We know from Deut. 4,4: ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים כולכם היום, "And you who have cleaved to the Lord your G–d are all alive this day," that G–d has chosen us from all other nations and elevated us beyond all other languages, i.e. He brought us close to His great Name, something which is the innermost secret of Torah. This is the true meaning of תורת ה' תמימה, that G–d's Torah is perfect. Our attachment, דבקות, to G–d finds its expression in our performance of the commandments contained in the Torah. When we fulfil Torah precepts we serve as G–d's throne, we honour Him. Due to our sins, unfortunately, we have been exiled and the name of G–d is no longer "whole," as our sages have told us.

The subject of דבקות to the Ineffable Name can be approached from two directions. One approach is by pointing out how G–d employed His Ineffable Name to be active in the emanations which initiated the בנין, i.e. the work of the six days of creation commencing from the emanation תפארת "downwards," up to and including מלכות, the seventh emanation, the Sabbath. Israel's connection with the emanation תפארת through the choicest of the patriarchs -Jacob- in his capacity as ישראל, i.e. the major part of the מרכבה, (although the other patriarchs also serve as part of the מרכבה) because מטתו שלמה, his demonstrated ability to raise all his children loyal to G–d's precepts, has already been discussed elsewhere.

Another way of looking at the דבקות which exists between Israel and G–d as the Ineffable Name has to do with the way Kabbalists view the width of the letters in that Name as alluding to the "four cubits" which play a role in the prohibition of carrying in the public domain on the Sabbath, and the "10 handbreadths" which play a similar role in the definition of what constitutes a private domain on the Sabbath. This number ten is represented in the Ineffable Name when it is spelled as words instead of as letters so that the total number of letters in the Ineffable Name becomes 10, such as י=יוד, ה=הא, ו=ואו, ה=הא.

This letter י=10, is an allusion to the 10 emanations which G–d in His Essence employed in order to be able to relate to a physical universe. The first letter of each of these ten emanations כתר, חכמה, בינה, תפארת, גדולה, גבורה, נצח, הוד, יסוד, מלכות, have the combined numerical value of the word ישראל, i.e. 541. [According to Pardes Rimonim, in his chapter dealing with definitons of certain terms, the name גדולה is used as a substitute for the emanation חסד, so that we may accept the numerical value of 541 for the combined ראשי תיבות. Ed.] When accepting this relationship between Israel and the emanations, the number of 600,000 Israelites at the time the Tabernacle was built assumes added significance because -according to Pardes Rimonim chapter 5 of his article on שער הצנורות, -there are a total of 600,000 such conduits, צנורות which originate in these emanations.

We have previously demonstrated Israel's relationship to the Tabernacle; here we may add Israel's specific relationship to the Sabbath legislation. Seeing that the Tabernacle was a re-enactment of the work of creation, and Israel, as the carrier of the מרכבה, is closely intertwined with the forces represented in the construction of the Tabernacle, we can understand why the 39 kinds of work prohibited on the Sabbath are the ones which were employed in the construction of the Tabernacle. [In the interest of preventing confusion, I have taken the liberty of considerably abbreviating the intricate series of allusions used by the author in this presentation. I trust that I have preserved the thrust of his argument intact. Ed.] Because the Sabbath represents a mystical element of the Ineffable Name, we have been forbidden to carry items from the "private domain," i.e. the domain represented by the Ineffable Name as י, as we showed earlier, to the public domain (which represents the number 4, as cubits) as we described. In a nutshell, before G–d created the physical universe, there was only a single domain, G–d's domain, the private domain; since G–d created a universe, there is an additional domain, the public domain, since G–d- by having created the universe- "shared" part of His previously exclusive private domain with His creatures. The principle of private and public domain thus became part of the creation, and is reflected in restrictions placed on the interaction of these domains on the Sabbath. Israel is described in numerous Midrashim as the בת זוג, mate of the Sabbath; this is because both Israel and the Sabbath are holy. In this portion Betzalel and the other divinely inspired artisans are commanded to observe the Sabbath regulations even during such a holy endeavour as the construction of the Tabernacle, because the Torah (31,13) says: אך את שבתותי תשמורו, "But you must observe My Sabbath days." We will come back to this subject in our discussion of פרשת ויקהל and פקודי.

There is a general concensus among our sages that the Torah was given to the Jewish people on the Sabbath. Torah originated in Heaven, (i.e. the domain of תפארת,) the domain in which the concept of Israel is at home. This domain radiates spiritual values in all six directions. Moses told the Israelites in Deut. 4,36: מן השמים השמיעך את קולו ליסרך, ועל הארץ הראך את אשו הגדולה, ודבריו שמעת מתוך האש. "G–d made you hear His voice from Heaven in order to discipline you, and on the earth He showed you His great fire, and you heard His words out of the fire." The "earth" referred to here is the emanation מלכות. G–d told us that the emanations from תפארת up to and including the emanation מלכות, i.e. 7 emanations, were part of the revelation at Mount Sinai. These are the seven קולות, voices, that David refers to in Psalm 29 which we recite every Friday evening when ushering in the Sabbath. They are also an allusion to the tradition that this universe will continue for 6,000 years before it will experience a metamorphosis of 1,000 years after which the עולם הבא will be ushered in. The 1,000-year interval symbolises the concept of the Sabbath. We have discussed the dimension of "Time" on pages 208-209. When calculating the number of Sabbath days in the 6,000 years and adding the fact that the 1,000-year interval before the advent of עולם הבא is composed only of Sabbath days we get a total of 600,000 Sabbath days, or the same number as the number of the Jewish souls which experienced the Revelation and the building of the Tabernacle. This number also equals the number of letters the Torah is made up of.

The author explains the prohibition of a private individual making anointing oil or incense, or even authorised people making up such incense in the amounts and proportions described here but intended for mundane purposes, as stemming from the fact that G–d has equipped the forces of the סטרא אחרא, the "left" side of the table of emanations, the side under the influence of Satan, with powers representing the equivalent or opposite of the powers of קדושה, holiness. We must therefore on no account provide those forces with additional ammunition by putting the tools of קדושה at their disposal.

