and he really doesn't. So he used to say no, he's not a baal ga'avah, he's a m'turaf, he's a meshuganeh. He thinks he knows and he doesn't, so that's not a baal ga'avah, he's a meshuganeh, he's out of touch with reality. What's a baal ga'avah? A baal ga'avah is someone who thinks he knows kol hatorah kulah and taka does know kol hatorah kulah. Ela mai, what's make him a baal ga'avah? He thinks it's kochi v'otzem yadi. He thinks it's kochi v'otzem yadi. never could have added up to this, it's only because Ribbono Shel Olam gave me the abilities, gave me the opportunities, and crowned them with success that it added up to to to whatever it is that the that I'm blessed to have. So a person the baal gaiva thinks כוחי ועוצם ידי עשה לי את החיל הזה. So if that's if that's the case so then you can understand that the Rambam says no that's mamash kefira, it's not ke'ilu kofer ba'ikar. A person really feels that way, a person is misga'eh, walks around with his his nose up in in in the air and all full of pride and and very boastful. So why is that? Because because Ribbono Shel Olam blessed him more than blessed other people, but that's not a reason to be a gaiva. No, but if I'm if a person thinks oh I outsmarted people, kochi ve'otzem yadi, I did this, I did this, so then a person is misga'eh. So that's mamash kofer ba'ikar, that's mamash against the the these yesodos. Okay. The yesod hashlishi, yesod harevi'i, we're not going to be ma'arich so much, we just want to maybe point out one or two one or two details here. The yesod hashlishi the Rambam says is shelilas hagasmius mimenu. That Hakadosh Baruch Hu is incorporeal, that that He has no body, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is not physical. Vehu shezeh ha'echad, again Hakadosh Baruch Hu who's been identified in the first two yesodos, אינו גוף ולא כוח בגוף. Hakadosh Baruch Hu doesn't have doesn't have a body and is not a physical He isn't He isn't something physical. And as a result obviously לא יארוהו מאורעות הגופים כגון התנועה והמנוחה לא בעצם ולא במקרה.
And as a result you can't nothing happens to Hakadosh Baruch Hu which happens to physical bodies. You can't say that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is literally moving or literally resting. And all these wherever you find it in the the three lines from the bottom of the column, וכל מה שבא בספרים מתואר בתוארי הגופות, and wherever we find in Tanakh such descriptions of Hakadosh Baruch Hu which relate to to being physical, for instance kegon hahalicha veha'amidah, walking, standing, yeshiva, sitting, vehadibbur, speech, וכיוצא בו זה הם כולם דרך השאלה. So it's all was sort of borrowing the phrase, right? It's an anthropomorphism that we're describing Hakadosh Baruch Hu using expressions which are really only appropriate for describing a person, וכמו שאמרו דיברה תורה כלשון בני אדם. Okay. Now just two two two little little little he'aros, not so much about the the ikar per se. It's interesting you find you find in a couple of places Chazal say for instance in the Yerushalmi Rosh Hashanah about the yud gimmel middos. So Chazal say a lashon that אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לומר, were it not that we had such a pasuk it would be assur to say it, שמלמד שנתעטף הקדוש ברוך הוא כשליח ציבור, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu put the tallis over His head like a shliach tzibbur and showed Moshe Rabbeinu how we should daven selichos, how we should daven selichos. And then you have the same lashon in in the Gemara beginning of the third perek in Megillah, ואתה פה עמוד עמדי, and there too the Gemara says a lashon that אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לומר, מלמד שאף הקדוש ברוך הוא בעמידה,
that amod imadi, right, that what that what that means is stand alongside Me, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is also standing, right? So the Gemara introduces it with אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לומר. And and you have to check but they have at least one other example of this, you don't have that many examples of of that lashon. Now question is why do Chazal say אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לומר in these cases more than all the cases that the Rambam is alluding to, right? Every case of yad Hashem, right? So why don't we say every case of yad Hashem, the hand of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לומר, right, we couldn't talk about the hand, nishba Hashem bimyino uv... In every context it's taki true. I don't know if on our own we would have had a heter to speak that way. But the אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לאומרו goes further than that. What it means is in every other context it's clear, it's clear that that it's derech hashalah as the Rambam says. It's clear that again it's just an anthropomorphic expression which is not supposed to be understood literally but figuratively, right? So Yad Hashem means the strength of Hashem. The