Tzohar: Window into A Philosophy of Language in Hebrew

Every day, consciously and unconsciously, human beings scatter heaps of words to the wind, with all their various associations; few men indeed know or reflect on what these words were like in the days when they were at the height of their power.

Many of these words came into the world only after difficult and prolonged birth pangs endured by many generations. Others flashed like sudden lightning to illuminate with one leap a complete world.

Many were paths through which living hosts passed, each leaving behind its shadow and odor. There were words which served as receptacles for delicate and profound thoughts and exalted emotions.

Some words were like the high mountains of the Lord, others were a great abyss. Sometimes all the vital essence of a profound philosophic system, its complete immortality, were hidden in one small world. There were words that laid low nations and lands in their time, deposed kings from their thrones, shook the foundations of heaven and earth. But there came a day when these same words, having fallen from their height, were thrown aside, and now people wallow in them as they chat, as casually as one wallows in grass.

Is this cause for wonder? The laws of nature are not to be questioned. That is the way of the world: Words rise to greatness, and, falling, turn profane. What is essential is that language contains no word so slight that the hour of its birth was not one of powerful and awesome self-revealment, a lofty victory of the spirit. So, for example, it was with the first man, when, taken aback by the sound of thunder (“The voice [sound] of the Lord is in the power, the voice [sound] of the Lord is in the glory”), overcome by amazement and terror-stricken, he fell on his face before the divinity. Then a kind of savage sound burst spontaneously from his lips—let us assume, in imitation of nature—resembling a beast’s roar, a sound close to the “r. .r” to be found in the words for thunder in many languages. Did not this savage cry vastly free his confounded soul? Was a smaller measure of the power, the fearfulness, and the exultation of creative victory revealed in this echo of a spirit shaken to its depths than are revealed in the “happy phrases” on exalted subjects expressed by any of the great seers in moments of spiritual elevation? Did not this meager syllable, this seed of the future word, embrace a complete volume of primordial emotions, powerful in their novelty and vigorous in their savagery, resembling terror, fear, amazement, submission, astonishment, preparedness for self-defense, and the like? And if this was true, was not the first man himself at that moment an artist and lofty seer, an intuitive creator of an expression—and a very faithful expression, for himself, at any rate—pointing to a deep and complicated inner disturbance? As one thinker has commented, how much of profound philosophy, of divine revealment was there in that small word “I” that the first man uttered!

Nevertheless, before our very eyes these same words, and a great many others like them, are being lost in language—and it does not matter. We are inwardly almost untouched. Their core is consumed and their spiritual strength fades or is hidden, and only their husks, cast out from the private domain to the public, still persist in language, doing slack service within the limited boundaries of logic and social intercourse, as external signs and abstractions for objects and images. It has come to the point where the human language has become two languages, built upon one another’s destruction: one, an internal language, that of solitude and the soul, in which what is essential is “how?” as in music—the domain of poetry; the other, the external language, that of abstraction and generalization, in which the essential is “what?” as in mathematics—the domain of logic.

Who knows whether it is not for the best that man should inherit the husk of a word without its core—for thus he can fill the husk, or supply it constantly from his own substance, and pour his own inner light into it. “Every man prefers his own measure.” If the spoken word were to remain throughout history at the height of its glowing power, if the same complex of emotion and thought which became attached to it in its prime were to accompany it always, perhaps no “speaking creature” would ever attain to its self-revealment and particular illumination. In the final analysis, an empty vessel can hold matter, while a full vessel cannot; if the empty word enslaves, how much more is this true of the full word?

What is there to wonder at? This:—the feeling of security and the satisfaction that accrue to human beings when they speak, as though they are really leading their thoughts or feelings beside the still waters and across the iron bridge of the Messiah, without their having any conception of how shaky is their bridge of mere words, how deep and dark the void is that opens at their feet, and how much every step taken safely partakes of the miraculous.

For it is clear that language with all its associations does not introduce us at all into the inner area, the essence of things, but that, on the contrary, language itself stands as a barrier before them. On the other side of the barrier of language, behind its curtain, stripped of its husk of speech, the spirit of man wanders ceaselessly. “There is no speech and there are no words,” but only a perpetual search, an eternal “what?” frozen on man’s lips. In truth, there is no place even for this “what?”, implying as it does the hope of a reply. Rather there is—“nothingness”; man’s lips are closed. If, nevertheless, man does achieve speech and with it contentment, it is only because of the extent of his fear at remaining alone for one moment with that dark “void,” face to face with the “nothingness,” with no barrier between them. “For man shall not look on me and live,” says the void, and every speech, every pulsation of speech, partakes of the nature of a concealment of “nothingness,” a husk enclosing within itself a dark seed of the eternal “stet” [let it stand]. No word contains the complete dissolution of any question. What does it contain? The question’s concealment. It makes no difference what the particular word is—you can exchange it for another—just so long as it contains the power momentarily to serve as concealment and barrier. Dumb music and symbolic mathematics—two hostile kin at two parallel extremes—attest unanimously that the word is not necessarily what it seems, that it is nothing but web and woof of the void. Or rather, just as physical bodies become sensible to the eye and determinate by virtue of the fact that they serve as barriers before light in space, so the word’s existence takes place by virtue of the process by which it closes up the small aperture of the void, constructing a barrier to prevent the void’s darkness from welling up and overflowing its bounds.

_____________

He who sits alone in the depths of darkness, trembling, speaks to himself: he recites the Confessional, or whispers a word. Why? Because the word is a “talisman” which serves to divert him and to dissipate his fear. It is the same with the spoken word—or with complete systems of words. The word’s power does not consist in its explicit content—if, generally speaking, there is such a thing—but in the diversion that is involved in it.

Averting one’s eyes is, in the final resort, the easiest and most pleasant means, although an illusory one, of escape from danger; in situations where keeping one’s eyes open constitutes the danger there is really no securer refuge, and “Moses did well to conceal his face.

Who knows, perhaps the truth is that from the time of creation speech has not been cast as a social vessel to pass between two men, i.e., it has not been speech for its own sake. It may have always had its source in men sitting alone, speaking to themselves, as a spiritual need, i.e., “speech for its own sake” falling in the class of “When my spirit within me is dumb, I shall speak unto my heart. . . .” The first man was not content until he had spoken himself aloud for himself to hear. For the sound that at the time of creation drew man’s self-recognition up from the depths of the void—that very sound suddenly stood as a dividing wall between man and that which is on the “other side,” as though to say: “Henceforth, O man, thou shalt direct thy face toward that which is ‘on this side.’ Thou shalt not look behind thee, and if thou shouldst—it shall not avail thee, for man shall not see the ‘void’ face to face and live. The dream that is forgotten shall not be recalled. Thy desire shall be to the ‘void’ and speech shall rule over thee.”

