I have written about the mystical dimension of the prohibition to carry objects on the Sabbath from the private domain into the public domain in my treatise on שבת. I have found an interesting article by the Ari zal on the subject of תחומים, the restriction of man's movements beyond a certain distance outside his home or city on the Sabbath. These are his words: "I have now decided to tell you that the biblical injunction is not to walk on the Sabbath beyond י"ב מיל (14,4 km.). The rabbinic injunction has reduced this to 1,2 km. You, the reader, are already aware that the emanations נצח, הוד, יסוד of the עולם העשיה unite with the emanations חסד, גבורה and תפארת. A חלל, vacuum is created by such a union. The numerical value of the word חלל is the same as the numerical value of the word חיים, life. This is an allusion to the disappearance or removal of the "life" of the קליפות (on the Sabbath). You have already learned that these קליפות had their hold on life exclusively in the region which has now become a vacuum by the union of the above-mentioned emanations; only death remains for these קליפות. Anyone performing work of the forbidden categories on the Sabbath thereby fills the vacuum and enables the קליפות to regain access to the three domains of of נצח, הוד and יסוד. Each of these domains represents one פרסה (4,8 km). The emanation מלכות is also included with them. Every פרסה consists of 4 מילין giving us a total of 12 מילין. In earlier times when the קליפות had not yet attained such predominance in our society, a person was permitted to walk on the Sabbath as far as the biblical limits, i.e. 14,4 km. Since the destruction of the Holy Temple -proof of the pervading influence of the קליפות which had penetrated into half the domain of נצח- the Rabbis decided to restrict the domain we can walk in on the Sabbath. This was alluded to in the words of the prophet Samuel (Samuel I 15,29) when he upraided Saul about not having killed Agag, king of the Amalekites: וגם נצח ישראל לא ישקר, "the domain of Netzach will not be forfeited by Israel." [My translation, to accommodate this רמז of the Ari zal. Ed.] Samuel only promised that Israel would not forfeit the entire domain of נצח. He did not promise that half of it would not be forfeited.

Concerning the domain of הוד, we are told in Daniel 10,8: "My vigor was destroyed," i.e. הודדי נהפך למשחית. For these reasons the permissible distance one may walk outside one's city or abode respectively has been reduced to 2000 cubits. The technical term for this distance, called תחום, in Hebrew, can also be written as חותם by re-arranging its letters. [the word spelled thus alludes to the seal of G–d. Ed.] The numerical value of these last two words is 454, which is equal to three times the name of G–d א-ה-י-ה, when spelled as words instead of letters, thus: אלף-הי-יוד-הי=161.The second variant uses the letter ה when making up the letters as a word thus: אלף-הה-יוד-הה= 151. The third method uses the letter א when spelling the letters as words, i.e. אלף-הא-יוד-הא=143. When you add the three results of these variant spellings you obtain 455, the equivalent of תחום or חותם. [This method presumes that you add the digit 1 to represent the whole word rather than merely the letters, something called the כולל in the system of גימטריות. Ed.] Allegorically speaking, this is perceived of as a barrier against the קליפות "invading" the domain of the 2000 cubits until the night following the Sabbath. Once the Sabbath is over, the "seal," חותם, is removed, and the three emanations נצח, הוד, and יסוד resume their normal positions, allowing the קליפות to resume their dominion. When G–d is described at the completion of the process of Creation (referred to in Exodus 31,17, and recited by us every Sabbath), as וינפש, commonly translated as: "He rested," [or by Rabbi Hirsch as "He withdrew into Himself," Ed.] the question arises why the word נפש is used instead of such roots as רוח or נשמה, both far more appropriate to describe the activity of a spiritual Being. The simple reason is that in our world of עשיה the spiritual force present is called נפש. When this נפש returns to the world of עשיה it experiences pain because it has to share with or be close to the קליפות which abound in this world. A spiritual force of the level of רוח or higher would not experience such a pain when in the same domain or adjacent to the קליפות. Thus far the Ari zal.

We need to clarify that the significance of מקום, place, is something that pertains to all matters pertaining to קדושות, sacred matters. Here, in the instance of the holiness of the Sabbath, limitations have been put in place as to the transfer both of objects to a different domain regardless of distance and of the human being to a different domain beyond certain boundaries. The views of the different Rabbis on the subject are all דברי אלוקים חיים, reflect genuine Torah viewpoints. When we observe the holiness of the Temple, a distinction has been made between service that is performed inside the Sanctuary and service performed on the copper altar outside the Sanctuary itself. [the majority of all service. Ed.] The Torah (Leviticus 21,12) says of the High Priest: ומן המקדש אל יצא, "he must not leave the Sanctuary." When discussing the sanctity of the place where one studies Torah, our sages say that whoever has reserved a specific place for himself for the study of Torah will overcome his enemies (Berachot 7). The same applies to someone who prays in the same place regularly. The sites in which holy tasks are performed are surrounded by קליפות, wicked people or influences. These influences form a barrier between our sins and our ability to approach G–d. Reserving specific places, seats, etc., is a method adopted by G–d's holy people, Israel, to internalise holiness so that it is not perceived externally. We know that the real "honour" of the king's daughter is פנימה, within the confines of her house (Psalms 45,14).