strength of Hashem because we associate, why do we associate strength? Right? You hold up your your arm and you make a muscle. That's that's our symbol of of strength, right? So that's so clearly it's supposed to be understood in a figurative way and that's why the Rambam devotes many many perakim in Moreh Nevuchim towards explaining what the figurative interpretation is of all these anthropomorphisms. Fine. But what's unique about that case in the Gemara Rosh Hashanah and the case in Gemara Megillah is that there the limmud is from the literal understanding, right? The literal understanding which really isn't true, right? That's what Chazal are telling us in אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לאומרו. But the limmud, right? The limmud is from the literal, again, the what seems to be the literal understanding of the pasuk, right? When it says ועתה פה עמוד עמדי, so what are we deriving from that? We're deriving that the ba'al korei is supposed to be standing. The ba'al korei is supposed to be standing for kerias hatorah. So this the Gemara says that's a double chiddush, right? Not only is it describing Hakadosh Baruch Hu in anthropomorphic terms the way we are every time when we taki talk about Yad Hashem, Yemin Hashem, etc., but this goes even further because here we actually have a limmud which requires the anthropomorphism, right? The stam anthropomorphism doesn't that's not necessary for the limmud. Aderaba, that's just the it's it speaks to us in a way that we're accustomed to hear and understand but but the limmud is the strength of Hashem or or yamin can represent rachamim and smol can represent din. Ma she'ein kein in these cases and that's what Chazal are saying. Imloi mikra kasuv, if not for a pasuk we never ever could have done this, to to use an anthropomorphism and then say that the limmud is based on the anthropomorphism. That's mamash an אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לאומרו. But clearly, I mean not that the Rambam needs the confirmation, I mean you clearly see between the lines, in the lines, you clearly see that the Chazal had the same understanding in in terms of shlilas hagashmus mimenu. The only other little he'arah here just to raise a question and maybe you'll think about it and if you have a teirutz please please let me know. When the Rambam says that again the Torah speaks of Hakadosh Baruch Hu in anthropomorphic terms or we'll talk about halichah, amidah, Yad Hashem etc. and that's in accordance with what Chazal say דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם. So if I'm not mistaken, if I'm not mistaken, I mean check, I mean I guess do do a word search and check it, but I think when Chazal say דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם, so Chazal are saying it about the double leshonos, right? The the let's say Rav Kapach sends you to the Gemara in Berachos where where Chana says to Hakadosh Baruch Hu אם ראה תראה בעני אמתך, right? That double the double lashon which you find so so commonly in Chumash. So there there's a machlokes tannaim whether or not in every case there must be a derasha or no, maybe maybe there isn't a derasha in every case but in some cases you can just say that דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם, right? That the that we would sort of speak that way poetically, right? If you read a poem, so you can't you can't darshen every single a person writes a poem. You can't darshen every single word in the poem. Some of it's just a poetic expression. That's the way sort of the language adorns it. But it's not that every every word is expressing an idea. So the peshat is that when Chazal use this phrase of דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם, so Chazal are referring to that the Torah didn't economize as much as it could have and it sort of it adopted our and time at times it adopted our style of of expression. Now the Rambam's using this for l'chora something which is a much bigger chiddush, right? To say that the Torah... spoke in anthropomorphic terms again which literally are misleading. Right, the Raavad writes in Hilchos Teshuva that the Rambam is obviously right about this that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is eino guf ולא ישיגוהו משיגי הגוף ואין לו שום דמיון כלל. The Rambam's obviously right about this, but he says people made mistakes about it, and among the other things, he said they were misled by pshutei hamikraos. So the Rambam seems to be a bigger chiddush than Chazal. So that the Rambam should bedafka be metzayen Chazal as though this were a little bit of a raya to what he's saying is a tzarich iyun because the Rambam's example and usage of דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם seems to be a much bigger chiddush than the context in which Chazal use it. Okay, then the Rambam concludes that amongst the psukim which express this yesod is in Sefer Devarim כי לא ראיתם כל תמונה כלומר לא השגתם אותי בעל תמונה.