And, in truth, “knowledge and speech” rule only over that which is “on this side,” within the four cubits of space and time. “Man walketh in the shadow merely”; the nearer he approaches the illusory light that is before him, the larger grows the shadow behind him, and the surrounding darkness is never lessened. Perhaps “on this side” everything can be explained—strictly or liberally, but explained. What is essential is that man’s atmosphere of knowledge must never for a single moment be rid of words, crowded and consecutive like the links in a suit of armor, without so much as a hair’s breadth between them. The light of knowledge and speech—the glowing coal and the flame—is an eternal light that must not be extinguished. Indeed, the very area “on this side” that lies within the bounds of the illusory light—in the final analysis, of what importance is it compared with the endless sea of universal darkness that still remains, and will always remain, outside?

And, in the final analysis, it is that very eternal darkness that is so fearsome—that darkness that from the time of creation has always secretly drawn man’s heart to it, arousing his hidden yearning to gaze on it for a brief moment. Every man is afraid of it, and every man is drawn to it. With our very lips we construct barriers, words upon words and systems upon systems, and place them in front of the darkness to conceal it; but then our nails immediately begin to dig at those barriers, in an attempt to open the smallest of windows, the tiniest of cracks, through which we may gaze for a single moment at that which is “on the other side.” But alas, vain is the labor of man! At the very moment when the crack is apparently opened—another barrier, in the shape of a new word or system, suddenly stands in the place of the old, shutting off the view again.

_____________

Thus, there is never an end. A word Cometh and a word goeth, a system riseth and a system falleth—and the old eternal “stet” remains as powerful as ever, unalterable and irreducible. Signing a note, or listing a debt in a ledger, is far from being the debt’s liquidation; it merely momentarily removes the note’s burden from one’s memory—and no more. The same is the case with definitive speech, that is to say, the assignment of names and the putting up of orderly fences around images and their associations. No reply to the question of essence is ever possible in the process of speech. Even the express reply to a question is really no more than another version of the question itself—“this is amazing” we understand as meaning “pause and think” (a form of concealment instead of revealment). If we were to strip all the words and systems completely bare to their innermost core, in the end, after the last reduction, we should be left with nothing in our hands but one all-inclusive word. Which? Again, the same terrible “what?” behind which stands the same X, even more terrible—the “nothingness.” Man chooses to tear the debt into small pieces under the false illusion that he is thus easing the final payment. When this illusion fails him, he exchanges the present word for another, the present system for another—that is to say, he writes a new note to take the place of the old, and delays or gives himself more time for the final payment In either event the debt is never paid in full.

So, a word or system declines and yields to another, not because it has lost the power to reveal, to enlighten, to invalidate the “stet,” either totally or in part, but for the very opposite reason—because the word or system has been worn out by being manipulated and used, is no longer able to conceal and hide adequately, and can, of course, no longer divert mankind momentarily. Man, gazing for a moment through the open crack, finding to his terror that awesome “void” before him again, hurries to close the crack for a time—with a new word. That is to say, he seizes the new “talisman,” like its predecessor a proven momentary diversion—and is saved from the terror.

Do not wonder at this! The “talisman” is effective for those who believe in it, for faith itself is no more than a diversion. Do not the “speaking creatures” themselves provide an analogy? So long as man moves and breathes—he occupies space and everything is apparently comprehensible; “everything is all right.” All the flow of life, all its content, is nothing but a continuous effort, an unremitting toil to be diverted. Every moment spent in “pursuit of” is at the same time a “flight from,” and flight, and flight alone, is its wages. The wages of pursuit is flight. At every moment the pursuer finds his momentary happiness not in that which he attains to, but in that which he escapes from, a fact which gives him a momentary shadow of security. “For to him that is joined to all the living there is security”.

But man dies—and his space becomes unoccupied. There is nothing to serve as a diversion—and the barrier is down. Everything suddenly becomes incomprehensible. The hidden X descends upon us in all its fearful shape—and we sit mourning on the earth before it for a moment in darkness and dumb as a stone. But for a moment only. For the Master of all life anticipates the opening with a closing. He immediately furnishes us with a new “talisman” with which to divert ourselves and dissipate the fear. Before the covering stone is sealed over the dead, the space that was emptied is again occupied with a word, whether it be one of eulogy, or solace, or philosophy, or belief in the soul’s immortality, or the like. The most dangerous moment—both in speech and in life—is that between concealments, when the void looms. But such moments are very rare both in speech and in life, and for the most part men skip over them unawares. “The Lord preserveth the simple.”

_____________

From all that has been said, it would appear that there is a vast difference between the language of the masters of prose and that of the masters of poetry. The former, the masters of exposition, find their sanction in the principle of analogy, and in the elements common to images and words, in that which is established and constant in language, in the accepted version of things—consequently, they walk confidently through language. To what may they be compared? To one who crosses a river walking on hard ice frozen into a solid block. Such a man may and can divert his attention completely from the covered depths flowing underneath his feet. But their opposites, the masters of allegory, of interpretation and mystery, spend all their days in pursuit of the unifying principle in things, of the solitary something, of the point that makes one body of all the images, of the fleeting moment that is never repeated. They pursue their solitary inwardness and the personal quality of things. Therefore, the latter [the masters of allegory] are forced to flee all that is fixed and inert in language, all that is opposed to their goal of the vital and mobile in language. On the contrary, using their unique keys, they are obliged themselves to introduce into language at every opportunity—never-ending motion, new combinations and associations. The words writhe in their hands; they are extinguished and lit again, flash on and off like the engravings of the signet in the stones of the High Priest’s breast-plate, grow empty and become full, put off a soul and put on a soul. By this process there takes place, in the material of language, exchanges of posts and locations: one mark, a change in the point of one iota, and the old word shines with a new light.

The profane turns sacred, and the sacred profane. Long-established words are constantly being pulled out of their settings, as it were, and exchanging places with one another. Meanwhile, between concealments the void looms. And that is the secret of the great influence of the language of poetry. And to what may they [the masters of allegory] be compared? To one who crosses a river when it is breaking up, by stepping across floating, moving blocks of ice. He dare not set his foot on any one block for longer than a moment, longer than it takes him to leap from one block to the next, and so on. Between the breaches the void looms, the foot slips, danger is close. . . .

Nevertheless, some of this group, too, “enter in peace and leave in peace,” crossing in safety from one shore to the other, “for the Lord preserveth not merely the simple.”

So much for the language of words. But, in addition, “there are yet to the Lord” languages without words: song, tears, and laughter. And the speaking creature has been found worthy of them all. These languages begin where words leave off, and their purpose is not to close but to open. They rise up from the void. They are the rising up of the void. Therefore, at times they overflow and sweep us off in the irresistible multitude of their waves; therefore, at times they cost a man his wits, or even his life. Every creation of the spirit which lacks an echo of one of these three languages is not really alive, and it were best that it had never come into the world.