Let us now examine this concept of the רשעים, wicked people, who surround people engaged in prayer. These are groups of forces trying to prevent the prayers from reaching their various objectives. We need great sophistication in order to thwart these forces. One of the devices that help thwart these evil forces are the פסוקי דזמרה, the various Psalms and hymns that are an introduction to our prayers. The effect of reciting these Psalms is to cut a path through the forces trying to impede our prayers. This is explained in שערי אורה. At this point I wish to concentrate only on a few verses from the present portion.

The Torah (14,15) quotes G–d as saying to Moses before the crossing of the sea: מה תצעק אלי, דבר אל בני ישראל ויסעו "Why do you cry out to Me, speak to the children of Israel, and they will start moving!" Rashi, quoting ancient sources, says that this verse teaches that while G–d spoke to him thusly Moses was engaged in lengthy prayer. G–d reprimanded Moses for spending all this time in prayer at a time when the Jewish people were in distress. This seems exceedingly strange. The Psalmist tells us in 86,7: ביום צרתי אקראך כי תענני, "On the day of my distress I call upon You, so that You will answer me." Had it not been for Rashi's comment on 14,15, we would not have experienced any difficulty. We would simply have understood G–d as telling Moses that there was no need for prayer since G–d had already assured Israel of His help when He said: ואכבדה במצרים ובכל חילו, "I shall deal severely with Pharaoh and his entire army" in 14,4. All Moses had to ask was how best to go about defeating Pharaoh. Nachmanides follows this approach in his commentary.

We must assume, however, that the word which troubled Rashi in that verse was the word אלי, "to Me!" Who else would Moses have cried out to? Why did G–d have to add this word? Would Moses have addressed the angels Michael and Gabriel? Surely not! Another difficulty is the very reply of G–d. How could G–d tell Moses that the Jewish people would (or should) march when the sea which they faced prevented them from doing just that? Maybe G–d should have said: "Tell the Jewish people if they get moving I shall split the sea for them!"

If we are to explain the plain meaning of the text we must keep in mind the preceding verses and pay close attention to them. Our sages in the מכילתא comment on the expression: "The children of Israel cried out to G–d," in 14,10, that they did the same time-honoured thing their ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had done when in trouble. The Talmud adds that there were four different groups of Israelites, each of whom reacted differently to the problem they faced.

Verse 11, seems to contain unnecessary verbiage: The Israelites are portrayed as sarcastic in lambasting Moses that, since there was no suitable burial sites in Egypt, why did they have to come thus far only to be buried? -followed by what seems as a repetition: "what did you do for us to take us out of Egypt?" Rashi attempts to explain the repetition by saying they asked Moses in a different language, maybe Egyptian: "Did you take us out to bury us?" He seems to exchange the usual meaning of the word לקחתנו, "you took us", for "you have seduced us." His reason maybe that man is first and foremost propelled by his intellect. It follows that the word "לקח", does not really fit when applied to human beings. One "takes" objects or animals, but not human beings. The truth is therefore that Moses had to induce the Jewish people to leave Egypt by promising to bring them to a land flowing with milk and honey. This still leaves the question why the Israelites did not say: למה הוצאתנו, "why did you lead us out," instead of saying "לקחתנו?" After all they did use the verb להוציא at the end of the same verse when they said !" להוציאנו ממצרים"

The very words "what is this you have done to us," seem a repetition. When Moses answers them at length, saying a) "do not fear," b) "stand upright," c) "watch the salvation of G–d," plus the words "the way you see Egypt this day you will never see Egypt again," this surely appears an unnecessarily long answer! Besides, the last statement is not a clear-cut promise, but could be interpreted in exactly the reverse manner! In fact, in the days of Jeremiah, the Israelites who fled from the land of Israel after the ruin of the Temple turned to Egypt for succour! Moreover, the Torah (Deut. 28,68) describes Israel's return to Egypt as one of the curses in store for them for not observing the Torah! For all these reasons our sages did not view this latter statement of Moses: לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד עד העולם as a promise, but construed it as a prohibition not to settle in the land of Egypt (Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah 5,5). Even so, how can the historical period under discussion be related to what happened a millenium later to permit a distorted text at this point! This was surely not the time and the place to teach Israel never again to settle in Egypt! At this time the only thing that mattered was a timely prayer! This is why G–d said to Moses: "Israel is in distress and you indulge in overly long prayer!"

