חקת התורה

(1) Some years ago a learned man asked me a question of great importance; the problem and the solution which we gave in our reply deserve the closest attention. Before, however, entering upon this problem and its solution I must premise that every Hebrew knows that the term Elohim is a homonym, and denotes God, angels, judges, and the rulers of countries, and that Onkelos the proselyte explained it in the true and correct manner by taking Elohim in the sentence, "and ye shall be like Elohim" (Gen. 3:5) in the last-mentioned meaning, and rendering the sentence "and ye shall be like princes." Having pointed out the homonymity of the term "Elohim" we return to the question under consideration. "It would at first sight," said the objector, "appear from Scripture that man was originally intended to be perfectly equal to the rest of the animal creation, which is not endowed with intellect, reason, or power of distinguishing between good and evil: but that Adam's disobedience to the command of God procured him that great perfection which is the peculiarity of man, viz., the power of distinguishing between good and evil-the noblest of all the faculties of our nature, the essential characteristic of the human race. It thus appears strange that the punishment for rebelliousness should be the means of elevating man to a pinnacle of perfection to which he had not attained previously. This is equivalent to saying that a certain man was rebellious and extremely wicked, wherefore his nature was changed for the better, and he was made to shine as a star in the heavens." Such was the purport and subject of the question, though not in the exact words of the inquirer. Now mark our reply, which was as follows:--"You appear to have studied the matter superficially, and nevertheless you imagine that you can understand a book which has been the guide of past and present generations, when you for a moment withdraw from your lusts and appetites, and glance over its contents as if you were reading a historical work or some poetical composition. Collect your thoughts and examine the matter carefully, for it is not to be understood as you at first sight think, but as you will find after due deliberation; namely, the intellect which was granted to man as the highest endowment, was bestowed on him before his disobedience. With reference to this gift the Bible states that "man was created in the form and likeness of God." On account of this gift of intellect man was addressed by God, and received His commandments, as it is said: "And the Lord God commanded Adam" (Gen. 2:16)--for no commandments are given to the brute creation or to those who are devoid of understanding. Through the intellect man distinguishes between the true and the false. This faculty Adam possessed perfectly and completely. The right and the wrong are terms employed in the science of apparent truths (morals), not in that of necessary truths, as, e.g., it is not correct to say, in reference to the proposition "the heavens are spherical," it is "good" or to declare the assertion that "the earth is flat" to be "bad": but we say of the one it is true, of the other it is false. Similarly our language expresses the idea of true and false by the terms emet and sheker, of the morally right and the morally wrong, by tob and ra’. Thus it is the function of the intellect to discriminate between the true and the false--a distinction which is applicable to all objects of intellectual perception. When Adam was yet in a state of innocence, and was guided solely by reflection and reason--on account of which it is said: "Thou hast made him (man) little lower than the angels" (Ps. 8:6)--he was not at all able to follow or to understand the principles of apparent truths; the most manifest impropriety, viz., to appear in a state of nudity, was nothing unbecoming according to his idea: he could not comprehend why it should be so. After man's disobedience, however, when he began to give way to desires which had their source in his imagination and to the gratification of his bodily appetites, as it is said, "And the wife saw that the tree was good for food and delightful to the eyes" (Gen. 3:6), he was punished by the loss of part of that intellectual faculty which he had previously possessed. He therefore transgressed a command with which he had been charged on the score of his reason; and having obtained a knowledge of the apparent truths, he was wholly absorbed in the study of what is proper and what improper. Then he fully understood the magnitude of the loss he had sustained, what he had forfeited, and in what situation he was thereby placed. Hence we read, "And ye shall be like elohim, knowing good and evil," and not "knowing" or "discerning the true and the false": while in necessary truths we can only apply the words "true and false," not "good and evil." Further observe the passage, "And the eyes of both were opened, and they knew they were naked" (Gen. 3:7): it is not said, "And the eyes of both were opened, and they saw"; for what the man had seen previously and what he saw after this circumstance was precisely the same: there had been no blindness which was now removed, but he received a new faculty whereby he found things wrong which previously he had not regarded as wrong. Besides, you must know that the Hebrew word pakaḥ used in this passage is exclusively employed in the figurative sense of receiving new sources of knowledge, not in that of regaining the sense of sight. Comp., "God opened her eyes" (Gen. 21:19). "Then shall the eyes of the blind be opened" (Isaiah 38:8). "Open ears, he heareth not" (ibid. 42:20), similar in sense to the verse, "Which have eyes to see, and see not" (Ezek. 12:2). When, however, Scripture says of Adam, "He changed his face (panav) and thou sentest him forth" Job 14:20), it must be understood in the following way: On account of the change of his original aim he was sent away. For panim, the Hebrew equivalent of face, is derived from the verb panah, "he turned," and signifies also "aim," because man generally turns his face towards the thing he desires. In accordance with this interpretation, our text suggests that Adam, as he altered his intention and directed his thoughts to the acquisition of what he was forbidden, he was banished from Paradise: this was his punishment; it was measure for measure. At first he had the privilege of tasting pleasure and happiness, and of enjoying repose and security; but as his appetites grew stronger, and he followed his desires and impulses, (as we have already stated above), and partook of the food he was forbidden to taste, he was deprived of everything, was doomed to subsist on the meanest kind of food, such as he never tasted before, and this even only after exertion and labour, as it is said, "Thorns and thistles shall grow up for thee" (Gen. 3:18), "By the sweat of thy brow," etc., and in explanation of this the text continues, "And the Lord God drove him from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground whence he was taken." He was now with respect to food and many other requirements brought to the level of the lower animals: comp., "Thou shalt eat the grass of the field" (Gen. 3:18). Reflecting on his condition, the Psalmist says, "Adam unable to dwell in dignity, was brought to the level of the dumb beast" (Ps. 49:13)."May the Almighty be praised, whose design and wisdom cannot be fathomed."

(1) GOOD deeds are such as are equibalanced, maintaining the mean between two equally bad extremes, the too much and the too little. 1 Virtues are psychic conditions and dispositions which are mid-way between two reprehensible extremes, one of which is characterized by an exaggeration, the other by a deficiency. Good deeds are the product of these dispositions. To illustrate, abstemiousness is a disposition which adopts a mid-course between inordinate passion and total insensibility to pleasure. Abstemiousness, then, is a proper rule of conduct, and the psychic disposition which gives rise to it is an ethical quality ; but inordinate passion, the extreme of excess, and total insensibility to enjoyment, the extreme of deficiency, are both absolutely pernicious. The psychic dispositions, from which these two extremes, inordinate passion and insensibility, result the one being an exaggeration, the other a deficiency are alike classed among moral imperfections.

