[Index of all Weekly Divrei Torah pages]
Our parsha (Bechukotai) starts with the words, “If you will walk in My ways (chukotai)Ŕ The word “ways” here usually means mitzvoth, or commandments of G-d. Rashi, however, explains differently; “You would think this means fulfillment of the mitzvoth, but they are actually mentioned later in the verse (“If you will fulfill my mitzvothŔ), so how then should we understand ‘my ways’? That you should labor hard in learning TorahŔ
Rashi wrote his commentary for the five-year old who is learning the Torah for the first time, and his intention was to answer all of the questions that a five-year old might come up with while studying the text of the Torah. That being the case, we have several questions;
1) In order to explain, all Rashi had to do was state simply; “You would think that the verse is referring to G-d’s commandments, but since it mentions the commandments later, they are already discussed.Ҕ
2) Thus, Rashi proved that “ways” (chukotai) does not mean mitzvoth. But, from where does he conclude that it means “learning Torah?”
3) Regarding the end of the verse, “Keep my mitzvoth,” Rashi says, “Work hard in my Torah in order to keep and fulfill [the mitzvoth].” This seems to contradict what he said earlier, that the end of the verse refers to physical fulfillment of the mitzvot, while it is the beginning of the verse that refers to learning Torah. If so, why explain that “My mitzvoth” at the end of the verse also involves learning?
In explanation, the five year old child is already aware that learning Torah is among the six hundred and thirteen mitzvoth. He knows that because he makes a blessing (“Blessed be He who has commanded us to learn Torah”) over learning the Torah every morning when he arises. Therefore, reasoned Rashi, the beginning of the verse must not apply to the general mitzvah of learning Torah, since that is a subject discussed elsewhere in the Torah. And of course, as Rashi mentioned, it cannot refer to fulfillment of the mitzvoth, since that is mentioned later in the very same verse. Therefore, it must apply to a particular aspect of learning Torah, a way of learning Torah that goes beyond merely fulfilling the basic mitzvah of learning Torah. What could the new way of learning be? If it is a variation in quantity, there is nothing to differentiate it from the basic commandment to learn Torah. The mitzvah of learning the Torah is fulfilled whether one learns a little, or whether one learns a lot. Therefore, reasoned Rashi, it must be a variation in quality, or how one learns Torah. From that, he concluded that to “walk in His ways” means to labor hard in learning Torah, over and beyond the learning that we must do in any case to fulfill the basic mitzvah of learning the Torah.
However, if that is the case, then the order of the verse is confusing. The end of the verse – “And fulfill My mitzvoth” - includes the basic commandment of learning Torah. And the beginning, according to Rashi, refers to laboring hard and increasing the quality of one’s learning. But, the natural order should have been the reverse; it would have been more logical to first mention the basic commandment, and only later to discuss the special case of laboring hard in learning. If we would have explained the beginning of the verse (“You should go in My ways”) as referring to basic Torah learning, and the end (“You should keep my mitzvoth”) to general fulfillment of the commandments, it would have made sense; for the learning of the Torah is what enables us to keep the commandments. But, what sense does it make to command the basic mitzvah at the end of the verse, while mentioning the special case at the beginning, before we even know of the basic mitzvah?
It is in order to answer this question that Rashi comments (at the end of our verse) that “Keep my mitzvoth” means “to learn in order to keep and fulfill the mitzvoth.” That is, even though in the beginning of the verse, Rashi gives the simple, straight-forward explanation of the words, that “Walk in my ways” means to work hard in the Torah, nevertheless, he elaborates at the end of the verse. He says that “Keep my mitzvoth” includes “to learn in order to keep and fulfill the commandments.” This part of the explanation, although written on the end of the verse, refers back to the beginning. It implies that the learning that one labors in (at the beginning of the verse) must also be for the purpose mentioned at the end of the verse; the fulfillment of the mitzvoth. That is, the learning that is necessary, even to practice the Torah, is learning that entails labor. All of the learning that we do, whether the relatively effortless learning necessary to achieve general understanding, or hard labor in learning in order to achieve a detailed picture, is for the purpose of keeping and fulfilling the commandments.