Our sages explain that the words in 14,10: "And here Israel saw מצרים travelling behind them,” refer to the שר של מצרים. This is the reason the Torah speaks about מצרים instead of about מצריים. When the Israelites saw this, they were assailed by great doubts. At the time of the slaying of every first-born in Egypt they had believed that G–d personally was in their midst and that all these miracles had not been orchestrated with the help of angels, etc., but had been performed by G–d in His capacity as the four-lettered Ineffable Name. They had been convinced that the first-born highest-ranking שר של מצרים, had also been defeated and no longer existed. They had believed that G–d had disposed of that force because no one but G–d Himself was able to accomplish this! The very fact that the Egyptians had buried all their dead had served as a sign for the Israelites that G–d personally had struck down every first-born (as described in Numbers 33,4). When Israel saw that all the Egyptian first-born on earth had been slain, they naturally assumed that their שר in the upper regions had been slain also, because we know of the principle that the spiritual counterparts of the nations on earth suffer defeat in the Celestial Regions prior to the defeat of the nations on earth whom they represent. In this instance, however, the שר של מצרים had not yet been totally eliminated. When the Torah in Numbers 33,4 spoke about G–d having struck, i.e. הכה Egypt, this did not mean that G–d struck a fatal blow at that time. G–d had allowed the שר to survive until the Egyptians were drowned in the sea. The שר had already been weakened.

When the Israelites saw the שר של מצרים, at the sea, he had allied himself with Samael in order to be a real threat against Israel. This is how the Rekanati explains this in his commentary on our portion. I have quoted part of his commentary in פרשת בא. G–d allowed this שר to exist in order to impress Israel even more deeply with His miracles. Israel was unaware of this at the time the Egyptian pursuit was in full swing.

They did not yet know that G–d was going to split the sea, save them and drown the Egyptian army in it. As a result of all this, they were beset by doubts as to whether it had been G–d or Moses who had orchestrated the Exodus. They thought that G–d perhaps had only wanted them to travel three days' journey into the desert, after which they were to return to Egypt, though not as slaves. They believed that Moses had over-stepped his authority and decided by himself that Israel should not return to Egypt at all. They believed that Moses had done so in the belief that G–d carries out the wishes of His prophets. This is why they cried out to G–d to demonstrate that He was a living G–d in their midst just as He had demonstrated this at the time He slew the first-born. They were angry at Moses, and this is why they accused him of taking them into the desert to die. The letter ה in the word המבלי, is one denoting a permanent question such as in הלבן מאה שנה יולד, "Can a hundred year-old man expect to sire children" (Genesis 17,17), or: הנגלה נגלתי "Was I in the habit of revealing Myself" (Samuel I 2,27)? The Israelites referred to their assumption that the שר של מצרים had been killed by basing themselves on their having seen the Egyptians bury their dead. They now doubted what their eyes had seen and implied that possibly the interment they believed they had witnessed did not prove that the first-born Egyptians were really in their graves. If so, instead of G–d having taken the Jews out of Egypt, "you Moses have taken us, לקחתנו, acquired us instead of G–d!" The word לקחתנו is used in contrast with G–d's והצלתי אתכם מעבודתם ולקחתי אתכם לי לעם. Those words had implied that Israel would be saved from the שר של מצרים who represented their deity i.e. עבודתם. When the children of Israel said: מה זאת עשית לנו, they merely paraphrased Pharaoh in 14,6 who had said: מה זאת עשינו כי שלחנו את ישראל מעבדנו. The word מעבדנו means that Pharaoh regretted allowing Israel to serve their own deity instead of that of the שר של מצרים.

At this point Moses revealed to them that they would not again observe the שר של מצרים as he had been. His demise was about to occur amongst tremendous miracles which they would witness. At that moment G–d's promise of והצלתי אתכם, "I will save you from their deity and take you to be My people" (a higher spiritual level by far) would be fulfilled. As to proof of its immediacy, they would observe G–d doing the fighting on their behalf. An even more immediate proof: None of the projectiles the Egyptian army hurled at the Israelites caused any damage. They were all caught by the angel described as travelling between the camp of the Israelites and that of the Egyptians (as per Rashi 14,19).

When G–d criticized Moses for calling out to HIM at that time, He meant that by doing so Moses only re-inforced the people's suspicions that he had acted high-handedly without consulting G–d and that he was now pleading with G–d to come to his assistance. If now He Himself would tell the Israelites that they should move forward they would realise and believe that whatever Moses had done in the past was also at G–d's behest, and that G–d personally slew the Egyptian first-born, not an agent. All of this message is contained in the brief instruction to "get moving." G–d purposely did not waste any time explaining that He would split the sea, etc. If G–d would now reveal His plan of drowning the Egyptians it would be perceived as a new decision by G–d and not as part of His overall plan conceived much earlier. An allusion to this impending miracle was already contained in the announcement of the plague of killing the first-born in 11,9, when G–d referred to רבות מופתי, "increasing My miracles" (pl). One of the "miracles" referred to was the slaying of the first-born, the other the splitting of the sea and the Egyptians being drowned in it (Rashi). G–d's entire purpose in the sequence of events was to build up Moses' reputation amongst the people.