Why? לפי שהוא כמו שאמרנו לא גוף ולא כוח בגוף. Okay. Hayesod harvi'i, hakadmos, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is eternal. והוא שזה האחד המתואר הוא הקדמון בהחלט וכל נמצא זולתו הוא בלתי קדמון ביחס אליו והראיות לזה בספרים הרבה.
He says the philosophical proofs for that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is eternal, there are many proofs for it. And in terms of what the psukim are, he says from v'zos habracha וזה היסוד הרביעי הוא שמורה עליו מה שנאמר מעונה אלוהי קדם.
So that what it means when we refer to Hakadosh Baruch Hu as Elokei Kedem, that he is eternal. Then the Rambam goes on to say, ודע כי היסוד הגדול של תורת משה רבנו הוא היות העולם מחודש.
Right, it's a yesod of Torah that the world is not eternal. Right, unlike the belief of Aristotle that the world is eternal, so the Rambam says our belief, and this is a major, major yesod in Torah, is that the world was created and created yesh me'ayin, right, and afkeifei from Plato's view as well. יצרו השם ובראו אחר ההעדר המוחלט. וזה שפירשתי שאני סובב סביב עניין קדמות העולם לפי דעת הפילוסופים הוא כדי שיהיה המופת מוחלט על מציאותו יתעלה כמו שביארתי וביררתי במורה.
So here the Rambam just alludes to something which he, as he says, he talks about ba'arichus. Rambam says as follows: against Rav Saadia Gaon, the Rambam was of the opinion that we can't prove this principle. The fact that the world is created and not eternal, so the Rambam thought that that can't be proved, and that we only know that from the, we know that from the Torah, but it's not something which we can prove on our own. Unlike the other yesodos ha'emuna in terms of metziyas Hashem, and yichud Hashem, and kadmos Hashem, and shlilas hagashmius mimenu, all of which the Rambam says, the Rambam says that we can know on our own. Rambam says this we can't know on our own. He doesn't think that you could prove it either way. He says Aristotle thinks he proved that the world is eternal, and the Muslim philosophers, they think they proved that the world is mechudash, and he says I think they're both wrong. I don't think either of them proved it. And he says, we know it because we know it from the Torah, but not, not because it could be proven. And he says that as a hasaga on Rav Saadia Gaon. Rav Saadia Gaon did think that you could prove that the world was, was created, right, which I think seems to be the direction if not already the conclusion of science nowadays that the world did, did begin at a certain moment, that you can even know that scientifically. So that's what Rav Saadia Gaon thought, and what's more, Rav Saadia Gaon thought, and that was then one of the proofs for how you know Hakadosh Baruch Hu has to exist. So that's what the Rambam is saying here. The Rambam saying, אני סובב סביב עניין קדמות העולם, literally I'm side-stepping it, right? The reason I side-step it is because since I don't think you can prove that, but I do think that you can independently prove metziyas Hashem, so that's why in all my proofs of metziyas Hashem, I don't, I don't factor in, I don't rely on the world being mechudash. but it's not something if we're trying to know the yedios hasodos on our own, it's not something we can build on. Now that was the Rambam's understanding and again Rav Sa'adya Gaon thought differently. Okay, I'd just like to introduce the yesod hachamishi and bli neder we'll continue that tomorrow. היסוד החמישי שהוא יתעלה הוא אשר ראוי לעבדו ולרוממו ולפרסם גדולתו ומשמעתו
that only Hakadosh Baruch Hu is to be worshipped, to be glorified, to publicize his greatness and to try to spread to others that others should accept his ol shamayim mishmato. ואין עושים כן למה שלמטה ממנו במציאות מן המלאכים והכוכבים והגלגלים והיסודות וכל מה שהורכב מהם
and none of these things: worshipping, glorifying, etc. should be done even to any of these celestial beings. Right? So you can't, you can't worship, you can't glorify any celestial being. לפי שכולם מוטבעים בפעולותיהם אין להם שלטון ולא בחירה אלא ברצונו יתעלה