(2) Likewise, liberality is the mean between sordidness and extravagance; courage, between recklessness and cowardice; dignity, between haughtiness and loutishness; humility, between arrogance and self-abasement; contentedness, between avarice and slothful indifference; and magnificence, between meanness and profusion. [Since definite terms do not exist in our language with, which to express these latter qualities, it is necessary to explain their content, and tell what the philosophers meant by them. A man is called magnificent whose whole intention is to do good to others by personal service, by money, or advice, and with all his power, but without meanwhile bringing suffering or disgrace upon himself. That is the medium line of conduct. The mean man is one who does not want others to succeed in anything, even though he himself may not thereby suffer any loss, hardship, or injury. That is the one extreme. The profuse man, on the contrary, is one who willingly performs the above-mentioned deeds, in spite of the fact that thereby he brings upon himself great injury, or disgrace, terrible hardship, or considerable loss. That is the other extreme.] Gentleness is the mean between irascibility and insensibility to shame and disgrace; and modesty, between impudence and shamefacedness. [The explanation of these latter terms, gleaned from the sayings of our sages (may their memory be blessed!) seems to be this. In their opinion, a modest man is one who is very bashful, and therefore modesty is the mean. This we gather from their saying, (Pirkei Avot 2:5) "A shamefaced man cannot learn". They also assert, (Pirkei Avot 5:20) "A modest man is worthy of Paradise", but they do not say this of a shamefaced man. Therefore, I have thus arranged them.] So it is with the other qualities. One does not necessarily have to use conventional terms for these qualities, if only the ideas are clearly fixed in the mind.

(3) It often happens, however, that men err as regards these qualities, imagining that one of the extremes is good, and is a virtue. Sometimes, the extreme of the too much is considered noble, as when temerity is made a virtue, and those who recklessly risk their lives are hailed as heroes. Thus, when people see a man, reckless to the highest degree, who runs deliberately into danger, intentionally tempting death, and escaping only by mere chance, they laud such a one to the skies, and say that he is a hero. At other times, the opposite extreme, the too little, is greatly esteemed, and the coward is considered a man of forbearance; the idler, as being a person of a contented disposition; and he, who by the dullness of his nature is callous to every joy, is praised as a man of moderation, [that is, one who eschews sin]. In like manner, profuse liberality and extreme lavishness are erroneously extolled as excellent characteristics. This is, however, an absolutely mistaken view, for the really praiseworthy is the medium course of action to which every one should strive to adhere, always weighing his conduct carefully, so that he may attain the proper mean.

(4) Know, moreover, that these moral excellences or defects cannot be acquired, or implanted in the soul, except by means of the frequent repetition of acts resulting from these qualities, which, practised during a long period of time, accustoms us to them. If these acts performed are good ones, then we shall have gained a virtue; but if they are bad, we shall have acquired a vice. Since, however, no man is born with an innate virtue or vice, as we shall explain in Chapter 8, and, as every one's conduct from childhood up is undoubtedly influenced by the manner of living of his relatives and countrymen, his conduct may be in accord with the rules of moderation; but, then again, it is possible that his acts may incline towards either extreme, as we have demonstrated, in which case, his soul becomes diseased.

(5) In such a contingency, it is proper for him to resort to a cure, exactly as he would were his body suffering from an illness. So, just as when the equilibrium of the physical health is disturbed, and we note which way it is tending in order to force it to go in exactly the opposite direction until it shall return to its proper condition, and, just as when the proper adjustment is reached, we cease this operation, and have recourse to that which will maintain the proper balance, in exactly the same way must we adjust the moral equilibrium. Let us take, for example, the case of a man in whose soul there has developed a disposition [of great avarice] on account of which he deprives himself [of every comfort in life], and which, by the way, is one of the most detestable of defects, and an immoral act, as we have shown in this chapter. If we wish to cure this sick man, we must not command him merely [to practise] deeds of generosity, for that would be as ineffective as a physician trying to cure a patient consumed by a burning fever by administering mild medicines, which treatment would be in-efficacious. We must, however, induce him to squander so often, and to repeat his acts of profusion so continuously until that propensity which was the cause of his avarice has totally disappeared. Then, when he reaches that point where he is about to become a squanderer, we must teach him to moderate his profusion, and tell him to continue with deeds of generosity, and to watch out with due care lest he relapse either into lavishness or niggardliness. If, on the other hand, a man is a squanderer, he must be directed to practise strict economy, and to repeat acts of niggardliness. It is not necessary, however, for him to perform acts of avarice as many times as the mean man should those of profusion. This subtle point, which is a canon and secret of the science of medicine, tells us that it is easier for a man of profuse habits to moderate them to generosity, than it is for a miser to become generous. Likewise, it is easier for one who is apathetic [and eschews sin] to be excited to moderate enjoyment, than it is for one, burning with passion, to curb his desires.

(6) Consequently, the licentious man must be made to practise restraint more than the apathetic man should be induced to indulge his passions; and, similarly, the coward requires exposure to danger more frequently than the reckless man should be forced to cowardice. The mean man needs to practise lavishness to a greater degree than should be required of the lavish to practise meanness. This is a fundamental principle of the science of curing moral ills, and is worthy of remembrance.

(7) On this account, the saintly ones were not accustomed to cause their dispositions to maintain an exact balance between the two extremes, but deviated somewhat, by way of [caution and] restraint, now to the side of exaggeration, and now to that of deficiency. Thus, for instance, abstinence would incline to some degree towards excessive denial of all pleasures; valor would approach somewhat towards temerity; generosity to lavishness; modesty to extreme humility, and so forth. This is what the rabbis hinted at, in their saying, "Do more than the strict letter of the law demands." When, at times, some of the pious ones deviated to one extreme by fasting, keeping nightly vigils, refraining from eating meat or drinking wine, renouncing sexual intercourse, clothing themselves in woolen and hairy garments, dwelling in the mountains, and wandering about in the wilderness, they did so, partly as a means of restoring the health of their souls, as we have explained above, and partly because of the immorality of the towns-people. When the pious saw that they themselves might become contaminated by association with evil men, or by constantly seeing their actions, fearing that their own morals might become corrupt on account of contact with them, they fled to the wildernesses far from their society, as the prophet Jeremiah said, (Jeremiah 9:1) "Oh that some one would grant me in the wilderness the dwelling of a wanderer, and I would quit my people and abandon them; for they are all adulterers, a troop of faith- less evil-doers."

