Good Old Days

There are many reasons given for the fact that this Shabbos has its own name—Shabbos HaGadol. Regardless of its origins, however, the title tells us that this Shabbos has a particular import. Other than the Yotzros that some Kehilos recite, however, the Shabbos is marked only by its Haftorah. This would imply that we must look to the Divrei HaNavi for a the message that Shabbos HaGadol is meant to impart.

The Haftorah for Shabbos Hagadol comes from the final Perek of Sefer Malachai. Malachai lived at the beginning of Bayis Sheni and was the last of our Neviim, and so it was he who relayed the Dvar Hashem directly to Klal Yisroel for the last time. The Pessukim of our Haftorah—the last in all of Neviim—can therefore be seen almost as parting words, intended to prepare us for a world in which we would no longer be Zoche to this level of connection to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It seems then, that by understanding these words we will be able to discern the message that is supposed to carry us through these times, until the days when Nevuah returns.

The Hafotrah begins with words that are somewhat familiar: “V’Arva L’Hashem Minchas Yehuda V’Yerushalayim K’Yimei Olam U’Kishanim Kadmonios.” The Navi speaks of future times, in which the Avodas HaMikdash will return, and the Korbanos of Klal Yisroel will once again be sweet, just like the days of old, “K’Yimei Olam U’Kishanim Kadmonios.” It seems that before Nevuah departed this world, Hashem was sending us a message that one day we will return to our full strength, so to speak, and our Korbanos will be accepted just as in prior times.

There is a simple question that arises from these words: what were the Yimei Olam U’Kishanim Kadmonios? To which time period does this phrase, which we utter so many times a day, refer?

Metzudos here explains that the Yimei Olam refer to the times of Moshe Rabbeinu and the Shanim Kadmonios to the times of Shlomo Hamelech. He further explains the message of the Navi: in the times of Moshe and Shlomo, an Aish came down from Shamayim to consume Korbanos—indicating an increased level of Ritzuy—but this experience was missing in the Bayis Sheni. The Navi is promising, however, that at a future date we will return to a level of Ritzuy that is K’Yimei Olam U’Kishanim Kadmonios.

The words of the Metzudos are based on a Medrash found in Eicha Rabba, as well as in Safra, both of which explain that Yimei Olam refers to Moshe Rabbeinu and Shanim Kadmonios to Shlomo Hamelech. Each also offers an alternative explanation: “K’Yimei Olam K’Yimei Noach…U’Kishanim Kadmonios K’Shnos Hevel Shelo Haysa Avodas Kochavim Adayin B’Olam.”

Now, it is understandable that Metzudos brought only the first explanation of the Medrash, as it can be explained in the realm of Pshat, as we have seen. At the same time, we must understand the words of the Medrash, which teach us that the Navi is promising that one day we will return to the days of Noach and Hevel. What does this mean? In what way is it desirable to return to the way things were in the days of Noach and Hevel, such that the Navi promises that indeed we one day will?

Also, the comparison of Noach and Hevel itself requires some explanation. We of course know that both Hevel and Noach brough Korbanos that the Torah attests were accepted by HKBH, but they do not appear to have been on the same level. In the case of Noach we are told “VaYarach Hashem Es Reyach HaNichoach”, indicating a very high level of Ritzuy. When Hevel brought his Korban, however, we are told only “V’Yesha Hahsem El Hevel V’El Minchaso”. We can understand the desire to return to the days of Noach, whose Korban was accepted on a high level, but what of Hevel? Why does the Navi promise a return to the days of “V’Yesha Hahsem El Hevel”?

It seems that perhaps the addition of the words “Shelo Haysa Avodas Kochavim Adayin B’Olam” is meant to address this question. The Medrash seems to be telling us that, at least in the case of Hevel, the message of the Navi is not tied merely to Ritzuy Korbanos. That said, we must understand these words themselves. How does the fact that Hevel lived before the advent of Avodah Zara affect his Korban, and why will we be able to recreate this affect in the days of L’Asid Lavo? What is the message of the words “U’Kishanim Kadmonios K’Shnos Hevel Shelo Haysa Avodas Kochavim Adayin B’Olam”?

There is another question that may be asked on these words as well. The Gemara in Avodah Zarah tells us that Adam HaRishon brought a Korban at the beginning of his life. Why then didn’t the Medrash tell us that the Shanim Kadmonios are the days of Adam Harishon, who also brought a Korban at a time of Shelo Haysa Avodas Kochavim Adayin B’Olam? It is clear that the Medrash chose Hevel specifically. Why? What was the secret of Hevel’s Korban, and why does the Navi promise a return to that experience?

Clearly if we are to understand the words of the Medrash, and the message of the Navi, we must have a deeper understanding of Hevel and his actions.

As is the case with many pivotal figures, the Torah tells us remarkably little about Hevel, but much can be gained from each word. The Pessukim tell us of the births of Kayin and Hevel, and then immediately of their life choices: “VaYehi Hevel Ro’eh Tzon V’Kayin Haya Oved Adama”, Hevel was a shepherd and Kayin chose to work the lands. Other than the story of his Korban, and its tragic outcome, this is all we are told about Hevel, that he was a Ro’eh Tzon, and it therefore cannot be trivial. What, then, does Hevel’s choice of occupation tell us about his character?