The prohibition of eating from meals part of which had been used by the Gentile as an offering to his deity is similarly understood as accomplishing the reverse, namely of transferring elements of the סטרא אחרא to the right side of the emanations, thus undermining their holiness. By absorbing such food, the forces of קדושה active within the Jew would be weakened. The prohibition of social dinners with idol worshippers is compared to the prohibition mentioned in Shabbat 13 that a Nazirite should not even set foot in a vineyard because proximity to forbidden matters increases the chance of violation. The violator of the prohibition of eating from תקרובת עבודה זרה must observe a 7-day quarantine period during which he recovers his status of purity; this is comparable to the law relating to the woman after menstruation. This is an allusion to the superior spiritual status of Israel which derives from Israel's close link to the seven days of בנין. In order to be fit to again enter the sphere of these emanations one must free onseself of any residue of negative influences experienced as a result of partaking of the remains of such a תקרובת עכו"ם.

The Torah here appends a summary of the שמטה legislation as a reminder of the seven-year cycle and of the various levels of sanctity inherent in the number seven. All of this is, of course, part of the mystical dimension of the Sabbath, the seventh day.

The number six in the six hundred thousand reflects the six directions in which the forces of the emanation תפארת radiate their influence. Israel, as the root cause and purpose of the creative process, acquired so much importance that each Israelite had to be individually counted. The number six and multiples thereof are so significant that the Torah was given on the sixth day of Sivan (or according to some on the seventh day of Sivan). In either event, the date alludes to a similar concept. The difference is only whether we consider the emanation מלכות in which the process which had taken place during the prior six emanations became visible, as included in the symbolism. Our sages, in commenting on the word יום הששי in Genesis 1,31 have described the six days of creation as a period during which all the matter which G–d created remained in a state of suspended animation until, with the advent of the giving of the Torah and its acceptance by 600,000 Israelites, the universe really qualified to become enduring (Shabbat 88). When Moses appeared in the Celestial Regions in order to take the Torah to the Jewish people and the angels challenged him, G–d told Moses to take hold of His throne, as reported in Shabbat 88. This was possible only because by acceptance of the Torah (i.e. the Ten Commandments) by the Jewish people which made them carriers of G–d's מרכבה. Israel itself had become G–d's throne. When the Torah speaks about כי תשא את ראש בני ישראל, "When you elevate the Children of Israel,” the Torah wishes to tell us that the "counting" is proof of the Jewish people having been elevated spiritually.

The above is similar to what I have written about elsewhere when I explained Genesis 4,7. There G–d explained to Cain that if he were to be good i.e. אם תיטיב, he could achieve a higher spiritual plateau, שאת. G–d told Cain that the alternative would be לפתח חטאת רובץ, that the חיות described in Ezekiel 1 which are carriers of G–d's throne perspire from their load, and that this perspiration is the river poured over the wicked people in purgatory, (cf. Chagigah 13). The word for perspiration is זיעה, the word G–d used when He told Adam that he would have to earn his livelihood the hard way (Genesis 3,19). [The poisonous nature of perspiration is also described in Bereshit Rabbah 78,1. Ed.] When Israel are free from sin, they act as the carriers of the throne of G–d; in fact they have been created to do just that. They are to occupy an exalted position as personified by the patriarchs who became carriers of G–d's מרכבה. When this idyllic state will have been achieved there will no longer be a purgatory since there will not be any perspiration by the חיות which were described in Ezekiel's vision as the carriers of the מרכבה. This is the vision or promise held out by G–d to Cain, that man has the potential of elevating himself to such a spiritual level. If man fails to achieve this level, the מרכבה will have to be carried by other creatures whose poisonous sweat creates גהנם.

The word ראש, head, in 30,11, tells us that if we manage to become the "head," then we can achieve this spiritual elevation. This word ראש also contains the mystical element of the Sabbath within it, since it alludes to the completion of the בנין, the creative process in the Celestial Regions, i.e. the ראש, "head." The Sabbath, as stated, is the בת זוג, mate, of the Jewish people. The expression זוג של ראש, mate of ראש, alludes to the letters in the alphabet following (i.e. being the mate) the letters in the word ר-א-ש. These letters are ש-ב-ת.

As far as the half-shekel contribution was concerned every Jew being counted, i.e. every ראש was equal. Since the word תרומה appears three times in this paragraph, it is clear that the Torah alludes to three distinct contributions to be made. One of these contributions is a voluntary one, described by the Torah as given to G–d, i.e. לי, "for Me," such as when the Torah described the donations made for building the Tabernacle in 25,2. When you combine the word לי there, with the word ראש used by the Torah here, you have the word ישראל. When all the Jews have made both their mandatory and their voluntary contributions the result is שבת קודש לישראל, meaning that the 600,000 Israelites have each joined their mate, the holy Sabbath, i.e. the seventh day. Tragically, when the Israelites sinned by worshipping the golden calf, an episode introduced by the Torah (32,1) with the words וירא העם כי בשש משה, normally translated as "the people noticed that Moses was late," the word Boshesh can be read as ba-shesh that the people regressed to the spiritual level of six instead of seven. Our sages all refer to the word meaning that Moses was six hours overdue or something to this effect, as mentioned already by Rashi. Israel's conduct discredited both the name of G–d and His throne. Their action was the equivalent of unhitching one of the four animals pulling G–d's chariot. This is the meaning of ופני שור מן השמאל לארבעתן, "the face of an ox to the left of the four" (Ezekiel 1,10). The ox is one of the four חיות described in the vision as pulling the chariot. [You are aware that the connotation of "left" is one that symbolises the domain of Satan. Ed]