We know that G–d succeeded in this because the Torah tells us in 14,31: "They believed in G–d and in His servant Moses." The verse in question refers to the Israelites having seen מצרים dead in verse 30. The Zohar is at pains to point out that the Torah does not speak about מצריים, Egyptians, being viewed as dead, but מצרים, i.e. the שר של מצרים. G–d made a point of showing the dead שר to the Israelites. I believe that this is the plain meaning of the verses dealing with this episode.

There is yet another dimension, which, if properly understood also explains the words of Shemot Rabbah 21,4 on the question מה תצעק אלי. The Midrash quotes Psalms 65,3: שומע תפלה עדיך כל בשר יבואו, "All mankind comes to You, You who hear prayer;" Rabbi Pinchas, quoting a number of sages, says that the Jewish people do not offer their prayers at one and the same time or from one and the same location, but stagger the times of their prayers. Once all congregations have concluded, the angel in charge of prayers gathers them all up, forms them into "crowns," and places the crowns on the head of G–d. We know this because of the verse quoted from Psalm 65. The word עדיך means "crown," as per Isaiah 49,18: כלם כעדי תלבשי, "You don them all like jewels." We have a similar verse a few lines earlier (49,3) in the same chapter: "Israel I glory in you!" This refers to G–d putting on the phylacteries of Israel as: עטרת תפארת בראשך, "a beautiful diadem will crown Your head" (Proverbs 4,9). Thus far the Midrash.

All those who are familiar with the exegetical system employed by the Midrashim know that, when the Midrash compares a verse in the Torah to another verse in scripture and prefaces the quotation with the introductory comment הדא הוא דכתיב, such as in the Midrash we have just quoted, the author of the Midrash found an obvious difficulty in the wording of the scriptural proof cited. The Midrash used the text of the Torah in order to explain the difficulty in the scriptural "proof" or analogy cited. We first have to understand where lies the difficulty in the verse cited from Psalms 65,3. Why would the Midrash feel that the words שומע תפלה need explaining? What difference does it make whether the prayers of the Jewish people are all offered up simultaneously or not? How do the words מה תצעק אלי in our portion help resolve the problem in the verse in Psalms?

We find that there are two important aspects to the way prayer is presented. First and foremost it is important that man approach G–d with a crushed heart when he asks G–d for something. We learn this from Psalms 102,1: "A prayer of the lonely man when he is faint and pours out his plea before the Lord." Our sages comment that even though all the other gates of Heaven peradventure may be locked, yet the gates of tears are never locked (Berachot 32). On the other hand, songs, such as the Israelites sang after the deliverance, must be offered to G–d only when the person or persons offering them are in a happy frame of mind.

We further have to keep in mind that the שירה, song, in our portion is introduced by the words: את השירה הזאת, "-in the feminine gender. This is peculiar in view of the fact that the corresponding song offered by the women under Miriam's leadership is addressed to להם, masculine. Why is Miriam's song not introduced by the words: ותען להן in the feminine gender? There are some linguistic experts who claim that the women never actually engaged in song, that they were not obligated to thank G–d in song but only played the drums and cymbals to give vent to their joy. According to these linguists, a number of Jewish men came to watch the women dance, whereupon Miriam called out to them: "Sing to the Lord, etc." Our sages reject this interpretation, saying that the women paraphrased Moses in their song.

Be that as it may, perhaps we can answer our question with another question. We know from various sources, including the Tanchuma Beshalach 10, that the whole song of הלל is not to be recited on the last day of the Passover, even though it is a full holiday, because G–d said that when He was forced to drown His creatures it would not be fitting for Israel- another one of G–d's creatures- to engage in such expressions of joy as reciting the whole of הלל. How do we reconcile such sentiments with the statement in Proverbs 11,10: באבוד רשעים רנה, "There is jubilation when the wicked perish"? I am indebted to the Zohar's explanation that such jubilation is in place only when the wicked have become so wicked that they have forfeited all redeeming features. As long as the wicked still possess some of them it is not appropriate to rejoice over their destruction, since the fact that the redeeming features did not lead them back to repentance causes sadness in Heaven, and, if G–d killed them all the same He did so only in order to protect the people of Israel or an individual deserving Jew. This is why G–d is described as saddened when מעשי ידי, "My handiwork drowns in the sea." When G–d drowned the Egyptians their measure of sin had not yet reached irrevocable dimensions. G–d killed them only on account of the people of Israel. This is the meaning of Exodus 18,8, where Yitro is reported as having heard what G–d did על אודות ישראל, "On account of Israel." This means that the death of the Egyptians at that time was orchestrated for less than objective considerations. The same considerations apply when we read in 14,25: אנוסה מפני בני ישראל כי ה' נלחם להם במצרים, "I shall flee on account of G–d fighting on behalf of Israel." The שר של מצרים realised that subjective considerations prompted G–d to personally intervene against his proteges and himself. Whenever the expression מפני is used we can understand it in this vein. It suited G–d's purpose at that time to have Israel witness this wholesale destruction of its enemies.