(16) Make a Tzohar for the ark, and terminate it within a cubit of the top. Put the entrance to the ark in its side; make it with bottom, second, and third decks.

What is the meaning of a door in the side: for he says, "Thou shalt make a door in the side?" (Genesis 6:16).

That door in the side very plainly betokens a human building, which he has becomingly indicated by calling it, "in the side," by which door all the excrements of dung are cast out. In truth, as Socrates says, whether because he learnt it from Moses or because he was influenced by the facts themselves, the Creator, having due regard to the decency of our body, has placed the exit and passage of the different ducts of the body back out of the reach of the sense, in order that while getting rid of the fetid portions of bile, we might not be disgusted by beholding the full appearance of our excrements. Therefore he has surrounded that passage by the back and posteriors, which project out like hills, as also the buttocks are made soft for other objects. Why has he said that the lower part of the ark was to be made with two and with three stories? (Genesis 6:16). He has here admirably indicated the receptacles of food, calling them the inner parts of the house; since food is corruptible, and what is corruptible belongs to the inward part, because it is borne downwards, since some small portions of meat and drink which we take are borne upwards, but the greater part is secreted and cast out into dung; and the intestines have been made in two and in three stories, because of the providence of the Creator in order to supply abundant support to his creatures; for if he had made the receptacles of food and its passage having a direct communication between the bowels and the buttocks, some awkward circumstances must have taken place; in the first place there would have been a frequent deficiency, and want and hunger, and sudden evacuations also arising from divers unseasonable events; in the second place there would have been an immense hunger, for when the receptacles are emptied, it is inevitable that hunger and thirst must immediately supervene, like absolute mistresses in difficulty from pregnancy, and then it follows also that the pleasant appetite for food must be perverted into greediness and into an unphilosophical state; for nothing is so very inconvenient as for the belly to be empty. And in the third place, there will be death waiting at the door; since those persons must speedily be overtaken by death who the very moment that they have done eating begin again to be hungry, and the moment that they have drunk are again thirsty, and who before they are thoroughly filled are again evacuated and oppressed by hunger; but owing to the long coils and windings of the bowels we are delivered from all feelings of hunger, from all greediness, and from being prematurely overtaken by death; for while the food which has been taken remains within us, not for such a time only as the distance to be passed requires, but for so long as was necessary for us, a change in it is effected; since by the pressure to which it is subjected, the strength of the food is extracted in the first instance in the belly; then it is armed in the liver, and drawn out; after that whatever predominant flavour there was is emitted upwards to the separate parts, in the case of boys in order to contribute to their growth, and in the case of fullgrown men to add to their strength; and then nature, collecting the remaining portions into dung and excrement, casts them out. Therefore a great deal of time is necessarily required for the arrangement of so many and such important affairs, nature effecting its operations without difficulty by perseverance. Moreover the ark itself appears to me to be very fitly compared to the human body; for as nature is exceedingly prolific of living creatures, for that very reason it has prepared an opposite receptacle similar to the earth for the creatures corrupted and destroyed by the flood; for whatever was alive and supported on the earth, the ark now bore within itself in a more general manner, and on that account God ordained it, being borne upon the waters as it was, to be as it were like the earth, a mother and a nurse, and to exhibit the fathers of the subsequent race as if pregnant with it, together with the sun and moon, and the remaining multitude of the stars, and all the host of heaven; because men beholding by means of that which was made by art, a comparison and analogy to the human body, might in that manner be more manifestly taught, for this was the cause of the various disputes among mankind; since there is nothing which has so much contributed to keep man in a servile condition as the essential humours of the body, and the defects which arise in consequence of them, and most especially the vicious pleasures and desires.

May one check dark passages purposely by candlelight? The words of the rabbis imply that not as it radiates at night it radiates during the day, as Rav Huna said, when we were fleeing to these catacombs of the great assembly they were lighting candles for us. When they were faint, we knew that it was day; when they were bright we knew that it was night. This parallels what Rebbi Aḥawa bar Ze`ira said, when Noah entered the Ark he brought with him precious stones and pearls. When they were dull, he knew that it was daytime; when they were shiny he knew that it was nighttime.Why? There are animals eating at daytime and there are animals eating at nighttime. But is there not written, make a skylight to the ark? Following him who said that the stars were not operative in the year of the flood.

With regard to the verse: “A tzohar you shall make for the ark” (Genesis 6:16), Rabbi Yoḥanan says that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Noah: Set precious stones and jewels in the ark so that they will shine for you as the afternoon [tzohorayim] sun.

"Make a tzohar for the ark" - R' Aba bar Kahana said: [Tzohar] is a window. R' Levi said: An opalescent gem. R' Pinchas said in the name of R' Levi: The entire twelve months Noah was in the ark, he did not need the light of the sun in the day or the moon at night. Rather, he had the gem, and he relied on it. When it dimmed, he knew it was day, and when it brightened, he knew it was night.

Rabbi Meir said: One pearl was suspended in the ark, and shed light upon all the creatures in the ark, like a lamp which gives light inside the house, and like the sun yonder which shines in his might, as it is said, "A light shalt thou make to the ark" (Gen. 6:16).

(צהר — Some say this was a window; others say that it was a precious stone that gave light to them (Genesis Rabbah 31:11).

A LIGHT. Tzohar (a light) means an opening through which light would enter. It comes from the same root as tzohorayim (noon). The opening was made in the usual place, on top of the ark. Scripture tells us that the top of the ark was a cubit in length. We gather from this that it was a sixth of a cubit wide. The ark was triangular in shape. Its top came to a point, and so did its corners. Therefore it did not overturn. The door was on one side and was reached by climbing a ladder. Now, we know that the ark was very large. Furthermore, it is possible that Noah was much taller than we, for the cubits mentioned with regard to the ark are Noah’s cubits. It is also possible, since the ark was divided into three stories, that the bottom story was ten cubits high. Some say that the ark had many stories and that Scripture abridged the number.

AND HE PUT HIM INTO PRISON, THE PLACE WHERE THE KING’s PRISONERS WERE BOUND. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra says that the verse itself explains that a beth haso’ar (prison) is “a place where the king’s prisoners were bound.” The reason this is stated in the verse itself is that beth haso’ar is an Egyptian word, for it is the style of Scripture to explain foreign words just as, they cast pur, that is the lot.
This interpretation is of no significance. Rather, And he put him into the prison, means that he put him into a certain prison recognized as the royal prison, which was the place where the king’s prisoners were bound. The sense of the verse is thus to state that this was the cause of the butler and the baker being imprisoned with him.
It is possible that the term, “the king’s prisoners,” means his servants and attendants who have sinned against him in matters of state, as other prisoners of the people sentenced by judges and officers were placed in another prison house. Scripture relates that they placed Joseph in the king’s prison because of his master’s love for Joseph, all of which was caused by G-d.
Linguists explain sohar as an arched chamber, similar in expression to, agan hasohar (a round goblet). In my opinion it is an underground house having a small opening above ground, through which the prisoners are lowered and from which they have light. The word sohar is thus derived from the word sihara (light) in Aramaic, just as in Hebrew, Scripture says; A transparency (‘tzohar’) shalt thou make to the ark, the word tzohar being derived from tzaharayim (mid-day — when the light reaches its zenith). The difference between tzohar and sohar is that tzohar connotes an abundance of light, while sohar connotes minimal light.

