Twitter

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Tu b’Av old article

Tu b’Av

Dancing in the Streets

Rabbi Ari Kahn

excerpt from "Emanations"

The Fifteenth of Av (Tu b’Av) is a holiday of unclear significance. Although certain elements of the celebration of this day have captured the imagination of popular Israeli culture, the day itself remains obscure. While not specifically mentioned in the Torah, it is described by the Mishna at the end of Ta’anit by way of a surprising analogy: This hitherto unknown day is compared with Yom Kippur, arguably the holiest day of the year.[1]

R. Shimon ben Gamaliel said: There never were in Israel greater days of joy than the Fifteenth of Av and the Day of Atonement. On these days the daughters of Jerusalem used to walk out in white garments which they borrowed in order not to put to shame any one who had none. All these garments required ritual dipping. The daughters of Jerusalem came out and danced in the vineyards exclaiming at the same time, “Young man, lift up your eyes and see what you choose for yourself. Do not set your eyes on beauty but set your eyes on [good] family. ‘Grace is deceitful, and beauty is vain; but a woman that fears the Lord, she shall be praised’. And it further says, ‘Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her works praise her in the gates’. Likewise it says, ‘Go forth, o ye daughters of Zion, and gaze upon King Solomon, even upon the crown wherewith his mother had crowned him on the day of his espousals, and on the day of the gladness of his heart’. ‘On the day of his espousals:’ this refers to the day of the giving of the Law. ‘And in the day of the gladness of his heart:’ this refers to the building of the Temple; may it be rebuilt speedily in our days. (Ta’anit 26b)

This Mishna is the concluding Mishna of the tractate of Ta’anit, which deals with fast days and the laws of fasting. The previous Mishna had taught the laws of the ninth of Av. Now the Mishna continues to the next day of importance in Av – Tu b’Av. Ostensibly, the intent of the Mishna is to end on a positive note, especially after all the tragedies enumerated in the previous section. Indeed, the Mishna concludes with the building of the Temple, clearly a cause for monumental joy.

A scene of dancing and celebration is described, raising two questions: First, the description of Yom Kippur as a day of song and celebration seems dissonant with our understanding of Yom Kippur. And secondly, what is the significance of Tu b’Av, and why did it deserve the same celebration as Yom Kippur?

The Talmud answers the first question while raising the second, explaining the joy of Yom Kippur while pondering Tu b’Av:

I can understand the Day of Atonement, because it is a day of forgiveness and pardon and on it the second Tablets of the Law were given, but what happened on the Fifteenth of Av? (Ta’anit 30b)

Ecstatic joy, which is absent from our contemporary experience of Yom Kippur, is taken for granted in the Talmud: The experience of Yom Kippur was palpably different in Temple times. We are told that the red string in the Temple turned white, serving as a veritable spiritual barometer of God’s forgiveness of man. When the people were shown this tangible sign of forgiveness, celebration erupted.

R. Yishmael said: But they had another sign too: a thread of crimson wool was tied to the door of the Temple, and when the he-goat reached the wilderness the thread turned white, as it is written: ‘Though your sins be as scarlet they shall be as white as snow’. (Yoma 68b)

They would accompany him (the Kohen Gadol) to his house. He would arrange for a day of festivity for his friends whenever he had come forth from the Sanctuary in peace. (Yoma 70b)

This type of joy was spontaneous, even though it was a yearly occurrence on Yom Kippur. Singing, dancing and celebration broke out all over. The women of Jerusalem began dancing in the vineyards. Marriage was on their minds. Perhaps this is the reference at the end of the Mishna:

‘On the day of his espousals:’ this refers to the day of the giving of the Law.

The Talmud had described Yom Kippur as a day of “forgiveness and pardon and on it the second Tablets of the Law were given.” Yom Kippur encapsulates the mutual commitment between the Jewish People and God. It is the day that the Jews finally took their vows and were forgiven for the indiscretion of the Golden Calf. The Seventeenth of Tammuz, the day Moshe first came down with the Tablets in hand, should have been the day when the Jews solidified their commitment with God; instead it became a day of infamy. The fate of the entire community was held in abeyance in the following weeks until Moshe was invited once again[2] to ascend the mount on the first day of Elul. Forty days later, on the Tenth of Tishrei, the day celebrated henceforth as Yom Kippur, Moshe descended with the second Tablets, and with God’s message that He had forgiven the Jewish Nation. This is what the Mishna describes as “the day of his espousals”.[3]

This idea dovetails with the teaching that one’s wedding day is a day of personal forgiveness, and has a cathartic, “Yom Kippur- like” element.[4] For this reason, tradition dictates that bride and groom fast on their wedding day, an additional expression of the atoning powers of the day. This may also explain the choice of Torah reading for Yom Kippur afternoon: The section of the Torah that enumerates forbidden relations. The backdrop of celebration in the streets explains the need, on this day more than others, for a warning against unmitigated, excessive frivolity, and a demarcation of forbidden relations.

While the celebratory aspect of Yom Kippur has been identified, the Fifteenth of Av remains elusive. The Talmud offers numerous explanations for the joy on that day:

Rav Yehdah said in the name of Shmuel: It is the day on which permission was granted to the tribes to inter-marry. … R. Yoseph said in the name of R. Nachman: It is the day on which the tribe of Binyamin was permitted to re-enter the congregation [following the episode of the concubine in Givah]. …Rabbah b. Bar Chanah said in the name of R. Yochanan: It is the day on which the generation of the wilderness ceased to die out. …‘Ulla said: It is the day on which Hoshea the son of Elah removed the guards which Yerovam the son of Nevat had placed on the roads to prevent Israel from going [up to Jerusalem] on pilgrimage, and he proclaimed ‘Let them go up to whichever shrine they desire.’ R. Mattenah said: It is the day when permission was granted for those killed at Betar to be buried. …Rabbah and R. Joseph both said: It is the day on which [every year] they ceased to fell trees for the altar. It has been taught: R. Eliezer the elder says: From the Fifteenth of Av onwards the strength of the sun grows less and they no longer felled trees for the altar, because they would not dry [sufficiently]. R. Menashya said: And they called it the Day of the Breaking of the Axe. From this day onwards, he who increases [his knowledge through study] will have his life prolonged, but he who does not increase [his knowledge] will have his life taken away. What is meant by ‘taken away’? — R. Yoseph learnt: Him his mother will bury. (Ta’anit 30b-31a)

While the Talmud offers six different causes for celebration on Tu b’Av, many of these reasons seem insufficient to justify the type and intensity of celebration described. At first glance the various explanations seem unrelated, but we may be able to find a common thread running through them by looking back to the first “Tu b’Av” ever celebrated:

