The commandments mentioned in this פרשה are based on the "six pillars of silver," i.e. the six pillars upon which the universe is built. These six pillars are: תורה, עבודה, גמילות חסדים, דין, אמת, שלום.

The pillar of דין is mentioned in the first part of this פרשה, where the appointment of judges and a Supreme Court is legislated. The rules about an individual Torah scholar who refuses to submit to the majority decision of his colleagues and the law to appoint a king whose function it is to lead the people in the path of Torah, all belong to the pillar דין. A king is permitted to deviate in some ways from Torah norms concerning the movement of boundaries, whereas other people are not. The rules not to judge on the basis of a single witness, how to deal with untruthful witnesses, etc., are all part of the pillar דין.

The pillar of אמת is represented by legislation dealing with sorcerers, a false prophet, etc., all of whom originate in the left side of the emanations, the domain from where שקר, lies, emanate. The legislation not to pay heed to a false prophet, not to be afraid of violating the demands he makes upon you, as well as the promise that G–d will provide true prophets, all are part of the pillar אמת.

The pillar of שלום, peace, is presented as part of the legislation dealing with warfare – provided the war is not against the seven nations who occupied Canaan at the time the Jewish people entered it – in order to show how the Torah stresses peace. The Torah nonetheless decrees the utter annihilation of all the inhabitants of the land of Caanan because true peace can only come about when the wicked have been removed or have become penitents. We are even commanded to preserve ecological "peace" when the plants in question are of immediate and universal use to man, i.e. fruit- bearing. Such plants must not be destroyed even if by doing so the war would be shortened. The anointing of the priest who addresses the soldiers on their way to battle is designed to assure the soldiers that G–d loves them and has their welfare in mind. When we love G–d there will be peace between G–d and us and war against our (His) enemies. This is why the Torah orders us not to fear our enemies.

The pillar of תורה is dealt with in the legislation denying the tribe of Levi a share in the land to be distributed amongst the other tribes. It is their task to study Torah and to teach it, as we know from Deut. 33,10:יורו משפטיך ליעקב ותורתך לישראל, “They shall teach Your laws to Jacob and Your instructions to Israel.” If the Torah had allocated them farmland and orchards they would be so busy tending their land that they would not be able to fulfil their spiritual tasks. This is why the Torah instructs the Israelite to give certain gifts to the Levites so that they should be free of the burden of earning a livelihood and shoulder the burden of Torah study, etc., instead. Once the priests had increased in number their service in the Temple was restricted to a few days a year for each shift. On the festivals however, when they were in Jerusalem anyways, they could then receive a share of the meat of the many offerings presented on the altar. They made their regular living from the portions of meat set aside for them from animals slaughtered for private consumption as well as from the firstborn male animals, the first shearings, the Terumah (approx. 2% of the farmer's grain, oil and grape harvest). The Levite also contributed to the priest 10% of the tithes received.

The pillar called עבודה is represented in our פרשה by the prohibition to plant a tree in the Temple precincts, and the prohibition to erect stone-monuments. The law forbidding the sacrifice of a blemished animal also falls under that heading.

The pillar of גמילות חסדים concerns the true kindness shown to people after their death. In our פרשה this pillar is represented by the law concerning the cities of refuge which are a partial restitution for the victims of unintentional murder. The requirement to kill the עגלה ערופה as a declaration that one has not been remiss in fulfilling this commandment also comes under this heading. I shall now deal with these "pillars" one at a time.

The עמוד הדין, is שופטים ושוטרים תתן לך. I will first explain the plain meaning of this legislation. Later on I will deal with the mystical aspects of these laws. The first difficulty is why the Torah chooses to use the term תתן לך "give for yourself," when the subject is the appointment of judges and law-enforcers, whereas when the Torah speaks about the appointment of a king, the king is described as תשים עליך, "you will appoint him over you." One cannot argue that the term עליך is inappropriate except when the subject is the appointment of a king, since our sages (Yevamot 45b) have used the term עליך in another context such as: כל משימות שאתה משים עליך אל יהו אלא מקרב אחיך, "anyone to whom you grant any authority over yourself must be a member of your people."

We can answer this after first examining some details of the legislation dealing with the appointment of a king. All our commentators have spent long hours trying to comprehend why Samuel was so angry at the people of Israel when they asked him to appoint a king, seeing that the Torah provides for the appointment of a king. In Sanhedrin 20b, Rav Yehudah says in the name of Shmuel that all the prerogatives a king claims for himself as per Samuel I 8, 11-17 are legally his. Rav, however, said that the entire passage was only meant to frighten the people out of their demand for a king. He based his opinion on the word עליך in our verse any שום תשים עליך מלך. Rabbi Yehudah said that the Torah legislated three commandments which would become operative upon the Jewish people entering the land of Israel. They are: The appointment of a king, the destruction of the people of Amalek, and the building of the Holy Temple. Rabbi Nehorai said that verses 15-20 in our chapter in Deuteronomy are only written in anticipation of the possibility foreseen in 17,14 that the Jewish people would actually demand to be ruled by a king. Rabbi Eliezer said that the elders who lived during the reign of Samuel did no wrong by phrasing their request for a king in the words: תנה לנו מלך לשפטנו. The only people who committed a sin were the עמי הארץ, the ignorant masses, who added in Samuel I 8,19 that they wanted a king עלינו, "over us," and who wanted the king in order to be like the other nations (ibid.). Rabbi Yitzchak Abravanel quotes all the various opinions in his commentary on our פרשה. He challenges the opinion expressed by Rabbi Eliezer by pointing out that in our פרשה, too, the people are presumed to have prefaced their desire for a king by saying ככל הגוים אשר סביבותי, "just as all the other nations around me." It is worthwhile to read up what Rabbi Abravanel has to say about this. Anyone who is intelligent will realize that one has to explain the opinion of Rabbi Nehorai in accordance with the interpretation offered by Rabbi Abravanel.