BEIN HA’ARBAYIM’ (AT EVENTIDE). “The period beginning at the sixth hour and onward, [counted from the beginning of the day, which in Torah-law is always divided into twelve hours], is called bein ha’arbayim (at eventide), because the sun inclines in the direction of its setting there to become darkened. It appears to me that the expression bein ha’arbayim denotes those hours which are between the beginning of the darkening of the day and the final darkening at night. The darkening of the day is at the beginning of the seventh hour of the day, from the time the shadows of the evening are stretched out, and the darkening of the night is at the beginning of the night. The word erev (night) is an expression of gloom and darkness, just as in the verse, All joy is ‘arbah’ (darkened).” Thus the language of Rashi.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra refuted [this explanation of Rashi] by pointing to the verse which says, And when Aaron lighteth the lamps ‘bein ha’arbayim’ [‘There is no doubt that he lights the lamps at sundown”], as it is written there, Aaron and his sons shall set it in order from evening to morning. [Thus it proves that bein ha’arbayim does not begin with the seventh hour of the day as Rashi would have it, but at sundown near night.] Besides, the verse regarding the paschal offering itself states: There thou shalt sacrifice the Passover-offering at even, at the going down of the sun, at the time thou camest forth out of Egypt, and “the going down of the sun” occurs at sunset. [How then could Rashi explain bein ha’arbayim mentioned here as commencing at the seventh hour of the day?]
But this is no refutation of the Rabbi’s [Rashi’s] explanation. Our Rabbis have already said that the meaning of the verse is as follows: “At even, you slaughter [the Passover-offering]; at the going down of the sun, you eat it; at the time thou camest forth out of Egypt, [i.e., in the morning of the fifteenth day of Nisan, it becomes nothar] and you burn it.” The Rabbi [Rashi] has already so commented [in his commentary to Deuteronomy 16:6].
The correct interpretation on this matter appears to me to be that the night is called erev, as it is said, ‘ba’erev’ ye shall eat unleavened bread. and this is at night, as it clearly states, And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread. Similarly, And there was ‘erev’ and there was morning, means the beginning of night when the stars do come forth. The same applies to the verse, In the twilight, ‘ba’erev’ of the day, in the blackness of night and the darkness, [where the word ba’erev, coming after “the twilight,” must signify the night]. Now the end of the day is also called erev, as the verses indicate: And the two angels came to Sodom ‘ba’erev,’ and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom; And it came to pass ‘ba’erev’ that the quails came up, and the quails did not come at night. There are many other such cases.
It is further written: ‘Erev,’ and morning, and at noonday, I will sigh and moan. Now these three periods include the whole day [of twenty-four hours. Therefore, if we interpret erev as meaning actual night, the hours from noonday to night will be missing here. We must] thus conclude that [the period] immediately after noonday is called erev, [which lasts from the latter part of the day till morning. Thus the verse encompasses the whole day of twenty-four hours].
Morning is so called from sunrise and thence onward as long as the sun remains in the east. This period lasts four hours, just as the Rabbis testified that the morning Daily Whole-offering [for the entire congregation of Israel] may be offered in the [first] four hours of the day [but not later].
After morning, the time is called tzohorayim (noonday), just as it is said, from morning until ‘tzohorayim’ (noon). It consists of two hours: the fifth and the sixth hours of the day. The word tzohorayim is of the root ‘tzohar’ (A light) shalt thou make to the ark, and implies brightness. It is written in the plural [tzohorayim] because it is the two [brightest parts of the day] which, so to speak, make two tzohorayim. It may be that it is written in the plural because light is then disseminated on all sides. In the morning the light is centered in the east, and towards evening it is in the west, but in the middle of the day when it is high in the sky, it gives light on all sides.
When tzohorayim (noonday) passes and the sun departs from shining upon two sides, the time of the day is called arbayim — [from the root erev (darkness)] - because the sun has darkened from [its state of shining on] those two sides. This period [of arbayim] lasts as long as the sun shines in the sky [and is permissible for the slaughtering of the Passover-offering]. But beginning with sundown, which is about an hour and a quarter [before the day terminates with the coming out of the stars], it is no longer the time for the slaughtering thereof according to the opinion of our Rabbis, for that period of time is no longer arbayim but rather erev yom (the evening of the day).
The reason it is called bein ha’arbayim [in the Torah, and not just arbayim], is not that the word bein signifies here “between,” [as Rashi above explained that the expression bein ha’arbayim denotes that time-period which is “between” the beginning of those hours, etc.], but it is something like “in their midst,” similar to these verses: Let there now be an oath ‘beinotheinu beineinu ubeinecha'; A piece of land worth four hundred shekels of silver, what is that ‘beini ubeincha’?; And her stature was exalted ‘al bein’ (among) the thick branches; Take fire ‘mibeinoth’ the wheelwork, which means from “within their midst”; Take up their fire-pans ‘mibein’ the burning, which means “from the midst thereof,” similar to the expression, She rises also ‘be’od’ night, which means in the midst of the night. And so is the expression bein ha’arbayim, [which signifies “in the midst of that part of the day called arbayim,” as explained above]. It does not state ba’arbayim, for that might have indicated the erev of many days. Thus Scripture is saying that we should slaughter the Passover-offering in the midst of the arbayim, since the time prescribed by the Torah for the slaughtering of the Passover-offering is from after the sixth hour of the day till the commencement of sunset. And Scripture also says, In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month ‘bein ha’arbayim’ (at eventide) is the Passover of the Eternal, which refers to the time of the slaughtering [of the Passover-offering]. Similarly, the verse, In the fourteenth day of this month ‘bein ha’arbayim’ ye shall observe it, refers to the beginning of the observance, which is the slaughtering, [while the eating of the Passover-offering takes place on the following night]. The verse stating [in connection with the quails], ‘bein ha’arbayim’ ye shall eat flesh, also refers to the hours mentioned, [i.e., from after the sixth hour of the day till the start of sunset], since they had extensive time for the eating of meat. The following verse there which states, And it came to pass ‘ba’erev’ (at even), that the quails came up, is [so stated] because on the first day, the quails came up for one hour within that period called erev. [Therefore it does not say, “and it came to pass bein ha’arbayim that the quails came up,” for that would have signified that the quails came up during the whole stretch of time from after the sixth hour of the day till sundown.]
It is possible to explain the expression bein ha’arbayim in accordance with the explanation of Rashi, i.e., that there are two kinds of erev, an erev of the morning and an erev of the day, for Scripture so calls them: the ‘minchah’ of the morning, and the ‘minchah’ of the evening, as it is said, And it came to pass in the morning, about the time of making the ‘minchah’, and it further says, And I sat appalled until the ‘minchah’ of the evening. And at the evening ‘minchah’ I arose up from my fasting. Now the word minchah is an expression denoting the resting of the sun and the diminution of its great light, just as the Targum rendered [l’ruach hayom] l’manach yoma (where the day comes to rest). And the plural form of arbayim connotes the two afternoons: “the greater afternoon,” [i.e., the time from six and a half hours after the beginning of the day], and “the smaller afternoon,” [i.e., from nine and a half hours after the start of the day until sunset], which the Sages have mentioned. Now during this entire period [of bein ha’arbayim], it is permissible to kindle the lamps of the candelabrum [in the Sanctuary] and to burn the incense, both of which are not permissible to be done at night but only at the time of the Daily Whole-offering of the eventide, and in fact their performance precedes the actual offering of the sacrifice upon the altar.
Onkelos’ opinion seems to incline towards this explanation [that the plural form of arbayim denotes two different parts of the day], for he translated bein ha’arbayim as bein shimshaya (between the suns), meaning the times when the sun is in the east and the sun is in the west. The verse stating, Aaron and his sons shall set it in order from evening to morning, means [that it be given its due measure of oil] so that it may burn a whole night [although the actual kindling thereof could be done anytime in the bein ha’arbayim. It does not mean, as Ibn Ezra explained, that this verse teaches that the kindling of the candelabrum took place at sundown].
Thus we can explain the verse, There thou shalt sacrifice the Passover-offering ‘ba’erev’ (at even), to mean at the above-mentioned time, [i.e., the afternoon], for that is called erev [as explained]. The following expression there, at the going down of the sun, is connected with the following verse, And thou shalt roast and eat it. There are many such cases in Scripture [where an expression in one verse is connected with the following verse].
In my opinion however, the verse, There thou shalt sacrifice the Passover-offering, does not at all refer to the time of the slaughtering thereof, [which took place on the afternoon of the fourteenth day of Nisan]. Rather, the purport thereof is to state that at the place which the Eternal thy G-d chose to establish His name in, there thou shalt observe [the commandment concerning] the Passover-offering at night, at the going down of the sun, which is the time thou camest forth out of Egypt. It is concerning this performance that Scripture says [in the following verse], And thou shalt roast and eat it in the place mentioned. The sacrifice itself is called zevach, as Scripture says, Thou shalt not offer the blood of ‘zivchi’ (My sacrifice) upon leaven, which means “My Passover-offering.”
This then is the purport of the whole chapter [in Deuteronomy]: Observe the month of Aviv, and observe the Passover unto the Eternal thy G-d; for in the month of Aviv the Eternal thy G-d brought thee forth out of Egypt by night, etc. Thou shalt eat no leavened bread with it. Thus He mentioned the observance of the Passover-offering and the night, [clearly indicating that in those verses, He refers only to the time of the eating of the Passover-offering, which occurs on the night of the fifteenth day, and not to the slaughtering thereof which takes place in the afternoon of the fourteenth day]. Commanding how they are to eat it, He then mentioned that [we must eat no leavened bread] for seven days. But in this entire chapter, there is not a single reference to the fourteenth day of Nisan on which the slaughtering of the Passover-offering takes place. Similarly He said there, Neither shall any of the flesh which thou sacrificest the first day at even, remain all night until the morning, Now the expression, the first day at even, [definitely] means the fifteenth day of Nisan, the first of the seven days mentioned, since the fourteenth day is not mentioned here at all. So also, the verse stating, On the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, means the night of the fifteenth day. Thus the intent of the expression, which thou sacrificest the first day at even, is that neither shall any of the flesh of the offering which you are eating on the night of the first day [of the seven-day festival] remain until the morning.

