See the conclusion of this sichah (sec. 10), where the Rebbe offers an interpretation of this teaching.
The sichah is focusing on the interconnection between two points: a) the concept of inheritance as a whole, i.e., the division of a person’s estate among his heirs, b) the division of Eretz Yisrael into ancestral heritages to be passed on from a person to his heirs, wherein that portion of land reverts to the heirs of the original owners in the Yovel (Jubilee) year.
The implication is that, in particular, there are three ways through which the connection between Eretz Yisrael and the Jewish people is expressed:
- as a heritage,
- a division according to logic (“to a more populous [tribes]...”),
- a division according to a lottery.
It is possible to say that the reason why all three ways of division were necessary is that the giving of Eretz Yisrael to the Nation of Israel as an everlasting heritage involved more than simply transferring and allocating plots of the land to the people. Eretz Yisrael is “G-d’s heritage,” and “The eyes of G-d are always [focused] on it from the beginning of the year until the end of the year.”
Therefore, it was appropriate that it be given specifically to the Jewish people for they, too, are the “inheritance of G-d,” and intrinsically bound up with Him. Thus, our Sages say, “The Holy One, blessed be He, declared, ‘Let Israel who became My portion inherit the Land that became My portion.’ ” Granting Eretz Yisrael – “G-d’s inheritance” – to the Nation of Israel thus reveals and expresses the Jewish people’s bond with Him.
Thus, all three elements – inheritance, a lottery, and a logical division (“to the more populous ones...”) – applied regarding the division of Eretz Yisrael as a whole among the entire Jewish people.
The Urim and Tumim also were involved with the designation of the portions of the Land into ancestral heritages. However, their involvement was identified with the division by lot, i.e., to corroborate that the lottery was dictated by Divine inspiration.
We find that there are three expressions of the Jews’ bond with G-d, as we say in our preliminary morning prayers, “We are fortunate! How good is our portion! How pleasant is our lot! And how beautiful is our inheritance!” Likewise, there are three ways of describing the manner in which G-d granted Eretz Yisrael to the Jews: as a portion, a lot, and an inheritance.
These three expressions – a portion, a lot, and an inheritance – follow an order, implying a pattern of successive ascents. Since “how beautiful is our inheritance” is the last, it can be understood that an inheritance possesses a deeper and superior dimension than the other two expressions.
Clarification is thus necessary:
- How are these three categories defined and how do they differ vis-à-vis the nature of the relationship between the Jews and G-d?
- How is it at all appropriate to speak of an inheritance – to quote the verse, “When a man dies...” – with regard to the connection between the Jews and G-d?
Distinguishing Between a Sale and a Gift
It can be said that the difference between “our portion” and “our lot” resembles the difference between a sale and a gift. A sale is dependent primarily on the money the purchaser pays for the item. By contrast, a gift is dependent upon the goodwill of the giver; he does not receive any payment from the recipient.
Similar concepts apply regarding the Divine beneficence bestowed upon the Jewish people. There are two general ways in which G-d grants this beneficence:
- as reward for the observance of the mitzvos; this beneficence is elicited by man’s Divine service, in the lexicon of Chassidus, it comes from “an arousal from below;”
- as a gift granted on G-d’s own initiative, as a result of His “goodness, grace, kindness, and mercy,” and an “arousal from Above.”
In general, this reflects the distinction between “our portion” and “our lot.” “Our portion” points to the connection between the Jewish people and G-d established through the Jews’ Divine service – and thus resembles “a sale.” “Our lot” describes the bond between the Jewish people and G-d that results from G-d’s having “chose[n] us from all nations.” The true concept of choice – free choice – is when an entity is not chosen for a reason or due to a calculated decision, i.e., because of the virtues, qualities, or the like that it possesses. Instead, it is chosen solely as a result of the will of the one who chooses. This resembles one who chooses by lot, for when a lot is cast, there is no reason or logic involved; there is no recognition of the merits of the article on which the lot falls. Instead, one relies on the lot entirely without knowing how it will fall – to cite the wording of the verse, “The lot is cast in the lap, but the entire outcome is dependent on G-d.”
This resembles a gift which is dependent solely on the will of the giver – except that there is an aspect of a gift that resembles a sale. Although a gift is given because of the desire of the giver, there is a reason why he gives which is connected with the recipient, as our Sages state, “If [the recipient] did not do something that brought [the giver] satisfaction, he would not have given him a gift.” By contrast, a lottery has no connection to reason or logic whatsoever.
Something Above Holiness
From a deeper perspective, “our portion” is connected not only with the Divine service of the Jewish people, but also with the very essence of their existence. The phrase, “G-d’s portion is His people,” refers to (the soul of) a Jew; to cite the wording of Tanya, “the second soul within a Jew is an actual part of G-d from Above.”
It could be said that, in this aspect, the quality possessed by the Jews alluded to by the term “our portion” surpasses that alluded to by the term “our lot.” Describing a Jew’s soul as “an actual part of G-d from Above” expresses the innate virtue and holiness of a Jew’s very being. It could be said that this is the reason the Alter Rebbe associates the Jews as embodying “an actual part of G-d” with their description as “children of the Omnipresent,” “children unto G-d your L-rd.”
On this physical plane, the connection between a father and a son relates to the very being of the son. Similarly, in the analogue, describing the Jews as “G-d’s children,” as it were, defines their very being. As such, the aspect of the Jews’ relationship to G-d implied by the term “our portion” reflects the spiritual qualities they possess and their inherent virtues. In this way, that term bears a similarity to a sale which is dependent on the purchaser’s payment of something of value.