The Sifri quotes Rabbi Nehorai as saying that the people's request for a king was only a pretext to enable them to worship idols. The author based his theory on the words (Samuel I 8,20): "and we shall then become like all the nations." Rabbi Abravanel challenges this statement saying that if this were true how could G–d possibly have concurred in providing a king for the people when He said to Samuel: (Samuel I 8,22) "Accede to their request and crown a king for them?" Why did G–d not at least warn the people not to make the incidence of monarchy a pretext for idol-worship? I believe that such a warning is alluded to in Samuel I 8,7, where G–d told Samuel: "It is not you they have rejected; it is Me they have rejected as their king." Nachmanides, referring to Genesis 49,10, where Jacob assures Yehudah that the sceptre signifying royalty will not depart from his tribe, explains that the sin of the Jewish people at the time was that they rejected Samuel who was such an excellent judge. If that were so, why did Nachmanides single out Samuel? Did our sages not say that the authority of every judge in his period equalled that of Samuel? They even considered an ignoramus such as Yiftach as being Samuel's equal in authority (Rosh Hashanah 25b)! The clearest of all our early commentators is the Ran who appears to adopt the approach of Rabbi Eliezer when he distinguishes between two kinds of leadership. 1) Authority which is based on Biblical law. The Sanhedrin was appointed to ensure the proper administration of that law. 2) The second kind of authority, which usually expresses itself in rulings which contradict Biblical law, is called הוראת שעה, decrees promulgated in order to meet certain emergencies. Our sages have said that the reason Jerusalem was destroyed was because the judges insisted on applying Biblical law (Baba Metzia 30b) when they should have taken into consideration the circumstances prevailing at the time and have made allowances before convicting certain people. There is an allusion to this in 21,9: ואתה תבער דם הנקי, "You will remove from your midst guilt for the blood of the innocent." This verse could also be translated as "you are destroying the blood of the innocent," i.e. that on occasion innocent blood is spilled by inflicting punishment on the innocent due to prevailing pressures, such as in emergencies and in times of war. Appointment of a king enables the nation to be administered expeditiously during emergencies; the king has the right to ignore certain Biblical laws. This subject is meant in Psalms 122,5: "There the thrones (literally chairs) of judgment stood, thrones of the house of David." The "thrones of judgment" are the Sanhedrin, whereas the "thrones of the house of David" refers to the thrones of the dynasty of the house of David.

It is a general rule that a Sanhedrin hands down what is called משפט צדק, based on direct Torah law, whereas whenever there is a need to bypass Torah law for reasons of emergency the king would sit in judgment and on occasion rule against Torah law. This is also alluded to in the Torah's demand 16,20: צדק צדק תרדוף, "Justice, Justice, you shall pursue." The first time the Torah uses the word צדק it refers to Torah law as administered by the Sanhedrin, the second time it refers to the administration of law by a king on the basis of הוראת שעה. Concerning the latter situation the Torah continues: "in order that you may live and inherit the land that the Lord your G–d is about to give you," for Jerusalem was destroyed only because the authorities insisted on basing all their judicial verdicts on Torah law.

In the days of Samuel, Israel sinned because they asked that the king be a judge, i.e. replace the Sanhedrin, and to base his administration of justice on Torah law. This was contrary to G–d's will. He had arranged for judges to be appointed to perform this task. The king was to usurp the powers of the Sanhedrin only when there was a הוראת שעה. The term שימה עליך is particularly appropriate for describing the הוראת שעה- nature of the king's function.

Prior to the appointment of the first king, the Sanhedrin performed both functions, i.e. משפט התורה as well as הוראת שעה. This is one of the reasons Moses is referred to in our traditonal sources as מלך, king. This is also why, after the destruction of the Temple when Israel no longer had a king, Rabbi Eliezer is on record as saying: "I have heard that (nowadays) a Jewish Court of Law may administer corporal punishment even when Torah law does not call for this."

Keeping all this in mind we can understand the meaning of Rashi's comment on 17,11: "Do not depart to the right or to the left," i.e. even if the judge tells you that (what you know to be) right is "left" or what (you know to be) left is "right." This interpretation was valid only when there was no king in Israel. Once a king was appointed, however, each level of administration had its functions clearly defined. In the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer Israel's sin consisted of their wanting to do away with this divison of responsibility between two different bodies. Israel committed a major error as soon as they asked for the king to act as שופט. Rabbi Eliezer divides the verse in Samuel I 8,5 שימה לנו מלך לשפטנו ככל הגוים into two distinct requests. One request was made by the elders, the second one by the people at large. The elders, who spoke about לנו, meant that the king would join them, as they were the judges already. This is why they did not say עלינו, "over us." The people at large, who entertained a different perception of the tasks to be performed by a king, said: שימה עלינו "place him above us" (Samuel I 8,5). They wanted the king to perform both the functions the Sanhedrin was designed for, i.e. משפט התורה, as well as those of a king, i.e. הוראת שעה.

To get back to our subject, i.e. the words ושפטו את העם משפט צדק, "They will judge the people according to the meaning of the word צדק" the first time they appear in 16,20. Another reason why the word צדק is repeated in that verse could be that it alludes to the statement in Tanchuma Shoftim 8 that כל הדן דין אמת לאמיתו זוכה לעולם הבא, that anyone who judges truthfully merits a place in the World to Come. Tosaphot comment on this in the first chapter of Baba Batra that the wording is meant to preclude a verdict which is based on trickery. Tur Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat section 15,3 explains what exactly such a דין מרומה is, namely that the testimony of witnesses is accepted only if the judge does not feel that they are trying to trick him into a false verdict. In other words: Judges must not only observe the formal provisions of the law but must endeavour to look beyond the correct formalities in order to arrive at a true verdict.

A third interpretation of the repetition of the word צדק would be that there are two ways of arriving at a fair judgment. The first צדק refers to the need to arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution of disagreements without recourse to the letter of the law. The second time the word צדק is used is for the eventuality that an agreed solution to the disagreement cannot be found. According to the Sifri it also means that the trial may not be re-opened once a person has been found innocent, even if new evidence against him is suppposed to have been found. Still another meaning of the second צדק could be that a judge, is supposed to be מתון, i.e. judge each case on its individual merits, without reference to precedent. It is not enough to refer to a previous judgment in what is perceived as an identical dispute. No two cases are identical. Moses already explained this point to his father-in-law Yitro in Exodus 18,16 when he told ושפטתי בין איש ובין רעהו, "When I pronounce judgment I have to consider each litigant on his own merits."

לא תטה משפט . This must be explained similarly to the words ימין ושמאל in 17,11: even if the Sanhedrin were to declare that "right is left" and "left is right," their verdict must be accepted. As we have explained earlier, verdicts which sound patently wrong must have been the result of the application by the court of the principle of הוראת שעה, i.e. that the overriding considerations of the authorities in charge were the demands of the hour. This was not the plain meaning of this verse, the פשט.

We also have to address the problem of why the Torah (17,9) speaks about an individual judge or a lower court turning for guidance to the Supreme Court "in those days." How can one appeal for guidance to a judge or court whose members are no longer alive? The Torah therefore only tells you that even though the judges in your generation are clearly inferior to the judges of a former generation they still are the authority of their day. If that were the true explanation why did the Torah have to allude to the subject altogether? I certainly would have known this by myself! Unless such an attitude was universally accepted, no one would have ever turned to Joshua to settle a dispute since everyone was aware that Joshua was inferior to Moses! One can understand why the Torah tells us not to bypass a certain priest (cf. 26,3) in favour of another priest, seeing that they both live in the same generation but are on duty on different days or weeks, but such an argument cannot be used with judges whose function is not restricted to a certain משמר, duty roster.