As there are 70 ways to explain the Torah, we are are permitted to approach these problems from a different angle. We will do so by referring to a different Midrash. Commenting on Song of Songs 4,8: תשורי מראש אמנה, Tanchuma Beshalach 10 states that the redemption of the Jews was triggered by G–d's knowledge that they would compose the song of gratitude and extol G–d's virtues as recorded in our portion. In turn the merit that enabled Israel to proclaim this song originally was Abraham's for he had expressed faith in G–d as reported in the Torah (Genesis 15,7) that he believed the promise that he would have children and that their children would inherit the land of Canaan.

The Hebrew expression used here by the Midrash, עתידין ישראל לאמר שירה coupled with the more customary לעתיד לבא for describing an event in the future is somewhat unusual. Why did the Midrash have to repeat itself? Either one of these expressions would have sufficed!

The Midrash's question "By what merit did Israel sing the שירה,” is itself difficult to comprehend! It is the practice of the צדיקים to give thanks to G–d immediately upon receipt of the promise of a forthcoming event. The צדיק does not wait until the promise has been fulfilled. The expression of his gratitude is no more than a true reflection of his abiding faith in G–d. If Moses, nonetheless had delayed his song of thanksgiving until after the miracle promised had actually materialised, this was but due to his lack of confidence in Israel's faith. This is why the Torah waited to report that Israel believed both in G–d and in Moses His servant until after the successful crossing of the sea and the drowning of the Egyptians in it (14,31). Only then was Moses able to break out in song. I have found this answer to the query raised in the introduction of a book called ברכת אברהם.

Our sages in Sanhedrin 94 discuss how G–d had intended to appoint king Chiskiyahu as the Messiah and to make the battle against Sancheriv the one the prophets describe as the war of Gog and Magog. When apprised of this, the Attribute of Justice demurred, saying that if King David, who had composed so many hymns to G–d, had not been found worthy to become the Messiah, how could G–d appoint Chiskiyahu, for whom He had performed so many miracles, and who had not composed a single song of thanksgiving in return as the Messiah? This objection is hard to understand in view of Isaiah 38,9 which introduces a "letter" (poem) from Chiskiyahu in which he expresses his thanks to G–d for his recovery in very lyrical terms. We must therefore assume, that the Attribute of Justice faulted Chiskiyahu for having waited until after he had recovered before composing his poem of gratitude. A man whom we associate with the stature of the Messiah should have thanked G–d immediately after having been told by G–d that he would recover, especially since that promise had been accompanied by a sign from G–d (the sun dial turning backwards).

Now we understand the Midrash which described the Israelites as עתידין ישראל לומר שירה לעתיד לבא. The Midrash tells us that in the future, עתידין, Israel will give thanks by means of a song as soon as they are told good news, even if the promise has not yet been fulfilled. The level of faith that the Jewish people will display at that time will exceed the level they displayed during the Exodus. This is the meaning of the quotation cited in the Midrash שירה לה' שיר חדש. The quotation continues כי נפלאות עשה, "for He has done wonderful things," although no miracles had yet been performed (Psalms 98,1). [We would have expected the sequence in that verse to be the reverse. Ed.] The quotation of the Midrash from Song of Songs 4,8: תשורי מראש אמנה now also falls into line. Israel is encouraged to start singing מראש, immediately, thus displaying its faith, אמונה.

This also explains G–d's comment: "While My handiwork drowns in the sea, you want to intone a song?" G–d must be perceived as saying to Israel: "Had you chanted your song before the drowning of the Egyptians, such a testimonial of your faith in Me would have been very welcome indeed.

We find that women are apt to display a higher degree of faith in the Lord than men. It was due to the merit of righteous Jewish women that the Israelites were redeemed from Egypt. Immediately upon hearing that G–d had promised salvation, they took the drums and cymbals because they believed G–d implicitly. This display of faith turned the women into heroes, a masculine quality; hence the Torah uses the masculine pronoun להם. The men, by comparison were turned into the weaker sex by their lack of faith, so that the Torah uses the feminine gender when describing their song. This is one way of answering some of the questions raised.

I have already pointed out that prayer involves two diametrically opposed emotions, joy and happiness on the one hand, a crushed heart on the other.