At the time when the Israelites were to rehabilitate themselves for the sin of the golden calf, 600,000 Jews each gave a half-shekel which alluded to the number 10, (a half-shekel contained 10 geyrah,) a number reminiscent of spelling the Ineffable Name fully, as words, making a total number of 10 letters. The following deals with an analysis of the mysticism contained in the legislation of the half-shekel, which the Torah also described as a whole shekel, though not a whole "sacred" shekel. The author quotes from the Zohar on the beginning of our portion, page 2 in the Sullam edition. The Zohar in turn quotes from a paragraph in the ספר יצירה which deals with the meaning of "Ten and not nine, Ten and not eleven,"

a subject to which Pardes Rimonim devotes many chapters. He discusses the statement of this Zohar in chapter six of his שער עשר ולא תשע. [I shall endeavour to present a brief summary. Ed] Although we speak of ten emanations, the fact is that these emanations are to be viewed as radiations from above to a point below ending in the emanation מלכות. Just as the sun's rays are effective only when they are reflected by some solid object- something that our astronauts found out on their first trip into space so the spiritual value of the emanations would be totally incomplete unless what I may call the spiritual input, i.e. the radiation from Celestial Regions earthwards, are reflected- i.e. have evoked a response- by radiations travelling heavenwards. As a result we may speak of not ten emanations but twenty. The shape of the letter א comprising a letter י at the bottom, a letter ו in the centre, and again a letter י at the top symbolises what the Zohar has to say on our subject.

Our author demonstrates by means of a number of allusions based on numerical values that by serving the golden calf the common numerical factors in the words Israel-Moses and Sinai were invalidated. These allusions depended on the use of the number 10 derived from the Ten Commandments which Israel violated when making and serving the golden calf. This relationship had to be restored after Israel repented of its errors. Counting the half-shekels helped restore the numerical equation which signalled Israel's and Moses' profound connection with Sinai and Torah which were expressed in numerical equations.

Yalkut Shimoni, item 386, quotes Rabbi Yoshia son of Nachman the priest saying that G–d said to Moses: "go and count the Jewish people." Moses replied: "It is written (Hoseah 2,1) that the Jewish people will be as the sand on the beaches of the sea which is not subject to count; so how can You ask me to count the Jewish people?" G–d answered Moses that he had misunderstood the verse he quoted. If he wanted to know the number of Israelites all he had to do was to take the first letter of the name of each tribe, i.e. the ר from ראובן, the ש from שמעון, the ל from לוי, etc., and he would get the number of Israelites. This is to be understood as a parable. A money-changer had a junior assistant whom he told to count a certain number of coins. [These coins were apparently stacked in a number of rows of different denominations. Ed.] The assistant did not know how to go about counting these coins. His employer explained to him that all he had to do was to count the denomination of each row and then he would have no difficulty arriving at the total amount of money in the various rows. This is why G–d said to Moses to take the first letter in the name of each tribe as his point of reference. The letter ר of the name ראובן represents 200,000. The letter נ in נפתלי represents 50,000. The letter ש in שמעון represents 300,000. The letter י in יוסף stands for 10,000, the letter י in יששכר also stands for 10,000. The letter י in יהודה also stands for 10,000. The ז in זבולון stands for 7,000, whereas the ד in דן stands for 4,000. the ג in גד stands for 3000, whereas the ב in בנימין stands for 2000. The letter א in אשר stands for 1000. So far you have a total of 597,000 (from 11 tribes excluding Levi, using Joseph instead of Menashe and Ephrayim). The reason the total does not amount to 600,000 is because 3000 Jews were killed during the episode of the golden calf, when the Levites were instructed to execute those who actively worshipped the calf. G–d wanted Moses to make a fast count, so he would know how many Jews were executed by the Levites (or died at the hand of G–d when there was no evidence upon which a Court could have acted). Thus far the Yalkut Shimoni.

There are numerous difficulties with this commentary. How could Moses say to G–d that he was unable to count the Jewish people, when the fact is that he did count them? Firstly, does not the Torah report that the count was 603,550 Israelites of the ages that were to be counted (Numbers 2,32)? Secondly, What did G–d mean when He told Moses that he had misunderstood the verse in Hoseah as meaning that the Jewish people were not capable of being counted? This implied that G–d did not intend them to be counted! Thirdly, The verse in Hoseah speaks about a prophecy intended for the distant future. This proves that at the present time the Jewish people were not so numerous that they could not be counted; there would come a time in the future, however, when they would be too numerous to be counted!

According to which yardstick are the tribes listed in this Midrash? They appear neither in order of birth nor in the groupings in which they camped around the Tabernacle The interruption of the list by the name of Naftali in between Reuben and Shimon seems altogether baffling? In a parallel version of the same Midrash in the Tanchuma the name of Naftali is actually listed immediately preceding that of Zevulun. We may answer that actually the list of their birth is used when it comes to the sequence of Reuben, Shimon. The same applies to the list of Yehudah, Issachar, Joseph. The reason that Joseph is appended at this point is that the author wanted to lump together all the names that represented the number 10,000. The name of Naftali would be justified to follow next, as set out in the Tanchuma; the sequence in the Yalkut is difficult. The sequence in the Yalkut cannot even be justified on the basis of a scale of reducing numbers, i.e. 300000, 200,000, 50,000, 10,000 etc.

What was the point of lumping together the three tribes whose names each begin with the letter א? Why, according to the version in the Yalkut, did G–d first mention the letter ל as an example for the tribe of Levi, whereas in the actual count the tribe of Levi is not even mentioned? Besides, once G–d had told Moses how to arrive at the number, what need was there to count them individually? Another difficulty in the Yalkut is the very number 597,000; we know that the correct number was 603,550! This last question may be solved by remembering that the actual count took place after the Day of Atonement, when G–d had forgiven the Jewish people for the sin of the golden calf. We have to simply assume that between the 17th of Tammuz, the date Moses descended from Mount Sinai, and the Day of Atonement some 80 days later, an additional 6,550 young men had attained the age of 20. The cut-off date for birthdays was the first of Tishrey, as explained by Rashi.