(8) When the ignorant observed saintly men acting thus, not knowing their motives, they considered their deeds of themselves virtuous, and so, blindly imitating their acts, thinking thereby to become like them, chastised their bodies with all kinds of afflictions, imagining that they had acquired perfection and moral worth, and that by this means man would approach nearer to God, as if He hated the human body, and desired its destruction. It never dawned upon them, however, that these actions were bad and resulted in moral imperfection of the soul. Such men can only be compared to one who, ignorant of the art of healing, when he sees skilful physicians administering to those at the point of death [purgatives known in Arabic as] colocynth, scammony, aloe, and the like, and depriving them of food, in consequence of which they are com- pletely cured and escape death, foolishly concludes that since these things cure sickness, they must be all the more efficacious in preserving the health, or prolonging life. If a person should take these things constantly, and treat himself as a sick person, then he would really become ill. Likewise, those who are spiritually well, but have recourse to remedies, will undoubtedly become morally ill.

(9) The perfect Law which leads us to perfection as one who knew it well testifies by the words, (Psalms 19:8) "The Law of the Lord is perfect restoring the soul; the testimonies of the Lord are faithful making wise the simple" recommends none of these things (such as self-torture, flight from society etc.). On the contrary, it aims at man's following the path of moderation, in accordance with the dictates of nature, eating, drinking, enjoying legitimate sexual intercourse, all in moderation, and living among people in honesty and uprightness, but not dwelling in the wilderness or in the mountains, or clothing oneself in garments of hair and wool, or afflicting the body. The Law even warns us against these practices, if we interpret it according to what tradition tells us is the meaning of the passage concerning the Nazarite, (Numbers 6:11) "And he (the priest) shall make an atonement for him because he hath sinned against the soul." The Rabbis ask, "Against what soul has he sinned? Against his own soul, because he has deprived himself of wine. Is this not then a conclusion a minori ad majus? If one who deprives himself merely of wine must bring an atonement, how much more incumbent is it upon one who denies himself every enjoyment." By the words of our prophets and of the sages of our Law, we see that they were bent upon moderation and the care of their souls and bodies, in accordance with what the Law prescribes and with the answer which God gave through His prophet to those who asked whether the fast-day once a year should continue or not. They asked Zechariah, "Shall I weep in the fifth month with abstinence as I have done already these many years?" His, answer was, (Zachariah 7:3-7) "When ye fasted and mourned in the fifth and in the seventh (month) already these seventy years, did ye in anywise fast for me, yea for me? And if ye do eat and if ye do drink are ye not yourselves those that eat and yourselves those that drink?" After that, he enjoined upon them justice and virtue alone, and not fasting, when he said to them, (Zachariah 7:9) "Thus hath said the Lord of Hosts. Execute justice and show kindness and mercy every man to his brother." He said further, (Zachariah 8:19) "Thus hath said the Lord of Hosts, the fast- day of the fourth, and the fast-day of the fifth, and the fast of seventh, and the fast of the tenth (month) shall become to the house of Judah gladness, and joy, and merry festivals; only love ye truth and peace." Know that by "truth" the intellectual virtues are meant, for they are immutably true, as we have explained in Chapter 2, and that by "peace" the moral virtues are designated, for upon them depends the peace of the world. But to resume. Should those of our co-religionists and it is of them alone that I speak who imitate the followers of other religions, maintain that when they torment their bodies, and renounce every joy, that they do so merely to discipline the faculties of their souls by inclining somewhat to the one extreme, as is proper, and in accordance with our own recommendations in this chapter, our answer is that they are in error, as I shall now demonstrate.

(10) The Law did not lay down its prohibitions, or enjoin its commandments, except for just this purpose, namely, that by its disciplinary effects we may per- sistently maintain the proper distance from either extreme. For, the restrictions regarding all the forbidden foods, the prohibitions of illicit intercourse, the forewarning against prostitution, the duty of performing the legal marriage-rites which, nevertheless, does not permit intercourse at all times, as, for instance, during the period of menstruation, and after child-birth, besides its being otherwise restricted by our sages, and entirely interdicted during the daytime, as we have explained in the Tractate Sanhedrin all of these God commanded in order that we should keep entirely distant from the extreme of the inordinate indulgence of the passions, and, even departing from the exact medium, should incline somewhat towards self-denial, so that there may be firmly rooted in our souls the disposition for moderation. Likewise, all that is contained in the Law concerning the giving of tithes, the gleaning of the harvest, the forgotten sheaves, the single grapes, and the small bunches in the vineyards for the poor, the law of the Sabbatical year, and of the Jubilee, the giving of charity according to the wants of the needy one, all these approach the extreme of lavishness to be practised in order that we may depart far from its opposite, stinginess, and thus, nearing the extreme of excessive prodigality, there may become instilled in us the quality of generosity. If you should test most of the commandments from this point of view, you would find that they are all for the discipline and guidance of the faculties of the soul. Thus, the Law forbids revenge, the bearing of a grudge, and blood-revenge by saying, "Thou shalt not avenge nor bear any grudge"; "thou shalt surely unload with him" (the ass of him who hates you); "thou shalt surely help him to lift them up again" (thy brother's ass or ox which has fallen by the way). These commandments are intended to weaken the force of wrath or anger. Likewise, the command, "Thou shalt surely bring them back" (thy brother's ox or lamb which has gone astray), is meant to remove the disposition of avarice. Similarly, "Before the hoary head shalt thou rise up, and honor the face of the old man", "Honor thy father and thy mother" etc., "thou shalt not depart from the sentence which they may tell thee" etc., are intended to do away with boldness, and to produce modesty.