Still, there is an overall dimension that is not understood here; the beginning of the verse mentions one category of mitzvot – chukim (laws that are not understood intellectually) – and the end of the verse mentions mitzvoth in general, without specifying what category (there are two other categories; edut – which are mitzvoth that we wouldn’t have thought of ourselves but which make sense when commanded, and mishpatim – which are mitzvoth that we may have thought of on our own). So, why should we not explain the verse as applying to two different categories of mitzvoth – the beginning (“if you will walk in my waysŔ) to chukot and the end (“If you will fulfill my commandmentsŔ) to other categories of commandments? What forces Rashi to explain the verse as applying to labor in learning Torah on the one hand, and fulfillment of mitzvoth on the other hand? Why not apply the entire verse to fulfillment of mitzvoth, but of separate categories?
The word, “mitzvoth” means commandments. It refers to the commandments that were given to us at Mt. Sinai, when we received the Torah. Since it is an all-inclusive word, it does not make sense that, after the giving of the Torah, the scripture would use the word “commandments” to refer to one or more of the specific categories, such edut and/or mishpatim, while excluding another category. Since the end of our verse uses the language, “My mitzvoth,” it is logical that it refers to all the categories of commandments, rather than just one or two. And since the end of the verse refers to all of the mitzvoth, Rashi found it necessary to explain that the beginning refers not to one of the categories of mitzvoth alone (since all of them are referred to at the end of the verse), but to something else completely; labor in learning Torah.
There are at least four levels to understanding the Torah, and our verse is no different. Even though Rashi defines chukotai (“my ways”) as labor in learning Torah, there must be something in the simple meaning of the word that coincides with Rashi’s definition. As mentioned above, the chukim are Torah laws that do not descend into the realm of human logic and understanding. They are laws that were given without explanation, that we were commanded to fill regardless of the fact that we have no grasp or understanding of them. In addition, the word chok comes from the Hebrew word meaning “engraving.” The difference between engraving and writing is the amount of work that goes into the activity. Writing is relatively easy; it does not demand a lot of effort or energy. Engraving, though demands much work. Similarly, the mitzvoth that we fulfill with understanding and grasp of the principles behind them do not demand as much work and energy on our part. It is much more difficult to do something “just because we were commanded,” even though we don’t understand. It is for that reason that the mitzvoth that are in the category of chukim – that are decrees from Above without any intellectual justification – are compared to engraving. Just like engraving requires greater energy and effort, so does it require more work on ourselves to perform mitzvoth that come as mere commandments, without any explanation. Nevertheless, it is that extra work, that added labor and effort to learn Torah that makes a deeper impression and takes us to new and higher levels of avodat HaShem (service of G-d).
The added work that is required by “laboring in Torah” makes a deeper impression in two ways. Learning the oral Torah in general requires understanding, since if we don’t understand, it is forbidden to say the blessing over learning the oral Torah. Nevertheless, “labor” in Torah requires that 1) that we surpass mere intellectual grasp. If we do not go beyond our normal understanding to find the spiritual dimension of the Torah, then we are not truly “laboring” in Torah. And 2); added labor in Torah must bring to the realization that even those Torah concepts that we do understand are nevertheless beyond our intellect. Even when we grasp the mitzvoth categorized as edut and mishpatim, we recognize the element of the Commander within them, that surpasses our limited understanding. And therefore, even while absorbing the other categories of the Torah, labor in Torah makes an engraving upon us – on our souls – reminding us that the edut and mishpatim are also chukim – that they come from far Above us in order to make an impression and engraving within us. But, that demands work on our part, which is why Rashi explains that “In my ways (chukotai) you should walk” means laboring in the Torah.
From Likutei Sichot of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, ztz’l, vol. 17, pp. 313-320 R’ David Sterne, Jerusalem Connection in the old city of Jerusalem