Parshat VaEschanan 5778
Rabbi Jablinowitz
We read in this week's parsha the Aseres HaDibros the second time it appears in the Torah. The first time is in parshat Yisro when Bnei Yisrael received the Torah. There a number of differences between the two parshiyot in how the Aseres HaDibros are brought. The most prominent distinction is in the mitzvah of Shabbos which we have discussed in the past. This week I would like to focus on the distinction in the way the mitzvah of Kibbud Av V'Eim is brought. Our parsha states that one should honor one's parents L'ma'an Yitav Lach, in order that Hashem should bring you good, yet this statement is missing in the first set in parshat Yisro. Why are these words included here and omitted there?
The Gemara in Baba Kama 54B-55A actually asks this question. The Gemara there states that Rabbi Chanina ben Agil asked Rabbi Chiya bar Abba why in the first set of Dibros it doesn’t say the word Tov and in the second set it does (by the mitzvah of Kibbud Av V'Eim). He responds in an amazing fashion. He says rather than ask me why it says Tov, ask me if it in fact says Tov or not and sends him to an Amora who was close to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi who was an expert in Aggadah. The Gemara ultimately concludes that since the first set of Luchos were going to be broken, the word Tov was intentionally omitted from them for chas v'shalom that Tov would be destroyed as well!
Rav Tzadok asks the same question and answers that even though the Gemara gives its response, in matters of Aggadah one can give an additional answer. He points out, as many of the commentators do, that the second set of Luchos were given after the sin of the Golden Calf. Bnei Yisrael were on a much lower level than they were when the Torah was first given to them. In the first set of Luchos, just promising eternal life (Shemos, Chapter 11, Pasuk 20), L'Ma'an Ya'arichun Yamecha automatically implies Tov. There wasn't a need for an additional bracha of L'ma'an Yitav Lach. But after chet ha'egel, Bnei Yisrael needed an additional bracha of L'ma'an Yitav Lach. There could be Chayim without Tov, as the pasuk says in Tehillim (Chapter 119, Pasuk 72), Mi Ha'Ish Ha'Chafetz Chayim, Ohev Yamim Liros Tov. There is Chayim and there is Tov, Tov being Torah Shebe'alpeh. This was the situation after the chet, but before, Bnei Yisrael were on the level of angels at Matan Torah. The promise of Chayim necessarily included the bracha of Tov.
The Meshech Chachmah gives a similar answer but adds an additional idea. He explains that the real reward for a mitzvah is the spiritual sense of connection one receives from doing the mitzvah, as Ben Azai teaches in Avos (Chapter 4, Mishnah 2), Schar Mitzvah, Mitzvah. The reward for doing a mitzvah is the mitzvah itself; the light and the Tov which results from the mitzvah. However, after the chet ha'egel Bnei Yisrael were on too low a level to feel this connection just from doing a mitzvah. Therefore, the bracha is given in the future L'ma'an Yitav Lach. In the future, L'Asid Lavo, you will feel the light and the Tov from your performing mitzvos. But in this world you won't be able to reach this level. And before the chet, in the Luchos Rishonos, this bracha isn't necessary since Bnei Yisrael felt the Tov immediately upon performing the mitzvos. Schar Mitzvah, Mitzvah.
Tosfos in Baba Basra (113A D"H Travayhu) asks how it could be that Rabbi Chiya bar Abba told Rabbi Chanina ben Agil to first check whether it in fact says Tov in the second set of Luchos? He concludes that we see from this Gemara that the Amora'im weren't experts in text and sent him to Rabbi Ben Levi who was an expert in Aggadah.
The Meshech Chachmah gives a different p'shat. He says that Rabbi Chiya bar Abba was telling him first ask if it says Tov or not. It doesn't say Tov; it says Yitav, future tense, as we explained. He told him to check out with Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi who is an expert in Aggadah why it says Yitav and not Tov. Certainly Rabbi Chiya bar Abba knew what it says in the parsha. Rather he was hinting to him this weakening of the generations and giving him his own answer. When you understand that it doesn't say Tov, i.e. V'Tov Lach, but rather it says L'ma'an Yitav Lach, future tense, you will understand the answer. In the first set of Luchos it wasn't necessary since Bnei Yisrael were on a high level, but in the second set there is a promise to ultimately feel the light inherent in performing mitzvos. Schar Mitzvah, Mitzvah.
Good Shabbos
Print this article