(11) Then, in order to keep away from the other extreme, i. e. of excessive bashful-ness, we are told, "Thou shalt indeed rebuke thy neighbor" etc., "thou shalt not fear him" (the false prophet) etc., so that excessive bashfulness, too, should disappear, in order that we pursue the medium course. Should, however, anyone who would with- out doubt be foolish if he did so try to enforce these commands with additional rigor, as, for instance, by prohibiting eating and drinking more than does the Law, or by restricting connubial intercourse to a greater degree, or by distributing all of his money among the poor, or using it for sacred purposes more freely than the Law requires, or by spending it entirely upon sacred objects and upon the sanctuary, he would indeed be performing improper acts, and would be unconsciously going to either one or the other extreme, thus forsaking completely the proper mean. In this connection, I have never heard a more remarkable saying than that of the Rabbis, found in the Palestinian Talmud, in the ninth chapter of the treatise Nedarim, where they greatly blame those who bind themselves by oaths and vows, in consequence of which they are fettered like prisoners. The exact words they use are, "Said Rabbi Iddai, in the name of Rabbi Isaac, 'Dost thou not think that what the Law prohibits is sufficient for thee that thou must take upon thyself additional prohibitions?' "

(12) From all that we have stated in this chapter, it is evident that it is man's duty to aim at performing acts that observe the proper mean, and not to desist from them by going to one extreme or the other, except for the restoration of the soul's health by having recourse to the opposite of that from which the soul is suffering. So, just as he who, acquainted with the science of medicine, upon noting the least sign of a change for the worse in his health, does not remain indifferent to it, but prevents the sickness from increasing to a degree that will require recourse to violent remedies, and just as when a man, feeling that one of his limbs has become affected, carefully nurses it, refraining from things that are injurious to it, and applying every remedy that will restore it to its healthy condition, or at least keep it from getting worse, likewise, the moral man will constantly examine his characteristics, weigh his deeds, and daily investigate his psychic condition; and if, at any time, he finds his soul deviating to one extreme or another, he will immediately hasten to apply the proper remedy, and not suffer an evil aptitude to acquire strength, as we have shown, by a constant repetition of that evil action which it occasioned. He is, like- wise, bound to be mindful of his defects, and constantly to endeavor to remedy them, as we have said above, for it is impossible for any man to be free from all faults. Philosophers tell us that it is most difficult and rare to find a man who, by his nature, is endowed with every perfection, moral as well as mental. This thought is expressed often in the prophetical books, as, "Behold in his servants he putteth no trust, and his angels he chargeth with folly", "How can man be justified with God? or how can be pure one that is born of woman?", and Solomon says of mankind in general, "For no man is so righteous upon earth that he should do always good, and never sin".

(13) Thou knowest, also, that God said to our teacher Moses, the master of former and later ages, "Because ye have not confided in me, to sanctity me", "because ye rebelled against my order at the waters of Meribah", "because ye did not sanctify me". All this (God said) although the sin of Moses consisted merely in that he departed from the moral mean of patience to the extreme of wrath in so far as he exclaimed, "Hear now ye rebels" etc., yet for this God found fault with him that such a man as he should show anger in the presence of the entire community of Israel, where wrath is unbecoming. This was a profanation of God's name, because men imitated the words and conduct of Moses, hoping thereby to attain temporal and eternal happiness. How could he, then, allow his wrath free play, since it is a pernicious characteristic, arising, as we have shown, from an evil psychic condition? The divine words, "Ye (Israel) have rebelled against me" are, however, to be explained as follows. Moses was not speaking to ignorant and vicious people, but to an assembly, the most insignificant of whose women, as the sages put it, were on a plane with Ezekiel, the son of Buzi. So, when Moses said or did anything, they subjected his words or actions to the most searching examination. Therefore, when they saw that he waxed wrathful, they said, "He has no moral imperfection, and did he not know that God is angry with us for demanding water, and that we have stirred up the wrath of God, he would not have been angry with us". However, we do not find that when God spoke to Moses about this matter He was angry, but on the contrary, said, "Take the staff . . . and give drink to the congregation and their cattle". We have, indeed, digressed from the subject of this chapter, but have, I hope, satisfactorily solved one of the most difficult passages of Scripture concerning which there has been much arguing in the attempt to state exactly what the sin was which Moses committed. Let what others have said be compared with our opinion, and the truth will surely prevail.

(14) Now, let me return to my subject. If a man will always carefully discriminate as regards his actions, directing them to the medium course, he will reach the highest degree of per- fection possible to a human being, thereby approaching God, and sharing in His happiness. This is the most acceptable way of serving God which the sages, too, had in mind when they wrote the words, "He who ordereth his course aright is worthy of seeing the salvation of God, as it is said, 'to him that ordereth his course aright will I show, will I show the salvation of God!' Do not read vesam but vesham derek". Shumah means "weighing" and "valuation". This is exactly the idea which we have explained in this chapter. This is all we think necessary to be said on this subject.

(1) "Listen, my son, to the thought of your father, and do not forsake the teaching of your mother." (Proverbs 1:8)

(2) Accustom yourself to always speak all of your words calmly, to every man and at every time. In doing so you will prevent your anger from flaring, which is a bad attribute in a man which may cause him to sin. And accordingly said our Rabbis, may their memories be a blessing: (Nedarim 22a) "Anyone who gets angry - all of Gehinnom holds sway over him, as it says: (Kohelet 11:10) 'And remove the anger from your heart, and take away the bad from your flesh', and 'bad' can only mean Gehinnom, as it says (Proverbs 16:4): 'And the sinner, he too, will have his day of bad'."

(3) When you will have freed yourself from anger, the quality of humility will enter your heart which is the best of all good traits, as is written(Mishlei 22:4), "The return for humility is fear of G-d."

(4) Through humility you will also come to fear God. It will cause you to always think about (Pirkei Avot 3:1) "where you came from and where you are going," and that while alive you are only like a maggot and a worm as after death, and before Whom you will eventually stand for judgment, the Glorious King, as it is written (I Kings 8:27) (Chronicles II 6:18) "Even the heaven and the heavens of heaven cannot contain You" -- "How much less the hearts of people!"(Mishlei 15:11), It is also written (Jeremiah 23:24), "Do I not fill heaven and earth? says the Lord."

(5) When you think about all these things, you will come to fear God who created you, and you will protect yourself from sinning and thereby be happy with whatever happens to you. Also, when you act humbly and modestly before everyone, and fear God and sin, the radiance of His glory and the spirit of the Shechina (Divine Presence) will rest upon you, and you will live the life of the World to Come!

(6) And now, my son, understand and observe that whoever feels that he is greater than others is rebelling against the Kingship of Heaven, because he is adorning himself with His garments, as it is written (Psalms 93:1), "The Lord reigns, He wears clothes of pride."