The true explanation is that offered in Tur Choshen Mishpat 25. It is stated there in the name of Rabbi Avraham ben David, better known as ראב"ד that "nowadays" [already 700 years ago, Ed.] a Rabbi does not have the right to challenge the decision of a Rabbi who occupied the position of "Gaon" unless the decision by such a Gaon is clearly at odds with all our traditions. Since this does not occur in practice, anyone challenging the decision of a Gaon is presumed to have committed the cardinal error of הטועה בדבר משנה, having erred in a fundamental point of law; he may be presumed simply to have been unaware of the decisions of the Geonim, or else he would not have challenged their validity. Had he been aware of such decisions he would have withdrawn his own ruling. The רא"ש writes in a similar vein that these statements are not only applicable to decisions made by the Geonim but also apply to those made by prominent Rabbis in subsequent generations. If someone nowadays, continues the רא"ש, rules contrary to earlier Rabbis, being unaware of their decisions, he is considered as טועה בבר משנה. When he later hears the decision of those Rabbis of earlier generations he may reverse his own decision if he agrees with the decision of those Rabbis. If, however, he does not agree and is able to substantiate his disagreement, he is at liberty to do so; the Torah has given the judges of their respective generations the right to make authoritative rulings, based on the statement that the authority of a Yiftach was in no way inferior to that of an outstanding prophet such as Samuel. This holds true as long as the decision is not clearly in conflict with all the views expressed in the Talmud. A Rabbi who lived after the period of the Geonim may therefore challenge their rulings. Thus far the רא"ש. It is clear from the רא"ש that when a Rabbinic authority in our generation rules against a ruling of one of the Geonim we must respect the ruling given in our generation. This is the plain meaning of the words: "You will come to the judge who lives in those days and enquire and they will tell you what is the law." When Rashi said that this applies even when the judges tell you that "left is right" and that "right is left," the meaning is that if, for instance, a Rabbi in the last generation ruled permissively in a certain matter, i.e. declared it "left," the Rabbi in the present generation who rules that the matter is prohibited, i.e. declares it as "right," must be obeyed. The same applies in reverse. This subject is also alluded to in the words: לא תטה משפט; on the one hand it warns against arbitrary decisions, on the other hand it allows the ignoring of earlier decisions on the basis of לא תכיר פנים, "Do not respect faces" i.e. do not blindly accept rulings of earlier authorities merely on the basis of precedent."

The mystical aspect of all this focuses on the line: ושפטו את העם משפט צדק … צדק צדק תרדוף. The active pursuit of צדק will be a direct result of the Courts handing down fair judgments. The reason the word צדק is repeated is because there is a צדק in our world and there is another צדק in the Celestial Regions. The first kind is generally known as דינא דמלכותא דינא, i.e. that the judgments pronounced in this world, though binding, represent the Divine name א-ד-נ-י, i.e. the letters in the word דינא rearranged. The צדק in the Celestial Regions is anchored in the emanation בינה from which דין/גבורה emanate. The צדק in our world is the mystical dimension of the earth. The צדק in the Celestial Regions is the mystical dimension of the World to Come. Both ארץ ישראל and עולם הבא are gifts G–d gave Israel on pain of sufferings, יסורים. All such יסורים originate in the emanation דין/גבורה. Whenever the Sanhedrin bases its judgments דין תורה, these result in יסורים, because Torah too is one of the three gifts we received from G–d which we acquire only by suffering some יסורים. When we now look at the words למען תחיה וירשת את הארץ in 16,20 we note that the promise of inheriting terrestrial ארץ ישראל is tied to the pursuit of צדק in this world, whereas acquisition of our share of the World to Come i.e. תחיה, is tied to the pursuit of צדק in the Celestial Spheres. By administering דין תורה we become able to obtain all these three great gifts G–d has bestowed on the Jewish people. The Sanhedrin is instructed by the Torah to hand down verdicts which are called משפט צדק. We are aware that משפט originates in the emanation תפארת, and that the combination of משפט and צדק is equivalent to a merging of the emanations תפארת and מלכות. What all this means in layman's language is that the Sanhedrin is to temper justice with mercy, דין with רחמים. This is accomplished when the judges try to arrive at some kind of compromise between the litigants. If they succeed in doing this they perform משפט and do not need to be תטה משפט, i.e. lean towards strict justice (rather than merely משפט). When they have done this they lean towards the attribute of חסד, and we have a tradition that G–d Himself is מטה כלפי חסד, inclines towards the attribute of Kindness. This means that two different attributes or emanations respectively are involved in arriving at the preferable resolution of disagreements. When the Torah legislates that the testimony of no fewer than two witnesses is required, this may symbolise that two different concepts are at work when deciding the outcome of litigation. Some of our Kabbalists said that the reason G–d is called א-ל דעות ה' (Samuel I 2,3), is that the word דעות is an allusion to עדות, testimony, the letters in both words being identical. It is a hint that two considerations are active when legal decisions are made. This matter is explained in detail in Pardes Rimonim in the chapter called אם אין סוף הוא הכתר. ולא יקום עד אחד באיש . "One witness shall not arise and testify against a man" (19,15). The Sifri interprets the word באיש to mean that if a single witness testifies that the husband of a woman has died and there is no corroborating evidence, it is sufficient to enable the widow to remarry.

We have a perfect example of the principle of מדה כנגד מדה, that retribution fits the crime, in the legislation about עדים זוממים, false witnesses trying to frame someone. These "witnesses" who testify to something they have not seen must suffer the fate their intended victims would have suffered had it not been that the truth was revealed in time (19,19). People must be judged by applying the same yardstick by which they judge others. The hidden message in this legislation is that when G–d created the universe, He created opposites. Just as He created domains of sanctity, He also created the alternative, i.e. a domain of impurity, קליפה. He who performs good deeds establishes his affinity to the domain of sanctity, whereas he who engages in sinful conduct establishes ties with the domain of impurity. All this is part of the concept: שכר מצוה מצוה, ושכר עברה עברה, that the "reward" of a good deed is another good deed and vice versa (Avot 4,2). The reward is the spiritual impact of the performance of the good deed. When the Torah ties the punishment of such a "witness" to כאשר זמם לעשות, "what he intended to accomplish" instead of to "what he did accomplish," it is to teach us the rule that we are measured by the same yardstick we apply to others. The Rekanati endeavors to explain how our sages dared arrive at the conclusion that if the intention of the עדים זוממים had in fact been accomplished, (i.e. that their victim had already been executed before discovery of the fact that they had not been at the scene of the crime to which they testified), that they then go out scot-free from a human tribunal (Chulin 11). This is what he writes: "I have to explain to you why the sages in Chulin arrived at such a ruling from something the Torah did not actually state. Did they presume to know everything that was in G–d's mind? First of all, let us be clear that the statement in Chulin כאשר זמם ולא כאשר עשה applies only in cases where a death penalty had been administered. If the subject of the testimony was something not involving a possible death penalty the witnesses in question will have to make restitution even if their victim has already been convicted. This is why our sages used as their example the words: הרגו אין נהרגים, "if they have killed they will not be executed." Having said this, know that G–d does not allow miscarriages of justice, i.e. that an innocent person be put to death by a Court. Anyone who has not committed a sin carrying the death penalty will not be convicted by the testimony of false witnesses. If such an accused is executed this merely proves that he was guilty of another sin for which he deserved to die, but that the other sin he was guilty of had not been witnessed, and that therefore no judicial proceedings could have been instituted. In view of this the false witnesses had actually accomplished G–d's purpose when they testified against the accused in question. They had actually merely caused the death of a person who -legally speaking- was already considered "dead" in G–d's books. How could we execute a witness for having caused the execution of someone already legally dead? All of the foregoing is based on our conviction that the Sanhedrin only confirm judgments already made in Heaven, that they are the representatives of the שכינה. If the witnesses were found out before their victim was executed, it is clear in retrospect that they were about to shed innocent blood. Clearly, for such a crime they must face retribution in kind. When judges perceive themselves as agents of G–d, it can be said of them that אלוקים נצב בעדת א-ל, 'G–d stands in the divine assembly'" (Psalms 82,1). Thus far the Rekanati.