R. Abin and R. Yochanan said: It was the day when the grave-digging ceased for those who died in the wilderness. R. Levi said: On every eve of the Ninth of Av Moshe used to send a herald throughout the camp and announce, ‘Go out to dig graves’; and they used to go out and dig graves in which they slept. On the morrow he sent out a herald to announce, ‘Arise and separate the dead from the living.’ They would then stand up and find themselves in round figures: 15,000 short of 600,000. In the last of the forty years, they acted similarly and found themselves in undiminished numerical strength. They said, ‘It appears that we erred in our calculation’; so they acted similarly on the nights of the 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th. When the moon was full they said, ‘It seems that the Holy One, blessed be He, has annulled that decree from us all’; so they proceeded to make [the fifteenth] a holiday. Their sins caused it {the Ninth of Av}to become a day of mourning in this world, in the twofold destruction of the Temple. That is what is written, ‘Therefore is my harp turned to mourning, and my pipe into the voice of them that weep.’ Hence, “And the people wept that night” (Bamidbar 14, 1). (Midrash Rabbah – Eichah, Prologue 33)

This description is certainly morbid, yet it succeeds in capturing the pathos of the yearly Tisha b’Av commemoration. The crying in the desert at the report of the spies created a negative paradigm for the rejection of the Land of Israel and it’s holiness, and even more, the rejection of God. The yearly commemoration of this breach of faith was systematic, inexorable: The entire generation of the Jews who had been redeemed from Egypt and crossed the Red Sea would die out in the desert. They had doubted God’s ability to complete His promise; they had rejected the Promised Land and their own destiny, and each year on this day of infamy they would dig their own graves and lie down in them, arising the next morning to take stock of their situation. The character of this day, the spiritual power of the paradigm unleashed at the sin of the spies, was revisited on future generations when Jews rejected the sacred. Tragedy struck over and over on this same date.

The Fifteenth of Av marked the end of the death sentence for the sin of the spies. Only on the night of the Fifteenth, by the light of the full moon, could they be certain that the chapter of the spies was closed. This alone would be sufficient rationale for the Mishna of Ta’anit, regarding Tish’a b’Av, to conclude with a teaching about Tu b’Av: On a conceptual level, the Fifteenth marks the end of the Ninth of Av.[5] During First Temple times the people certainly did not fast on Tisha b’Av but they may have celebrated Tu b’Av.

The end of the death sentence is the main cause for celebration offered by the Sages. But what of the other explanations offered by the Talmud? Arguably the strangest of these relates to the pagan king[6] Hoshea the son of Elah. While it may be argued that he displayed remarkably liberal thinking and was not particular whether his constituents served foreign deities wherever they chose, or served God in the Beit HaMikdash, he certainly did not lead people toward Jerusalem, toward the service of God! Why would this be a cause for celebration? Hoshea’s decree reversed the nefarious deeds of his predecessor on the throne, Yerovam, yet even this reversal seems insufficient cause for celebration: Hoshea merely removed the guards charged with preventing pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Furthermore, during Hoshea’s reign the Ten Tribes were carried into captivity. He was not a leader to be remembered in song and celebration.

In order to understand the significance of Hoshea’s decree we must first understand the implications of Yerovam’s actions. Due to the spiritual failings of Shlomo, God wrested part of the monarchy from the Davidic family.

And it came to pass at that time when Yerovam went from Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahiya the Shilonite found him in the way; and he had clad himself with a new garment; and the two were alone in the field; And Ahiya caught the new garment that was on him, and tore it in twelve pieces; And he said to Yerovam, 'Take you ten pieces; for thus said the Lord, the God of Israel, 'Behold, I will tear the kingdom from the hand of Shlomo, and will give ten tribes to you; But he shall have one tribe for my servant David’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s sake, the city which I have chosen from all the tribes of Israel; (1 Melachim 11:29-32)

Yerovam ignored God’s plan and built an alternative place of worship in an attempt to deter the people from Jerusalem, and, perhaps, allegiance to the Family of David. Motivated by jealousy, totally misdirected and self-centered, Yerovam did the unthinkable: he built places of worship replete with Golden Calves:

Then Yerovam built Sh'chem in Mount Ephraim, and lived there; and went out from there, and built Penuel. And Yerovam said in his heart, 'Now shall the kingdom return to the House of David; If this People go up to do sacrifice in the House of the Lord at Jerusalem, then shall the heart of this People turn back to their Lord, to Rehavam King of Yehudah, and they shall kill me, and go back to Rehavam King of Yehudah. (1 Melachim 12:25-27)

And the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said to them, ‘It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem; behold your gods, O Israel, which brought you out of the land of Egypt. And he set one in Beit-El, and the other he placed in Dan. (1 Kings 12:28,29)

Unlike Yerovam, Hoshea was not afraid or jealous of Jerusalem or the Davidic dynasty. He may have been an idolater, but he was not filled with spiritually self-destructive hatred. Thus, Hoshea removes the guards stationed by Yerovam, indicating healing from the hatred and jealousy, and the possibility of reconciliation.

This observation will help us reveal the message our Sages were trying to convey. The sages associated the destruction of the Temple with the sin of baseless hatred,[7] which has its roots in the fratricide perpetrated by Cain. This strand of baseless hatred is first discerned within the Jewish community in the hatred of the sons of Leah toward the sons of Rachel. Yerovam’s scheme should be seen within this context, proving that a son of Rachel could be just as bad, if not worse than the sons of Leah.

The Temple in Jerusalem was a manifestation of the unity of Israel, bringing together diverse spiritual attributes within the community of Israel. The primary tribes are Yehuda, descendents of the son of Leah who would one day be kings, and the tribe of Yosef, descendents of the favorite son, the son of Rachel. It may be argued that had the sons of Ya’akov been able to unite, the Temple would have stood in the portion of Yosef (Jerusalem) and the seat of the monarchy would have been in the realm of Yehuda. With the sons of Rachel and Leah united, this Temple would never have fallen. Unfortunately, the brothers are never able to resolve their differences with Yosef. The son of Rachel who becomes the unifying symbol of the people is Binyamin, and the Temple eventually stands in his portion. This explains the tears of Yosef and Binyamin at the moment when Yosef reveals himself to his brothers:[8]

And he fell upon his brother Binyamin’s neck, and wept; and Binyamin wept upon his neck. (Bereishit 45:14)

R. Eleazar said: He wept for the two Temples destined to be in the territory of Binyamin and to be destroyed. And Binyamin wept upon his neck: he wept for the Mishkan of Shiloh which was destined to be in the territory of Yosef and to be destroyed. (Megila 16b – see Rashi Bereishit 45:14)

The hatred of the brothers created the spiritual power for the hatred that would one day destroy the Temple. This simmering conflict is what caused the Temple to be built in the portion of Binyamin, and not in the portion of Yosef. This is the same hatred that poisoned Yerovam and motivated him to place guards in the path of would-be pilgrims to Jerusalem. On Tu b’Av, when Hoshea rescinds the evil edict of Yerovam, the division and hatred cease.