(7) What cause does one have for pride? Perhaps his wealth? "The Lord impoverishes and enriches" (I Samuel 2:7). Perhaps his honor? It belongs to God, as it is written (I Chronicles 29:12), "Wealth and honor come from You." So how could one adorn himself with G-d's honor? And one who prides himself in his wisdom surely knows that God "takes away the speech of assured men and reasoning from the sages" (Job 12:20). Thus, all are equal before God, since with His anger He lowers the proud and when He wishes He raises the low. So humble yourself and G-d will raise you up!

(8) Therefore, I will now explain to you how to always behave humbly. Speak gently at all times, with your head bowed, your eyes looking down to the ground and your heart focusing on God. Don't look at the face of the person to whom you are speaking. Consider everyone as greater than yourself. If he is wise or wealthy, you should give him respect. If he is poor and you are wealthier or wiser than he, consider yourself to be more guilty than he, and that he is more worthy than you, since when he sins it is inadvertent, while you act knowingly!

(9) In all your actions, words and thoughts, always regard yourself as standing before God, with His Shechinah (Divine Presence) above you, for His glory fills the whole world. Speak with fear and awe, as a servant in the presence of his master.

(10) Act with restraint in front of everyone. When someone calls you, don't answer loudly, but calmly, as one who stands before his master.

(11) Take heed to study Torah constantly, so you will be able to fulfill it's commands. When you arise from your learning reflect carefully on what you have studied, to find a lesson in it that you can be put into practice. Examine your actions every morning and evening, and in this way every one of your days will be spent in returning (to God).

(12) Remove all worldly concerns from your heart during prayer. Prepare your heart before God, purify your thoughts and think about the words before you utter them.

(13) Do this each and every day of your life, in all of your activities and you will not come to sin. This way all your words, deeds and thoughts will be proper, your prayers will be pure, clear, clean, appropriate and acceptable to God, as it is written (Psalms 10:17), "When their heart is directed to You, listen to them."

(14) Read this letter at least once a week and not less. Fulfill it, and in so doing, walk with it forever in the ways of the Lord, may He be blessed, so that you will succeed in all your ways. This is how you will succeed and merit the World to Come which is reserved for the righteous. Every day that you shall read this letter, heaven shall answer whatever arises in your heart to request, forever. Amen, Sela!

(93) 87. The Rabbi: The Sabbatical law is derived from this circumstance, as well as from the creation of the world in six days, also from another matter to be discussed later on. Although the people believed in the message of Moses, they retained, even after the performance of the miracles, some doubt as to whether God really spake to mortals, and whether the Law was not of human origin, and only later on supported by divine inspiration. They could not associate speech with a divine being, since it is something tangible. God, however, desired to remove this doubt, and commanded them to prepare themselves morally, as well as physically, enjoining them to keep aloof from their wives, and to be ready to hear the words of God. The people prepared and became fitted to receive the divine afflatus, and even to hear publicly the words of God. This came to pass three days later, being introduced by overwhelming phenomena, lightning, thunder, earthquake and fire, which surrounded Mount Sinai. The fire remained visible on the mount forty days. They also saw Moses enter it and emerge from it; they distinctly heard the Ten Commandments, which represent the very essence of the Law. One of them is the ordination of Sabbath, a law which had previously been connected with the gift of the Manna. The people did not receive these ten commandments from single individuals, nor from a prophet, but from God, only they did not possess the strength of Moses to bear the grandeur of the scene. Henceforth the people believed that Moses held direct communication with God, that his words were not creations of his own mind, that prophecy did not (as philosophers assume) burst forth in a pure soul, become united with the Active Intellect (also termed Holy Spirit or Gabriel), and be then inspired. They did not believe Moses had seen a vision in sleep, or that some one had spoken with him between sleeping and waking, so that he only heard the words in fancy, but not with his ears, that he saw a phantom, and afterwards pretended that God had spoken with him. Before such an impressive scene all ideas of jugglery vanished. The divine allocution was followed by the divine writing. For he wrote these Ten Words on two tablets of precious stone, and handed them to Moses. The people saw the divine writing, as they had heard the divine words. Moses made an ark by God's command, and built the Tent over it. It remained among the Israelites as long as prophecy lasted, i.e. about nine hundred years, until the people became disobedient. Then the ark was hidden, and Nebuchadnezzar conquered and drove the Israelites into exile.

(56) 56. The Rabbi: Didst thou not see how David introduces the praise of the Tōrāh, when he first speaks of the sun in the words: 'The heavens declare the glory of God' (Psalms 19:2). He describes how ubiquitous its light, how pure its body, how steady its path, and beautiful its countenance. This is followed by the words: 'The law of the Lord is perfect' (Psalms 19:7), etc., as if he wished to convey that one should not wonder at such a description. For the Tōrāh is more pure, more resplendent, more widely known, more exalted, and more useful still. If there were no Israelites there would be no Tōrāh. They did not derive their high position from Moses, but Moses received his for their sake. The divine love dwelt among the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The choice of Moses, however, was made in order that the good fortune might come to them through his instrumentality. We are not called the people of Moses, but the people of God, as it is said: 'The people of the Lord' (Ezekiel 36:20) and 'The people of the God of Abraham' (Psalms 47:10). Proof of the Divine Influence is not found in well chosen words, in raising the eyebrows, closing the eyes during prayers, contrition, movement, and talk behind which there are no deeds; but a pure mind, illustrated by corresponding actions which, by their very nature, are difficult to perform, and are yet performed with the utmost zeal and love. It is to be found in one who, wherever he may, strives to reach the chosen place three times a year, and bearing with the greatest pleasure and joy all fatigues and expenses connected therewith. He pays the 'first tithe,' and the 'second tithe,' and the 'poor tithe,' and the expenses connected with his apparel for the Temple. He renounces the harvest in the years of release and jubilee, incurs expense for a tabernacle, holy days, and abstention from work; gives the first fruits, the firstborn animals, priests' emoluments, the first of the shearing, and the first of the dough, apart from vows and free gifts, and fines connected with intentional and unintentional sins, and peace offerings. Further offerings due on account of private happenings, impurity, child-bed, issue, leprosy, and many other things. All this is regulated by divine command, without [human] speculation. It is not possible for man to determine the relative importance of each, and he need not fear any deterioration in them. It is as if He assessed Israel, and measured them as well as the harvests of Palestine as regards vegetable and animal life. He also considered the tribe of Levi, and ordained these assessments in the desert, because he knew that, as long as they were not infringed, Israel would retain its surplus, and the Levite would not be in want. It never could come to such a pass that a tribe or family would be reduced to poverty, because he ordained the return of the whole property in the year of jubilee in the same status as it was in the first year of the distribution of the land. The details of these regulations would fill volumes. He who studies them carefully will see that they are not of human origin. Praised be He who has contrived them: 'He hath not dealt so with any nation; they are judgments which they knew not' (Psalms 147:20). This arrangement lasted during the periods of both Temples for about 1,300 years, and had the people remained in the straight path, it would have been 'as the days of the heaven on earth' (Deuteronomy 11:20).