The Sanhedrin consisted of seventy judges (elders) plus the president, i.e. the most outstanding scholar. The number seventy corresponds to the seventy "princes" who represent the seventy Gentile nations at the Celestial Court. These seventy "princes" are preceived of as surrounding the Celestial Court where G–d presides, thirty-five on His right and thirty-five on His left. The Ineffable Name which represents תפארת is above them. The Jewish nation which is also known as תפארת performs this function amongst the nations of the world.

The very concept of a king, מלך, is rooted in the emanation מלכות. We have already shown that the Talmudic dictum of דינא דמלכותא דינא, is based on the word דינא being the name of G–d א-ד-נ-י, the same letters as the words דינא. The mystical dimension of the directive that the king has to write a ספר תורה for himself is that the emanation מלכות "receives" the written Torah, whereas the emanation itself is perceived of as being the "oral Torah." The Torah alludes to this attribute when writing והיתה עמו, "it shall be constantly with him" (17,19). The word והיתה is feminine, whereas the instruction immediately following is masculine, i.e. וקרא בו, "he shall read in it." This results in a union between the concepts represented by the respective emanations תפארת ומלכות. When David (Psalms 119,56) said: זאת היתה לי, this was because he knew that the attribute מלכות is called זאת. It was because David was aware of this that he could say (Psalms 27,3): אם תחנה עלי מחנה לא יירא לבי, אם תקום עלי מלחמה בזאת אני בוטח, "Should an army besiege me, my heart would have no fear; should war beset me, I would still be confident in זאת." In view of such considerations we can understand why the king was commanded not to amass too many horses; after all, we have a principle (Psalm 33,17) that שקר הסוס לתשועה, that "horses are a false hope for deliverance." The king must demonstrate that he relies on זאת, the merit acquired through his Torah writing and Torah study instead. The prohibition to amass too much silver and gold is due to similar considerations. A very wealthy king would tend to hire mercenary soldiers to fight his battles instead of relying on G–d's help. G–d's ability to help in war does not depend on the number of the king's soldiers but on their spiritual preparation. We know this from Judges 7,6 where Gideon sent home all but three hundred of his volunteers. He had first tested their degree of religious observance by the way they scooped drinking water from a pool without going down on their knees (a sign of having once worshipped idols). In 17,16 the Torah links a return to Egypt to the king's possession of an inordinately great number of horses. Amassing horses is an outward sign of lack of reliance on the merit of זאת. Such lack of confidence in G–d will ultimately result in a moral backsliding of the people, an immersion in the moral morass of the Egyptians which originates in the impurity of the menstruant woman. The mystical dimension of the Egyptian philosophy is called מצולת ים, [a term used in the Zohar for Samael and the forces associated with him. The idea is that Samael's domain is beneath the מים העליונים. Ed.] The morally best of Egypt i.e. the attribute of שפחה, is but a maid-servant of ארץ ישראל. The relationship of Hagar (the best of Egypt, spiritually speaking), to Sarah is seen as symbolising this relationship.

The following is the commentary of the Rekanati on the limitation of the number of wives a king may marry: "In view of the fact that the attribute זאת must dominate in the conduct of the king, G–d has warned him not to be attached exclusively to the philosophy of מלכות represented by that attribute. Were he to do so, he would remove himself further and further from the attribute of חסד. (Cf. Solomon in Proverbs 30,20 who describes the adulterous woman as: "she eats, wipes her mouth and claims not to have committed any wrong.") In order to prevent the king from falling victim to such influences, the Torah warns the king only (because he is more at risk than the ordinary citizen) not to marry too many wives, not to amass too many horses, etc.

I must confess that I have been troubled for many years by what happened to king Solomon. How is it possible that a man who is described as having been wiser than anyone (Kings I 5,11) and beloved of his G–d, could become so bereft of wisdom when he became old that he is described in the Book of Kings I 11,4 as having been misled by his wives to follow idols, in particular the cult of "Ashtoret the idol of the Tzidonites and Milkom the abomination of the Ammonites?" Such conduct would be totally incomprehensible if an ordinary Israelite had engaged in it, how much less could one credit such behaviour to the wise king Solomon? Besides, most of the Book of Proverbs authored by Solomon in his prime is devoted to warnings of the wiles of women! Once I reminded myself that the one thousand wives and concubines Solomon is reported as having wed or consorted with were predominantly of non-Jewish descent, the veil was lifted from my eyes. The genuine Kabbalists have said that the total number of levels of impurity leading to the highest level of impurity is one thousand. These levels of impurity are referred to collectively as נכריות, "foreign-born wives." [I believe that Rekanati here deliberately leaves open the question of whether the number one thousand mentioned as the number of Solomon's wives is to be understood allegorically. Ed.] Solomon's very wisdom was the cause that he investigated the significance and influence of all these various levels of the original serpent's pollution. When the Book of Kings describes Solomon of having "walked after Ashtoret the idol of the Tzidonim," it does not say that Solomon served or worshipped such idols. The meaning is that 'he went to investigate the philosophical basis of that cult.' In the process, he became more involved than necessary for the purpose of his investigation. This was accounted a sin on his part. Whereas it was incumbent upon Solomon to understand the nature of that cult, it was wrong of him to develop any kind of attachment to it." Thus far the Rekanati.