In order to solve the various remaining difficulties, let me first explain the meaning of the Yalkut as well as the statement that Moses had deducted 3,000 who had been killed by the Levites during the operation referred to in Exodus 32,27-28. These three thousand people were the ones against whom there were valid witnesses, and who had been warned of the consequences if they persisted in what they were doing or were about to do. Further there was a number of people who died through a plague at the hands of G–d, because they could not be brought to trial legally. The Torah refers to these people in 32,35 without specifying their number. In view of this why did Rabbi Hoshiya in the Yalkut say that only 3,000 had died? Why does he give us the impression that only 3,000 were missing from the number of eligible young men prior to the sin of the golden calf? It certainly seems unlikely that those who died from the plague were all under twenty years of age, or that they were all part of the mixed multitude. It seems certain therefore that a number of thousands of young men of the age of 20 and over, all of whom belonged to the twelve tribes, died as a result of that plague. We must assume that the number of young men who reached their 20th birthday before the first of Tishrey in that year made up for those who had died as a result of the plague. Hence, once Moses knew the number of Jewish men of military age prior to the sin of the golden calf, he was able to account for the number who had died during this episode.

Let us now take a closer look at the meaning of the Yalkut. When Moses received the instructions from G–d to count the Jewish people by means of their half-shekel contributions, he was not certain whether this was a command that applied to future generations on an annual basis and would form the basis of each Jew's annual contribution to the public offerings brought on their behalf by the priests, or whether it was a command that applied only this once. If the Torah wanted an annual census of the Jews to be undertaken in this fashion this could account for the command that the rich should not contribute more nor the poor less, so that the count would reflect the true number of people. If, on the other hand, the command was to be performed once only, then the reason for requiring exactly one half-shekel from both rich and poor could have been so as to enable Moses to know how many of the people had died as a result of the episode of the golden calf. In subsequent years, however, each Jew would be allowed to contribute his half-shekel for the purchase of animals for the public offerings without a count being made. The latter explanation happened to be the correct one. The only reason for not allowing the rich to contribute more (and the poor less), was so that the rich could not boast of having had his sins expiated because he was wealthy and contributed more to these public offerings.

Moses understood that this commandment was for all time, an error on his part. He asked himself that if the commandment were a one-time commandment in order to let him know how many Jews had died as a result of the golden calf, he would not be able to see how such a count would provide proof positive for there had not been a previous census to compare the new figures with. While it is true that the Torah (Exodus 12,37) had given a round figure of 600,000 men of military age at the time of the Exodus, Moses did not know about this because the Torah had not yet been written down. Moses' question then was: "How can this commandment be performed in the future when the promise that the Jewish people will be so numerous that they cannot be counted will have become true?" Moses did not have a problem with the commandment as it applied at that time. G–d informed him that his difficulty was due to the faulty premise that there would be an annual census. The Israelites had to be counted now so that the number who had died during the tragic golden calf episode could be established.

Concerning the difficulty that Moses did not know how many there had been previously, G–d offered to help him by asking him to consider the first letters in the names of the respective tribal heads to serve as a guide. This left Rabbi Hoshiya with the problem of how to account for the missing number 3,000 from the total of 600,000 reported as having left Egypt. These missing 3,000 men were the ones who had been executed by the Levites as reported in the Torah. The reason they had never been alluded to in the number arrived at by combining the first letters of the names of the 11 tribes excluding Levi is that they had already been guilty of death when they came out of Egypt. Their death sentence had only been suspended temporarily. Presumably, their guilt had been that they had already then harboured thoughts of an idolatrous nature, but had only found an outlet for these thoughts during the episode of the golden calf. When Moses added up the total from the eleven letters of the respective tribal heads and saw that they amounted to 597,000 he realised what had happened to the missing 3,000; there was no good reason that such people should have been included in the number of true Israelites in the first place. Once Moses had found out that 600,000 male Jews of military age had left Egypt he knew how to account for the missing number. He also knew how many had turned 20 between the Exodus and the first of Tishrey.

Israel are so beloved of G–d and vice versa that just because there is no intermediary between us and G–d, once we have sinned we are no longer called עם ה'. This theme is elaborated on in the Yalkut item 391 where Rabbi Berechyah is quoted as saying in the name of Rabbi Levi that we must understand this relationship by means of a parable. A king who owned a vineyard entrusted the vineyard to a leaseholder. As long as the leaseholder produced good wine the owner described the wine as his. When the leaseholder produced inferior wine, the owner referred to the inferior wine as that of the leaseholder. When the leaseholder became aware of this, he said to the king: "My lord king, why is the wine yours when it is is good, whereas when it is inferior it is mine? After all, it is yours regardless of whether it is good or inferior?" Something similar describes the relationship between the Jewish people and G–d and Moses their leader. When G–d first appointed Moses as the leader of the Jewish people (Exodus 3,10) He said to him: "Come, I shall send you to Pharaoh to free MY people the Children of Israel from Egypt." After the Jewish people made the golden calf, G–d said to Moses: "Go and descend, for YOUR people whom you have brought out of Egypt have become corrupted." Thereupon Moses said to G–d: "When they are sinful they are MY people, and when they are meritorious they are YOUR people? They are Your people and Your inheritance regardless of whether they are sinful or whether they are full of merits. Do not let Your anger blaze forth against them, etc,” Rabbi Symon added that Moses refused to budge until G–d had again called them "MY people." We know this from Exodus 32,14: "G–d renounced the punishment He had planned to bring upon HIS people."