(103) 97. The Rabbi: All nations were given to idolatry at that time. Even had they been philosophers, discoursing on the unity and government of God, they would have been unable to dispense with images, and would have taught the masses that a divine influence hovered over this image. which was distinguished by some miraculous feature. Some of them ascribed this to God, even as we to-day treat some particular spots with reverence, going so far as to believe ourselves blessed by their dust and stones Others ascribed it to the spiritual influence of some star or constellation, or of a talisman, or to other things of that kind. The people did not pay so much attention to a single law as to a tangible image in which they believed. The Israelites had been promised that something visible would descend on them from God which they could follow, as they followed the pillars of cloud and fire when they departed from Egypt. This they pointed out, and turned to it, praising it, and worshipping God in its presence. Thus they also turned towards the cloud which hovered over Moses while God spake with him; they remained standing and adoring God opposite to it. Now when the people had heard the proclamation of the Ten Commandments, and Moses had ascended the mount in order to receive the inscribed tables which he was to bring down to them, and then make an ark which was to be the point towards which they should direct their gaze during their devotions,[2] they waited for his return clad in the same apparel in which they had witnessed the drama on Sinai, without removing their jewels or changing their clothes, remaining just as he left them, expecting every moment to see him return. He, however, tarried forty days, although he had not provided himself with food, having only left them with the intention of returning the same day. An evil spirit overpowered a portion of the people, and they began to divide into parties and factions. Many views and opinions were expressed, till at last some decided to do like the other nations, and seek an object in which they could have faith, without, however, prejudicing the supremacy of Him who had brought them out of Egypt. On the contrary, this was to be something to which they could point when relating the wonders of God, as the Philistines did with the ark when they said that God dwelt within it. We do the same with the sky and every other object concerning which we know that it is set in motion by the divine will exclusively, and not by any accident or desire of man or nature. Their sin I consisted in the manufacture of an image of a forbidden thing, and in attributing divine power to a creation of their own, something chosen by themselves without the guidance of God. Some excuse may be found for them in the dissension which had broken out among them, and in the fact that out of six hundred thousand souls the number of those who worshipped the calf was below three thousand. For those of higher station who assisted in making it an excuse might be found in the fact that they wished to clearly separate the disobedient from the pious, in order to slay those who would worship the calf. On the other hand, they sinned in causing what was only a sin of intention to become a sin in deed. This sin was not on a par with an entire lapse from all obedience to Him who had led them out of Egypt, as only one of His commands was violated by them. God had forbidden images, and in spite of this they made one. They should have waited and not have assumed power, have arranged a place of worship, an altar, and sacrifices. This had been done by the advice of the astrologers and magicians among them, who were of opinion that their actions based on their ideas would be more correct than the true ones. They resembled the fool of whom we spoke, who entered the surgery of a physician and dealt out death instead of healing to those who came there. At the same time the people did not intend to give up their allegiance to God. On the contrary, they were, in theory, more zealous in their devotion. They therefore approached Aaron, and he, desiring to make their plan public, assisted them in their undertaking. For this reason he is to be blamed for changing their theoretical disobedience into a reality. The whole affair is repulsive to us, because in this age the majority of nations have abandoned the worship of images. It appeared less objectionable at that time, because all nations were then idolators. Had their sin consisted in constructing a house of worship of their own, and making a place of prayer, offering and veneration, the matter would not have been so grave, because nowadays we also build our houses of worship, hold them in great respect, and seek blessing through their means. We even say that God dwells in them, and that they are surrounded by angels. If this were not essential for the gathering of our community, it would be as unknown as it was at the time of the kings, when the people were forbidden to erect places of worship, called heights. The pious kings destroyed them, lest they be venerated beside the house chosen by God in which He was to be worshipped according to His own ordinances. There was nothing strange in the form of the cherubim made by His command. In spite of these things, those who worshipped the calf were punished on the same day, and three thousand out of six hundred thousand were slain. The Manna, however, did not cease falling for their maintenance, nor the cloud to give them shade, nor the pillar of fire to guide them. Prophecy continued spreading and increasing among them, and nothing that had been granted was taken from them, except the two tables, which Moses broke. But then he pleaded for their restoration; they were restored, and the sin was forgiven.