There are two diametrically opposed verses, each one of which purports to tell us how to serve the Lord by prayer. In Psalms 100,2 we are told: עבדו את ה' בשמחה, "Serve the Lord in joy," whereas in Psalms 2,11 we are told: עבדו את ה' ביראה, "Serve the Lord in trepidation, reverence!" The plain meaning of the verses in question is that they apply to prayer which is called עבודה שבלב, "service with the heart." Our sages have said that while praying, we must direct our heart toward Heaven and our eyes towards Earth: Our downcast eyes to remind us of our puniness, our insignificance before G–d the Exalted. Our uplifted heart will induce fear and trepidation so that we may serve the Lord out of true reverence. Once we have attained this level of reverence our heart will contemplate what is above us and thus will be full of joy that we have been found fit to serve such a Master. We note that both emotions are an integral part of prayer.

There are still other mystical aspects to this problem of prayer. I have already mentioned earlier that I have discussed the problem of all the forces that interpose themselves between us and Heaven, trying to prevent out prayers from reaching there. The sages who formulated the sequence of our prayers arranged for us to recite the פסוקי דזמרה, various hymns, so that we may cut a path through these forces impeding our prayers. This is why someone who engages in conversation between the recital of ברוך שאמר, the beginning of the פסוקי דזמרה, and ישתבח, its conclusion, thereby undermines the purpose of the recital of these hymns, and, as a result, the major part of our prayers will not be able to proceed heavenwards while the פסוקי דזמרה should have been engaged in deflecting the קליפות which try to prevent our prayers from "breaking through." The Zohar describes these hostile forces as two groups which are called two harlots, one of which is called Machalat, whereas the other is called Lilith. Machalat controls 478 groups corresponding to the numerical value of its name מחלת, whereas Lilith has 480 such groups at her command, again corresponding to her Hebrew name לילית. These hostile groups fill up the entire atmosphere between them.

Details of this concept have been explained in a book called קולבוכים in its reference to Lamentations 5,11: נשים בציון ענו, "They have ravished women in Zion." [according to the interpretation now offered, the translation should be: "women have ravished Zion." Ed.] Clearly, even during the period of the destruction of the Holy Temple, there must have been numerous Torah scholars and pious people who tried to intercede on behalf of the Jewish people by means of their prayers. The reason their prayers did not reach Heaven was the presence of these two "women" referred to in Lamentations, who ענו "violated", or "held up" and "delayed" these prayers from reaching their destination. By doing this, the prediction referred to in Lamentation 3,8: שתם תפלתי,”He (G–d) shut out my prayer," was fulfilled. The author of קול בוכים explains that normally Machalat and Lilith are constantly at war with one another for they represent opposing forces. Machalat, as implied by her name represents dances, joy and happiness. All the happy-go-lucky scoffers who consider life one single long row of sensual pleasures derive their impetus from that "woman.". Lilith, on the other hand, also true to her name, represents melancholy, despair and the heretical views portrayed in the early chapters of Kohelet that all life is a futile, heart-breaking experience. As a result, these two "women" are in constant conflict with one another. This conflict benefits the prayers of Israel. As long as these two forces are engaged in feuding with each other they do not have the energy to concern themselves overly with the prayers of Israel and with their desire to interfere with these prayers. Our prayers can ascend to Heaven without undue interference. At the time of the destruction of the Holy Temple, however, they made a truce and thus shut out the prayers of Israel.

When Joshua was about to conquer the land of Israel, he sent out two spies who, due to their lofty spiritual level, overcame and humbled the two "harlots" mentioned by the Zohar. Once the Holy Temple was built in the days of King Solomon, when the fortunes of the Jewish people were at their peak [the 15th generation after Abraham. Ed.], these two "harlots" were defeated absolutely, and this is one of the reasons Solomon is described as sitting "on the throne of G–d" (Chronicles I 29,23). This is the mystical dimension of the two נשים זונות, harlots, who approached him, each claiming that the surviving baby was hers (Kings I 3,16-27). The above is all based on the Zohar, and elaborated on in the book קול בוכים.