A slightly different version in Shemot Rabbah 42,6 attributes the reason that G–d used the term "your people" when speaking to Moses to the fact that it was the mixed multitude who initiated the sin of the golden calf. Moses had taken those people out of Egypt without having consulted G–d. When G–d spoke about wiping out the people in 32,10, He had these people in mind. Thereupon Moses began pleading with G–d in 32,11 asking G–d why He would be angry at the people of Israel, i.e. "Your people whom You have taken out of Egypt?" Moses implied that G–d did indeed have reason to be extremely angry at the mixed multitude, i.e. Moses' people. G–d then admitted that Moses had a point, and this is the meaning of 32,14 that G–d renounced His plans to punish His own people so severely. After reading both versions of the Midrashim it is clear that the Jewish people were still regarded as G–d's people even after they had participated in the sin of the golden calf. Not only that, but they bear the imprint of G–d's "seal" upon themselves as did their patriarch Jacob whom G–d had called “א-ל אלוקי ישראל, "the Lord of Israel called him א-ל." Moses, by contrast, was called א-לוהים. This whole reciprocal attachment, דבקות, is due to the intermediary Torah. It was the Torah which cleansed Israel from the residual pollutant of the original serpent when the Israelites stood at Mount Sinai.

This residual pollutant returned to infect Israel as soon as they had made the golden calf. Whatever negative influences were found in the serpent were present also in the golden calf. This applies to the overall influence of the serpent or the golden calf respectively, and to some specific manifestations. To illustrate: Our sages say that most of mankind is guilty of robbery whereas a minority is guilty of sexual aberrations. All of mankind is guilty of אבק לשון הרע, different shades of slander. The truth of this statement is demonstrated when we look at what happened during the episode of the golden calf. The slander became manifest when the perpetrators described the golden calf as "these are your gods, O Israel" (32,4). The sin of sexual excesses is alluded to in 32,6 where the Torah tells us: ויקומו לצחק, "they rose to dance" (the implication is an erotic one, compare Rashi). Regarding the sin of robbery, the Talmud tells us in Berachot 35 that anyone who enjoys the pleasures of this world without first reciting a benediction acknowledging and thanking G–d as the Provider of these pleasures is considered as having robbed both G–d and Israel (alternate version: father and mother). We also have a verse in Proverbs 28,24, which describes a person who robs father and mother -while claiming that such action is no sin- as a companion to a destroyer. The Talmud goes on to describe G–d as our "father," and the כנסת ישראל, "the spiritual concept of the people of Israel," as the mother. As a practical example of such a destroyer the Talmud cites king Jerobam who destroyed the affinity of the people of Israel with their Heavenly Father by placing golden calves on the way to Jerusalem, preventing the pilgrims from making the pilgrimage to the Temple without first making an obeisance to these calves. We therefore see that the construction of the golden calf was an act of robbery vis-a-vis G–d. It robbed Israel of the abundance that G–d used to shower upon them. Expressed differently; The שפע, abundance from on high, was withheld because of פשע, sin. Our failure to acknowledge G–d's gifts would make us guilty of a similar sin. As a result of such considerations Moses explained to the Levites who were charged with carrying out the executions of the idol worshippers that by killing the guilty they were actually the cause of G–d bestowing His blessing on them (32,29). We therefore notice that the three sins we mentioned were all part of the episode of the golden calf. We find an allusion to this in the text in the very letters of the word עגל as acronyms for the three types of sin, i.e. עריות, גזל, לשון הרע. When our sages stated that there is no sin for which the penalty does not include some part of the punishment for the sin of the golden calf (Sanhedrin 102), they simply meant that since every sinner belongs to the ones guilty of either the sins most people are guilty of, or to the ones a minority are guilty of, such a person has once again become guilty of part of the sin committed by the Jews during the episode of the golden calf. We find the same in the story of the encounter between the serpent and man in גן עדן. Adam and Eve took fruit which did not belong to them; they were guilty of robbery. Eve was guilty of a sexual offence because the serpent mated with her. The serpent was guilty of slander and seduction, a sin which is irreversible.

The sin of the golden calf involved three distinct kinds of death penalty. Those who had been warned by reliable witnesses were executed by the Levites. Those who worshipped the golden calf but could not be executed judicially because although there were witnesses against them they had not been properly warned, were killed by a dragon; those who were guilty but against whom there were no valid witnesses died by the plague. Something similar happened in the case of the seduction by the serpent. Adam had been warned not to eat, the penalty spelled out. G–d Himself was the witness in his case. Eve was guilty because G–d had stated in Genesis 2,24: "Therefore man leaves the home of his parents and cleaves to his wife." Rashi sees in this the prohibition of the different kinds of incest that apply to all of mankind. However, she had not been warned that the penalty for contravening this law was death. The serpent's sin was committed with neither forewarning nor the testimony of an independent witness against it. We have a halachic rule that one does not use any argument that can serve as an extenuating circumstance on behalf of a seducer (Sanhedrin 29). Adam rehabilitated himself by offering an ox, as explained by our sages (Shabbat 28). When the Jewish people made the golden calf they reversed what Adam had done by exchanging the true G–d for the image of an ox.

Yalkut Shimoni item 386 at the beginning of our פרשה points out that the last paragraph in the previous פרשה mentions that Aaron used the corners קרנות of the altar to perform the rites of atonement on the Day of Atonement (30,10). The Hebrew word for corners is קרן, horn, the same as the "horn" of the ox. G–d told Moses to use this method of atonement because Israel had sinned with the golden calf. Moses queried that the Torah had stated that this method was effective only "once a year," i.e. on the Day of Atonement (ibid.) G–d replied that Moses should erect it (the altar) immediately, as soon as he had performed the counting of the Children of Israel. Rabbi Joshua son of Nachman said that G–d told Moses: "Go and count the Children of Israel!" Moses replied that we have two verses. In one of them the Israelites are compared to the dust of the earth, and in the other they are compared to the sand on the beaches of the sea. Both verses point out that one cannot count all the Israelites. In view of this, how could he be expected to carry out such a command? G–d told Moses that he was mistaken, that if he wanted to find out the number all he had to do was to use the first letters of each of the tribal heads' names etc., as we pointed out earlier. All G–d had intended was to find out how many of the Israelites had died as a result of the episode of the golden calf. Those who survived were to give a ransom for their souls (lives, 30,11). When Moses heard this he became afraid and said: עור בעד עור וכל אשר לאיש יתן בעד נפשו (Job 2,4), "Skin for skin; all that man has he will give up for his life." [Moses did not yet realise that G–d required only a half-shekel from each person as the ransom for his life. Ed.]

