| “F |
or a mitzvah is a candle, the Torah is light; and ethical admonishment the path of life.”[1]
The simple meaning is that doing a Mitzvah is similar to the value of a candle. The mitzvah itself is an action. The action of a Mitzvah is fertile ground for light to appear, but the light is naturally associated more with the understanding of the Mitzvah. The “Torah” refers to the “inspiration that brings one to do a Mitzvah. Thus the Torah is naturally associated with the “light” and the Mitzvah to the “candle”
We must understand: What is the intent of [the expression] “the path of life”? Is there a path of life other than the Torah and its mitzvos mentioned previously?
Since the Mitzvah and the Torah account for the “light” what addition is being referred to by the statement “the path of life”?
[Also requiring explanation is] the analogy of a mitzvah to a candle, and Torah to light. At the beginning of his text, the Shaloh interprets the word ner as referring to a single candle, while the term or refers to a large bonfire.
Here the Sheloh is explaining this a bit different than the simple understanding. The “candle” i.e. the Mitzvah, in this case is indeed bringing light into her environment. But the light that emerges from the “Torah” is referred to as a light that is far more powerful, “a large bonfire”. In other words a Mitzvah brings a more limited amount of light compared to the light that ensues through the study of the Torah
A similar thrust is reflected in our Sages’ statements (Sotah 21a):
Rabbi Menachem the son of Rabbi Yossi expounded: “ ‘For a mitzvah is a candle, the Torah is light.’ The verse used the analogy of a candle for a mitzvah and that of light for the Torah, teaching that just as a candle only offers protection for a brief period, so too, a mitzvah offers protection only temporarily. The Torah, [by contrast,] is described by the analogy of light. Just as the light offers protection forever, so too, the Torah offers protection forever.”
When a person does a Mitzvah, if it is not accompanied by the background inspiration of the Torah, it’s “protection” from the dark forces in this world is temporary. As long as the person is busy with the act of the Mitzvah, the person is protected from these forces. However this “protection” on it’s own, is of temporary nature. Since the act itself, detached of it’s meaning (the Torah) is short lived. However through the study of the Torah one imbues themselves with a deeper connection to The Holy One Blessed Be He thus bringing a longer lived light into their atmosphere.
[There is, however, a distinction between the two sources. Our Sages interpret] or as referring to daylight. This is obvious from the continuation of the passage which speaks about the break of dawn. See also Rashi’s commentary. This is not the same as the Shaloh [who interprets or] as a bonfire. Daylight is more powerful than even a great bonfire.
At first glance there seems to be a difference in understanding of this verse between the Sheloh who describes the light that emanates from the Torah as a “bonfire” vs. the Talmud which compares the light of the Torah to “daylight” which is a far more powerful light than that of a “bonfre”
To understand the above, it is necessary to preface[2] the explanations given on the [apparent contradiction implied by the following verses]. One verse states:[3] “Whatever G‑d desired, He did,” [which indicates] that the creation [of existence] stems from G‑d’s desire and will. And yet it is also written:[4] “With the word of G‑d, the heavens were created.” And [our Sages] say:[5] “The world was created with ten utterances,” indicating that the creation stems from [G‑d’s] utterances and speech, and was not brought into being by will and desire alone.
“The Torah speaks in language that is spoken by Man” however when words such as “desire” and “word” are used to describe something emanating from the Creator of the universe, they are not to be understood simply. Rather, it is a starting point for us to understand something far more profound than our first natural observation. As will be explained shortly, in observing how things happen in our world, there is an order to how things work. When one wants something the very first inclination is “desire”. When the “desire” persists there is an ensuing chain of events that must take place prior to the manifestation of the “desire” First there is a desire, then there is a thought out plan, and then there is is the “production”
The fact that King David describes the Creation as being a result of “desire” without mentioning the later stages of the development seems to contradict the statements of the Torah “and G-d said let there be light and there was light” etc. clearly here there seems to be another stage in the development of creation described as “speech”. As we will soon see there is a significant difference in the product of that which is brought into being by “desire” vs. speech. Thus the above question.
To explain the above: It is known that every entity possesses matter and form. Matter refers to the actual body of the entity as it exists in general, for example, the heavens in general or the earth in general. Form refers to the configuration and picture of the entity, e.g., that the heavens are round, and the form in which they appear.
In observing something from the perspective of “matter” one can easily overlook the “design” that preceded that which is being observed. As an example when one looks at a beautiful home, the observer is hardly aware of the importance of the desire and subsequent thought process of the developer. Why are the rooms the size that they are? Why are these colors the ones that were chosen? Are all questions that can be easily overlooked by the observer.
The “matter” is what is naturally observed by the observer, but the intricate “form” or “design” is concealed from the natural perspective of the observer.
The same is true with the creation of this world. Our general observation of all things is most associated with the observance of “matter” in truth, behind all that we observe there is a “design” that is perfectly aligned with the preceding “desire” Thus the statement “every entity possesses matter and form” i.e. the matter meaning the “product” and the “form” meaning the “design”
The matter of the entity is created through “the word of G‑d,” through the ten utterances of creation. Through the statement:[6] “Let there be light,” the light was created something from nothing. And similarly through the statement: “Let there be a firmament,” the firmament was created something from nothing.
In observing are world, one can break down all existence to two observations; the “matter” and the “form” or design. The “matter of a “home” is the bricks and mortar that make up it’s edifice. The “form” is the detailed “design” and the form it thus takes on. In Hebrew “devar Hashem” is translated as the “word of G-d . Whenever the “word of G-d” is used it is the ijnteraaction between the creator and the “matter” it is creating. The “design” is still not observational from the “word of G-d” perspective.
The manner in which the firmament was formed, its image and its likeness, was brought into being through G‑d’s desire which is not at all revealed through speech or utterances. This is the intent of the statement: “Whatever G‑d desired, He did.”
Just like our example of a “home” where the design cannot be observed by looking at the home strictly form it’s “matter perspective” one needs to have a deeper observation to understand the “design” and the “purpose” that the “architect” had in mind by creating this design, the same is true with the design of our world. The “intent” of the design is concealed behind the “edifice” of matter