I have found an allusion along these lines in the portion dealing with expansionary wars in Deut. 20,1-9, participation in which is restricted to certain categories of people outlined there. It is clear that the paragraph speaks about מלחמת רשות, a permissible expansionary kind of war, as distinct from מלחמת חובה, an obligatory war against the seven Canaanite nations in which no potential soldier of military age was exempt. In connection with this מלחמת חובה, the Torah writes: לא תחיה כל נשמה, "you must not allow any soul to survive" (Deut. 20,16). The sequence of the paragraphs dealing with the capture of a physically attractive woman prisoner (Deut. 21,11), followed by the paragraph of a man who has two wives and wishes to appoint the first-born of his more beloved wife as his principal heir, though the son in question is junior to another son from his first wife whom he grew to hate in the meantime (Deut. 21,15), is intriguing. The two wives which the Torah describes as האחת אהובה, והאחת שנואה, may be understood as referring to the "harlots" mentioned in the Zohar. The אהובה, refers to מחלת, the happy and beautiful one. The שנואה refers to לילית, the melancholy one. When the Torah speaks about a beautiful woman whom you see in captivity, this is a woman captured during a מלחמת רשות in one of the surrounding countries where the קליפות are permanently at home. The duty to subjugate these קליפות is part of the injunction to do good. This has to be done in one of two ways. In order to defeat and humble Lilith, harsh measures are required. Prayer "a la" Lilith, has to originate from a crushed heart, has to be accompanied by tears. Lilith can only be rehabilitated in this way. In order to be successful, the process of subjugating and rehabilitating Machalat, the happy-go-lucky one of these two harlots, needs to be handled differently. We have to demonstrate to Machalat the joyful aspects of Judaism, the Sabbath days, the holidays, the joy experienced in helping the less fortunate, etc., as well as to convey some of our knowledge about the goodness and grandeur of G–d. As long as we are exiled from our homeland all our joy on holidays is subdued due to the קליפות surrounding us on all sides. It is extremely difficult to totally defeat the קליפות of Machalat in such circumstances. When the Torah refers to the beautiful woman prisoner as: וראית בשביה אשת יפת תואר, this is to tell us that under conditions of exile, i.e. שביה, the קליפה מחלה continues to exist. We have only succeeded in eliminating the קליפה לילית. When the Talmud teaches that all gates are sometimes closed except the gates of tears, this is a hint that at least the קליפה לילית can be overcome at all times.

To sum up: We are to serve the Lord with joy to help us eliminate Machalat, and we are to serve the Lord with fear, awe, and tears, to help us eliminate Lilith. The application of שמחה, in prayer is the knowledge and use of the names of G–d in the proper manner. This makes such a deep impression in the Celestial Regions that it creates a "crown" for the "head" of G–d Himself. It contributes to the unification of His Name in those regions.

This is the reason that G–d is perceived of as desiring the prayers of the righteous, since the service of G–d by means of prayer is a need that G–d feels, as we have mentioned on numerous occasions. The above is true only when the prayers are offered up in the Holy Land, a region from which the prayers ascend ever higher, something that cannot occur in the Diaspora in which the קליפות predominate and interfere. Prayers offered חוץ לארץ are as if dressed in the air of impurity, and it would be presumptuous to say that G–d longs for such prayers. Even in חוץ לארץ, however, the gates of tears subdue the forces of Lilith so that prayers offered in such circumstances are acceptable to G–d. The main difference between such prayers and identical prayers offered within the boundaries of ארץ ישראל is that the latter are something G–d has expressly desired. When the Torah speaks about וראית בשביה, the message is that while we are in exile, שביה, G–d does not desire that we worship Him in joy because we have not been found worthy to live in our homeland.

Jacob made this point in Genesis 30,2,when he said to Rachel: התחת אלוקים אנכי? "Am I under the personal supervision of G–d?" Rachel had asked Jacob to offer prayer so that she could conceive and bear children. She thought G–d had made her barren because He wanted to hear the prayer of the righteous Jacob (as our sages have explained about all the difficulties our matriarchs experienced in having children). Jacob had to explain to Rachel that G–d had withheld children from her not because He waited for Jacob's prayer, since Jacob could not compare himself to Isaac and Abraham who were on Holy Soil when they prayed. He, Jacob, was in exile, not a place from which G–d desires prayer to emanate. He, Jacob, was not under the guidance of אלוקים, but under the guidance of one of the שרים as long as he was away from ארץ ישראל.

The Sifri has stated that Deut. 21,10 speaks about a permissible expansionary war, and that the legislation introduced by the words: וראית בשביה אשת יפת תואר applies only when such a war is fought outside the boundaries of Israel, whereas when a war is fought on the soil of Israel the command: לא תחיה כל נשמה, "you must not take any prisoners," applies. The reason is that within the boundaries of the land of Israel both harlots, i.e. Lilith as well as Machalat, can easily be eliminated. This is the mystical dimension of Joshua sending two spies in order to totally defeat these two harlots, as did indeed happen during the rule of King Solomon.

This is also the deeper reason that the righteous Miriam and her companions took drums and cymbals (15,20). The word תף, drum is spelled defectively, without the letter ו. This is an allusion to the subjugation of לילית, whose name has the same numerical value as תף, =480. We have read about these destructive forces in page 474. The women's taking up of the מחולות, cymbals, is an allusion to the efforts on their part to neutralise the forces under the command of מחלת. It was most appropriate that righteous women should be the instruments whereby the two "harlots" and their underlings should be defeated.

We are told in 14,20 that after the angel of the Lord took up his position between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of the Israelites, ולא קרב זה אל זה כל הלילה, "that one did not approach the other during the entire night." We may understand the word לילה to be an allusion to לילית, one of the perennial accusers of the Jewish people. The Torah tells us that the efforts of Lilith during that night to accuse Israel at the Celestial Court failed. When the Torah writes in 15,26 that if the Jewish people listen to G–d's voice and perform His commandments: כל המחלה אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך, "I will not set the whole מחלה against you but against Egypt," the Torah refers to the "harlot" Machalat. I have found in the commentary of Rabbenu Bachyah that the word אשר which can also be rad as ראש, has the same numerical value as the abbreviation of the Ten Plagues mentioned in the name of Rabbi Yehudah in הגדה של פסח, דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב =501. .

