קיבלה מיניה או לא קיבלה מיניה ת"ש אחד לדין ואחד לצדקה דברי רבי עקיבא אמר לו ר"א בן עזריה עקיבא מה לך אצל הגדה כלך מדברותיך אצל נגעים ואהלות אלא אחד לכסא ואחד לשרפרף כסא לישב עליו שרפרף להדום רגליו שנאמר (ישעיהו סו, א) השמים כסאי והארץ הדום רגלי
The Gemara asks: Did Rabbi Akiva accept this rebuff from him, or did he not accept it from him? The Gemara offers a proof: Come and hear the following teaching of a different baraita: One throne is for judgment and one is for righteousness; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said to him: Akiva, what are you doing occupying yourself with the study of aggada? This is not your field of expertise. Take [kelakh] your words to the topics of plagues and tents. Meaning, it is preferable that you teach the halakhot of the impurity of leprosy and the impurity of the dead, which are within your field of expertise. Rather, with regard to the two thrones: One throne is for a seat and one is for a small seat. The seat is to sit on, and the small seat is for His footstool, as it is stated: “The heavens are My seat, and the earth My footstool” (Isaiah 66:1).
ת"ר ארבעה נכנסו בפרדס ואלו הן בן עזאי ובן זומא אחר ורבי עקיבא אמר להם ר"ע כשאתם מגיעין אצל אבני שיש טהור אל תאמרו מים מים משום שנאמר (תהלים קא, ז) דובר שקרים לא יכון לנגד עיני
§ The Sages taught: Four entered the orchard [pardes], i.e., dealt with the loftiest secrets of Torah, and they are as follows: Ben Azzai; and ben Zoma; Aḥer, the other, a name for Elisha ben Avuya; and Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva, the senior among them, said to them: When, upon your arrival in the upper worlds, you reach pure marble stones, do not say: Water, water, although they appear to be water, because it is stated: “He who speaks falsehood shall not be established before My eyes” (Psalms 101:7).
בן עזאי הציץ ומת עליו הכתוב אומר (תהלים קטז, טו) יקר בעיני ה' המותה לחסידיו בן זומא הציץ ונפגע ועליו הכתוב אומר (משלי כה, טז) דבש מצאת אכול דייך פן תשבענו והקאתו אחר קיצץ בנטיעות רבי עקיבא יצא בשלום
The Gemara proceeds to relate what happened to each of them: Ben Azzai glimpsed at the Divine Presence and died. And with regard to him the verse states: “Precious in the eyes of the Lord is the death of His pious ones” (Psalms 116:15). Ben Zoma glimpsed at the Divine Presence and was harmed, i.e., he lost his mind. And with regard to him the verse states: “Have you found honey? Eat as much as is sufficient for you, lest you become full from it and vomit it” (Proverbs 25:16). Aḥer chopped down the shoots of saplings. In other words, he became a heretic. Rabbi Akiva came out safely.
Rabbi Levi Yitzchok of Berditchev, also known as the holy Berdichever, and the Kedushas Levi, was a Hasidic master and Jewish leader. He was the rabbi of Ryczywół, Żelechów, Pinsk and Berdychiv, for which he is best known.