they have no free will, they're programmed. They're programmed to do the ratzon Hashem. Right? The Rambam thinks that they are alive, that they're not inanimate, but the Rambam thinks that the celestial beings are alive but they're programmed. ואין עושים אותם אמצעים להגיע בהם אליו and we don't make them intermediaries for us to reach Hakadosh Baruch Hu. אלא כלפיו יתעלה יכוונו המחשבות towards Hakadosh Baruch Hu all thoughts should be directed. ויניחו כל מה שזולתו and anything other than Hakadosh Baruch Hu should be left to the side. וזה היסוד החמישי הוא האזהרה על עבודה זרה you want to know where this is in the Chumash, so this is basically what the Torah codified as the prohibition against avoda zara. ורוב התורה בא להזהיר על זה that's what the majority of Torah is all about. Fine. So there're a couple of, couple of interesting things here. First of all, why does the Rambam need to tell us that the malachim, the kochavim, all these things are programmed, that they're not ba'alei bechira? What would be if a malach, if the conception we were to have of a malach were that he is a ba'al bechira? Okay, so let's say that the malach is a ba'al bechira. How does that affect this yesod? Right? This yesod is that when you daven or when you serve Hakadosh Baruch Hu, when you serve Hakadosh Baruch Hu, so you serve Hakadosh Baruch Hu directly, without intermediaries. Good. Okay, fine. And why is that such a, why is that such an ikar gadol? Because it's not only wrong on the level of action, it's also wrong on the level of belief. Because if a person uses intermediaries, so then the implication is, right? That Hakadosh Baruch Hu is not a personal God for each and every one. Right? If a person needs an intermediary, right? If a person thinks that I can only rachmana litzlan approach the planets and and other things the Rishonim refer to as as the galgalim. So then a person is minei ubei denying that HaKadosh Baruch Hu is a personal personal Ribono shel Olam for each and every and every one. And that's why again this is not only a a an ikar bemaaseh but it's an ikar in in belief in emuna as well. There is a very beautiful he'ara from Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch. He says about the about the poem Adon Olam. Beautiful beautiful he'ara he has. Right? So the first half of Adon Olam אדון עולם אשר מלך בטרם כל יציר נברא לעת נעשה בחפצו כל אזי מלך שמו נקרא ואחרי ככלות הכל לבדו ימלוך נורא והוא היה והוא הוה והוא יהיה בתפארה והוא אחד ואין שני להמשיל לו להחבירה בלי ראשית בלי תכלית ולו העז והמשרה.
Right? So basically we're talking about these yesodos of the Rambam of kadmus Hashem vechulu. Then what's the next line? So we're talking about how how great HaKadosh Baruch Hu is, how infinite HaKadosh Baruch Hu is, how exalted HaKadosh Baruch Hu is, how absolutely independent HaKadosh Baruch Hu is. And what's the next line? So says Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch what's the next line? והוא קלי וחי גואלי. And the next line is yeah in all that and yet who is he? He's my this is this is my this is my father. This is this is my Ribono shel Olam. A person says it in the personal right? This and this is the one with whom I have a personal relationship. All this והוא אחד ואין שני להמשיל לו להחבירה, you can't you can't ואל מי תדמיוני ואשוה. You can't compare you can't equate you can't and who is and והוא היה הוה ויהיה and yet vezeh keili. And that's exactly what the yesod hachamishi if a person makes an intermediary between himself and the Ribono shel Olam rachmana litzlan so then he's being kofer in in that in that yesod. Okay bli neder we have some more to discuss here so we'll continue with this tomorrow and and all the while I hope that you're doing chazara on for for the bechina.