Shabbat Parashat Vayigash 5786

Moreshet Shaul: Introduction to Midrash Rabba – part I

The Torah’s Oral Law has two parts: Halacha (Rabbinical scholarship’s operative part) and Aggada (Rabbinic scholarship’s exegetical and philosophical part).

Halacha is the formulated form of the special spirit that makes Torah special. Legal systems generally have a platform, a philosophy that justifies the laws, and from which they emanate. When we analyze the halachot, we can notice the special spirit of justice that form their foundation. A different worldview from that of the Torah would necessarily create a different set of laws, whose rectitude would depend on their conformity to the worldview. Indeed, some countries have laws that stand in contradiction to those of other countries. The different spirit that serves as the foundation of the countries caused these differences. The laws of Sodom were also laws. They had judges, who judged the people “justly,” according to the concept of justice that they believed in.

Aggada is the internal spirit that gives life to Halacha. It is from it and upon it that Halacha was created. It is in Aggada that we find the special philosophy that makes Halacha crucial and understandable. By knowing Aggada, we can grasp the direction that Halacha provides. Through it, we can reach the same conclusions that Halacha sets. Aggada is the soul of Halacha.

One who embraces the Torah without the basis that gives it life does a great injustice. Its “letters” (a reference to a sefer Torah whose letters flew up to the Heaven when its parchment was burning) fly away, and it remains a matter lacking its own life. Over time, the corpus of Halacha can be corrupted, which can impact the very essence of the laws.

The spirit of the Written Law is the Oral Law, and the Oral Law’s spirit is Aggada. One who separates them brings destruction on himself.

Israel accepted the Torah, and the nations of the world also accepted parts of it. However, there is a huge difference between the acceptances. The laws and statutes do not cause Israel to suffer or feel subjugated. Rather, the laws and service of Hashem give life to Israel, making us feel a “lofty freedom.” In contrast, the nations of the world feel that their elements of the Torah limit them and diminish their freedom. It is a Torah of suffering, that creates an image of fear, of serving Hashem by necessity, not choice. The relationship between man and Hashem is for Israel of a son to his father, whereas for the nations, it is as a servant to his master.

The following aggadic Talmudic story (Avoda Zara 2b-3a) typifies this idea. In the future, the nations will complain to Hashem that He did not “hold the mountain (Sinai) over their heads” [to coerce them to accept the Torah like He did for Israel.]  Hashem gave them the mitzva of sukka as a test, and then He made it very hot, so that they kicked the sukka and left it. This is because one cannot effectively notice the difference between Israel and the nations by means of actual performance of the mitzvot. The difference is noticeable when the mitzva is not fulfilled, such as when circumstances exempt people from it. When someone in Israel is unable to fulfill the mitzva of sukka properly, e.g., it rains on the first night, he looks up in disappointment. He concludes that apparently Hashem does not want the person to serve Him in this way and waits in pain until the weather may improve and finally allow him to perform the mitzva. The holding of the mountain over our heads was just to awaken the focused desire to act. Due to this, one who is prevented from performing a mitzva is not considered as if he performed it, which causes a Jew to be upset when he cannot perform it. The other nations kicked the sukka, and were happy to be exempted from it, as they saw it as a heavy burden. The extenuating circumstances make him happy, as they enable him to finally get rid of the unpleasant obligation.

Top of page

Print this page

Send to friend