We have stated that the authority of the king includes that he has the right to be פורץ גדר, override certain rules which apply to the ordinary citzen. This is part of the attribute of being אדון הארץ, "master of the land." The king's authority on earth is rooted in the fact that his appointment was first approved in the Celestial Regions. The ordinary citizen who does not enjoy the privilege of being פורץ גדר, [nor has to meet the challenges faced by a king. Ed.] is bound by לא תסיג גבול רעך אשר גבלו ראשונים (19,14).

עמוד האמת . The legislation in 18,10-12 which prohibits resorting to sundry ways to influence one's fate by consulting the occult or sacrificing one's children to the Moloch, is part of what we described as the "pillar of truth" in our opening comment on this פרשה. The Torah describes such activities as abominations and insists on תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך (18,13) "You shall be whole-hearted with the Lord your G–d." The next instalment of legislation which comes under the heading of עמוד האמת, "the pillar of truth," tells us how to deal with false prophets. I have already explained how G–d created a domain whence the false prophets and their ilk derive whatever knowledge they possess. This was part of G–d's system of providing balances in this world. It is necessary in order to give meaning to the freedom of choice we have been granted. The Torah is at pains to point out that whereas we do not dismiss all these phenomena as total deception, yet the wisdom possessed by these media is not true wisdom. This is why the Torah emphasizes in 18,14 that "these nations whose land you are about to dispossess are in the habit of turning to soothsayers, etc." The Torah goes on to say that we, the Jewish nation, do not need to do so. We already have Bileam's assurance (Numbers 23,23) that "Israel does not need to employ snake-charmers, etc." Israel is fortunate that תתן אמת ליעקב, that G–d has given us access to truth, to genuine wisdom (Michah 7,20). We must make a point of always adhering to the attributes on the "right" side of the emanations.

עמוד השלום . The outstanding lesson about the importance of the pillar "Peace" which the Torah teaches us is that, even while discussing the preparations under way to invade the land of the enemy, the Torah speaks about Israel offering a peaceful solution to the problems it encounters with its neighbors. We must keep in mind that in the last analysis רע, evil, did not originate in Heaven. The only reason there is such a thing as רע at all is so that the טוב may be be appreciated. I have discoursed on this subject at length. Once "evil" will be overcome, "good" will assert itself permanently. Anything which contains "good" must be seen to do so.

This is a reason why fruit-bearing trees must not be cut down. The commandment not to destroy foods, etc., is a comprehensive commandment. Everything has a root in the Celestial Regions, be it inert matter, vegetable matter or living creatures including human beings. It is basically forbidden to uproot plants unless such uprooting serves a useful purpose, such as feeding it to one's domestic animals. The very act of uprooting the plant in question raises it to a higher level in nature's scheme of things. The vegetable matter is thereby raised to the level of the animals.Slaughtering an animal for human consumption similarly raises its spiritual level to that of the human beings for whom it provides nourishment. Our sages call such a process: לחוב על מנת לזכות, "to create a liability for the sake of bestowing an asset." Rabbi Eliezer the Great said (Yoma 20) that "whenever one cuts down a fruit-bearing tree in the land of Israel its voice can be heard protesting from one end of the earth to the other."

The appointment of the כהן המשוח who addresses the soldiers prior to their going into battle (20,2) symbolizes the attribute of חסד. It is especially important for soldiers who are about to risk their lives in an encounter with our enemies to be aware that the attribute of חסד is active on their behalf. They will make a point of cleaving to the attributes of חסד ושלום.

The reason that men of military age who are engaged in building a house for themselves, or in the planting of a vineyard which has not yet borne fruit, or who have betrothed a bride without as yet having consummated the marriage are free to return to their homes to complete these endeavours is explained by the Rekanati. We are quoting verbatim: "Know that the three categories of people listed by the Torah in 20,5-8 are people who are especially prone to meet with disaster. The attribute of Justice is more likely to seek them out than others. We have proof for this from what happened during the episode of the golden calf. If you will examine the various occasions when the Torah reports the Jewish people as sinning while they were in the desert, you will find that it was almost invariably after they had experienced a spiritual "high." The first set of tablets were smashed because of the golden calf. Our sages explain that the עין הרע the evil eye, had focused on these tablets. After the Israelites had travelled only three days' journey from Mount Sinai, the very next verse (Numbers 10,36) ויהי העם כמתאוננים, רע באזני השם "The people were complaining before the Lord; they spoke evil within the hearing of G–d." All this in spite of the Torah having told us that the Presence of G–d rested over their encampment. The sin of the spies occurred at a time when the people were ready to conquer ארץ ישראל, i.e. they were at a spiritual "high." The sin of בעל פעור occurred immediately after G–d had made Bileam bless the people instead of cursing them as he had been hired to do (Cf. Numbers chapters 24 and 25). After all, Michah 6,5 reminds the Jewish people to remember the advice given to Bileam by Balak how to curse the Jewish people and how Bileam had responded to him. In that admonition of the prophet the Jewish people are addressed by G–d as "My people," i.e. they were on a morally high level at that time. This is the meaning of the statement of our sages in Shabbat 130 that ליכא כתובה דלא רמו בה תיגרא, "There is no marriage contract which does not give rise to some dispute." Thus far the Rekanati.

To summarize: The more a person or a people ascends spiritually the greater the challenge to Satan. Satan will "work overtime" to try and entrap people who are on a spiritual high and to drag them down. People who are about to see their life's wish fulfilled by entering marriage, consecrating a house, or by harvesting the first harvest of their vineyards, are therefore at risk because they have reached a situation close to fulfilment of a major aspiration-similar to that of the Jewish people prior to their entry into the Holy Land. The Rekanati also explains the custom of breaking a glass during the wedding ceremony as a "bribe" to the מדת הדין, much as the proverb about "giving the devil his due." As a result of receiving this recognition, ועולתה קפצה פיה, "the mouth of wrongdoing is stopped" (Job 5,16). When Israel stood at Mount Sinai and received the Torah they were in a state similar to a bride prior to her wedding. Satan exploited this opportunity by making extra efforts to subvert the Jewish people, being afraid that once the tablets became the property of the Jewish people they would forever be immune against his efforts to corrupt them i.e. he would lose his power to hold the threat of mortality over them. By employing the "evil eye," Satan, in the form of the golden calf, succeeded in seducing the nation even though it was on such a high spiritual level.

