Pirkei Avos 1:1 – : Avos According to Pardes

I. The Emphasis on Sinai

Avos begins with an enumeration of the pivotal periods of Torah transmission. Moses received the Torah at Sinai and from there it was passed on to subsequent periods until it reached the Men of the Great Assembly, whose ethical teachings are the first to be mentioned in this treatise. The purpose of this chronology is to underscore how all of Judaism, including the ethical teachings, was handed down to us by G-d.¹ The first question that arises is why the author did not mention this fundamental description of how the Torah came from G-d and was transmitted to us through Moses and subsequent leaders in an earlier Tractate? Why doesn’t the first Mishnah—in tractate Berachos—feature this order of transmission so that we will know that the teachings of the entire Mishnah originated at Sinai?

Indeed, Maimonides did precisely that in his introduction to his Mishneh Torah, a compendium of all of Jewish law. His introduction is devoted to a detailed description of how the Torah came from G-d at Sinai and was transmitted to us via Moses, and all of the subsequent links in the chain of tradition. Why didn’t Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, the redactor of the Mishnah, do the same and preface the order of transmission before the first laws of the first Mishnah?

A second question that arises is the syntax of the first sentence: Moses received the Torah at Sinai.” The focus of this Mishnah is Torah, not Moses. The word Torah should, therefore, have been the subject of the sentence and it should have stated: “The Torah was received by Moses at Sinai.” Why does it have Moses as the subject?

A third question relates to the phrase “from Sinai.” Commentators explain that it means “from G-d who was revealed at Sinai.” If so, the question can be asked, why did the Mishnah have to rely on an inference? Why didn’t the Mishnah simply state that Moses received the Torah from G-d?

II. The “P’shat” Of Sinai

Torah can be understood on four levels. P’shat (the straightforward and surface meaning) Remez (interpretations based on hints and allusions, or allegorical interpretations) Drush (the homiletic approach, where the meaning of a text is discovered after probing beneath the surface to discover its underlying meaning, and Sod (the esoteric and mystical approach, where the text alludes to the mystical teachings of Kabbalah).² With regard to tour Mishnah, too, there can be four ways of understanding the emphasis on the word “Sinai.”

The straightforward meaning of the emphasis on the word Sinai in the sentence, “Moses received the Torah from Sinai” is to highlight the special circumstances that surrounded the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai that provides us with a proper understanding as to how we should approach Torah. The giving of the Torah on Sinai was accompanied with thunder and lightning.³ It better understand the four levels we can make use of a series of analogies, with respect to how one can define the earth. To the farmer, who sees things straightforwardly, as they appear on the surface, it is the source of vegetation—P’shat. To the archeologist, who looks for relics in the ground, the earth is what contains hints about life in the distant past—Remez. To the geologist, who analyzes the composition of the earth, often digging much deeper than the farmer of archeologist, the earth is the repository of many minerals and rich resources—Drush. To the treasure hunter, the earth contains secret treasures that were put there by its owner that can be found only by its owner or one who has been given a treasure map—Sod.] was an awesome experience, one that generated great reverence and trepidation.⁴ From this very image that the mention of Sinai conjures we can derive a lesson that our Torah study today must be one that reflects the awesomeness of the Sinai experience. One must be cognizant of the Divine source and revelation of Torah that occurred at Sinai. This awareness that precedes our study of Torah, will evoke a feeling of humility and self-effacement.⁵ All this is the obvious symbolism of the word Sinai.

III. The “Remez” of Sinai

From the vantage point of Remez, the emphasis on the giving of the Torah on Sinai is to underscore the uniqueness of the Torah that was given on Sinai. Despite the fact that several of the commandments had already been given previously in places such as Marah or Refidim, nevertheless, these very same commandments were transmitted to Moses once more at Sinai. Sinai revolutionized all of the Mitzvos that were given previously.

All this is hinted in the word “Umesoroh-And he passed it on” which consists of the four letters, mem, samach, reish and hei. These four letters are said to be an acronym for the four words, Marah, Sinai, Refidim and Har, a reference to the various locations where G-d communicated some of His Mitzvos to the Jewish people.⁶ All of them were reiterated at Sinai.

This lesson hinted in the Mishnah conveys a matter of Halacha as to the way we ought to view the observance of all Mitzvos and echoes the words of Maimonides:⁷ “All of that which we avoid doing or do today, we do not do it save for the fact that it is G-d’s commandment [given to us] through Moses our Teacher, peace be unto him, and not because it was said to the prophets who preceded him.” This can be extended to include even the Mitzvos that were given through Moses before Sinai. We observe them not because they were given to us in those places, but because they were given at Sinai. The revelation at Sinai represents the ultimate source for G-d’s directives to us.