ויתנהו אל בית הסוהר, “and he put him in jail.” This is a kind of underground prison, a dungeon, a place where the mentally ill are kept nowadays (author’s time). These prisons have a small hole on top through which the prisoners are brought in and a little daylight is seen. The expression סוהר is similar to the word צוהר, which is used in Genesis 6,15 to describe the source of light in Noah’s ark. The exchange of the letters ס and צ respectively is not unique. The Torah next mentions that this was an extraordinary dungeon, reserved for the King’s highly placed servants if they had incurred his displeasure. This is why the Torah writes: “the place where the king’s prisoners would be kept locked up.” There were two jails within the same compound, the one reserved for the king’s prisoners being the “deluxe” accommodation. The main distinction between the two appears to have been the amount of daylight the prisoners enjoyed. The reason the Torah adds: “he (Joseph) remained there in the jail,” is in order to place these words next to the words ויהי ה' את יוסף, “G’d remained at Joseph’s side.” This teaches that even within the prison G’d’s שכינה, benevolent presence, remained with Joseph.(based on Mechilta Bo, 14).

Scientific books claim that the basic number of gemstones, (not allowing for variants, mutations) are only 12 in number, so that they were all represented on the breastplate of the High Priest. They may be considered as the “patriarchs” of all other precious stones. The reason that the gemstone assigned to the tribe of Reuven was the אודם was the fact that it symbolised the blush on his face when he owned up to being guilty of his misdemeanour in Bilhah’s tent. The fact that he was not ashamed to admit his guilt is a credit to him reflected by this red-coloured stone known as “rubin.” It is supposedly found in certain areas at the bottom of the sea. It is chipped of a great rock beneath the sea, and is mined similar to silver and gold. The rock is known as Balax. Rubin and Balax are supposedly two names for the same kind of stone. The difference between them is only that the variety known as rubin is reddish looking. Onkelos also translates the word אודם as סמקן, a red stone. It is the choicest of a number of sub-categories of the same basic kind of precious stone. Seeing it is red, an essential colour reminding us of blood, it is reputed to have the power to protect a woman who wears this jewel against ever aborting any fetus she carries. Women who wear jewelry made from this stone will give birth to babies that have been growing in their wombs for the full nine months. The stone is even supposed to have positive effects upon women who are having a difficult delivery. If this stone will be crushed into powder and consumed with food and drink it displays properties similar to those of the דודאים (mandrakes?), the plant which Leah “sold” Rachel in order to help her achieve pregnancy (compare author’s comment on Genesis 30,14). The shape of those dudaim which Reuven had found at the time was the outline of a human being. This is the reason that the word אודם, normally spelled with the letter ו was spelled without that letter in order to draw our attention to the spelling which could be read “Adam,”אדם . The reading of the word teaches the nature of the stone, whereas the spelling teaches the effect of that stone, its function.
Shimon’s stone פטדה, is a greenish-looking gemstone, similar to the turquoise colour of the sea in certain coastal cities. Onkelos also translates it as ירקן (emerald?). It is of the same group as the gemstone נפך, the stone with the name of Yehudah inscribed on it. Both are of similar colour, except that the stone described as נפך is the more precious of its group. It sparkles very much. The פטדה is inferior to the נפך both in colour and in sparkle. The greenish colour symbolises the terrible sexual licentiousness committed by that tribe who had caused the face of their leader Zimri to turn green in shame (Numbers 28,14). The same happened to all the other members of the tribe of Shimon who took part in that sin at that time. Darkon, dropsy, was the illness from which these people died. The positive feature of that gemstone is that it cools the body. This may be the reason it is found in hot countries such as Nubia (the Sudan). The people in that country are especially steeped in sexual licentiousness. They need to “cool off” in order to counteract their tendencies. This is why we read in Job 28,19 “topaz from Nubia cannot match its value (that of rubies).” The reason Job made this comparison was because these stones were found in Nubia.
The stone which bore the name of Levi was the ברקת, known popularly as carbuncle (a rounded gemstone without facets). It is so called as it flashes just like a bolt of lightning, ברק. It illuminates like a lamp. Onkelos also translates it as ברקן, a flashing stone. This was the gemstone Noach hung in the ark to provide him with light. The Torah referred to this light in Genesis 6,15 צהר תעשה לתבה. Isaiah refers to it as אקדח, in Isaiah 54,12 where, speaking of the future of Israel he writes: ”I will make your battlements rubies and your gates of precious stones, i.e. לאבני אקדח.” The name is justified as it appears glowing like red-hot coals. A similar expression occurs also in Isaiah 50,11: “kindlers of fire.” The reason this stone was chosen to symbolise Levi was that the Levites illuminate the people by teaching them spiritual illumination, i.e. Torah, as we know from Deut. 33,10 יורו משפטיך ליעקב ותורתך לישראל, “they teach Your judgments to Yaakov and Your Torah to Israel.” We also know of Moses, who was of the tribe of Levi, that the whole house was filled with light when he was born as the Midrash (Shemot Rabbah 1,24) interpreted the words in Exodus there (Exodus 2,2) that “she (his mother) saw that he was good.” Furthermore, when Moses returned from Mount Sinai with the second sets of Tablets the Torah testified that the skin of his face emitted rays of light (Exodus 34,29). We have another verse (Kohelet 8,1) “a man’s wisdom lights up his face.” The positive value of this gemstone is that it is apt to enlighten the foolish, providing him with insights he never had. This is in addition to the general usefulness of that jewel in providing light just as does a lamp. People say that if one pounds this carbuncle into fine dust and mixes it with food or drink as one mixes certain medicinal herbs into the food it proves very capable of providing wisdom and opening up previously “closed” hearts.
Yehudah’s name was inscribed on the gemstone called נפך as we mentioned already. This jewel is known either as merkedy or zemurah in Arabic. Onkelos’ translation azmoragdin, (emerald) can support either one of these names. He chose a combination of these two words. As already mentioned, it is a greenish stone of high luster and represented his shame-facedness in accusing his daughter-in-law Tamar’s pregnancy as being the result of harlotry when he himself had fathered the child she was carrying (Genesis 38,26). Seeing that he overcame his embarrassment and made a public confession of his own involvement, this stone, i.e. its color, was chosen as appropriate for him. In addition he also had had to bear the shame, i.e. his face turning green, in the matter of having sold Joseph and his father suspecting him of this though the matter had never been spoken of. When Yaakov blessed Yehudah on his deathbed saying: “from the prey, my son, you elevated yourself,” he wanted him to know that he suspected him of having been involved in the deception which had made Yaakov call out in anguish: “a wild beast has torn Joseph to shreds (Genesis 37,33).” When hearing his father say that he considered Yehudah as having elevated himself, i.e. having exonerated himself from that guilt, his face was restored to its original colour after all these years. It then resembled the appearance of the emerald giving off a sparkle. It is also written of Yehudah (Genesis 49,8) “your hand is at the neck of your enemy,” and the outstanding feature of the gemstone emerald is that people wearing it experience that their enemies turn their neck towards them, i.e. that they attempt to flee. This is the reason this jewel is known as נפך. The Bible comments on Yehudah’s bravery in battle more than once, and it is written of David (Samuel I 18,7) that he defeated his enemies in their tens of thousands, Of the messiah it is written: (Isaiah 11,4) “with the spirit (breath) of his mouth he will kill the wicked.”