Born 1740, Zamosc, Poland
Died: 1810, Berdychiv, Ukraine
Kedushat Levi is arranged by Torah portion and is a commentary on the text
ולכן אמר ה' ביום אכלך ממנו מות וכו' (בראשית ב, יז), פירוש רק באותו יום דייקא שיאכל ימשיך בחינת מות, כי על ידי זה יהיה גורם שיפלו הנצוצות וירדו מטה להתלבש במלבושים גשמיים קליפות נוג"ה שהוא בחינת מות אבל אחר כך בעבודת הצדיקים בתורה ומצוות אדרבה יתהפכו מחשוכא לנהורא ויעלו מעלה מעלה לשרשם ומקורם ויתוסף תענוג גדול מזה. והנה אדם וחוה קודם החטא עדיין לא השיגו בחינת העלאת התבררות הנצוצות לכן לא הבינו דבר ה' שהוא רק על מיתה לשעה וסברו על מיתות עולמות ועל זה היה קשה להם הלא הוא נברא בדבר ה' שהוא מקור החיים כנ"ל ולכן סברו שכוונת ה' היה על דרך זה, היינו מחמת שבחינת עץ הדעת אורו גדול כל כך אשר אין ביכולתם להמשיך עליהם אור גדול כל כך כי לא יסבולו אור גדול כזה והוא על דרך שאמרו רבותינו ז"ל (חגיגה יד:) ד' נכנסו לפרדס וכו', ולכן אמרו פן תמתון, פירוש כי אולי לא נהיה ראויים לאור גדול כזה ואי אפשר לנו להשיגו ולסבלו לכן יכול להיות שעל ידי זה יומשך להם בחינת מיתה והיה אצלם בספק מטעם קושית הנחש וכו'. ועל זה השיב להם הנחש לא תמתון, פירוש שאין בזה אפילו ספק שבודאי לא תמתון כי אתם במדרגה גדולה שתכלו לסבול אור גדול כזה בפרט כאשר תאכלו ממנו. והייתם וכו', פירוש שתעלו במדריגה גדולה כל כך אשר תהיו ראויים לקבל לסבול אור גדול כזה. ובזה השיאם הנחש לזה והבן:
In the words of our author, the brilliance of the “sparks” which had not yet been sufficiently reduced in intensity for man, even an Adam, G’d’s personal handiwork, to be exposed to without being harmed by it, [absorbing it internally, Ed.] was the reason why G’d warned him on pain of death not to eat from it.
The author illustrates all this by means of a parable. A son had become estranged to his father, thereby losing the path he had walked and getting lost in all kinds of dead end alleys which he found difficult to get out of. When, in spite of these detours, he eventually found his way back to his father’s home, the joy of his having returned pleased the father immeasurably more than the satisfaction an obedient son who had never left the parental home in the first place could have afforded him.
When considering the relationship between the tree of knowledge and its roots in the celestial spheres, the words of warning issued by G’d, i.e. “on the day when you will eat from it you will die,” will become clearer. The tree of knowledge will remain alluring to its beholders as long as what they see reflects the thinly veiled brilliance of its celestial origin. Only after man violated G’d’s commandment did it cease to be such and assume more earthly proportions so that being exposed to it any further will spell eventual death as man had contaminated it. [“Death” may be perceived as the ultimate contraction of Divine glory on earth, G’d having veiled His spiritually illuminating light with so many veils that none of them reach man, and therefore cannot “revive” his spiritual resources. Ed.]
The good deeds performed by the righteous reverse this entire process and, ultimately, when brought to its successful conclusion, will enable a different world from the one we are familiar with to be revealed even on earth.
In the dialogue just described by the Torah, the first difficulty is the meaning of the word אף with which the serpent commences. Normally, we understand this word to mean: “although, in spite of,” or something to that effect. Why would the serpent begin the conversation by using this as an introductory word? Furthermore, why did the serpent “quote” G’d as having said פן תמותון, “lest you will die,” when in fact G’d had said [concerning a single tree Ed.] כי ביום אכלך ממנו תמות “for on the day you eat from it you will die.”(Genesis 2,17) G’d had made an absolute statement “you will die,” whereas the serpent changed the statement to a warning rather than a threat, i.e. “lest you may die,” describing death as a possible rather than as a definite result of eating from the tree.'
Prior to the sin, both Adam and Chavah did not appreciate the concepts of ascent and descent of “sparks” of the Shechinah, so that when they heard G’d mention the word “death,” they had understood it as a merely temporary condition, such as unconsciousness. They had not understood it as referring to the “death” of worlds, and that is why the serpent’s argument made sense to them, as they felt that the Creator would be contradicting all that He had created if He were to allow it to disintegrate so easily by a relatively insignificant action such as eating from the fruit of the tree.
