Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Weak Spots in Creation/Enemies of Klal Yisrael/Kingdoms of the Nations -- All One

One of my favorite poems (ok... I've only read about four poems -- excluding Nursery Rhymes -- in my life, but saying it this way gives me the appearance of well read) is The Deacon's Masterpiece (aka, The Deacon's One Hoss Shay).  The Deacon, you see, was irritated with things breaking.  He reasoned that when something broke, it meant the manufacturer had been lazy/cheap about the component that was responsible; that is, a piece had been included that was of less quality than the rest of the components of the contraption.  He therefore set out to build a one hoss shay that did not suffer from that malady; there was no weakest link.  I urge you to read the poem, but the bottom line is that the driver of the shay found himself one day sitting on just a mound of dust -- every component had failed at precisely the same time.  So the poem ends:
End of the wonderful one-hoss shay.
Logic is logic. That's all I say.
Still brings tears to my eyes.

Whenever you have a bridge from one modality to another, that bridge will perforce be imperfect.  After all, it is trying to be one thing on one side and another on the other.  A shay is stationery under the person, but moving on the road.  Soap is soluble in oil on one side and water on the other (that's how it lifts the grease).  This universe is a bridge between the Creator and His masterpiece -- man.  In the case of the universe, the imperfections themselves are actually the point of creation.  It is man's dealing with and overcoming those imperfections that actually give us our perfection.  The Maharal's נר מצוה (introduced in TftD on our four challenges) discusses that and gives as a fascinating insight into the precision and depth of prophetic visions and also the unity of Creation.

In Daniel's vision, the four kingdoms of the nations that were/are the world powers -- Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome -- are described as various beasts rising from the sea.  Chazal, in B'reishis Raba, relate those four kingdoms to imperfections/weaknesses introduced into creation from its inception.  Of course, those four kingdoms are also the four leaders of the diasporas that have taken Klal Yisrael out of our land and away from our Temple.  Why four?  Why animals?  Why from the sea?  Why are weaknesses in creation expressed as kingdoms?  Why are those kingdoms all enemies of Klal Yisrael?

Very, very briefly: HaShem created this world to express His Glory; meaning to say, so that every part of the creation would accept willingly and with love to act in accordance with His Will because they see that as True and Perfect. The only nation who accepted that on themselves and to bring that message to the world is Klal Yisrael, the nation that makes Him King.  Not ruler, which just means in change, but King -- one who rules by choice of and at the insistence of a nation.  The kingdoms of the nations are therefore a direct challenge to the very reason for creation.  A weakness in creation means a place where HaShem's Will is felt less keenly/openly; obviously that will make its appearance as a kingdom.  Since those kingdoms challenge the authority of HaShem, they naturally are enemies of His representative nation and their national mission because the absorption/destruction of the Jewish people as there final blow to HaShem's sovereignty.  Man is created in HaShem's image (צלם אלוקים), so putting one's efforts into thwarting HaShem's purpose for creation ipso facto makes him less human; ie, turns him into an animal.  Animals that come from the sea onto dry land have no real power, as they are dying even as the attack.  The enemies of Klal Yisrael have, at the end of the day, no real existence since they are fighting the Author of existence.

Why four?  Sorry... no more time.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aru...