עמוד התורה . I have already explained that all the levies which the Torah legislates for the benefit of the priests and the Levites are designed to enable their recipients to devote themselves to a life of study and dissemination of Torah. They have been charged by the Torah with teaching Israel the Torah (33,10). The entire universe was created for the sake of Torah. It is significant that the gifts the Torah allocates to the priests and Levites comprise parts of the inert, the vegetable world, the animal kingdom, as well as the firstborn male human beings. They receive certain cities to dwell in, i.e. part of the inert portion of the universe. The tithes represent the vegetable matter, whereas the cheeks, stomachs and thighs of the animals slaughtered for consumption represent their share of the animal kingdom. This is in addition to their receiving the ראשית הגז, the tithes of the firstlings of the shearings. Rabbi Menachem Habavli writes that just as the hairs of the goats are for the goats and the goats dance there (cf. Isaiah 13,21 describing satyrs dancing), so the ראשית הגז is for the priests seeing G–d has chosen them to perform the sacrificial service and to serve as atonement for the sins of the Jewish people referred to by Jeremiah 50,17 as שז פזורה ישראל. The priests even receive a share of the part of the universe called המדבר, i.e. human beings, when they are offered the first-born sons of the other tribes for redemption. The priests are commanded to perform their service in shifts, משמרות, just as the angels in the Celestial Sanctuary perform those duties in rotation.

עמוד העבודה . The first time the Torah mentions the pillar עבודה is in our portion in 16,21 where the planting of an אשרה in the Temple precincts is prohibited. Erecting a מצבה, stone monument for the purpose of offering a sacrifice, even to G–d, is prohibited anywhere (16,22). The offering of an animal or anything else which is imperfect as a sacrifice is also prohibited (17,1). Over and beyond all this the Torah refers to perfect service by the words: תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך, "be perfect with the Lord your G–d," i.e. the person who offers the sacrifices must be perfect. Neither the person offering the sacrifice nor the animal he offers – which represents him – may be be imperfect. A blemish on an animal serving as an offering reflects on the owner of the sacrifice. We can draw a logical inference from all this. If perfection of the object to be sacrificed is demanded, then the souls of the departed which are to be presented on the Celestial Altar by the archangel Michael, the High Priest in those regions, must surely also be perfect, unblemished. How indeed must we endeavour to perfect our personalities while we are in this world that our souls when they ascend to those regions will not be rejected as unfit for sacrifice by the archangel Michael; should a certain aspect of our personality be blemished we must make every effort to overcome this. In this respect character traits are viewed as comparable to the limbs or organs in sacrificial animals in which a defect has been discovered.

The examples of אשרה and מצבה are selected as representing something totally blemished. The Canaanites used to engrave likenesses of their deities on stones or trees. These images would grow with the tree. The Canaanites would worship those trees and prostrate themselves before them. Our sages made a very apt comparison between the unfit judge with ever-increasing authority and the אשרה which does not produce fruit. Rabbi Menachem Habavli calculated that the numerical value of the word אשרה and the word דיין is an identical 11, provided we use the system known as מספר קטן which ignores all the zeros (wherever they may be). The numerical value of the word מצבה, adding the digit 1 for the word itself and also using the מספר קטן method, is the same as that of the word פרנס=21. It follows then that an אשרה is equivalent to a dried out tree unable even to provide shade. Leaders unfit for their position are compared to the מצבה, a stone, totally devoid of all feelings.

עמוד גמילות חסדים . The last of the six pillars which is part of the legislation in our פרשה concerns first and foremost something one does for the dead. The latter cannot repay us as our performance of any service for them is the true rendering of kind deeds. The first such example the Torah deals with in our פרשה concerns the person who has killed inadvertently and is protected against the vengeance of the victim's blood relations by taking refuge in one of the cities set aside for such a purpose (19,2-10). He must remain there until the death of the High Priest during whose tenure the killing occurred, and who represents the attribute of חסד. We have alluded to these details in our commentary on Numbers 35,9-36 where we pointed out the element of חסד inherent in this legislation.

The legislation of the עגלה ערופה, the apparently senseless killing of an innocent heifer which has not had a chance to perform a useful function in life (21,1-9), is also an act of true kindness, חסד. It is both an act of kindness towards the victim of the murder as well as towards the inhabitants of the town near which the foul deed was perpetrated. By performing the rite of breaking the neck of the heifer in question the chances of finding the murderer are enhanced, which in turn would lead to justice for the murdered person when his murderer is punished. Rabbi Menachem Habavli comments on this paragraph as follows: "The reason for this legislation is that the publicity surrounding the breaking of the neck of the heifer in a valley of virgin soil will lead to the unmasking of the murderer. The procedure bestows honour both on the deceased and on the living. The murderer attacked from behind, i.e. the neck of the victim. This is why the neck of the heifer is broken. The murderer committed his act secretly. Therefore the act of atonement is also performed in a spot which is not used by the public. During periods when the general public observed the laws of the Torah and murder was almost unknown, the worms which infested the carcass of the heifer would gradually travel in the direction of the home of the murderer and lead to his discovery. Although it would, of course, be impossible to make such a murderer stand trial on the basis of such "evidence" seeing there had not been reliable witnesses to his act, the murderer would be ashamed once he realised that the people all were certain in their hearts that he was the guilty person." Thus far the commentary of Rabbi Menachem. The "honour" this procedure provided for the living was that the implied suspicion is removed that someone from the nearest town to where the victim had been found might have committed the murder is removed. The Zohar (Rosenberg Montreal edidtion page 133 on Parshat Shoftim) quoting Rabbi Shimon, explains that when someone is murdered the victim's soul is not perceived as having been snatched by the angel of death but by the murderer instead. This means that the murdered person was not allowed to live out the span allocated to him on earth. This single act of murder set back the time of the coming of the Messiah by denying the angel of death his task of helping to rehabilitate mankind from the pollutant of the serpent (and therefore mortality brought about by Adam's sin) and thereby bringing closer the time of the ultimate redemption (which frees mankind from mortality). This crime is especially serious when it happens in ארץ ישראל, where the earth itself needs atonement for having accepted the blood of the victim. G–d took pity on us and legislated the procedure of עגלה ערופה so that we may compensate for any setback in the time-table of redemption due to the murder that has been committed on holy soil by a person or persons unknown. Thus far the Zohar.

I myself feel that the reason this procedure involved the priests (as we read in 21,5) is because the priest represents the attribute חסד. It is this attribute which is required to neutralise the forces of the accuser.

This also explains the prayer (verse 8) accompanying this procedure in which the elders of the city nearest the victim implore G–d: "Absolve, O Lord, Your people Israel whom You have redeemed, and do not let the guilt for the blood of the innocent remain among Your people Israel." This prayer implies that the city suffered from the guilt of innocent blood spilled in its vicinity. This seems outrageous! Who would accuse G–d the Merciful of burdening the whole city with such guilt in the absence of any evidence that these people had in any way be involved in murder? We must look at this by keeping in mind that there is no human being so righteous that he never sins (Kohelet 7,20). Sometimes the only reason a person is saved from punishment for a sin committed is the temporary absence of Satan who would have accused him of such before the Heavenly tribunal. Whenever there is a gathering of the wicked, everyone of whom is in line for punishment, there the accusers will most certainly be present to press their claims. On such occasions they will also indict the righteous for any sin they committed at a time when no accuser was at hand. This is what our sages meant when they said that the righteous becomes a victim for the sins committed by the people in whose generation he lives (Shabbat 33). We can now understand the need for the person who is innocent, i.e. who has led the life of a צדיק, to pray not to become a victim of the general retribution which may occur as a result of all the accusations levelled by Satan the perennial accuser now that a serious crime has been committed.