Issachar’s name was inscribed on a jewel called ספיר, sapphire, a jewel known as sephily of a blue colour. It had been assigned to Issachar because he was extremely wise and his tribe excelled in Torah knowledge. This has been attested to in Chronicles I 12,32. We have a tradition that the Tablets with the Ten Commandments were made of sapphire (Tanchuma Ki Tissa 26). We also find another reference to this jewel in Exodus 24,10 where the vision of G’d seen by the elders and the nobles is described as their observing with their mental eyes the appearance of bricks made of sapphire. It is a well known fact that the souls of Torah scholars are part of a whole bundle of souls beneath the throne of G’d’s attribute כבוד. This is derived from Ezekiel 1,26: “as the semblance of a throne, in appearance like sapphire.” The blue color of this jewel is not like the blue which denotes haughtiness similar to certain shades of red or green; on the contrary, it is a color symbolizing humility, modesty, a character trait equally becoming to both young and old. This is what Isaiah 57,15 meant when he wrote: “I dwell on high, in holiness; yet with the contrite and lowly in spirit.” The outstanding feature of this jewel is that it is good for one’s eyesight; this is the reason people have a habit of passing this jewel back and forth in front of their eyes. It was appropriate for Issachar as Torah also provides enlightenment. There is a popular saying that this jewel is useful in getting rid of all manner of pains and any swelling one experiences in any part of one’s body. The Torah too is a powerful remedy for all parts of the body. We have been told in Eyruvin 54 that if someone suffers from headaches the best remedy is to immerse oneself in the study of Torah.
The name of Zevulun was inscribed on the gemstone known as יהלום, diamond. This gemstone is known as pirle, same as bedolach. It is clear, transparent. It is to remind us of “white” silver, an allusion to the material wealth of the tribe of Zevulun. We know from Yaakov’s blessing of Zevulun in Genesis 49,13 that he was a great trader sending his ships far afield in order to bring home wealth from foreign lands. It was appropriate therefore that the stone bearing his name was the diamond. The special property of the diamond for man is that it helps one to go to sleep, something Leah referred to when she (the mother of Zevulun) said after he was born: “this time my husband will make his permanent home with me” (Genesis 30,20). [I believe what the author meant was that possession of diamonds allows people to sleep easy as they feel emotionally and economically secure. Ed.]
The name of the tribe of Dan was inscribed on a gemstone called לשם, known as opal, or ashtefassis. It shows a human face turned upside down, reminiscent of the time when the tribe of Dan attempted to reverse the norms of Judaism by appointing for themselves a non-Levite as religious leader (compare Judges 18,31). We find in Joshua 19,47 that a certain town previously called Leshem was renamed Dan in commemoration of the founding father of that tribe. This city became an integral part of the land of Israel.
The name of the tribe of Naftali was inscribed on a jewel known as שבו, agate. It is commonly known as turquoise. [The various names which I have spelled in italics appear to be the equivalents of these gems’ names in Spanish or old French during the time of the author. Ed.] Onkelos also translates it as טרקיא. The special property ascribed to that gemstone was that it “pulls” man while riding in carriages or riding horses and enables him to become successful as a driver or rider. This occurs through man and beast developing mutual affinity for each other while man sits in the saddle. It was appropriate for Naftali to be associated with this gemstone as at the time he was born his step-mother Rachel had said that she had prevailed in a struggle with the attribute of Justice and her sister and as a result her handmaid had born this son for her. Rachel also had to use all her abilities (she thought) in order to have a son at least through her handmaid (compare Genesis 30,8).
The gemstone bearing the name of Gad was the אחלמה, popularly known as crystal. This is why Onkelos translates the word as עין עגלא. A better known gemstone called lemon is similar to it but reddish in appearance. The reason this gemstone was used to symbolize Gad was that seeing the gemstone crystal is very common and everyone is familiar with it, the members of the tribe of Gad were also widely known as were the people who had been slain by this tribe in the wars of Israel against the Canaanites. This is the meaning of Deut. 33,20 וטרף זרעו קדקד , “tearing off arm, and even head.” The special property of this gemstone is that it reinforces the resolve of one’s heart when going to war and prevents one from becoming faint-hearted. The gemstone gives man strength. It is called אחלמה, as that word is connected to מלחמה, attributes needed to be successful in battle. The expression occurs in that sense in Isaiah 38,16: ותחלימני ותחיני, “You have restored me to health and have revived me.” The idea is that G’d made King Chiskiyah strong again. Another verse with a similar message is Job 39,4 where G’d speaks to Job about the health of the hinds, etc., saying יחלמו בניהם ירבו בבר, “their young are healthy (strong) able to grow up in the open fields.”
The gemstone on which the name of the tribe of Asher was inscribed is called תרשיש, better known as cariolica, topaz, chrysolite. Its color is close to that of oil (olive oil). Others say that its color is azure-blue (compare R' David Kimchi). Onkelos translates it as כרום ימא, aquamarine. The reason is that the color of the sea resembles that of azure-blue. The name Tarshish appears also as a destination in the ship hired by the prophet Jonah, presumably because these gems could be found in that country. The special property of this topaz is to facilitate in the digestion of foods. It is even more important if one first pulverizes it and mixes the powder into one’s food. It will then make a mass similar to a mixture of flour and oil. The Torah extols Asher’s land portion within the land of Israel as being particularly full of oil, i.e. rich soil as we know from Yaakov’s blessing in Genesis 49,20.
The gemstone bearing the name of the tribe of Joseph was called שהם, better known as onyx. The special property of this jewel is that its owners enjoy favor in the eyes of people. The letters in that stone also spell השם when read in a different order. This is an allusion to the verse in Genesis 39,2: “G’d was with Joseph and he became a successful man;” or, Genesis 39,24 “G’d made the warden of the prison like Joseph, etc.” Anyone who wears the jewel in the king’s palace will find that he becomes very successful and that his suggestions will be well received.
The name of the gemstone on which Binyamin’s name was inscribed was ישפה, better known as jasper. It is a multi-colored gem consisting of red, black, green. Binyamin had many contradictory thoughts about the sale of Joseph by his brothers, all of which are reflected in the different colours of the jasper. The special property of that stone is that it stops the flow of blood. The reason this gemstone was assigned to the tribe of Binyamin had to do with the founder of that tribe not being able to decide if to tell his father that Joseph was most likely alive, or to keep silent as he could not foresee how Yaakov would react to such information. In the end he controlled himself, stopped himself, and did not reveal what he knew. The word ישפה may be understood as two words, i.e. יש פה, “he has a mouth,” or words to that effect. The name of that stone alludes to the fact hat Binyamin deserved credit for keeping silent about what he knew his brothers had done to his older brother Joseph.
This completes the discussion about the twelve gemstones on the breastplate of the High Priest. All the details connected with the stones, the breastplate, the inscriptions, etc., are part and parcel of the detailed supervision G’d exercises over the fate of the Jewish people in all its aspects.