Rabbi Yehudah son of lla-i said that Moses originally thought that the ransom for a person's life was one talent of silver since it is written in Kings I 20,39: "it will be your life for his, or you will have to pay a talent of silver." Rabbi Yossi believes that the amount of ransom appropriate is the amount of 100 pieces of silver, and that we compare this to the case of a groom who accused his bride of not having been a virgin (Deut. 22,19). The sin of the Jewish people at the time was comparable to that of the מוציא שם רע, because the people proclaimed "These are your gods O Israel, which have taken you out of Egypt," a clear defamation of G–d's reputation. Thus, every Jew should have been required to pay 100 shekels. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish felt, that the amount of the ransom payment should be compared to the person who has raped a young woman in Deut. 22,29 who is required to pay a ransom of 50 shekels to the father of the rape-victim. The sin of the Jewish people at the episode of the golden calf was akin to that of the rapist. We, who have been told "You shall not have any other G–d," have subjected G–d to the pain of our making another god for ourselves. It is therefore appropriate for each Jew to ransom himself to the tune of 50 shekels. Rabbi Yehudah bar Symon said that the appropriate ransom payment should be derived from the Torah's legislation dealing with the ox which has gored someone's slave and the owner of which has to pay 30 shekels to the owner of the slave who was killed (Exodus 21,32). The comparison is fitting because the Israelites demeaned themselves to be no better than the image of the ox which they worshipped. They had devalued themselves, so to speak, so that their lives were no longer worth more than 30 shekel.

G–d realised what was in Moses' heart and reassured him by saying that not a talent of silver, not 100 shekels, etc. would be required but only one half shekel.

How did our Rabbis know what was in Moses' mind at the time? Another difficulty is that originally the Torah had said that a life cannot be ransomed at all, whereas later we hear about four different amounts as appropriate in different circumstances! Besides, how did G–d answer Moses' problem of knowing what the half-shekel was by showing him a coin of fire, as our sages say in Shemot Rabbah?

Why did G–d not simply say: "they shall give a ransom for their lives in the amount of a half-shekel each?" Furthermore, the word איש in the verse also seems totally superfluous! Actually, G–d wanted Moses to have a chance to reflect in order that the process of atonement could begin. If the Torah had simply said: ונתנו איש, "They shall give a person," I would have concluded that there is no such thing as ransom-money to redeem a capital crime. G–d added: זה יתנו, "This they shall give" (there is such a thing as monetary ransom). I have explained elsewhere that when G–d imposes a punishment this must not be viewed as something that represents Him, the One who gave the commandment, but it should be seen as the natural consequence if the person who was commanded to do something failed to carry out that commandment. The reason this is so is to limit the scope of the punishment. Just as there is a גבול, limit, to our lives, so the punishment is limited in duration. When we speak about the reward for commandments performed, however, the process is reversed. The reward originates with the Law-giver. Just as He is not bound by any restrictions, so the scope of the reward for observing His commandments is unlimited. All this is hinted at in the word איש. If the penalty were directly related to the Law-giver, it would have to be unlimited in scope, i.e. it would consume the guilty person איש totally; he would have to die. Allowing the person in question to expiate his sin by a ransom payment demonstrates that the penalty is related directly only to the person who has committed the sin, not to G–d.

We have shown earlier that the sin of the golden calf comprised four sins, i.e. idol worship, robbery, sexual licentiousness and slander. The four different teachers of the Talmud who are quoted in the Midrash as holding different views concerning the amount of the ransom payment simply address themselves to a different one of the four sins which formed part of the episode of the golden calf and which are alluded to in the respective letters of the word עגל.

We need not assume that the sages disagree. The ransom payment for someone guilty of slander is derived from the example of the groom who slandered the reputation of his bride; the ransom payment for sexual licentiousness is derived from the amount listed as due from the rapist. The ransom payment for robbery is derived from the example of the owner who allowed his ox to gore the slave of his neighbour. The ox which Adam sacrificed corresponded to the lesson learned at the beginning of the Book of Leviticus that when one offers a sacrifice it must be מכם, must belong to you, cannot be something stolen (Leviticus 1,2). G–d told Moses: "I am very merciful;" He showed him a coin of fire as a symbol that an offering burned up on the altar is ריח ניחוח, acceptable to G–d as a sweet-smelling fragrance. In other words, the half-shekel contribution by each Israelite was to be used for the purchase of animals to be offered as sacrifices, as Adam had done at the time he expiated for his sin.

To get back to the subject of דבקות, the affinity between us and G–d and the reciprocal relationship between Israel and G–d as portrayed by the ten, respectively 20 emanations we mentioned on page 638. Whereas the plain meaning of this statement in the Zohar remains unaffected, the story in the Yalkut adds a number of additional allusions to the mystical meaning of this דבקות. The numbers 200,000, 300,000, and 50,000 allude to three of the names of G–d i.e. א-ל, א-להים, י-ה-ו-ה. The word א-להים when spelled as follows: א-ל, א-לה, א-להי, א-להים, totals 199 plus the name itself =200. When you write א-להים using the word method you obtain the number 300, i.e. אלף, למד, הי, יוד, מם. You also obtain the equivalent of 300 when you apply the system of א"ת, ב"ש to the way you write the Ineffable four-lettered Name, thus: מצפץ=300. Since we are not allowed to even contemplate G–d as Essence, an alternate method of writing His name indicates the difference between G–d as Essence and G–d as a symbol of a concept that we may contemplate. The number 50 alludes to the letters י-ה of the Ineffable Name which we are allowed to contemplate. You view this name as a combination of the two letters i.e. 10 times 5=50. The Ineffable Name also includes within it the name א-ל, such as when you write the Ineffable name as the name that amounts to 63 instead of 72. The spelling then is 15=הי, 13=ואו, 15=הי, 20=יוד, total=63. The other letters of the heads of the 11 tribes in the Yalkut Shimoni also allude to concepts of G–d's management of our history, such as the letter ז which alludes to the mystical dimension of בנין, and the fact that G–d's “seven eyes” sweep the universe the letter ד to the four חיות supporting the throne of G–d, the letter ב, to the concept of ברכה, the letter ג to the three classes of angels who sing G–d's praises in the Celestial Regions. The three letters י and the letter א together account for the name א-ל. דביקות ה', close affinity to G–d, is the reverse of idol worship. The angels singing G–d's praises in the Holy Tongue are the opposite of לשון הרע, slander. The letter ב stands for ברכה, blessing, which is the opposite of גזל, robbery, and is the reason the Torah does not start with the letter א which is short for ארור, "cursed." The letter א symbolises the union of man and wife, i.e. והיו לבשר אחד, "They shall become one flesh" (Genesis 2,24). This union is the opposite of גלוי עריות, indiscriminate mating between men and women. The reason that the names of the tribal heads are used for this parable is that they represent a strong affinity to G–d.