I have found a similar interpretation by the Rekanati who writes as follows: "The plain meaning of the prayer in 21,8: 'do not burden the people of Israel with the guilt of shedding innocent blood' is undoubtedly the spilling of blood of the innocent. We must ask, however, why there is a need to pray to G–d not to burden us with a guilt we have not been guilty of? Who could imagine that G–d would punish without due process of law? Was this not precisely the response of Avimelech to G–d when he knew that he had not actually raped Sarah (Genesis 20,5)? He claimed that Sarah had misled him! King David in Psalms 7,5 said: "If I have dealt evil to my ally, etc." He defended himself against G–d not considering him worthy of intervention because of a sin he might have committed quite by accident. A similar passage is found in the Book of Jonah when the sailors about to go down with their ship reluctantly agreed to save themselves by throwing Jonah overboard (Jonah 1,14).

The answer to this is that, although G–d is well aware of what goes on within the heart of man, man is nonetheless required to declare his innocence through prayer. By doing so he evokes the goodwill of the attribute of Justice. Ever since earth had become tainted the attribute of Justice can be reconciled only through the prayers of the righteous. The goodwill of that attribute is secured in direct proportion to the efforts of the righteous to lead exemplary lives. The Zohar describes that the state of guilt in which the world finds itself because of the deeds of the wicked, can be set right only through the removal from earth of a number of righteous people who will atone for the state of the world in the Celestial Regions. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 44,5) comment on Genesis 15,1: אנכי מגן לך, where G–d promises to act as shield for Abraham [after he had defeated the four most powerful kings with the help of supernatural intervention on his behalf. Ed.] that G–d said to Abraham that ever since the generation of Noach He had not used the righteous as protectors for their respective generation, but that starting with Abraham's generation He would do so. Moreover, whenever Abraham's descendants would become deeply involved in wickedness, G–d would focus on a righteous person in that generation who would confront the attribute of Justice calling out "enough" and offer himself as atonement for the sins of his contemporaries, [a synopsis of the principle of זכות אבות. Ed.].This is the meaning of the statement: "give Satan a limb as a bargaining chip." This is the meaning of Job 16,11: יסגירני א-ל אל אויל ועל ידי רשעים ירטני, "G–d hands me over to an evil one, thrusts me into the clutches of the wicked." It is considered better that a righteous person confront Satan rather than that the wicked should be the ones who goad him. Thus far the comment on Genesis 15,1. [I believe the author portrays Job as complaining that he the innocent has been treated as the scapegoat for the wicked. Ed.] This is also the meaning of the statement by our sages in Baba Kama 60 that "once G–d has given free rein to Satan to punish the guilty, Satan no longer distinguishes between the guilty and the innocent. At such a time the righteous are invariably his first victims." [Cf. Rashi on Exodus 10,22. Ed.] On the same folio Rav Joseph quotes biblical proof for this thesis from Ezekiel 21,8: "I shall cut off from you the righteous and the wicked alike." Additional support comes from Exodus 22,5: "If a fire is started and the stacked corn is consumed and it spreads to thorns, etc." The Talmud says that the only time a fire "spreads" beyond the confines of one's own property is when the גדיש, "stacked corn" (simile for the righteous) has already been consumed i.e. נאכל instead of ואכל. Afterwards the "thorns," i.e. the wicked, are also consumed by such a fire [seeing that there are no more righteous people to step into the breach. Ed.]. This is yet another description of the principle of בקרובי אקדש, "I will be sanctified by those who are closest to Me," which we discussed in connection with the death of Aaron's two sons Nadav and Avihu. Another occasion when our sages focus on this phenomenon of G–d's justice is Ezekiel 9,6: וממקדשי תחלו, "And begin from My Sanctuary." Rav Joseph suggests that the reading should be ממקדושי, from those that are holy to Me. This means that destruction will commence with the righteous. [In that connection the righteous are seen as guilty for not having sufficiently protested the wickedness. Ed.]

We have now concluded our explanation of the various categories of commandments legislated in this portion. Perhaps one can regard the six steps that led up to the throne of King Solomon (Chronicles II 9,18) as symbols of the six pillars (categories of commandments), which between them ensure the continued existence of this world. There is a Midrash which quotes Rabbi Acha as commenting on the comparison between these six steps and the six prohibitions in our פרשה. The six negative commandments in our portion (which deals with the subject of the king and his prerogatives) are: (16,19) לא תטה משפט, לא תכיר לא תטע ל אשרה, לא תקום לך (16,20), פנים, לא תקח שוחד לא תבח לה' אלוקיו שור ושה אשר יהיה בו (17,1) and מצבה מום.” These are the six negative commandments. There was a crier who was stationed at the bottom of King Solomon's throne. As soon as the king ascended the first of the six steps this crier would call out the first of these six negative commandments. When the king ascended the second step he would call out the second of these six commandments. He would continue thus until the king reached the last step. It is difficult to understand the connection between the commandment not to sacrifice blemished animals and Solomon's throne.

Another major difficulty is presented by a statement both in Bamidbar Rabbah 12,3 and Esther Rabbah on the verse in Esther 1/2: כשבת המלך אחשורוש על כסא מלכותו. In both instances the Midrash describes the steps to Solomon's throne as symbolizing alternative commandments from our פרשה i.e. the respective prohibitions of marrying too many women, amassing too many horses and amassing too much silver and gold; also the three commandments already listed from 16,19. According to the description given in Esther Rabbah the lowest step would represent a reminder not to marry too many wives, the next step not to amass too many horses; the third step not to amass too much gold and silver. Step number four would remind the king not to plant an אשרה; step number five would remind him not to erect a private altar, מצבה; step number six would remind him not to offer a blemished animal as a sacrifice. The description in Esther Rabbah also lists three other symbolisms of six each, such as six of the (7) heavens, the six sections of the oral Torah, i.e. the Mishnah, as well as six different terms used by the Bible to describe the earth.

According to Pardes Rimonim (beginning of section three of the chapter called אצילות, בריאה, יצירה, עשיה), G–d's throne is to be perceived as having six steps and being supported by four posts making a total of ten. The "throne" is equivalent to the emanation בריאה.

[Our author goes to great lengths to explain how Solomon's throne was a terrestrial replica of the perception we have of the Celestial Throne. I have decided to omit this paragraph. Ed.]