(7) It is written: Evening, morning, and noon [I commune and murmur, and He hears my voice]' (Psalm 55:18). This verse has been established and discussed, but here is time of times of daily prayer, and the Companions have aroused the meaning of these three times. Evening is a speculum that does not shine; morning is a speculum that shines; non is not the place called darkness, but rather a place situated between this and that--though the time of mincha is the place called darkness, linked with evening, one standing with the other.

(8) As for the word noon, conveying the power of the sun, Scripture employs a euphemism. This is customary: a black person may be called white, (1) employing a euphemism; and sometimes white is called black, as is written: for he had taken an Ethiopian wife (Numbers 12: 1); Are you not like the Ethiopians to Me? (Amos 9:7).

(2) Evening is the evening prayer. Because this evening is intermingled with the Other Side, who darkens its light and rules the night, they have made it optional and without a set time. Sacrificial portions and fat are consumed at this time, nourishing numerous ravaging bands of dazzling demons who emerge to dominate the night. (Matt tr. Pritzker Zohar, vol. V, pp. 210-211).

Make a skylight (tzohar). To reconcile two views presented in the Midrash — this is the window through which he dispatched the raven and the dove, but as long as it was closed he hung there a luminous stone. On the plain level tzohar is related to yitzhar — “olive oil”; i.e. the ark was illuminated with an oil lamp. A window would have provided no light since the celestial bodies did not shine throughout the year of the flood.