Rashi, on this Passuk, explains the decision Hevel made: “Lefi Sheniskalilah Ha’Adama Peirash Lo M’Avodasa”. Because the Adama had been given a Klalah, after the Chet of the Etz HaDa’as, Hevel did not wish to associate with it and therefore chose to be a Ro’eh Tzon.

It is interesting to note that the words of Rashi seem to be based on a Medrash Aggadah that expounds on the idea a bit more. The Medrash tells us that Hevel was “Nisyareh Min HaKlalah”, he was afraid because of the Klalah, whereas Kayin had no such compunction and therefore chose to be an Oved Adama.

How can we understand this idea? What made Hevel “afraid” of the Klalah and why did this dissuade him from being an Oved Adama?

Perhaps we can answer this question if we better understand the Klalah given to the earth in the times of Adam and Chava.

During Maysa Beraishis, the Torah tells us that Hashem said: “Tadshe HaAretz Desha…Etz Pri Oseh Pri L’Mineihu”. Rashi explains that the words “Etz Pri” refer to a tree that itself tastes just like its fruit, “Ta’am Eitzo U’Piryo Shavin”. Rashi, based on Medrashim, tells us that the intent of the Borei Olam was that all trees should be “Ta’am Eitzo U’Piryo Shavin, but the ground did not listen and instead bore the trees that produce fruit but do not taste like them. As a result, concludes Rashi, when Adam was given a Klalah, the Adama was similarly punished for its Chet.

This Rashi certainly requires some explanation.

Maharal, in Gur Aryeh, notes that the Adama has no Bechira, and so it cannot therefore willfully defy the Dvar Hashem. He therefore explains the words of Rashi in a different light.

The Passuk in Tehillim tells us: “HaShamayim Shamayim L’Hashem V’HaAretz Nassan L’Bnei Adam.” This tells us, explains Maharal, that the Adama is different, and considered “Min HaTachtonim”. As a result, the Adama is never Shalem, it is always less than complete. When Koheles tells us “Ain Adam Tzaddik B’Aretz Asher Lo Yechetah”, it means that it is impossible to be a Tzaddik on the “Aretz” because the earth always lacks a certain Shelimus. Therefore, although HKBH told the earth to give forth “Ta’am Eitzo U’Piryo Shavin” the earth could not, because it could not produce Shelimus—by its very nature it is only capable of Chisaron. When Adam and Chava committed their Chet, they showed that they too were “Min HaTachtonim” and not capable of pure Shleimus. It was then that the Adama, which is so closely associated with mankind, “V’HaAretz Nassan L’Bnei Adam”, was punished as well.

Perhaps we can understand the thought process of Hevel based on this idea.

Hevel knew that his parents had been Choteh, and that the Adama was Niskalelah at that time as well. He understood the pitfalls of being to closely related to the Aretz: complacency. If one submits to his reality of Chisaron, he will be discouraged from chasing Shelimus, and settle for less. Our role on this earth is to understand that the words “Ain Adam Tzaddik B’Aretz Asher Lo Yechetah” are not confining—they are invigorating. We can make our efforts to achieve greatness while understanding that to err is human. Hevel took this message to the extreme—the prospect of complacency scared him—and he therefore chose to be a Ro’eh Tzon.

Kayin, as the Medrash told us, was not afraid—he thought that he could be an Oved Adama without being affected. As we know, however, this was not the case: Hevel brought the best of his flock as a Korban, and Kayin settled for less. The Korban of Hevel was an expression of his refusal to be locked into a lifetime of Chisaron, an urge to grow closer to Hashem. It was this Mincha that Hahsem turned to, as the Torah tells us, because it was brought for the purpose of increased Kirva, a desire to leave behind the earth, and its shackles of Chisaron, and pursue the Shelimus of Shamayim.

This was only possible when it could be said “Shelo Haysa Avodas Kochavim Adayin B’Olam”.

At the beginning of Hilchos Avodas Kochavim, the Rambam explains the origins of Avodah Zarah. He writes that in Dor Enosh, just one generation after Hevel, the Chachmei HaDor made a terrible mistake and began to serve Avodah Zarah. The Passuk that teaches us this fact is found shortly after the story of Hevel and says: “Az Huchal L’Kroh B’Shem Hashem”.

Rashi tells us that the word “Huchal” comes from the word Chulin, and explains the Passuk as follows: in the times of Enosh people turned the Shem Hashem into Chulin, and began assigning it to items such as grass. It emerges that the roots of Avodah Zarah are taking the Shleimus of Shamayim, and installing it in the Adama. When one conflates Kodesh and Chol, “Huchal L’Kroh B’Shem Hashem”, he no longer seeks a closer connection to Shamayim, because he thinks he can merely bring the world of Shelimus into his own.

Now we can understand the words of the Navi.

L’Asid Lavo, promises Malachi, we will live an existence of “Shanim Kadmonios K’Shnos Hevel Shelo Haysa Avodas Kochavim Adayin B’Olam.” We will clearly fathom the difference between Kodesh and Chol, between the Shelimus of Shamayim and the Chisaron of Aretz, and our Avodah will be affected. We too will be able to bring Korbanos for the sake of Kirva, seeking to rise above our Chisaron and achieve true Shelimus.

What better preparation can there be for Zman Cheiruseinu, the Yom Tov of Geulah, than to clarify our goal? Shabbos Hagadol reminds us that we seek Geulah so that we may lead lives K’Yimei Olam U’Kishanim Kadmonios, when we will be able to serve HKBH in a way that brings us closer to Him, and to the Shleimus we can achieve.