On Tisha b’Av the tribes of Yosef and Yehuda were united: When the spies returned only Yehoshua and Calev, from the tribes of Yosef and Yehuda respectively, remained steadfast in their desire to enter Israel. They serve as the prototypes for the Messiah from Yosef, and the Messiah from David (Yehuda), who will usher in the messianic era.[9] Tragically, the other tribes did not rally around those two leaders; what should have been the beginning of the great march to Israel became the day the Land of Israel was rejected. What could have been a day of celebration became a day of mourning.

This theme of division and reunion may be the key to some of the other reasons for Tu b’Av festivities offered by the Talmud. Significantly, the prohibition of inter-tribal marriage began with the daughters of Zelofchad – from the tribe of Yosef. Surely, this law, which maintained each tribe as insulated and separate, also had a negative impact on interpersonal relationships between Jews. Tu b’Av marked the end of this division. Likewise, the isolation of the tribe of Binyamin: Their role in the episode of the concubine of Givah was certainly an outrage [See the Shoftim, Chapters 19,20,21]. But the isolation of an entire tribe, specifically of the son of Rachel, was even more significant in light of the ongoing division between the sons of Rachel and the sons of Leah. Tu b’Av, in all three of these episodes, marks a reunion of the estranged sons of Rachel with the larger community of Israel.

This, then, is the unifying theme in all the explanations offered by the Talmud for the celebration of Tu b’Av: The battle of Betar was the culmination of the Bar Kochva rebellion, which was doomed to failure because the students of Rabbi Akiva did not treat one another with respect (see essay on the omer). Without national unity, the Third Temple could not be built: The failure of Bar Kochva’s messianic movement was caused by the breakdown of the Jewish community, represented by Rabbi Akiva’s students who could not get along with one another.

Another of the reasons for Tu b’Av celebrations now seems less strange: The days begin to get shorter, or in the Talmud’s words “the sun loses its strength”. The Midrash, in recounting the first Tu b’Av in the desert, noted that on this date the moon is full. The tension between the sun and moon represents the first struggle for dominance, for leadership. This ancient, primordial struggle between the sun and the moon[10] is the same struggle for dominance as the struggle between the sons of Ya’akov, and between Yerovam and the Davidic dynasty: two kings cannot share one crown. In fact, the resolution of this struggle for dominance is one of the harbingers and prerequisites for the messianic age: The Talmud speaks of the complementary leadership of a Messiah, son of David, and a Messiah, son of Yosef, which will pave the way to the messianic age[11].

As we noted above, the first catastrophe of Tisha b’Av was the failure of the spies, and the nation’s inability to rally around a united core of leadership- Yehoshua/Yehuda and Calev/Yosef. The Land of Israel was forfeited, the messianic age passed up, and the Temple, which cannot tolerate disunity, laid to waste on this day. The spiritual character of this day is one of discord, internal struggle. Conversely, Tu b’Av, is a day which has the potential to rebuild the community of Israel and, as a result, the Temple. Unity of the community is a prerequisite for building and preserving the Temple; this is the message of the last phrase of the Mishna with which we began:

Likewise it says, ‘go forth, o ye daughters of Zion, and gaze upon King Solomon, even upon the crown wherewith his mother had crowned him on the day of his espousals, and on the day of the gladness of his heart’. ‘On the day of his espousals:’ this refers to the day of the giving of the law. ‘And on the day of the gladness of his heart:’ this refers to the building of the Temple; may it be rebuilt speedily in our days. (Ta’anit 26b)

After describing the unique celebration of Yom Kippur and Tu B’Av, the Mishna intertwines the giving of the Law and building of the Temple. As we have seen, “the giving of the Law” refers to Yom Kippur.[12] Now we understand why the reference to “the building of the Temple” refers to Tu b’Av. On this day the daughters of Jerusalem would share their clothes and dance merrily in the streets, united. The Zohar identifies the type of material the garments are made from:

“Scarlet” (tola'at shani) is connected with the Fifteenth day of Av, a day on which the daughters of Israel used to walk forth in silken dresses. (Zohar Sh’mot 135a)

The significance of silk and its connection to the unique spiritual character of Tu b’Av lies in a more mystical message: Silk is not like wool or linen. The Vilna Gaon points out that the prohibition of mixing wool and linen – shaatnez- emanates from the hatred between Cain and Abel. On these glorious days the daughters of Jerusalem freely share their clothing, with no hatred or jealousy in their hearts.[13] The distinctions made by the requirements of shaatnez are irrelevant on this day. Perhaps this served as a type of healing for the hatred the brothers directed toward Yosef and his coat of many colors. This may also be the significance of the Talmud’s description of God’s attempt to lure Yerovam back into the fold:

‘After this thing Yerovam turned not from his evil way.’ What is meant by, ‘after this thing’? — R. Abba said: After the Holy One, blessed be He, had seized Yerovam by his garment and urged him, ‘Repent; then I, thou, and the son of Yishai [i.e.. David] will walk in the Garden of Eden.’ ‘And who shall be at the head?’ inquired he. ‘The son of Yishai shall be at the head.’ ‘If so,’ [he replied] ‘I do not desire [it].’(Sanhedrin 102a)

God grabbed Yerovam by his clothing to break his jealousy; alas, Yerovam could only join if he was given center stage and the leading role. Ultimately he was unable to control his self-centeredness. The image of his garment, torn into twelve pieces by the prophet, prevails over the image of God Himself attempting to mend the torn fabric of Jewish community.

This is the secret of Tu b’Av and the reason that marriages abound on this day. Marriage of two individuals, the most basic of all relationships, is only possible if each one controls innate egoism and narcissism. The rebuilding of the Temple is dependent on the community being able to unite in a similar manner. The first step is controlling hatred and jealousy, breaking the boundaries that exist between people. The Talmud therefore associates the mitzva of bringing joy to the newly married couple with building Jerusalem:

And if he does gladden him (i.e., the groom) what is his reward?… R. Nahman b. Isaac says: It is as if he had restored one of the ruins of Jerusalem. (Brachot 6b)

Tu b’Av marks, celebrates, even creates this type of healing behavior. Jealousies are broken down, tribal distinctions disappear, new unions are created.

