However, the blessings in Bechukotai that transcend nature are due to the fact that the Jewish people as well serve G-d in a way that transcends their own nature. This is expressed in the explanation that the blessings of Bechukotai revolve around.
On the verse, “If you follow My statutes and observe My commandments and perform them,” Rashi comments:
Text 5
I might think that this refers to the fulfillment of the commandments. However, when Scripture says, “and observe My commandments,” the fulfillment of the commandments is [already] stated. So what is the meaning of “If you follow My statutes”? It means that you must toil in the study of Torah.
Rashi, Vayikra 26:3
Because the Jewish people do not only learn Torah according to their obligation, but instead toil in it beyond their natural inclination, they are blessed as well with blessings that transcend nature.
Question
However, Rashi’s explanation on another verse in Parshat Ki Tavo seems to negate this explanation.
On the verse, “Look down from Your holy dwelling, from the heavens, and bless Your people Israel, and the ground which You have given to us, as You swore to our forefathers a land flowing with milk and honey,” Rashi comments on the words, “Look down from Your holy dwelling” and states:
Text 6
We have fulfilled what You have decreed upon us. Now You do what is incumbent upon You to do, for You said, “If you follow My statutes... then I shall give [you] your rains in their [proper] time....”
Rashi, Devarim 26:15
Rashi seems to make a hybrid of what he explains in our parsha in the first half of his explanation there, with the statement, “We have fulfilled what You have decreed upon us. Now You do what is incumbent upon You to do,” and follows with the opposite theme, that as a reward, G-d will repay us as stated in Bechukotai, “then I shall give [you] your rains in their [proper] time....”
By explaining that “then I shall give [you] your rains in their [proper] time” is a reward for fulfilling “what You have decreed upon us,” Rashi seems to negate what was previously explained that G-d only blesses the Jewish people in a way that transcends nature, when they too go beyond the letter of the law and toil in Torah.
Decrees and obligations
Upon analyzing Rashi’s exact statement, however, it is clear that Rashi circumvents this question through slight variation of his words, which brings about a tremendous difference in the intent of the statement.
Parshat Eikev: “You will have done what is [incumbent upon] you; [so] I will do what is [incumbent] upon Me.”
Parshat Ki Tavo: “We have fulfilled what You have decreed upon us. Now You do what is incumbent upon You to do.”
By changing the words “what is incumbent upon us” to “what You have decreed upon us,” Rashi explains that the reason for the blessings which transcend nature is due to Israel’s fulfillment of the mitzvot in a manner that transcends human logic. Rashi explains the following regarding those mitzvot that are referred to as decrees:
Text 7
Because Satan and the nations of the world taunt Israel, saying, “What is this commandment, and what purpose does it have?” Therefore, the Torah uses the term “statute.” I have decreed it; You have no right to challenge it.
Rashi, Bamidbar 19:2
Rashi is not discussing those mitzvot that are done because they are understood logically but those that supersede reason and are fulfilled in a way that one fulfills a decree.
Because the person transcends the limitations of his intellect and fulfills these commandments by nullifying himself to G-d’s will, the reward for that act as well is that G-d’s blessings are brought upon him in a way that override nature.
The needs of the land
It is because of the general difference between Bechukotai and Eikev mentioned above, that causes the difference of the words “I will give the rain of your land at its time” that is stated in our parsha and the words “I will give your rains in their time” that is stated in Bechukotai.
In Bechukotai, where the blessing of rain is referred to as “your rains,” and comes to Israel as a reward to for transcending nature, the rain comes at a time that it is most convenient for them.
The time that is most suitable is during the periods when he does not go out at all. Therefore Rashi writes, that the rain falls “at a time when people do not usually go out, for example, on Shabbat Eve.” Although in order for rainfall that falls in such a short period of time to be adequate for the produce to grow is beyond nature, they are nevertheless bestowed with a blessing that transcends nature because of their actions of toiling in Torah beyond their obligation.
However, in our parsha, the blessing is referred to as “the rain of your land.” It is because the blessing is directed towards the land that the rain is according to the needs of the nature of the land. It is for this reason that Rashi explains that the blessing here is that rain should fall “at night,” (leilot) in the plural, and not only once a week, on Shabbat; as according to the perimeters of nature, the land needs rain more often than once a week.
The proper time
Both verses say that rainfall will come in its proper time. In Bechukotai the verse states, “I will give your rains in their time,” and in our parsha the verse states, “I will give the rain of your land at its time.” However, within the proper time for rainfall there are two approaches:
A) When the blessing is directed to Israel, then the time of the rain depends on Israel as its starting point and the needs of the land are dependent on their needs. It is for this reason that when Rashi defines the word “in their time” he states, “at a time when people do not usually go out (at all), for example, on Shabbat Eve.” It is for this reason that he first states “at a time when people do not usually go out” and only afterwards does he say “for example, on Shabbat Eve.” By doing so he stresses that the time for rainfall in this scenario is at a time when it is exceedingly convenient.