When Moses (in his parting address to the Jewish people in פרשת וזאת הברכה) wanted that his blessing should apply to the people of Israel, he "awoke," or activated the six "pillars." The word אשדת in 33,2 is to be read as two words אש דת. The letters in those two words represent the first letters each of the four pillars אמת-שלום-דין תורה. The other two "pillars" חסד-עבודה are mentioned by Moses a little while later in verse 8 where Moses speaks of תמיך ואוריך לאיש חסיד"ך, referring to the tribe of Levi. Moses goes on to say in verse 10: ישימו קטורה באפך. We know that the choicest of all sacrifices i.e. עבודה is the incense, קטורת. At the very end of his blessings (verse 26), Moses speaks of רכב שמים בעזרך, that with Israel's (i.e. Yeshurun, Israel in its most ideal state) help G–d "rides" the heavens. When Isaiah 66,1 has G–d describe the Heaven as His throne, this is a reference to "G–d riding." When Moses says in 33,25 at the end of the blessings: וכימיך דבאך, "Your strength corresponds to Your days," this is an allusion to the six days of Creation. The six pillars are also called days. Torah is called "day," as we know from Exodus 19,1 where Israel's arrival at Sinai- the source of Torah- is described as occurring ביום הזה, "On 'this' day they arrived in the desert of Sinai." Rashi comments that the reason the Torah employs the words ביום הזה, "on this day," instead of the more appropriate ביום ההוא, "on that day," is to urge us to love the words of Torah as dearly to-day as on the day they were first received thousands of years ago. We know that עבודה is called "day" because the Torah (Leviticus 7,38) writes in connection with the service in the Temple: ביום צוותו, from which we derive that the service has to be performed by day. The connection between the pillar גמילות חסדים and "day" is found in Psalms 42,9: יומם יצוה ה' חסדו, "May G–d command His kindness by day." Our sages (Chagigah 12b) say that anyone who is preoccupied with Torah study at night will have a thread of G–d's kindness extended across to him from the day. We know that the pillar דין is related to "day" from Deut. 21,16: והיה ביום הנחילו את בניו, "On the day he will transmit his estate to his sons as an inheritance, etc." Judgments are not handed down at night. The pillar אמת is the integration of two opposing forces. This corresponds to the concept "day" which is the harmonious blending of opposites i.e. evening and morning into a single unit (Genesis 1/5).

The above mentioned six pillars are alluded to in the six letters of the word וכימיך in 33,25. The letter ו alludes to the pillar שלום, which symbolises making a whole out of parts. The number six is divisible into six parts, three parts or two parts. The resulting parts then are א,ב,ג [units of one, two, or three respectively. Ed.] When you combine the respective number of these units i.e. 1+2+3=6 you get the original total. I have demonstrated elsewhere that the regular letter כ symbolises עבודה, seeing that it is shaped in a form of כפיפה subordination. A true and loyal servant subordinates himself totally to his master. This idea is symbolised by the shape of the Shofar which we blow on New Year's Day. The Rabbis (Maimonides chapter 1, Laws of the Shofar) said that it is preferable to use a ram's horn because its shape suggests subordination. The letter י alludes to the Torah, the synopsis of which is represented by the Ten Commandments. The letter מ which is the middle letter in the word אמת alludes to the eternal nature of G–d who "was, is and forever will be." He is "first", He is "last" and as He is now He will always be. The pillar אמת, also testifies to this inasmuch as its letters are the first, the middle, and the last letter of the Aleph Bet. The second time the letter י appears in כימיך, it alludes to the pillar דין. It alludes to the ten judicial aspects in which the judging of capital crimes -דיני נפשות- differs from litigation involving merely monetary disputes, דיני ממונות. The "final" ך i.e. the open-ended letter כ at the end of the word וכימיך alludes to the pillar חסד, and reminds us to have an "open hand," to be generous to appeals by the poor and the destitute. The Torah (15,7) warns expressly: לא תקפוץ ידך, "Do not ball your hand into a fist." Moses concluded the verse (33,25) with the word דבאך. The four letters of this word are the respective first letters of four foundations of succesful life on earth i.e. of G–d's blessing. They are: דירה נאה, a beautiful home, בד קודש, a certain amount of solitude or seclusion, אשה נאה, happy married life, and כלים נאים, nice clothing. [Three of these four, the home, the wife and the clothing, are mentioned in Berachot 57 as "broadening" man's mind. Ed.]

These six pillars and four supports are already alluded to in the words of 18,13: תמים תהיה עם השם אלוקיך. The word תמים alludes to the six pillars. The first is תורה, (for Psalms 19,8 speaks of תורת ה' תמימה. The next pillar, עבודה, is alluded to because the Torah (Leviticus 22,19) speaks about תמים זכר. The pillar גמילות חסדים -by definition- appears in conjunction with the pillar אמת becomes a true חסד של אמת, something which does not look forward to something in return. This is the true meaning of תמים. Both the pillars אמת, שלום, and דין are associated with the word תמים as we know from Deut. 32,4: הצור תמים פעלו כי כל דרכיו משפט א-ל אמונה ואין עול; we also know that שלום is equivalent to תמימות since the Torah tells us that when something is joined the result is תמים as in Exodus 26,24. The verse תמים תהיה עם ה' אלוקיך continues with the words עם ה' אלוקיך which is an allusion to the four "supports" of the throne. We have mentioned that the uniqueness of G–d is to be emulated by us by התבודדות, seclusion. The אשה נאה, whom we have described as one of the fundamentals of successful existence on this earth, is a simile for the נשמה, soul, which is part of G–d, His "wife," so to speak. This is why the Torah writes: עם ה' אלוקיך. The דירה נאה, beautiful dwelling we mentioned as another ingredient of successful life on earth is a metaphor for a good and dedicated heart, (seeing that the "dwelling" is something interior just as the heart). Whenever the Torah speaks of a commandment the fulfilment of which primarily depends on one's heart, we find an exhortation ויראת מאלקיך, "You shall fear the Lord your G–d." Rashi comments that this is because G–d looks into our hearts. Finally, the כלים נאים, nice clothes which we described as another fundamental for a successful existence in this life, are a metaphor for the various parts of the body with which we perform most of G–d's commandments, and which have been granted us by G–d for this purpose. Proof that we are beloved by G–d is the fact that we have been created in His image.

An important function of the six pillars which ensure this world's continued existence is that we, who perform the commandments which symbolise these six pillars, associate as closely as possible with the four supports. In metaphorical language: Since we have a tradition that G–d only has the four cubits of הלכה in this world, study and performance of the six pillars mentioned is equivalent to secluding oneself in the Tent of Torah. Our sages (Berachot 6b) have said that all our enemies will succumb if someone sets aside a special place for studying Torah.

[The author continues in this vein for several more pages. Inasmuch as I have not found anything there that has not been said in a similar vein on previous occasions, I have decided to omit it. Ed.]