We are taught that in the future the fast days marking the Temple’s destruction will be transformed into days of celebration:

Thus says the Lord of hosts: The fast of the fourth month (17th of Tammuz), and the fast of the fifth (9th of Av), and the fast of the seventh (Yom Kippur), and the fast of the tenth(10th of Tevet), shall become times of joy and gladness, and cheerful feasts to the house of Yehuda; therefore love truth and peace. (Zecharia 8:19)

Rav Zadok HaKohen from Lublin taught that the Ninth of Av will indeed become a holiday – a seven-day holiday similar to Pesach, consisting of festival on the first and last days as well as intermediate days (Chol HaMoed). We may theorize that the first day of the holiday, Tish’a b’Av, will commemorate the coming of the Messiah[14]. Then there will be Chol haMoed, and on the seventh day – Tu B’Av - the Temple will be rebuilt. The day when Jews arose unscathed from their graves in the desert will witness the spiritual rebirth of the entire nation, symbolized by the building of the Temple. This will be followed by the ultimate Resurrection: Once again, the people will climb from their graves, as the world achieves perfection and completion. On that day the joy in the streets will be echoed in the vineyards surrounding Jerusalem, and will reverberate throughout the entire world.



[1] Rav Menachem Azarya Defano, and Rav Zadok Hakohen (Yisrael Kedoshim section 5) both point at the power of minhag –custom- at the core of this day. We know of Torah festivals, and Rabbinic festivals; Tu B’Av has its unique charisma as an expression of the power of custom.

[2] According to tradition, Moshe ascended the mountain three times: the first and last, to receive the Tablets, and, in between, to pray for forgiveness for the People. See Rashi on Shmot 33:11, Devarim 9:18.

[3] See Rashi’s Commentary on the Mishna 26b “Zeh”.

[4] This idea may be found in The Jerusalem Talmud Bikurim Chapter 3 section 3 page 65c. See Rashi Bereishit 36:3, Torah Temmimah Bereishit 28:9, שו"ת יחווה דעת חלק ד סימן סא

[5] Whether the fifteenth of Av marks the end of the sadness of Tish’a b’Av is a point debated by the Halachik authorities. The Mishna (Ta’anit 4:6, 26b) teaches that from the beginning of Av happiness is decreased, and debates whether this sadness continues until Tu b’Av or until the end of the month. See Shulchan Oruch, Orach Chaim section 551:1, Mishna Brura bet opines that the entire month is sad, whereas Chatam Sofer rules that Tu b’Av marks the end of the sadness. See Piskei Teshuva 551:2.

[6] For more on this king see II Melachim, Chapter 15:30. “And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and struck him, and killed him, and reigned in his place, in the twentieth year of Yotam the son of Uzziah.”

[7] See Yoma 9a

[8] See Explorations page

[9] See Sukka 52a

[10] See the essay on Rosh Chodesh

[11] See Sukkah 52a. Rashi on Yishayahu 11:13 states that the two Messiah’s will not be jealous of one another.

[12] See Rashi Commentary on the Mishna 26b “Zeh”

[14] According to Rabbinic tradition, the Messiah is born on Tish’a b’Av.

Monday, August 3, 2009

Parshat Ekev 5769

Parshat Ekev 5769

Rabbi Ari Kahn

Walking Together with God

Parshat Ekev begins with what seems like a familiar dictum:

ספר דברים פרק ז

(יב) וְהָיָה עֵקֶב תִּשְׁמְעוּן אֵת הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים הָאֵלֶּה וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם וְשָׁמַר ה’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ אֶת הַבְּרִית וְאֶת הַחֶסֶד אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ:

And it will be because you heed these judgments, and safeguard and do them, that the Eternal, your Almighty God shall safeguard and uphold with you the covenant and the mercy which he swore to your fathers; D’vraim 7:12

Man is commanded to follow the commandments and to obey the Word of God. This is far from unusual; such statements are to be found many times in the Torah, and in the book of Dvarim in particular. In fact, in the verse immediately preceding this one, the concluding verse of Parshat V'etchanan, man is enjoined to follow the Torah:

דברים פרק ז

(יא) וְשָׁמַרְתָּ אֶת הַמִּצְוָה וְאֶת הַחֻקִּים וְאֶת הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם לַעֲשׂוֹתָם: פ

You shall therefore safeguard the commandment(s) and the statutes and the judgments which I command you this day, to do them. D’vraim 7:11

While the division of the Torah into weekly portions is somewhat artificial, in the written text of the Torah, Parshat Ekev always begins a new paragraph, as indicated in our printed texts by the Hebrew letter “peh”, shorthand for petucha (scibal instructions to leave the line petucha, open). In other words, the two verses in question seem to say the same thing, despite the formal indication that a new idea has begun. The last verse of V'etchanan and the first verse of Ekev both are exhortations to follow the commandments of the Torah. Why, then, are they separated? Or, we might ask, what does the first verse in our present parsha add to what had already been stated in the preceding verse?

The language of our verse does not solve our quandary: the word “Ekev”, is variously translated as “come to pass”, "because of" or "as a result of"; the placement of this word here is awkward and the meaning difficult to pinpoint. Explanations of this word often rely on the relatively straightforward meaning of its three-lettered root, ayin – kuf – bet, “heel”, as in the source of our patriarch Yaakov's name. With this in mind, Rashi explains:

רש"י דברים פרק ז פסוק יב

והיה עקב תשמעון - אם המצות הקלות שאדם דש בעקביו תשמעון:

"And it will be because you heed": if you heed the 'light' commandments that a person tramples with their heel. Rashi D’vraim 7:12

What is unique about our verse is that it describes the outcome of our behavior; as a result of our heeding the Torah's pronouncements and fulfilling the commandments, God will fulfill His part in the covenant: “that the Almighty your God shall keep with you the covenant and the mercy which he swore to your fathers”. And yet, the same message could have been transmitted in far less convoluted language. Had the Torah wished to state this wonderful result in more straightforward terms, describing the ongoing relationship with God and the dynamic nature of His covenant with the Jewish People, simpler words could have been employed. Would the meaning have suffered had the common 'im' (“if”) been used – as it is later in the same parsha? “If” is the most straightforward word that connotes conditionality: 'If you obey the commandments, I will uphold the covenant," or even, “When you behave as I have commanded, the desired result will surely follow".

Rashi is sensitive to the unusual usage of ekev, and points to an additional message that is conveyed by this particular word. He speaks of the "light" commandments, simple or easy commandments that are “trampled with the heel”. Various later commentaries ponder this idea: What are these "small" mitzvot? Why would these mitzvot suffer discrimination at the hands of those who obey God's command?