B) When, however, the blessing is for the land, as in the statement in our verse, “I will give the rain of your land,” then the primary concern is the land and Israel’s work on it, and the general convenience of Israel is secondary. That being the case, the primary time for rainfall is at a time when it is not being worked on—at night. It is for this reason that Rashi explains firstly that the time for rainfall is “at night,” being that nighttime is not a time that the fields are worked on. In order to further explain what the advantage of rainfall is at night, Rashi continues and states that the reason is “so it will not disturb you.” Indeed, this that rain falls at night is not for the land per say, but for the people that need to work on the land.
The difficulty
There is however, a difficulty with Rashi’s first explanation where he defines “at its time,” which necessitates Rashi’s second explanation that rainfall will come on Shabbat eve. The difficulties are as follows:
A) If the verse wished to state that rainfall would come at night, it could have easily switched the word “at its time,” (b’ito) which is one word, to the word “at night,” (baleilot) which is one word as well.
B) Rashi’s explanation for “at its time,” that it is in a time that does not disrupt work, is not completely satisfactory, as the simple explanation of “at its time” is the time for rain in general—not taking into account the needs of the people working the land. According to Rashi’s (first) explanation though, the reason that the rain falls at night is for the people working and has nothing to do with the time of rain in and of itself.
It is because of these questions that Rashi brings his second explanation that “at its time” is “On Shabbat [Friday] nights, when everyone is at home.” For this second explanation therefore, Rashi again quotes the words “at its time,” to express that what necessitated the second explanation is the definition of the words “at its time.”
Nevertheless, the primary explanation for the words “at its time” is “at night,” as this fits with the general intent of the verse. For this reason, regardless of the questions on this explanation, Rashi still brings it as the first and therefore principal explanation.
Additional differences
According to what was explained in regard to Bechukotai speaking of the reward for toiling in Torah and our parsha discussing the reward for fulfilling ones obligation, another difference in the two parshiyot becomes clear:
Being that Bechukotai discusses the reward for toiling in Torah, it is evident that there are only a distinct quantity of people that fall into this classification. However, our parsha, which discusses fulfilling one’s obligations, includes the entire Jewish people.
With this in mind the differences between the two Rashi’s can be illuminated:
A) In our parsha, Rashi writes “when everyone is at home”—i.e., all of the Jewish people as opposed to a select few. However, in Bechukotai, Rashi writes, “At a time when people do not usually go out” and does not use the word everyone, as he is only discussing those specific individuals that toil in Torah study.
B) In our parsha, Rashi writes “when everyone is at home” in the positive, as opposed to his commentary in Bechukotai, where he negates the notion of going out and writes “at a time when people do not usually go out.” The reason for the difference is because of the variance of individuals that each parsha discusses.
Pertaining to “everyone” it is not possible to say that they categorically do not leave their home Shabbat nights, as, though they are generally home, they do still go out of their houses to visit others or to go to the synagogue. However, regarding those that toil in Torah, when they are absolved from laboring in employment (which they are busy with during the rest of the week) they use all their free moments to toil in Torah and “do not usually go out.”
The lesson
From all of the above, the greatness of studying Torah and doing mitzvot with exertion is clear. It is not satisfactory to merely fulfill one’s obligations; one must transcend their nature and do mitzvot above and beyond the natural order of their body and their soul.
A person is likely to think to themselves: why must I exert myself in Torah and mitzvot if I am already immersed in holiness according to what I am obligated?
The answer however, is that when an individual is lacking in exertion and toil, not only can they not be sure lest they falter and sin, but it is considered in a sense as if they do not serve G-d.
Text 8
This will explain the statement in the Gemara that "One who is serving G-d" refers to him who reviews his lesson 101 times, while "One who serves him not" refers to him who repeats his lesson no more than 100 times. This is because in those days it was customary to review each lesson one hundred times, as, indeed, illustrated in the Gemara, ibid., by the example taken from the market, where donkey-drivers used to hire themselves out at a rate of ten parasangs for a zuz, but for eleven parasangs charged two zuzim, because that exceeded their customary practice.
Tanya, Ch. 15
A person who does not go the extra mile is as if he does not serve G-d at all, as all that he does is according to his nature.
When, however, a person transcends their nature and serves G-d in a way of toil, then G-d blesses the Jewish people in a manner of which he transforms negativity into good.
(Based on Likutei Sichos 19, Eikev 4, reworked by Rabbi Dovid Markel. To see other projects and to partner in our work, see: www.Neirot.com.)