When our sages in Chagigah 14 relate that four people “descended” into the pardess, (acronym for “peshat, drush, remez, sod) the four disciplines used to explore the depths of the Torah, and that only Rabbi Akiva, returned unscathed, they meant to warn us not to embark on such excursions as they might result in our death. Adam and Chavah entertained doubts about the exact meaning of the result of disobeying G’d’s prohibition and its consequences for anyone disregarding this command. These doubts made them potential victims of the serpent, who phrased the ”threat” in such a manner that Chavah thought there was logic to the serpent’s words, especially when by repeating: לא מות תמותון, the serpent claimed that no manner of “death” would result from her eating from the fruit of the tree. The serpent implied that creatures who are ranking as high in G’d’s hierarchy as Chavah and her husband, did not have any reason to fear “death.” The serpent implied that the unscreened “light” emanating from the Shechinah was not beyond their ability to digest without harm, on the contrary, they would gain additional wisdom, and become able to tolerate even more intense rays of Divine “light.”
The author illustrates all this by means of a parable. A son had become estranged to his father, thereby losing the path he had walked and getting lost in all kinds of dead end alleys which he found difficult to get out of. When, in spite of these detours, he eventually found his way back to his father’s home, the joy of his having returned pleased the father immeasurably more than the satisfaction an obedient son who had never left the parental home in the first place could have afforded him.
When considering the relationship between the tree of knowledge and its roots in the celestial spheres, the words of warning issued by G’d, i.e. “on the day when you will eat from it you will die,” will become clearer. The tree of knowledge will remain alluring to its beholders as long as what they see reflects the thinly veiled brilliance of its celestial origin. Only after man violated G’d’s commandment did it cease to be such and assume more earthly proportions so that being exposed to it any further will spell eventual death as man had contaminated it. [“Death” may be perceived as the ultimate contraction of Divine glory on earth, G’d having veiled His spiritually illuminating light with so many veils that none of them reach man, and therefore cannot “revive” his spiritual resources. Ed.]
The good deeds performed by the righteous reverse this entire process and, ultimately, when brought to its successful conclusion, will enable a different world from the one we are familiar with to be revealed even on earth.
In the dialogue just described by the Torah, the first difficulty is the meaning of the word אף with which the serpent commences. Normally, we understand this word to mean: “although, in spite of,” or something to that effect. Why would the serpent begin the conversation by using this as an introductory word? Furthermore, why did the serpent “quote” G’d as having said פן תמותון, “lest you will die,” when in fact G’d had said [concerning a single tree Ed.] כי ביום אכלך ממנו תמות “for on the day you eat from it you will die.”(Genesis 2,17) G’d had made an absolute statement “you will die,” whereas the serpent changed the statement to a warning rather than a threat, i.e. “lest you may die,” describing death as a possible rather than as a definite result of eating from the tree.'
Prior to the sin, both Adam and Chavah did not appreciate the concepts of ascent and descent of “sparks” of the Shechinah, so that when they heard G’d mention the word “death,” they had understood it as a merely temporary condition, such as unconsciousness. They had not understood it as referring to the “death” of worlds, and that is why the serpent’s argument made sense to them, as they felt that the Creator would be contradicting all that He had created if He were to allow it to disintegrate so easily by a relatively insignificant action such as eating from the fruit of the tree.
When our sages in Chagigah 14 relate that four people “descended” into the pardess, (acronym for “peshat, drush, remez, sod) the four disciplines used to explore the depths of the Torah, and that only Rabbi Akiva, returned unscathed, they meant to warn us not to embark on such excursions as they might result in our death. Adam and Chavah entertained doubts about the exact meaning of the result of disobeying G’d’s prohibition and its consequences for anyone disregarding this command. These doubts made them potential victims of the serpent, who phrased the ”threat” in such a manner that Chavah thought there was logic to the serpent’s words, especially when by repeating: לא מות תמותון, the serpent claimed that no manner of “death” would result from her eating from the fruit of the tree. The serpent implied that creatures who are ranking as high in G’d’s hierarchy as Chavah and her husband, did not have any reason to fear “death.” The serpent implied that the unscreened “light” emanating from the Shechinah was not beyond their ability to digest without harm, on the contrary, they would gain additional wisdom, and become able to tolerate even more intense rays of Divine “light.”