The Maharal explains that these mitzvot are neglected because they are perceived as bearing minimal reward.[1] This explanation echoes a teaching found in the Ethics of the Fathers (Pirkei Avot):

משנה מסכת אבות פרק ב משנה א

והוי זהיר במצוה קלה כבחמורה שאין אתה יודע מתן שכרן של מצות

…and be careful with a light[2] precept as with a grave one, for you do not know the (calculation) of reward [for the fulfillment] of the mitzvot. Mishna Avot 2:1

Another possible understanding of these “trampled” mitzvot is that these mitzvot are, in fact, performed, but without proper intention or devotion; these are mitzvot which a person may fulfill out of habit, by rote, and without full concentration or consideration.

A third possible understanding of these "trampled" mitzvot centers around the intent of the person who fulfills the mitzva: The mitzva is performed, intentionally, but for the wrong reason. The scenario created by this understanding is one in which a prescribed act is performed, or a proscribed act avoided, but not because it is so decreed by God. The mitzva is not, in fact, "credited" to the account of the person who performed it if his or her intention was devoid of any desire to heed the Word of God.

Particular deeds are often performed for reasons of altruism, or out of some sort of self-serving motivation. In this case, the performance of the mitzva has not been trampled upon; it was fully and precisely performed. Rather, the sense of command is lacking. How is such an action to be judged? What is the nature and status of such behavior?

The Netziv, (Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehudah Berlin), in his commentary to the Torah, writes that a mitzva is only a mitzva if the person performing the act believes he was commanded to do so. In the literal sense, the word mitzva means "command". It therefore stands to reason that a person who behaves in accordance with a Torah law but does not believe himself to be fulfilling a precise and specific command, is not, in fact, performing a “mitzva”.[3]

The question of the intention in fulfilling mitzvot is treated extensively in various Talmudic discussions. Although various opinions are offered and different conclusions are drawn for different categories of mitzvot, the Netziv clarifies a very basic underpinning of the Talmudic debate that the Sages, as well as later readers such as ourselves, might have taken for granted:[4] According to the Netziv, the entire argument is predicated upon the premise that the person performing the act believes in God and Torah.

We may better understand this in terms of our more familiar relationships: Do behaviors in interpersonal relationships require intentional effort, or is the "bottom line" what is important? If we imagine a husband handing his wife flowers, but telling her at that very moment that he does not, nor has he ever, had any feelings for her, would she still be happy to receive the flowers? Even further, the Netziv points out – the entire scenario would be incomprehensible if the man did not recognize the woman to whom he handed the flowers, had no relationship with her at all. Analogously, the sages of the Talmud debated whether any specific act requires active attention and intention, or if an absent-minded gesture is acceptable. Does the husband buy flowers out of habit? Is that enough of a reason? The Netziv points out that this entire question is predicated on there being a relationship between the person buying the flowers and the person to whom they are presented: What a person behaves in the precise manner mandated by Torah Law, but has no consciousness of God or Torah?

This question arises concerning the behavior of ethical non-Jews: If they perform the Noachide laws, but not because they are in any way cognizant of having been commanded to do so, should their gestures be interpreted as fulfillment of these seven commandments? Given the nature of these commandments, it is altogether conceivable that there are those who fulfill the commandments simply because they are decent people. If they do not believe that they were commanded to perform the specific actions, we would be hard-pressed to say that they are performing mitzvot.

The Rambam broaches this subject in his consideration of the possibility that an ethical gentile may have a share in the World to Come. Despite the fact that the majority of the seven Noachide laws are proscriptive, rather than proactive calls for specific action, the Rambam refers to “acceptance” of the Noachide laws:

רמב"ם יד החזקה - הלכות מלכים פרק ח

(יא) כל המקבל שבע מצות ונזהר לעשותן הרי זה מחסידי אומות העולם ויש לו חלק לעולם הבא והוא שיקבל אותן ויעשה אותן מפני שצוה בהן הקב"ה בתורה והודיענו על ידי משה רבינו שבני נח מקודם נצטוו בהן אבל אם עשאן מפני הכרע הדעת אין זה גר תושב ואינו מחסידי אומות העולם ולא מחכמיהם:

Whoever accepts the seven Noachide laws and is careful to fulfill them is considered a righteous gentile and has a share in the World to Come. This is so if he accepts them and performs them because the Holy One blessed be He commanded it in the Torah, and informed us via Moshe or teacher, that the Noachides were previously thus commanded. But if he did these commandments because of his own mind, he is not considered a “stranger who lives among us” nor is he a righteous gentile, nor among their wise people. Rambam, Mishne Torah, Laws of Kings and Wars chapter 8 section 11.

This is the text which is found in the printed edition, however in other texts, notably the Yemenite manuscript, the concluding sentence ends differently:

רמב"ם יד החזקה (כתב יד תימני) - הלכות מלכים ומלחמות פרק ח

(יא) כל המקבל שבע מצות ונזהר לעשותן הרי זה מחסידי אומות העולם, ויש לו חלק לעולם הבא, והוא שיקבל אותן ויעשה אותן מפני שצוה בהן הקדוש ברוך הוא בתורה והודיענו על ידי משה רבנו שבני נח מקודם נצטוו בהן, אבל אם עשאן מפני הכרע הדעת אין זה גר תושב ואינו מחסידי אומות העולם אלא מחכמיהם:

But if he did these commandments because of his own mind, he is not considered a “stranger who lives among us”, nor is he among the righteous gentiles; rather, he is considered among their wise people. Rambam Mishne Torah Laws of Kings and Wars, Yemenite Manuscript chapter 8 section 11.[5]

According to the Rambam, a mitzva performed by a non-Jew results in a “Share of the World to Come”. However, a "good deed", which may be the exact same action as a “mitzvah” but is performed independent of God-consciousness, devoid of a God-Man relationship, cannot by definition be a mitzva. To return to our earlier analogy, we may say that a loving spouse who buys flowers performs an act as means of cementing a relationship with their significant other. The person who presents flowers to a perfect stranger has acted in identical fashion, but without the awareness of the relationship, without the underlying intention to express closeness and love, the action has completely different significance. Although presenting flowers to a total stranger may, indeed, be an act of altruism that may warm another person's heart, no token passed between two strangers can compare to the understanding that is passed between two people involved in a deep and meaningful relationship. I would posit that the Rambam's formulation regarding the gentile who may indeed be wise but is not considered righteous, is akin to this altruist and the flowers presented to a stranger: While all good deeds are rewarded, not all good deeds result in a relationship with God, in the ongoing and eternal relationship that our tradition refers to as "a share in the World to Come." Only one who has a relationship with God can perform a mitzva, an act which forges and solidifies a relationship that lives beyond the confines of our limited, physical world.