This subject matter is alluded to further in the paragraph (33,12) beginning with the words: "See, You have said to me: 'Lead this people forward, but You have not made known to me whom You will send with me.'" Why does the Torah begin this paragraph with the word ראה? Rashi comments that the word is to be understood as "concentrate your eyes and heart on your words." We still need to understand what exactly Moses was meant to concentrate on. Moses' statement that G–d had not informed him whom He would send with him is also difficult. The Torah had already mentioned in 33,2 that G–d would send along an angel who would expel the Canaanites, etc. Rashi uses the word לא הודעתני in verse 12 as meaning that Moses was not satisfied with the angel G–d had mentioned in 23,20 as accompanying the Jewish people on their journey. This seems a forced explanation. Another difficulty is the meaning of ידעתיך בשם וגם מצאת חן בעיני in our verse. Besides, what is the connection between the words: "for this is Your people" at the end of 33,13, and G–d's reply: "My Presence will go, and I will lighten your burden?" Why does Moses demur saying: "if Your Presence does not go" in 33,15, when G–d had already promised that His Presence would go with the people? The plural used for G–d's Presence in both instances, i.e. ילכו, and הולכים is also unusual! The cumbersome verse 16 ובמה יודע אפוא וגו' is also difficult.

I have already written in my introduction that we are G–d's people and that we cleave to His Ineffable Name; I have also used the parable by Rabbi Berechyah showing that we remain G–d's people even when we have sinned and that Moses refused to budge until G–d again referred to Israel as "My people." Moses objected to G–d suddenly saying to him in 33,12: "Lead up this people," which implied that the Jewish people were no longer G–d's people. By using the expression "Look here, i.e. concentrate on what you have said, Moses referred to a previous occasion when G–d had said to Moses: "go and descend, for your people have become corrupted." Now, when G–d is supposed to have forgiven, He did not say: "Go and lead My people, etc.,” but all He said was "go and lead up this people!" We have learned that the stature of the prophet is closely intertwined with the spiritual level of his people. When the Jewish people's moral level declined, G–d told Moses to reduce his own stature in accordance with the reduced stature of his people. Now that G–d signalled that Moses' standing had again risen, Moses could not understand why something parallel had not occurred with the standing of his people. Moses therefore wondered whether he had misunderstood the meaning of the words העל את העם הזה, as an expression of G–d's forgiveness, and that all it meant was what the Torah said in connection with 33,1 לך עלה מזה אתה והעם, which Rashi explains as a call to go up to the land of Canaan which is topographically on a higher level than all other countries. The statement in 33,2 certainly indicated that G–d's personal Presence was henceforth not going to be with the Jewish people in their journey and that this is why He said in 23,30: "I shall send My angel ahead of you to protect you on the way, etc."

Moses therefore had good reason to complain that G–d had not indicated whom exactly He was going to send with him now -since the promise in 23,20 referred to the angel who would accompany Joshua when he invaded the land of Canaan. When the angel arrived in Joshua's time he identified himself as the angel G–d had spoken about in 23,20 saying "now I have come" (Joshua 5,14). He implied that he had not had permission to come during the lifetime of Moses. Although Moses had not yet been told that Joshua would lead the Jewish people in the conquest of the Holy Land and still thought that he himself would conduct that campaign, he did realise that the statement by G–d that He would send an angel presaged a sin on the part of the Jewish people and that as a result the שכינה would announce that G–d's direct Presence would not accompany them, just as Rashi explains. At that time Moses thought that the sin referred to would be something Israel would become guilty of in a far distant era, a time when the Temple would be destroyed and would subsequently be rebuilt and that at the time of this future redemption an angel would accompany the people of Israel back out of exile. He was certain, however, that as far as the present was concerned, G–d personally would lead the Jewish people in their ascent to the land of Canaan. This is why he was non-plussed saying: "You have not informed me," because he was not willing to accept the promise in 32,2 as, adequate. He explained the reason for his dissatisfaction with the words: "You have told me that I am persona grata." You might ask why it should have mattered so much whether an angel or G–d's personal presence would accompany the Jewish people on this journey. Moses reiterated that G–d had told him that he had become close enough to His Ineffable Name, i.e. ידעתיך בשם. This expression reflected the דבקות, affinity with G–d, which had been achieved. When the people left Egypt the plan had been to march to the land of Canaan without delay, a land in which the Ineffable Name is at home.

When Moses added the words וגם מצאתי חן בעיניך, the word וגם suggested that the Presence of the Ineffable Name extended not only to the Holy Land itself but also to the journey of the Jewish people in the direction of the Holy Land. Moses felt entitled to the דבקות ה' which would earmark the relationship between G–d and Israel in the Holy Land to earmark their relationship already at this time. The practical proof of that relationship would be that G–d personally would accompany the Jewish people on their journey. Moses asked for a revelation assuring him that such דבקות ה' would become manifest as of now when he said: הודיעני נא את דרכיך ואדעך בשם, "please let me know Your ways that I may know Your Ineffable Name (even when You go with with us now)" [combination of parts of verses 13 and 16. Ed.] Moses added: "In this way You will demonstrate that this nation is Your people."