(3) 3 (Numb. 19:2) “This is the statute of the Torah”: R. Isaac began [his discourse] (with Eccl. 7:23), “All this I tested with wisdom; I thought I could fathom it, but it eludes me.” It is written (in I Kings 5:9), “So God gave Solomon wisdom [...].” What is the meaning of (I Kings 5:9, cont.,) “As vast as the sand of the sea.” The rabbis say, “[This] teaches that He gave him as much wisdom as all Israel, who are compared to the sand, as stated (in Hos. 2:1), ‘The number of the Children of Israel shall be like that of the sands of the sea. R. Levi said, “Just as sand is a wall and a fence for [the sea], that it not go out and flood the world; so was wisdom a fence for Solomon.” The proverb says, “If you lack knowledge, what have you gained? If you have gained knowledge, what do you lack?” Like (in Prov. 25:28) “A city broken into with no walls,” so “is a person who does not restrain his spirit.” (I Kings 5:10) “Now Solomon's wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the East”: And what was the wisdom of the peoples of the East?²⁹Above, Gen. 7:24; PR 14:9. [In that] they were astute at divination (from birds). Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel said, “I like three things, etc.” (I Kings 5:10, cont.) “From all the wisdom of Egypt”: What was the wisdom of Egypt? You find that when Solomon wanted to build the Temple, he sent to Pharaoh Necho and said to him, “Send me craftsmen [to work] for a wage, for I want to build the Temple.” What did Pharaoh do? He gathered all his astrologers³⁰Gk.: astrologoi. and said to them, “Foresee which people are going to die this year and send them to him.” When they came to Solomon, he foresaw through the holy spirit that they would die during that year. He [therefore] gave them shrouds and sent them [back] to [Pharaoh]. He sent to him, saying, “Do you not have shrouds to bury your dead? Here they are for you with their shrouds.” (I Kings 5:11) “And he was wiser than any man (literally, than all of Adam),” than the first Adam. And what was his wisdom? You find that, when the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to create the first Adam, He consulted with the ministering angels. He said to them (in Gen. 1:26), “Let us make humankind (Adam) in Our image.” They said to him (in Ps. 8:5), “What is a human that You are mindful of him?” He said to them, “This Adam that I want to create Adam shall have wisdom greater than yours.” What did He do? He gathered all cattle, wild beasts, and fowl to pass before them. He said to them, “What are the names of these [beings]?” They, however, did not know. When He had created Adam, He made them pass before him. He said to him, “What are the names of these [beings]?” He said, “It is fitting to call this one an ox, this one a lion, this one a horse, [...]” and so on for all of them. It is so stated (in Gen. 2:20), “So Adam recited names”³¹The understanding of the midrash is that the creatures implicitly already possessed names. He said to him, “And you, what is your name?” Adam said to him, “Adam, because I was created out of the ground (adamah).” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “I, what is My name?” He said to him, “The Lord, because you are Lord over all creatures,” namely as written (in Is. 42:8), “I am the Lord, that is My name,” which the first Adam gave me. It is the one which I have agreed to [for use] between Me and Myself; it is the one which I have agreed to [for use] between Me and My creatures. (I Kings 5:11, cont.) “[Wiser] than Ethan the Ezrahite”: This is Abraham, of whom it is stated (in Ps. 89:1), “A maskil (a psalm of erudition) of Ethan the Ezrahite.”³²It is assumed, of course that Abraham wrote the Psalm, an assumption based on a comparison of Ps. 89:1 and Is. 41:2: WHO HAS RAISED UP RIGHTEOUSNESS FROM THE EAST?. See BB 15a. The Ezrahite (‘ezrahi) of Ps. 89:1 is understood in the sense of “Easterner,” and Ethan (which means “steadfast”) is regarded as equivalent to “righteous.” For another argument identifying Ethan and Abraham, see PR 6:5. (I Kings 5:11, cont.) “And Heman (rt.: 'mn)”: This is Moses, of whom it is stated (in Numb. 12:7 with reference to Moses), “[… he is trusted (rt.: 'mn) in all My house].” (I Kings 5:11, cont.) “Calcol (klkl)”: This is Joseph, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 47:12), “And joseph sustained (rt.: klkl) [his father and his brothers].” The Egyptians said, “Has this slave come to rule over us for any reason but because of his wisdom?” What did they do to him? They brought seventy tablets³³Gk.: piyyakia; Lat.: pittacia. and wrote on them in seventy tongues. Then when they cast them before him, he read each and every one in its own tongue. And not only that, but he spoke in the holy tongue, which they did not have the ability to understand, as stated (in Ps. 81:6), “He made it a statute upon Joseph, when he went out over the land of Egypt. I hear a language I had not known.” (I Kings 5:11, cont.) “Darda (drd')]:” This is the generation (dor) of the desert, which had knowledge (de'ah). (I Kings 5:11, cont.) “The children of Mahol,” i.e., the Children of Israel whom the Divine Presence forgave (rt.: mhl) for the deed of the calf. (I Kings 5:12) “Moreover he composed three thousand proverbs”: R. Samuel bar Nahmani said, “We have gone over all of the scriptures and have found that Solomon only uttered prophetically close to eight hundred verses.³⁴See Cant. R. 1:1:11. Then what is meant by three thousand? [This number] teaches that each and every verse that he spoke contains two [or] three interpretations, just as it says (in Prov. 25:12), ‘Like an earring of gold, a necklace of fine gold, [so is a wise reprover to a listening ear].’”³⁵The midrash understands the WISE REPROVER TO BE Solomon himself, who is likened to both a golden earring and a golden necklace. But the rabbis say, “Every verse has three thousand proverbs, while each and every proverb has a thousand and five interpretations.” [(I Kings 5:12, cont.) “And his song numbered a thousand and five”:] “His songs” is not written here, but “his song,” the song of the proverb. (I Kings 5:13) “And he spoke with/concerning ('al)³⁶The point of the midrash in this and in the following chapter concerns whether to understand ‘al as “with” or “concerning.” the trees”: Is it possible that a person would speak with the trees? Solomon merely said, “For what reason is a leper cleansed through the tallest among the trees (the cedar) and through the lowest of the low (the hyssop); through (according to Lev. 14:4) cedar wood, [crimson stuff,] and hyssop?’ It is simply because he had exalted himself like the cedar, that he was stricken with leprosy. As soon as he humbled himself like the hyssop, he was therefore cured through hyssop”. (I Kings 5:13, cont.) “He also spoke with/concerning ('al) the cattle and the fowl”: Is it possible that [a person] would speak with cattle and with fowl? Rather [the passage is concerned with] why the cattle are permitted [as food] with [the cutting of] two organs³⁷Gk.: semeia (“signs,” “omens”). (the gullet and the windpipe); but the fowl, with [the cutting of] one organ (i.e., the gullet or the windpipe).³⁸See Hul. 2:1; Hul. 27b. Because cattle were created from the dry land. But in regard to fowl, one text says [they came] from the dry land, while another text says [they came] from the sea. [The text stating fowls came] from the dry land is what is written (in Gen. 2:19), “So from the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the heavens.” The other text says (in Gen. 1:20), “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures and the fowl fly above the earth.”³⁹This unusual translation of Gen. 1:20 is required by the midrash. Bar Qappara said, “They were created from the mud which is in the sea.” R. Abbin said the name of R. Jose the Galilean said, “Nevertheless, the feet of the cock resemble the scaly skin⁴⁰Reading HSPNYT’ with the parallel in Yalqut Shim‘oni, Kings, 178, for Buber’s HRTsPYTYH. of the fish.”⁴¹A fish of the genus anthias. (I Kings 5:13, cont.) “And with/concerning ('al) the creeping things”: Is it possible that one would speak with a creeping thing? Solomon simply said, “What is the reason that in the case of the eight swarming creatures which are in the Torah, one is culpable for hunting or injuring them (on the Sabbath)⁴²Shab. 14:1.; but in the case of the rest of the swarming creatures, one is exempt?⁴³Shab. 14:1. For the reason that they (i.e. the former) have skins.”⁴⁴Shab. 107ab, explains that in the case of skin, as distinct from the flesh, a wound does not completely heal but leaves a scar. Thus part of the animal’s life is lost. See yShab. 14:1 (14b); also Hul. 9:2. Cf. Rashi on Shab. 14:1, according to whom cutting the skin causes blood to color it in a form of dying, an act forbidden on the Sabbath. (I Kings 5:13 cont.) “And with/concerning ('al) the fish”: Is it possible that one would so speak? Solomon merely said, “For what reason do cattle, beasts, and birds require ritual slaughtering, while fish do not require ritual slaughtering?” Rather it is from this verse (in Numb. 11:22), “Are there enough flocks and herds to slaughter for them; [are there enough fish in the sea to gather for them]?” Jacob the man of Kefar Nibburayya taught in Tyre with respect to fish, that they do require ritual slaughtering. When R. Haggai heard, he sent for him to come. He said to him, “On what basis did you decide this?” He said to him, “From here (in Gen. 1:20), ‘Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let the fowl fly.’ Just as fowl require ritual slaughtering, so do the fish require ritual slaughtering.” He said to them (i.e., those standing by), “Lay him down to receive lashes.” He said to him, “Shall a person who speaks words of Torah be lashed?” He said to him, “You did not decide [the law] well.” He said to him, “On what basis?” He said to him, “From here (in Numb. 11:22), ‘Are there enough flocks and herds to slaughter for them; are there enough fish in the sea to gather for them?’ The former require ritual slaughtering, while the latter [is taken] through gathering.” He said to him, “Give [me] your beating, as it is good for retention.” And again did Jacob the man of Kefar Nibburayya teach in Tyre, [this time] with respect to an Israelite man, who came upon a foreign woman and had her bear him a son, that he should be circumcised on the Sabbath. When R. Haggai heard, he sent for him to come. He said to him, “On what basis do you hold this?” He said to him, “[From this which is written] (in Numb. 1:18) ‘then they registered their lineages according to their families according to the house of their fathers.’” He said to them (i.e., those standing by), “Lay him down to receive lashes.” He said to him, “Shall a person who speaks words of Torah be lashed?” He said to him, “You did not decide [the law] well.” He said to him, “From where can you show me?” He said to him, “If one of the gentiles came to you in order to become a proselyte on condition that you circumcise him on the Sabbath day or on the Day of Atonement, would you profane the Sabbath on account of him or not? Is it not true that one does not profane the Sabbath or the Day of Atonement for him but only for the son of an Israelite woman.” He said to him, “On what basis do you hold this?” He said to him (in Ezra 10:3), “So now let us make a covenant with our God to put away all (foreign) wives and (anyone] born of them […].” He said to him, “Would you lash me on the basis of [a non-Mosaic text]?” He said to him, “It is written (ibid.), ‘let it be done [according to] the Torah.’” He said to him, “From which [piece of] Torah?” He said to him, “From that of R. Johanan, when he said in the name of R. Simeon ben Johay, ‘It is written (in Deut. 7:3), “You shall not intermarry with them; do not give your daughters to their sons.” Why? (As in Deut. 7:4,) “Because they will turn your children away from following me.” Your child that comes from an Israelite woman is called "your child"; but that which comes from a foreign woman is called, not "your child," but "her child,” as stated (in Gen. 21:13), “And I will also make the son of the maidservant into a nation.”’" He said to him, “Give [me] your beating, as it is good for retention.” Solomon said, “About all these things I have knowledge; but in the case of the parashah on the red heifer, I have investigated it, inquired into it, and examined it. [Still] (at the end of the verse in Eccl. 7:23), ‘I thought I could fathom it, but it eludes me.’”

