חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם

Parashat Kedoshim (5760)

Back to list  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
Translation (GPT-5.4) of a Hebrew essay on פרשת קדושים by Rabbi Michael Abraham. ↑ Back to Weekly Torah Portion Hub.

With God's help, on the eve of the holy Sabbath, Parashat Kedoshim, 5760

'The Sanctity of Life'

Our portion opens with the command: 'You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy,' and concludes with the command:

'And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy.' The concepts of holiness in general, and the 'sanctity of life' in particular,

have in our day acquired various strange meanings, and I would like to discuss these concepts a bit.

The concept of holiness as it appears in Parashat Kedoshim is a concept of separation from sin, as Rashi

says in the name of the Midrash at the beginning of the portion: 'You shall be holy'—be separate from forbidden sexual relations and from sin,

for wherever you find a fence against sexual impropriety, you find holiness. And in the Sifra (a tannaitic halakhic midrash) on this verse

they expounded: 'You shall be holy'—be separate. This is a passive concept of holiness, whose meaning is abstention

from transgressions.

According to this, we need to understand how the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself can be described as holy. Is He also separated

from transgressions? Seemingly, the concept of holiness with respect to the Holy One, blessed be He, must be understood as a positive, active concept.

Another question is how a person can be commanded to be holy like the Holy One, blessed be He. In what sense is he

supposed to resemble Him?

The concept of holiness also appears in contexts that are not necessarily passive. Thus, for example, this is implied by the Mishnah in tractate

Kelim: 'The Land of Israel is holier than all other lands, and wherein lies its holiness? In that they bring from it the omer and the two

loaves.' In this Mishnah, holiness is expressed in positive commandments, and not only in passive avoidance

of transgressions.

It may be that these questions about the passive or active character of holiness can be resolved on

the basis of the assertion of several thinkers who wrote that we cannot describe the Holy One, blessed be He, the source

of holiness, except by negative attributes. That is, we can describe Him only through negative

statements whose point is what does not characterize Him, for He cannot be grasped positively. Clearly

this is our limitation as created beings. The Holy One, blessed be He, Himself is not a negative concept, and certainly not a passive one. Religion

in general appears, at first glance, to be passive, and it seems that it deals more with negating the outside

than with positive construction of the inner world. A clear example is Sabbath observance, which is generally perceived as a burden,

because of the passive character of the Sabbath. On the Sabbath, everything connected with ordinary life is forbidden. The Sabbath too is described

mainly in negative ways.

In truth, this is only an appearance. The Sabbath (like the Holy One, blessed be He) is a positive concept. Cessation

from labor makes it possible to attain states that cannot be attained through explicit positive commands. The

positive part of the Sabbath cannot be formulated, and therefore it is expressed mainly through commands of passivity

and abstention, through prohibitions. We should note here that the positive component of the Sabbath's commandments is solely

to 'sanctify' it; that is, the Sabbath, like the Holy One, blessed be He, is connected to concepts of holiness, except

that its essence is wrapped in a cloud of restrictive commands, a kind of 'negative attributes.'

From here we may learn about the concept of holiness in general. The concept 'holiness' is a positive

concept, but it cannot be described except by means of 'negative attributes.' We saw above that Rashi writes: 'For wherever you

find a fence against sexual impropriety, you find holiness.' From Rashi's wording it emerges that he is not making an identification:

a fence against sexual impropriety = holiness, but rather positing a condition: a fence against sexual impropriety is what leads to holiness.

We see that the demand for holiness is a supreme expression of the tension of a person who lives in the world of action.

How is one to live life in this world in its full intensity, and at the same time keep one's head in the heavens,

seemingly precisely by refraining from the world? The abstention, which at first glance seems

to demand detachment, is meant to elevate a person to a different level of life, more intense and purer, and not to detach him from

life (see also my comments on Parashat Tazria).

In these days we stand between Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day and Memorial Day for Israel's Fallen Soldiers.

One of the strongest expressions of the fact that there is a holiness without which life is not life

appears when a person gives his life for a value, thereby showing that this value constitutes a condition

for his life. The true 'sanctity of life' is the conception that only a life of holiness is called life. A life

of mere breathing, eating, and materiality is life in the biological sense, like that of an animal; such a life is not

life in its full sense at all. Today people speak of the 'sanctity of life' as a sanctity inherent in a person's very existence,

in the fact that he breathes and exists; here I mean to add that there are defining characteristics of true

life, and only these are worthy of being described in terms of holiness.

As with the individual, so too with the collective: its life is not exhausted merely by its existence. The purpose of an

organism, individual or collective, is holiness.[1] The independence of a nation is only its physical existence.

The question is: in what do we 'live' beyond that? On the approaching Independence Day it is worthwhile for us to examine carefully

where we as a society stand on the planes of values and Jewish identity. Is there also present among us a dimension of

holiness, of Torah, or is our independence nothing but mere physical existence? It is worth examining whether

Jewish characteristics still remain in our society in the realm of values, or only in racial-biological

terms (and even those are not beyond challenge).[2]

A peaceful Sabbath

It may be deposited for genizah in any synagogue or yeshiva. Comments and responses will be welcomed.

———————–

[1] I feel the need to clarify here that a state (at least in its present form, and perhaps in general) is, in my view,

an instrument devoid of any holiness. My intention in the above remarks is only to ask whether it expresses, or

enables, holiness for the society and the individuals who live in it.

[2] In present-day Israel, a considerable portion of the citizens are children of Jewish mothers (still

a majority, though steadily decreasing). The converse statement—that a not insignificant portion (though certainly not רוב) of the children

of Jewish mothers in the world are citizens of the state—is also true. Anyone who is dissatisfied with such a racial

and minimalist characterization of the Jewishness of our society should take note.

Biton36.doc

השאר תגובה

Back to top button