G–d responded: "Indeed My Presence will go." To the request that this should occur already at this time, G–d said this will occur at a time והניחותי לך, "when I will will grant rest, i.e. in the land of Israel itself, not on the journey." A parallel meaning of the word והניחותי may be found in Deut. 25,19, in conjunction with the duty to wipe out Amalek after G–d has given the Jewish people rest, i.e. בהניח from all their enemies becomes operative. You might ask that if G–d had already told Moses that His Presence in the form of the Ineffable Name would be revealed once the Jewish people were in the land of Israel, what would have been the advantage if Moses had been allowed to bring the Jewish people to the land of Israel? In either event there would be a manifestation of the Ineffable Name in the land of Israel? Under the leadership of the angel who accompanied Joshua G–d's Presence as the Ineffable Name became manifest only within the precincts of the Holy Temple. Had Moses been allowed to bring the Jewish people into the Holy Land, such a presence of the Ineffable Name would have been manifest throughout the Holy Land, not only within the precincts of the Holy Temple.

It was concerning this that Moses pleaded that if G–d was not prepared to accompany the Jewish people immediately in His manifestation of the Ineffable Name, as evident by the fact that G–d had employed the future tense פני ילכו, "My Presence will go," how would he, Moses, know that he indeed enjoyed G–d's full measure of confidence if G–d did not already go with the Jewish people now, i.e. אם אין פניך הולכים, "If Your Presence does not go now?

G–d responded to this last request of Moses by saying in verse 17: גם את הדבר אשר דברת אעשה, "I shall also comply with the matter you have mentioned." On the one hand G–d would go with the Jewish people now, and He would prove that He had granted Moses a superior degree of intimacy; this would become manifest once the Jewish people would be in the land of Israel. In verse 17 Moses first mentioned the fact that he had found favour, חן in the eyes of G–d, i.e. on the way to the Holy Land, before he mentioned that he had been found worthy of intimacy with G–d on the basis of His Ineffable Name, ואדעך בשם, i.e. in ארץ ישראל. He did so because, chronologically speaking, the journey preceded Israel's arrival in the Holy Land. Earlier, when he prayed (verse 12), he had first asked for a sign in ארץ ישראל, something not to be granted immediately; once G–d would have obliged, he would have asked for more, i.e. a display of grace already now while the Jewish people were still in the desert. This is what he meant when he said ונפלינו אני ועמך מכל העם, "so I and Your people will be distinguished over and beyond any other nation on earth."

He prayed for the דבקות to become manifest already before the conquest of the land of Canaan. As long as Israel carries out G–d's wishes this affinity exists, and the name of G–d as well as the throne of G–d is complete. When Israel sinned with the golden calf, one of the four supports of G–d's throne, i.e. the פני השור, "slipped," causing G–d's throne and His name to become impaired. As long as Israel carry out G–d's desires, they are the carriers of the Presence of G–d, they serve as the throne. As long as such a situation continues they are called אדם, i.e. they represent the פני אדם mentioned in Ezekiel's vision as one of the four carriers of G–d's throne (Ezekiel 1,10). The study of the Torah is one leg of the four legs supporting G–d's throne, the one called פני השור. This is based on ורב תבואות בכח השור (Proverbs 14,4). Our sages have said that one should apply oneself to Torah study as an ox applies himself to the yoke (Avodah Zarah 5). When it comes to the practical performance of what is written in the Torah one should behave like a lion and an eagle, as we know from Rabbi Yehudah ben Teyma in Avot 5,20. The Rabbi refers to the sharp eye possessed by the eagle and the courage possessed by the lion, a function of the heart. The Torah itself warns us not to allow our eyes and our hearts to make us stray from the path of Torah (Numbers 15,39), evidence that these two organs are of prime importance in carrying out G–d's commandments. Should Israel fail to live up to these obligations, also these two legs of G–d's throne would collapse.

We will deal with the significance of the שור in connection with פרשת פרה, which is usually read on the Sabbath we read פרשת כי תשא. Due to our being in exile on account of our many sins, our preoccupation with Torah is unfortunately greatly reduced; this situation will not be drastically changed until the time of the final redemption when the whole world will become filled with the knowledge of G–d (Isaiah 11,9). Our sages state that though generally speaking the Torah is referred to as masculine, when the Torah is spoken of in connection with exile it is referred to as feminine such as in Deut. 31,21 כי לא תשכח מפי זרעו, “For she will not be forgotten by its descendants." When Torah is thus "weakened," it assumes the image of a feminine שור, i.e. a cow. This is the mystical dimension of the פרה אדומה, the red heifer and of the legislation concerning its treatment. We view the red heifer as the instrument that is to expiate for the fact that the Torah has been downgraded from the image of the male (ox), to the female (cow). The ash of the red heifer purifies a person who has been ritually contaminated by contact with a dead body or exposure to the enclosed airspace harbouring a dead body.

At the time the Jewish people accepted the Torah they were freed from the need to die, i.e. from the influence of Satan. They had become totally free from the influence of other nations as alluded to in Psalms 82,6: "I had taken you for divine beings, sons of the Most High, all of you; but you shall die as men do, fall like any prince." This is an allusion to death and exile. This sin of the golden calf is the reason that even when we experienced redemptions at a later stage, such redemption is always characterised as being feminine, incomplete. When we give thanks for such a redemption we sing שירה חדשה, a new song (feminine gender) as distinct from when we received the Torah where the Torah was referred to as masculine. An example for the dual function of the פרה is found in Samuel 16,12 where the cows are described as וישרנה, "they walked straight (masculine form). Kimchi points out that the grammar here is a combination of the masculine and the feminine gender, i.e. the ending is feminine, whereas the first half of the word is masculine. This is an allusion to the שיר, song, which is sometimes masculine and sometimes feminine as the situation requires. We have written more about this both in our treatise on פרשת פרה, on פרשת ויקהל-פקודי, as well as on פרשת חוקת.