What, then, of the good deeds performed by the moral atheist, Jewish or non-Jewish? What impact do these good deeds have? Perhaps some questions are best left unanswered, and we need not attempt to stand in as God’s “accountant”. Be that as it may, the word “mitzva” would hardly apply to such good deeds. Regarding such deeds as fulfillment of a commandment would be an oxymoron – from the perspective of the person performing the deed, as well as from our perspective.

Rabbi Menachem Twersky, founder of the Chernobyl dynasty (1730-1797) felt that the word 'mitzva' connotes more than “command”; he saw within it the word 'b'tzavta', which means togetherness: Every mitzva fulfilled is a point of connection between He who commands and we who are commended and who acquiesce. The result of fulfilling a mitzva is togetherness – what we have referred to elsewhere as 'a rendezvous with God'. Seen from this perspective, the question of the ethical non-believer seems simpler: The question is no longer one of accounting, but of closeness, of communication, and there is no communication when the person performing the act does not believe in God, does not believe that God has spoken, does not believe that God takes an interest in human behavior. It is impossible to perform a mitzva if there is no awareness of God's involvement in our lives; as impossible as the sound of one hand clapping, it is impossible to have a rendezvous of one.[6]

Our point of departure was Rashi's comment on the strange and impenetrable use of the word ekev in this seemingly-redundant verse. While we may not know which of the various interpretations of this particularly difficult usage to adopt, we should not overlook another component of Rashi's comments on the verse which is often ignored: While the unusual word in the verse may be “ekev”, the clause as a whole is centered around the word tishme'un - “hear”. The verse as a whole stresses the importance of hearing – according to Rashi, even the oft-trampled mitzvot. But what is meant by the word “hear”? The second half of the verse touches upon performance of the mitzva, fulfilling the commandment, as well as safeguarding the mitzva (presumably, referring to the spirit behind the prescribed actions). What, then, is the verse referring to when it commands us to "hear" or "heed"?

ספר דברים פרק ז

(יב) וְהָיָה עֵקֶב תִּשְׁמְעוּן אֵת הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים הָאֵלֶּה וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם וְשָׁמַר ה’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ אֶת הַבְּרִית וְאֶת הַחֶסֶד אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ:

 And it will be because you heed these judgments, and safeguard and do them, that the Eternal, your Almighty God shall safeguard and uphold with you the covenant and the mercy which he swore to your fathers; D’vraim 7:12

While we might be tempted to translate "heed" or "hearken" as study or learning, the Targum translates tishme'un as “acceptance”.

תרגום אונקלוס על דברים פרק ז פסוק יב

(יב) ויהי חלף די תקבלון ית דיניא האלין ותטרון ותעבדון יתהון ויטר יי אלהך לך ית קימא וית חסדא די קיים לאבהתך:

Throughout the Torah, the Targum is fairly consistent in translating “hear” as 'accept'. For example, Adam was not punished for “hearing” the words of Eve, he was punished for listening. The Targum repeatedly translates 'listened' as “accepted her words”:

בראשית פרק ג פסוק יז

וּלְאָדָם אָמַר כִּי שָׁמַעְתָּ לְקוֹל אִשְׁתֶּךָ וַתֹּאכַל מִן הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִיךָ לֵאמֹר לֹא תֹאכַל מִמֶּנּוּ אֲרוּרָה הָאֲדָמָה בַּעֲבוּרֶךָ בְּעִצָּבוֹן תֹּאכֲלֶנָּה כֹּל יְמֵי חַיֶּיךָ:

And to Adam he said, Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree, of which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat of it'; cursed is the ground for your sake; in sorrow shall you eat of it all the days of your life; Bereishit 3:17

אונקלוס בראשית פרק ג פסוק יז

(יז) ולאדם אמר ארי קבילתא למימר אתתך ואכלת מן אילנא דפקידתך למימר לא תיכול מניה ליטא ארעא בדילך בעמל תיכלינה כל יומי חייך:

The most famous “listening” is the Sh’ma, in which we are commanded not merely to “hear” that God is One, but to listen and internalize. This founding principle of our faith is known as Kabbalat 'Ol Malchut Shamayim, accepting the Yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven.[7]

דברים פרק ו

(ד) שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל ה’ אֱלֹהֵינוּ ה’ אֶחָד:

Hear[8], O Israel; The Eternal is our Almighty God, the Eternal is One. D’varim 4:6

Similarly, the second section recited in the Shma prayer, found at the end of our present parsha, speaks of 'listening' to the mitzvot. Our Sages refer to this as kabbalat ol mitzvot – accepting the yoke of mitzvot:

דברים פרק יא

(יג) וְהָיָה אִם שָׁמֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ אֶל מִצְוֹתַי אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם הַיּוֹם לְאַהֲבָה אֶת ה’ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וּלְעָבְדוֹ בְּכָל לְבַבְכֶם וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁכֶם:

And it shall come to pass, if you shall give heed diligently to my commandments which I command you this day, to love the Eternal your God, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul… D’varim 11:13

אונקלוס דברים פרק יא

(יג) ויהי אם קבלא תקבלון לפקודי דאנא מפקיד יתכון יומא דין למרחם ית יי אלהכון ולמפלח קדמוהי בכל לבכון ובכל נפשכון:

When the commandments are to be accepted, what is needed is not merely passive hearing or even more active listening; we are to forge a powerful, reciprocal, eternal relationship - not a relationship of the order to which we have become accustomed in the interpersonal sphere, but by accepting God as King and accepting our own role as His servants. The type of listening called for here invites us to be sensitive to even the “minor” commandments, as servants of the King. This type of rapt attention transforms actions that we might well have performed otherwise, or actions that we might otherwise perform without conviction, zeal, or full attention,– into powerful religious experience. It is this type of listening that is our acknowledgement of our relationship with God, and it is this attentiveness that creates the meeting point for our rendezvous with God, Creator and Sustainer of the universe. This attentiveness infuses every act, no matter how small and routine, with supreme significance, for we are in the service of the King. Every commandment becomes a privilege, a sign of the trust the King has in each of his faithful servants, and an opportunity to repay that trust, deepen that trust, and become worthy of that relationship. That is why we are instructed to hear and listen specifically to the “small”, "mundane" mitzvot: When we hear in this way, allowing ourselves to concentrate on the significance of each mitzva with which we have been entrusted and reminding ourselves that these are opportunities to reach out to God who has spoken to us, no commandment will ever seem “small”.