G–d's question in 14,15: מה תצעק אלי, which Rashi had understood as a criticism of Moses who engaged in lengthy prayer when the need of the hour was action, becomes clearer now. G–d hinted to Moses that he was mistaken when he thought that he fulfilled G–d's desire, i.e. that his prayer was something which G–d "needed." As long as Israel was in distress, i.e. in exile, not on the soil of the land of Israel, there is no such thing as G–d "desiring" or "needing" such prayer. As long as the שר של מצרים is still in pursuit of the people of Israel, "I may be with My people, as I am always when they are in difficulties, but I do not 'desire' their prayer." At a time such as this the adversary has to be humbled; this can only be done by action. Hence: "tell the Israelites to get moving!"

Such considerations also help to explain the Midrash which I mentioned earlier. Let me first mention a comment I have seen in a book called בית אלוקים. The author of that volume questions that we have a tradition according to which G–d has made a covenant with Israel (Berachot 8) that communal prayer is always welcomed and accepted by Him. A comunity which prays to G–d never returns empty-handed. The origin of that tradition is based on: הן א-ל כביר לא ימאס "See G–d is mighty; He is not contemptuous" (Job 36,5). The author's question is: "Everyday we see that what the verse in Job purports to promise does not happen! How many times has the Jewish community prayed for redemption and our prayers have not been answered! We pray daily in the עמידה that תקע בשופר גדול, or: השיבה שופטנו, or: ולירושלים עירך תשוב and other similar entreaties. All of these prayers are offered up three times a day, communally, and nothing has changed! We are still in exile after close to two thousand years!" The author of בית אלוקים answers in a variety of ways. Personally, I believe that the plain meaning of the statement in the Talmud is not that G–d has to respond immediately and totally whenever a community offers a prayer. Such prayer will not be rejected out of hand; any time we pray daily for our redemption, part of our prayers will find a ready response. Although our enemies try constantly to destroy us, the very fact that we are still in existence and, in many instances, more prominent and numerous than before, shows, that every day we experience some nucleus of the redemption. Were it not for G–d having listened to our prayers and responded to them at least partially, we would have ceased to exist a long time ago. We are, after all, like a sheep surrounded by seventy wolves.

When we examine the statement of the Rabbis concerning the efficacy of communal prayer, the true meaning is not that G–d carries out the expressed will of the petitioners. The meaning is that the prayer itself, if offered by a community, is welcome before G–d. Just as other commandments observed by us are favourably received by G–d, such as when one builds a סוכה in order to observe the holiday of Tabernacles, or when one purchases a לולב, etc., so communal prayer is always welcome. Performance of a commandment leaves an indelible impression in the Heavenly Spheres; so does communal prayer. The reward for such prayer is stored up in Heaven, just as is the reward for מצות performed by the individual. Although reward in this life has not been promised for performance of most מצות, some dividends accrue to us in this world while the "capital" is left intact pending our transfer to the Hereafter.

It is a positive commandment to pray to the Lord, a sub-category of the commandment to serve Him, in this instance by means of one's heart. Prayers offered by individuals are sometimes rejected, not being always considered ריח נחוח, "sweet smelling fragrance" by G–d. Publicly offered prayer, however, converts into a "crown" for G–d's "head," at all times.

There is a qualitative difference between a commandment performed by a numerically small group of people and the same commandment when it is performed by large numbers of people. When the Midrash above described the angel in charge of prayers as gathering up the various prayers of different communities not offered simultaneously before fashioning a "crown" for G–d's "head" out of those prayers, the angel is described as doing so in order to weave the most precious "crown" possible, that composed of prayers by the largest number of worshippers.

The Midrash also teaches that though the individual congregations here on earth may be diverse, i.e they pray at different times in different locations, in the Celestial Regions they are all viewed as having prayed together and simultaneously. The uniqueness of G–d and the uniqueness of His people are found side by side when G–d wears the "crown" woven out of the prayers of His people. The verse from Psalms 65,3: "עדיך כל בשר יבואו” is therefore quite appropriate since עדיך is a reference to that crown.

The reason that the Midrash also quoted the verse from Proverbs 4,9 describing the crown on G–d's head as His תפארת, glory, is, that it wishes to alert us to the fact that there are times -such as when Israel is on its own land- when G–d actively desires our prayers. At such a time the prayers are both עטרת and תפארת. During such times G–d is perceived as courting כנסת ישראל, the spiritual equivalent of the people of Israel, much as a groom courts a bride. This is understood in kabbalistic circles as the union of the emanation תפארת and מלכות.