The “Drush” of Sinai

From the vantage point of Drush, Sinai symbolizes the mountain characteristic that one must possess when one studies Torah. One must be imbued with a sense of firmness and certitude—like a mountain— Despite the fact that Maimonides only mentions the commandments of Ever min Hachai (a limb torn from a living animal), Circumcision, and Gid Hanashe (the prohibition against eating the sciatic nerve), and he does not mention those commandments that were given at Marah etc., nevertheless we are compelled to conclude that he includes those Mitzvos as well. The proof is that Maimonides words are based on the wording of the Mishnah that says, “it was said on Sinai.” Second, Maimonides concludes, “Do you not see that our Sages said, ‘613 Mitzvos were said to Moses from Sinai.”

when one approaches Torah study. Without this approach, one can be daunted by the prospects of engaging in the study of G-d’s Torah. The evil impulse could very easily attempt to deter us from Torah study by saying, “What right do you have to learn Torah, considering the Divine nature of Torah?” One must be armed with strength and pride to not be affected by this argument.

Coupled with the lesson of pride and confidence that is symbolized by the fact that G-d gave the Torah on a mountain,⁸ one must also possess the paradoxical characteristic of humility that is represented by the fact that Sinai was lowest of all mountains.⁹ The “Sod” of Sinai From the perspective of Sod, the significance of Sinai is that it has the same numerical value of 130. This number is significant because it is five times the numerical value of the Divine name, the Tetragrammaton, which is numerically 26 (5x26=130).¹⁰ The significance of this numerical equivalency is that at the time of the revelation at Sinai, five Divine forces were revealed, as the Talmud¹¹ states that “the Torah was given with five sounds.” The term “sounds” is expressive of the concept of communication. And the fact that the Torah was given with five sounds suggests that five levels of Torah—that correspond to the numerical value of the word Sinai, 130, which is five times the numerical value of G-d’s name—were communicated to the world at Sinai.

The significance of having five aspects of Torah communicated is related to the fact that the entire framework of existence— including the spiritual realms—consists of four general levels. The four conventional levels of Torah thus relate to the four “normative” levels of existence.

The fifth level of Torah is not just one more level; it is the very essence of Torah that transcends all of existence.

When it is said that at Sinai all five levels were revealed it means that the fifth, transcendent and essential level of Torah was communicated together with the four conventional levels of Torah. All these four levels were, in effect, influenced by the fifth level of Torah, which is its essence.

The lesson from this mystical understanding of the word Sinai is that our souls comprise four levels or faculties. They are referred to as Nefesh, Ruach, Neshomo and Chaya. These four names reflect the soul’s capacity to motivate us to action (Nefesh), arouse our feelings (Ruach), activate our intellectual powers (Neshomo) and stimulate our will power (Chaya). Each one of the four levels of Torah relates to its corresponding level of the soul and serves to activate it and actualize its potential.

There is, however, a fifth level of the soul that is called Yechidah. This level represents the essence of the soul that does not normally find its expression within the other of the soul’s activities.

However, at Sinai, even the fifth level of the soul was moved and revealed together with the other four levels of the soul, because even the fifth level of Torah, its essence was communicated.

Moreover, it was not revealed by itself, but it was revealed together with the other four levels of Torah. This translated into a process that all the faculties of the soul—even the most prosaic—was influenced and affected by the soul’s very essence, its Yechidah.¹² (Adapted from the talk of Shabbos Parshas Shemini, 5731)

From the book Essays on Pirkei Avos: Chapter One, Mishnah One by Rabbi Heschel Greenberg, adapted from the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe and published by the Jewish Discovery Center.

Footnotes

1. See Bartenura. ↩

2. [These four methods are often represented by the acronym Pardes, which literally means orchard. To ↩

3. Exodus 19:16. ↩

4. Ibid. ↩

5. Sifsosav notfos mor ↩

6. See Sanhedrin 56b; Ramban, Exodus, end of Beshallach. ↩

7. Commentary on the Mishnah, Chullin, end of chapter 7. ↩

8. See Sotah that a Torah Scholar must have an “eighth of an eighth” of pride. ↩

9. Midrash Tehllim (Buber edition) 68:17. ↩

10. Kehillas Yaakov, on the entry Sinai. ↩

11. Berachos 6b. ↩

12. [In the original transcript, the answer to the first two questions is missing. Perhaps, in light of the Rebbe’s analysis above, we could see how these questions can be resolved. The first question as to why the order of transmission is not mentioned earlier in the Mishnah is resolved, because the intention of the author of this Mishnah is not historical. Rather, the author intended to highlight the preeminence of Torah that it was given at Sinai, which serves to teach some very special things about Torah, according to all levels of Torah interpretation. This preface is not germane to other parts of the Mishnah, but it is relevant here in Avos, where the focus throughout the Tractate is the virtue of Torah. This enables us to dispatch with the second question, which is why he doesn’t start with the word Torah, instead it begins with Moses receiving the torah at Sinai. Indeed, the focus of this Mishnah is not to describe the chronology of Torah, but to define the greatness of Torah by Moses receiving of it at Sinai,] ↩