(6) At the end of forty days, Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made

צוהר, “a light,” according to some commentators this source of light was a gem stone which refracted whatever light was available in all directions. Others believe that the reference is to some kind of window (transparent material) Our sages question that seeing that the sun and moon did not operate during the duration of the flood, what good would a window have done? The answer provided is that it would enable the people inside the ark to calculate when 12 months would have passed. This is not a satisfactory answer either; however we know that a window had functions other than the admitting of light from the outside, namely it served as a means to dispatch the raven and the dove, and it is written, "Noah opened the window of the ark, which he had made..." (Gen. 8:6)

(1) "Make an opening [tzohar] for the ark [teivah], closing up to a cubit at the top." (Genesis 6:16) -- The Baal Shem Tov, peace be upon him, explained these words in the following way: let the word (teivah) said in Torah or in prayer radiate light (matzhir)! For in every letter there are worlds, souls and divinity, that rise up and interconnect and cleave to one another and to the divine. Afterwards, these letters connect and conjoin, finally becoming a word. After that, they connect and unify unifications of truth in the Divine - and one must unify one's soul with each of the aforementioned aspects. In this way, all the worlds rise and become as one, and then there is immense joy and immeasurable delight... In each and every word one must listen to what is being spoken, since the Shechinah is the world of speech, as it is says (Zohar III:230a) "She speaks and He is Her escort." "Tzohar" - this 'opening' for light - that everything should be illuminated with clarity, giving pleasure to the Creator. For this, one needs great faith... It could be said that after the word leaves one's mouth, it does not need to be remembered again, one does not see that it rises to an elevated place, just as one can not look at the sun, as it says, "closing up at the top." How does one do all this? "Go into the ark [teivah], you and all your household." (Genesis 7:1) -- this means that with all your body and strengths, you shall enter the word [teivah]!

"Put the entrance to the ark in its side" - ...It is impossible for there to be darkness without light, evil without good, for light emerges and is perceived from within darkness, and similarly good emerges from evil, though it is hidden and concealed there. One must discern the good, so that evil is pushed off and goodness ascends. Through this one can understand what is written in the holy books of R' Yaakov Yosef [of Polnoye] in the name of my grandfather [the Ba'al Shem Tov], on the mishnah in Pirkei Avot (5:14): "There are four kinds of people who go to the beit midrash: [One who attends but does not practice, receives a reward for attendance]..." This applies to prayer, as well: sometimes strange thoughts come to a person, which obstruct the light of Torah and worship, G-d forbid, but one who has eyes of wisdom can understand that there is great light concealed and hidden within this darkness, for "there is no place devoid of G-d" (Tikkunei Zohar). And when one understands this and believes it with whole faith, then one's holy service, light, vitality, and goodness are strengthened, and through this one is able to refine and discern the good from the bad, with the bad falling away, that is, the murkiness and genuine waste falls away and descends, while the good ascends above...

This is what the verse means: If one sees that sometimes the light is obstructed and cannot become apparent or recognizable at all, and one does not know how to break through and reveal the light, regarding this [the Torah] said "Place an opening in the teiva," that is, crack open the word (teiva) so that it is not shut down or closed... "place it in the side," that is, if you search it out, you will find an opening for the word (teiva) in its side specifically, that is, in the darkness itself in which the light still resides though in concealment. It is not in heaven, and it is not across the sea... but rather it is very close, within your mouth." (Deut. 30:13) Understand.

...This is the meaning of: "Make a tzohar for the ark" (Genesis 6: 16). Rashi explains, "some say a window, and some say a gemstone." This is the difference between a window and a [glowing] gemstone: the window has no light of its own, but through it light enters. When there is no light, it does not illuminate. But a glowing gemstone, even when there is no light outside, gives light of its own. So too, there are people whose speech is a window, and who have no ability to give light on their own. This is like some say- their speech is made into "a window". And some say- and their speech is like "a gemstone" which gives its own light. All of this is because of the greatness of Truth. The essence of divine light, the core of Truth. And the essence of yearning for the divine towards Truth...

This is the meaning of the verse: “God said to Noach: ‘Make for yourself a teivah (an ark)…. Make a light for the ark, and to an amah (a cubit) techalenah (finish it) milemaalah (up above); and put the opening of the ark b’tzidah (in its side), and make it with a lower, second and third stories’” (Genesis 6:14-17). This is the explanation of, “Make a light for the ark.” Rashi explains: “some say a window, and some say a precious jewel.” The difference between a window and a precious jewel is that a window has no light of its own. It is simply [a medium] for the light to enter through. But when there is no light, the window does not give light. With a precious jewel, however, even when there is no outside light the jewel shines of itself. So, too, there are people whose words are [like] a window, incapable of giving them light on their own. This is [what Rashi means by] “some say.” Their “saying” becomes a window. And there are some whose “saying” becomes a precious jewel and [their words] radiate.

(3) “Seers” alludes to the Master of the Field when his eyes are in the aspect of “Seers Field.” He can then look upon and fix those that are close to the ultimate goal, so that when they reach the end of the prayer they are still “at the beginning of the [first] word.” And [he can also look] into those who are far from the ultimate goal. They correspond to “the end of the word,” because when they are at the end of the word, they are literally at the end of the [last] word. But the seers fix them and bring them to the ultimate goal, as explained above. This is the meaning of “they fixed which one is at the beginning of the word and which is at the end of the word”—i.e., [the Seers] fixed them so that when they would reach the end of the word, they would still be holding at the beginning.

(1) Modeh Ani. The first appearance of the exuberance of life brings with it the transcendent joy of holy rejoicing, which finds the fullness of its glorious expression through thanksgiving. Gratitude, recognizing the goodness of the Lord of the world, Master over all works, who in His goodness gives life to the living, is the storehouse of good. It contains all the substance of a fulfilment of obligation, as well as that spiritual refinement which comes through the fullness of love produced through relationship, and the neshama is illuminated by it, filled with light and joy. The teaching that there is an obligation to give thanks through language, particularly through the expression ‘grateful acknowledgement’ (modeh), is derived from two aspects of meaning in this term. One is thankfulness, todah, which results from gratitude toward the one who does good; the other is confession, hitvadut, which is an acknowledgement of the truth. The two are fit to one another. The first exuberance of life which meets one as they rise from sleep, finding before them a full, new world in all its wholeness and goodness, lifts up the light of the inner intellect to recognize the light and brilliance which lie at the foundation of life. In place of the muddied, physical perspective which is impressed in the nature of flesh, the spirit rises to a clear Divine perspective, to see the soul of the light of the Life-giver of the world in the splendor of its action. And moved by his feelings of thanksgiving, man acknowledges the truth, fulfilling the depths of the truth of spiritual awareness, testifying on all the light of life and existence, that it flows from the spring of goodness and its source, from the source of transcendent lovingkindness, which pours out abundant life to all the many worlds and their creations.

(2) I. A human finds oneself within one's inner self, through the light of the Divine life which appears within him, that fills him with the good spirit of a feeling of gratitude, of a recognition of the Divine goodness and its expression. Because of what consideration is man worthy in the weakness of his power, in his small nothingness, when compared to the mighty greatness of existence and the awesome powers of creation which crown it. Standing before them, filled with emptiness, human loses the substance of his selfhood. But when the light of recognition of the Divine goodness shines on him, and all the holy offshoots, powerful in their holy might, which it awakens with him – then a human comes to awareness of the greatness of his worth, of his ‘I-ness’ and its non-disappearance into the wholeness of existence. Then he finds himself filled with joys to say wholeheartedly, I.

(3). Before You: The first illumination of the sacred which is a phenomenon that is more clarified, that is more elevated

(4). King: The universal sovereignty of the world, the