(8) A gentile asked Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, "These rituals you do, they seem like witchcraft! You bring a heifer, burn it, crush it up, and take its ashes. [If] one of you is impure by the dead [the highest type impurity], 2 or 3 drops are sprinkled on him, and you declare him pure?!" He said to him, "Has a restless spirit ever entered you?" He said to him, "No!" "Have you ever seen a man where a restless spirit entered him?" He said to him, "Yes!" [Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai] said to him, "And what did you do for him?" He sad to him, "We brought roots and made them smoke beneath him, and pour water and it flees." He said to him, "Your ears should hear what leaves from your mouth! The same thing is true for this spirit, the spirit of impurity, as it is written, (Zachariah 13:2) "Even the prophets and the spirit of impurity will I remove from the land." They sprinkle upon him purifying waters, and it [the spirit of impurity] flees." After he left, our rabbi's students said, "You pushed him off with a reed. What will you say to us?" He said to them, "By your lives, a dead person doesn't make things impure, and the water doesn't make things pure. Rather, God said, 'I have engraved a rule, I have decreed a decree (chukah chakakti, gezeira gazarti), and you have no permission to transgress what I decreed, as it says "This is a chok (rule) of the Torah."

(8) A gentile asked Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, "These rituals you do, they seem like witchcraft! You bring a heifer, burn it, crush it up, and take its ashes. [If] one of you is impure by the dead [the highest type impurity], 2 or 3 drops are sprinkled on him, and you declare him pure?!" He said to him, "Has a restless spirit ever entered you?" He said to him, "No!" "Have you ever seen a man where a restless spirit entered him?" He said to him, "Yes!" [Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai] said to him, "And what did you do for him?" He sad to him, "We brought roots and made them smoke beneath him, and pour water and it flees." He said to him, "Your ears should hear what leaves from your mouth! The same thing is true for this spirit, the spirit of impurity, as it is written, (Zachariah 13:2) "Even the prophets and the spirit of impurity will I remove from the land." They sprinkle upon him purifying waters, and it [the spirit of impurity] flees." After he left, our rabbi's students said, "You pushed him off with a reed. What will you say to us?" He said to them, "By your lives, a dead person doesn't make things impure, and the water doesn't make things pure. Rather, God said, 'I have engraved a rule, I have decreed a decree (chukah chakakti, gezeira gazarti), and you have no permission to transgress what I decreed, as it says "This is a chok (rule) of the Torah."