[1] Maharal Gur Aryeh D’vraim 7:12.

ספר גור אריה על דברים פרק ז פסוק יב

אם המצות קלות כו'. פירוש, דהוי למכתב 'עקב אשר תשמעון', כמו "עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקולי" (בראשית כו, ה), כי אצל "עקב" שייך לשון "אשר". והא דכתיב בהך פרשה (להלן ח, כ) "עקב לא תשמעון", אין ראוי לכתוב 'עקב אשר לא תשמעון', שהיה משמע שכך הוא בודאי, שכך משמע לשון "אשר", כדכתיב בפרשת ראה (להלן יא, כז) "את הברכה אשר תשמעו", ואצל הקללה (שם שם כח) לא כתיב "אשר", מוכח מזה כי לשון "אשר" משמע יותר ודאי. אבל גבי ברכה שייך בו "אשר". וראיה לזה, שהתרגום מוסיף (כאן) מלת 'די', והוא כמו "אשר". אי נמי, דדייק דלא הוי למכתב כלל "עקב", דהא כתיב (ויקרא כו, ג) "אם בחוקותי", וכיוצא בזה הרבה, ולא נאמר לשון "עקב", אלא לדרשה אתא. ואף על גב דכתיב "את המשפטים", ואין המשפטים מצות קלות (קושית הרמב"ן), אין זה קשיא, דאין מצוה חמורה בתורה שאין לה דקדוקי מצוה, ואפילו שבת שהיא חמורה מאד, יש בה דקדוקי מצוה, והם קלות:

אך קשיא, כי דרש זה רחוק מאוד מפשוטו, ואין דרך רש"י להביא אותו בפירושו. ויראה, דהכא מוכח לפי פשוטו שהכתוב מדבר מן מצות קלות, דאם לא כן - "והיה עקב" למה לי, לכתוב 'והיה אם המשפטים תשמעון', כדכתיב (שם) "אם בחוקותי תלכו", על כרחך הכתוב רצה לומר שאפילו דבר שנראה לכם שאין בו שכר כל כך - תקבלו שכר גדול עליו, כאילו אמר שדבר זה יהיה שבשביל דבר קטן יהיה לכם שכר גדול, ולכך כתיב "והיה עקב", שלשון "עקב" הוא שכר. והשתא קשיא באיזה מקום נזכר בכתוב מצות קלות, קאמר דנרמז גם כן דבר זה בלשון "עקב", מצות קלות שהאדם דש בעקב - יהיה לכם שכר גדול. והשתא כיון שקרא בלאו הכי מוכח שמדבר במצות קלות, נוכל שפיר לפרש לשון "עקב" המצות שהאדם דש בעקביו, כיון דמוכח דקרא איירי בקלות בלאו הכי:

[2] The Rambam, in his commentary to the Mishna, brings several examples of “light mitzvot”, such as being joyful on holidays, and knowledge of the Hebrew language:

רמב"ם על משנה מסכת אבות פרק ב משנה א

אחר כך אמר שראוי להזהר במצוה שייחשב בה שהיא קלה, כגון שמחת הרגל ולמידת לשון קודש.

[3] Ha’amek Davar Bamidbar 15:39

העמק דבר על במדבר פרק טו פסוק לט

ולא תתורו אחרי לבבכם ואחרי עיניכם. לימדנו בזה מעשה המצות שלא נחשבו למצוה אלא אם עושה ומאמין עכ"פ שהוא מצוה ועושה. ולאפוקי אם לבבו פונה אחרי מינות שאינו מאמין במצוה כלל. אין בעשייתו נחשב למעשה וזהו אחרי לבבכם.

[4] See Shulchan Oruch 60:4, sources and commentaries.

שולחן ערוך אורח חיים הלכות קריאת שמע סימן ס סעיף ד

י"א שאין מצות צריכות כוונה, * וי"א (ח) שצריכות כוונה * (ט) לצאת בעשיית אותה מצוה, * (י) ג [ב] וכן הלכה.

[5] Many authorities were aware of this alternate reading. See, for example, Tosfot Yom Tove Avot chapter 3, who “corrects” the text.

תוספות יום טוב מסכת אבות פרק ג

חביב אדם שנברא בצלם חבה יתירה וכו' שנאמר בצלם אלהים עשה אתהאדם - פירש"י חביב אדם שנברא בצלם. לכן מוטל עליו לעשות רצון קונו. ע"כ. ובכל אדם אמר ר"ע. וכמו שהוא הראיה שממנו הביא שהוא נאמר לבני נח לא לבני ישראל לבדם ורצה ר"ע לזכות את כל אדם אף לבני נח. ומאמר מלא אמר הרמב"ם בפ"ח מהלכות מלכים [הלכה י']. וז"ל צוה משה רבינו ע"ה מפי הגבורה לכוף את כל באי העולם לקבל מצות שנצטוו בני נח. וכל מי שלא יקבל יהרג והמקבל אותם הוא הנקרא גר תושב בכ"מ וכו' כל המקבל שבע מצות ונזהר לעשותן. הרי זה מחסידי אומות העולם ויש לו חלק לעוה"ב. והוא שיקבל אותן ויעשה אותן. מפני שצוה בהן הקב"ה בתורה. והודיענו ע"י מרע"ה שבני נח מקודם נצטוו בהן. אבל אם עשאן מפני הכרע הדעת אין זה גר תושב ואינו מחסידי אומות העולם. ולא [צ"ל אלא] מחכמיהם. עכ"ל.

ר' צדוק הכהן מלובלין - ישראל קדושים אות ז

ובאמת הוא מאס בתורה ובחר בזה רק מצד שכל אנושי ואם כן אינו כלום. לא מיבעיא דאין מקבלין שכר [נצחיי כחסידי אומות העולם שיש להם חלק לעולם הבא אבל בעולם הזה אין הקדוש ברוך הוא מקפח שכר שיחה קלה כמו שאמרו בבבא קמא (ל"ח ב) וגם על מצוות קלות שעושין אומות העולם להתייהר וכיוצא והוא חטאת להם. מכל מקום מקבלין שכר גם כן וממתינין לשבירתן עד יבוש קצירה כמו שאמרו בפרק קמא דבבא בתרא (י' ב)] שאפילו בשבע מצוות בני נח אם עשה מצד שכלן ולא לפי שהשם יתברך ציוה אין נקרא מחסידי אומות העולם אלא מחכמיהם. כמו שכתב רמב"ם בהלכות מלכים (פרק ח' הלכה י"א). אלא נענש גם כן במצוות מחודשות שעושה וכמו שכתב רמב"ם (שם פרק י' הלכה ט') דאסור לו לעשות מצוות חדשות מדעתו. והוא בכלל גוי ששבת או עסק בתורה שחייב מיתה (שם וסנהדרין נ"ט):

שו"ת מהר"ם אלשקר סימן קיז

אמר הכותב כבר פירש לנו רבינו הרב בסוף פ"ח מהלכות מלכים מה הכוונה בחסידי אומות העולם בבירור שלא יוכל שום סכל ולא מתעקש להכחיש וז"ל שם כל המקבל שבע מצות ונזהר לעשותן הרי זה מחסידי אומות העולם ויש לו חלק לע"ה והוא שיקבל אותו ויעשה אותן מפני שצוה בהן הב"ה בתורה והודיענו על ידי משה רבי' ע"ה שבני נח מקדם נצטוו בהן אבל אם עשאן מפני הכרע הדעת אין זה גר תושב ואינו מחסידי אומות העולם אלא מחכמיהם עכ"ל.

שו"ת עונג יום טוב סימן יט

ודע דלכאורה יש להקשות ע"ד רבינו שמואל שהביא הר"ן דבמכוון שלא לצאת לכ"ע לא יצא מהא דאמרינן בקידושין (דף ל"ט) ובחולין (דף קמ"ב) ר' יעקב אומר אין לך כל מצוה שבתורה שאין תחיית המתים תלוי' בה בכיבוד או"א כתיב למען ייטב לך והארכת ימים. ובשילוח הקן כתיב למען יאריכון ימיך ולמען ייטב לך הרי שאמר לו אביו להביא גוזלות ועלה לבירה ונטל את האם ושלח את הבנים ונפל מן הגג ומת היכן אריכות ימיו של זה והיכן טובתו ש"ז אלא למען ייטב לך לעולם שכולו טוב ולמען יאריכון ימיך בעולם שכולו ארוך ודלמא לא הוי הכי ר' יעקב מעשה חזא ודלמא מהרהר בעבירה הוי מחשבה רעה אין הקב"ה מצרפה למעשה ודלמא מהרהר בע"ג הוי כו' דכתיב למען תפוש את ישראל בלבם כו' וקשה לימא דלמא חישב בלבו שאינו עושה הדבר לשם מצוה אלא להנאת אביו. וכן בשילוח הקן חישב בלבו בהדיא שאינו עושה לשם מצוה אלא למדת הרחמנות כדאמרינן בברכות אתה חסת על קן ציפור וכשמכוון בפירוש שלא לשם מצוה אין כאן מצוה כלל. א"ו דאף שמחשב שלא לשם מצוה נמי הוי מצוה. ושפיר הוכיח ר' יעקב מזה דמתן שכרן של מצות בעוה"ב הוא [ועיין ברמב"ם ז"ל שכ' (בהלכות מלכים) גבי ב"נ שקיים שבע מצות מפני שדעתו נוטה לזה ולא לשם מצות בוראו אינו מחסידי אוה"ע אלא מחכמיהם דמשמע שכל העושה שלא לשם מצוה אין בזה סרך מצוה. ואפשר לומר דדוקא בב"נ אמרינן הכי ולא בישראל. וכה"ג מפלגינן (בפ"ק דר"ה) לענין סלע זו לצדקה בשביל שיחי' בני דמהני בישראל ולא בב"נ. וכן אפשר לומר במכוון שלא לצאת דבישראל מקרי מצוה ולא בב"נ. ועוד יש לחלק בין מצוה שבקום עשה לשב ואל תעשה דבשוא"ת לא הוי מצוה אלא כשמכוון לשם מצוה כדאמרינן בקידושין פ"ק גבי ר' צדוק וחביריו שישבו ולא עברו עברה מחמת מצות בוראן מעלה עליו הכתוב כאלו עשה מצוה. אבל אם לא עבר אלא מחמת משפט שכלו לא חשיב כאילו עשה מצוה ולהכי בב"נ שאין בשבע מצות דידהו קום עשה רק שוא"ת שפיר כתב הרמב"ם ז"ל שאם קיימן מחמת נטיית דעתו לא מחשב מצוה. אבל בקום עשה שעושה מעשה מחשב מצוה בכל גווני]:

שו"ת יד חנוך סימן סב

R. Chanoch Henoch ben R. Yosef David Teitelbaum 1884 - 1943.

והנה הרמב"ם ז"ל פרק השמיני מהלכות מלכים (הלכה י"א) כתב, וזה לשונו, בן נח שעשה מצוה מפני הכרע הדעת ולא מפני שציוה בהן ה' אינו מחסידי אומות העולם אלא מחכמיהם, עכ"ל. ומקורו ממדרש שוחר טוב, א"כ היה צורך לצוות אותם במצוות אלה למען יעשום מפני ציוו הקב"ה. ולקמן אבאר היטב ההבדל בין עושה מפני הכרע הדעת האנושיי והכרח ההנהגה החברתיית והמדיניית, ובין עושה דבר זה כדי לקיים מצות המלך מי שאמר והיה העולם:

[6] Sefer Me’or Enayim Parshat Baha'alotcha:

ספר מאור עינים - פרשת בהעלותך

וידבר ה' אל משה לאמר וגו' בהעלותך את הנרות אל מול פני המנורה יאירו שבעת הנרות ויעש כן אהרן וגו' פירש רש"י להגיד שבחו של אהרן שלא שינה אמרו רז"ל שכר מצוה מצוה ר"ל שהשם יתברך נתן לנו המצות כדי להדבק על ידיהם בהשם יתברך וזהו שכר מצוה הוא מצוה לשון צוותה דהיינו שנדבק על ידי בהשם יתברך ואין לך שכר גדול מזה. והנה מצוה הוא אותיות השם הוי"ה ב"ה כי השני אותיות ראשונות שהם מ"צ הם בא"ת ב"ש אותיות י"ה ולהבין זה למה החצי הראשון של השם הוא נסתר באותיות א"ת ב"ש:

[7] See Mishna Brachot 2:2

משנה מסכת ברכות פרק ב

א"ר יהושע בן קרחה למה קדמה שמע לוהיה אם שמוע אלא כדי שיקבל עליו עול מלכות שמים תחלה ואחר כך יקבל עליו עול מצות

R. Joshua B. Korhah said: why was the section of 'Hear' placed before that of "And it shall come to pass"? So that one should first accept upon himself the Yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven and then take upon himself the yoke of the commandments.

[8] Remarkably, the Targum does not even translate the word Sh’ma in this instance.

אונקלוס דברים פרק ו פסוק ד

שמע ישראל יי אלהנא יי חד: