Milton Torres-Ceron
Introduction
Leviticus chapter 26 includes a passage known in the Jewish tradition as the Tokhahah. It receives its name from the Hebrew word for rebuke, as it contains God’s warnings towards the Israelites about the consequences of transgressing the covenant. This passage may be difficult to read, since it portrays a very vivid and explicit consequence for the people of Israel if they reject the covenant. The Tokhahah describes a series of punishments that increase in severity, culminating in the exile of the Jewish people from the Land of Israel. Although Leviticus 26 is often read as a list of punishments, this article aims to demonstrate how, through a close textual analysis of lexical choices and thematic patterns, it simultaneously portrays divine punishment and an enduring divine promise of companionship.[1]
This article uses a multi-layered exegetical methodology in order to uncover a deeper meaning of the biblical text.[2] Classic rabbinic commentaries, from talmudic and midrashic sources through the middle ages and contemporary commentators, are used as interpretative tools of Hebrew grammar, theological motifs, and recurring biblical paradigms, some of which reflect archetypal patterns identified in broader religious thought. In the language of Jewish mysticism, this article aims to reveal hesed she-bigevurah,[3] the divine loving-kindness embedded within the divine judgment in Leviticus 26.
Literary and Lexical Framework
The first half of chapter 26 describes the blessings that will come to those who observe the mitzvot. Then, in verse 12, the Torah states a profound promise:
“Ve-hit’hallakhti be-tokhekhem, ve-hayiti lakhem le-Elohim, ve-atem tihyu li le-am.”
“And I will walk within you, and I will be your God, and you will be My people.”[4]
This verse is essential for understanding the chapter. The key word here is the verb “to walk.” As the Torah transitions to describing the consequences of transgression, we encounter this theme of walking repeatedly. In verses 23-24, we read:
“And if through these [punishments] you are not disciplined to Me, and you walk with Me in opposition, then I will also walk with you in opposition and punish you seven times for your transgressions.”
At this point, a thematic pattern starts to emerge based on God’s response to the people’s behavior. Between verse 12 and verse 24, the idea of “walking with God” has been repeated three times already. The first time, in verse 12, God is walking within the people as a reward for obedience; then, they walk in opposition to God; and, finally, God walks in opposition to the people as a consequence.
This pattern appears to reflect the divine response described by R. Hayyim of Volozhin in his work Nefesh Ha-Hayyim.[5] Psalms 121:5 reads: “The Lord is your guardian; the Lord is your protective shade at your right hand.” Commenting on this verse, R. Hayyim explains that God acts with humanity the way a shadow moves with a person’s hand. When someone moves their hand, the shadow follows accordingly. If a person elevates themselves through good deeds and mitzvot, God elevates them as well. Conversely, if someone lowers themselves through wrongdoing, God responds in kind. This principle is clearly demonstrated in the Tokhahah, where God’s response mirrors the people’s behavior, in the verses above mentioned and again in verses 27-28.
A closer analysis to verse 24 will reveal something more. The first four words in the verse are as follows: “Ve-halakhti af ani immakhem,” that can be translated, in a literal way, as “I will walk, even I, with you.” Verse 28 contains similar language:
“I will walk with you in the fury of opposition, and I will discipline you seven times for your transgressions.”
The crucial element here is the word immakhem, “with you,” in the plural. This represents a significant change from verse 12, where God walks “within” (be-tokhekhem) the people when they follow the divine commandments. During times of consequence, God walks “with” (im) them.
The Nuance of “Im” vs. “Et”: Partnership and Proximity
The Tanakh, when describing the companionship of two individuals walking, uses two Hebrew words: im and et. As I will develop in the next paragraphs, according to some biblical commentators, im describes a partnership characterized by equality, cooperation, or shared purpose, while et implies mere physical proximity without partnership.
Walking with God: Noah vs. Avraham
The first time in the Tanakh where we see an explicit description of a human being walking with God is found in Parashat Noah.[6] Here the Torah describes the righteousness of Noah “in his generations,” portraying his walking with God as follows: et ha-Elohim hit’halekh Noah. The sages (Bereishit Rabbah 30:10) discussed this verse and contrasted the walking with God of Noah with the “walking before God” of Avraham.[7] According to the midrashic interpretation of the sages, the description of Noah walking with God represents a weaker walk than that of Avraham. The sages suggest that this description implies that Noah’s righteousness depended on God’s support, indicating a more passive spiritual stance, whereas Avraham’s walking was proactive.
Walking in unity: Bil’am and the Moabites
Another example of et vs. im appears in Parashat Balak.[8] Initially, God tells Bil’am: Rise, go with [ittam, a construct of et] them [the Moabites who sought Israel’s destruction]. Later, the Torah describes Bil’am as going “im sarei Mo’av,” “with the Moabite officers.”[9] Malbim, in his commentary on this passage, explains that this change from et to im indicates equality between Bil’am and the Moabites, in that they shared the same destructive intention towards the people of Israel.
Divine companionship in the context of divine forgiveness
One of the most puzzling events of the Torah is the incident of the Golden Calf, in which the people of Israel created a statue of a calf made of gold as a physical representation of God. As a result of this transgression, God decides to destroy the people of Israel and start again with Moshe’s offspring. After Moshe’s plea, God forgives the people of Israel, but decides that He will not accompany the people Himself; rather, He will do so through an angel. Moshe keeps pleading, and God forgives the people of Israel. As a result, God reveals something known in the Jewish tradition as the “13 Attributes of Mercy.” These 13 Attributes of Mercy (whose application to the Tokhahah is discussed in the next section) comprise a prayer to be recited during a time of crisis where divine judgment is imminent. The presence of divine judgment provides a thematic relationship with the Tokhahah. In this context, before the introduction of the 13 Attributes, there is a fascinating application of divine companionship in Moshe’s’ plea for forgiveness. In Exodus 33:16, Moshe states that divine grace and the uniqueness of the peoplehood of Israel are conditioned on divine companionship (be-lekhtekha immanu). Notice that in this verse, both the verb to walk and the word for companionship (im) are used here, which could be understood as a hint (remez) to the Tokhahah via the use of Hebrew words with the same grammatical root in a shared thematic context (divine judgment as a consequence of the transgression).
R. Prof. Umberto (David Moshe) Cassuto, in his commentary on this verse, states that “by your [God] walking with us will the world know that we have found favor in [Y]our sight and that ou have chosen us and we are distinguished.” Therefore, both the peoplehood and chosenness of Israel are a consequence of divine companionship. Another use of the word im appears just before the revelation of the 13 Attributes. In Exodus 34:35 we read that “the Lord descended in a cloud and stood with him (immo). The use of the word im in this context reinforces the idea of divine companionship as a vehicle of divine grace for forgiveness and for the peoplehood of Israel.
Divine aid and empowerment through divine companionship
Additionally, in the book of Ruth,[10] we encounter the explicit phrase, “The Lord be with [immakhem] you,” an expression that the sages (Rut Rabbah 4:5) equated with a greeting of the Angel of the Lord to Gideon.[11] Building on the distinction previously highlighted between et’s implication of passive proximity and im’s suggestion of active partnership, these im-only examples further underscore the latter.
In Ruth, Bo’az came to the field workers and greeted them with “may the Lord be with (im) you,” to which Ibn Ezra comments that the workers needed divine assistance in order to keep working. It is probable that Ibn Ezra based his comment on Targum Yonatan, since the Targum interprets this verse as “may the Word of the Lord help you.”[12] In other words, the workers needed God to be with (im) them in order to receive divine assistance in completing their work. R. Shem Tob Gaguine, in his work Keter Shem Tob, echoes this idea.[13] He explains that, in the Sephardic liturgy, when an oleh is called to read from the Torah scroll, he repeats the words of Bo’az to the congregation, “may the Lord be with you,” and the congregation responds, “may the Lord bless you.” One of the reasons offered by R. Gaguine for this custom is that, given that Torah study exhausts the person’s strength, he requests a divine blessing before reading from the Torah. R. Shem Tob also notes that in Ottoman Arabic culture, a worker is greeted with “Allah ma’ak” (“may God be with you”), to which he replies, “Tubarak Allah” (“may God bless you”). This greeting closely echoes the exchange in Ruth 2:4, suggesting that the association between divine presence and human effort resonates across Semitic religious traditions. While further investigation into linguistic and cultural parallels is beyond this article’s scope, this example illustrates how the biblical theology of divine empowerment continued to find expression in traditional Middle Eastern culture.[14] Furthermore, in the Sephardic liturgy, during the Shabbat morning prayer for the congregation, the text of the prayer switches from Hebrew to Aramaic, and includes the quotation of Targum Yonatan’s “may the Word of the Lord help you,” when asking for divine aid and help for the members of the community.
In Judges 6:12, cited in the midrashic commentary of Rut Rabbah 4:5, the Angel of the Lord appears to Gideon and greets him with “may the Lord be with you, mighty soldier.” On this, Rashi comments that the Angel was declaring that the presence of God be on Gideon in order to receive divine strength to carry his divine mission.[15]
Divine companionship in times of crisis
In Isaiah 7:14, a prophecy highlights divine support for the Kingdom of Judah during the reign of King Ahaz. At the time, Judah was under pressure from the kings of Aram (Syria) and the Northern Kingdom of Israel, who sought to force Ahaz into joining their anti-Assyrian alliance, a move that threatened Judah’s autonomy. It is in this context that the prophet Isaiah visits King Ahaz and delivers a divine message: the threats posed by Aram and Israel will not succeed. As a sign of God’s intervention, Isaiah announces the birth of a child named Immanuel. The name, meaning “God is with us” (Immanu-El), serves as a symbol of divine presence and protection. Both Ibn Ezra and Metzudat David, in their respective commentaries on this verse, explain that the child’s name indicates that God would be with the king of Judah, offering support amid the crisis caused by these two hostile kingdoms.[16] Interestingly, R. Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz interprets the child as a representative of the whole nation (due to the use of the plural immanu), thereby broadening the interpretation of the child Immanuel to symbolize divine companionship to the entire nation during this time of distress.
In Psalms, as well, we find the word im in the context of divine help. In Psalms 91:15, the psalmist states that God “will be with him, (“immo”) [the person who trusts in God] in times of distress.” Psalm 91 seems particularly interesting for the present discussion, given that R. Menahem ben Shlomo Ha-Me’iri (Meiri), in his commentary on Psalms 91:1, homiletically states that this psalm is a prophecy of the redemption of the Jewish people from exile, a topic we will discuss in the following section.
Similarly, Psalms 23:4 presents a clear example of divine companionship during times of distress. The verse states that, even when a person walks through “the valley of the shadow of death,” they do not fear, “for You [God] are with me (immadi),” a grammatical form of the word im). Both Ibn Ezra and Meiri interpret the “valley of the shadow of death” as referring to harsh decrees from heaven, divinely ordained afflictions that may come upon a person, such as those listed in the Tokhahah. Meiri explicitly emphasizes that the reason the person is able to endure these decrees without fear is because of God’s presence: “for You are with me.”
This understanding of divine companionship during punishment finds profound expression in the mystical interpretation of R. Ya’akov Abuhatzeira.[17] He sees the “valley of the shadow of death” as representing Gehinnom, a spiritual state where a transgressor is trapped due to their transgressions. In this view, divine companionship is not just a comfort for the individual, but a divine empowerment that enables the tzaddik, the righteous person, to descend into this spiritual abyss and rescue the transgressor. The tzaddik does not fear this descent because “You are with me,” meaning that God’s presence empowers him to redeem others from spiritual ruin. Abir Yaakov’s reading directly parallels the dynamic we see in the Tokhahah: just as the tzaddik can descend into Gehinnom because “You [God] are with me,” so too can the Jewish people endure exile because God walks immakhem, “with” them, through their punishment. This mystical-homiletical reading illuminates how the im of divine companionship operates not just linguistically but also spiritually. The tzaddik’s ability to rescue others from spiritual ruin mirrors Israel’s journey through the punishments of the Tokhahah, both of them requiring divine empowerment (im) to transform a place of destruction into a path of return. Abir Yaakov’s insight reveals the deeper mechanics of divine companionship in judgment: God’s presence doesn’t prevent the descent into spiritual darkness, but enables redemption through it. This is precisely the dynamic at work in the Tokhahah: the punishments become instruments of restoration because God accompanies His people through them. This idea will be discussed further in the following section.
Divine help coming from God’s companionship
Finally, an interesting grammatical twist of the word im comes from Psalms 121:2. Here, the author indicates that, when hoping for divine help, divine aid comes from (mei-im) God himself. In the context of the present discussion, we can understand this verse as “My help comes from the companionship of the Lord, Maker of heavens and earth.” Malbim comments on this verse that the psalmist is talking about a providential help that, even when it may appear to be an earthly/natural help, is actually an act of heavenly supervision. This verse reinforces the idea of divine companionship as the source of divine aid and redemption.
These examples highlight the use of the Hebrew word im, not only as a divine partnership in equality and shared objective, but as a descriptor of divine companionship with people in need of divine help in order to succeed in a specific duty (as the passages in Ruth and Judges exemplify), or to overcome times of distress (as in Psalms 91:15). On the other hand, the walking with God described using the Hebrew word et indicates a passive attitude towards God, perhaps a spiritual lethargy (as exemplified in the story of Noah).
Divine Strengthening for Atonement in Exile
As the reading of the Tokhahah progresses, we find the ultimate punishment for the transgression of the people of Israel, the exile. In Leviticus 26:29-32, the Torah describes the siege of the Judean cities by enemy armies,[18] culminating with the sentence of the exile from the Land in verse 33. Nahmanides, cited and analyzed by R. Prof. Jonathan Grossman,[19] noticed an interesting pattern regarding the idea of the exile in the Torah that creates an archetype within the Jewish tradition. This pattern involves the displacement of the transgressors. In other words, transgressions of the divine commandments bring about the loss of the home and, consequently, exile the transgressor from his homeland. Grossman explains that the blueprint for this pattern of transgression-displacement/exile is found in the narrative of the Creation in Genesis.[20] Adam and Eve are expelled from Eden as a consequence of their transgression of ingesting the fruit of “knowledge of good and evil.” Cain, similarly, is expelled to the east after murdering his brother.
When God inhabits the land, explains Grossman, the human dwellers are expected to behave according to specific religious and moral standards, as detailed in the Tokhahah. R. Jonathan Sacks expounds on this idea, explaining that teshuvah means both “repentance” and “return,” in the sense of a homecoming, a physical act of return to the place of origin.[21] When the transgressor “repents” from his transgression, he is “returning” to his place of origin, and, as a consequence, is bringing the exile to an end.
However, between the transgression and the teshuvah, there must be a mechanism that enables the transgressor to overcome the displacement and successfully terminate the exile. This is where divine companionship comes into action. The use of the word immakhem in the Tokhahah indicates that, during the process of the punishments described in Leviticus 26, Israel would actively atone for the transgressions committed, and, therefore, the people will need God’s being with them to receive divine assistance in order to atone for the transgressions. Indeed, the Tanakh presents a profound theological connection of the two, suggesting that the exile which occurred at the end of the First Temple Era served as a means to atone for the transgressions listed in Leviticus 26.[22]
As explored in the previous section, the divine companionship expressed with the word im indicates divine strength given to the people in order to perform an action. The specific strength-forgiveness interaction can be illustrated through the biblical story of the twelve spies sent to the Land of Israel in Parashat Shelah.[23] After the spies come back from the Land, they give a pessimistic report, discouraging the people from entering and conquering the Land and, in turn, triggering divine anger. Eventually, Moshe prays for divine forgiveness for the transgression of the spies. R. Ezra Bick offers a fascinating commentary on the prayer of Moshe, found in Numbers 14:17-18,[24] in which Moshe prays for “the increase of God’s ‘strength.’” R. Bick sees the increasing of God’s strength as the basis of forgiveness. In other words, Moshe’s prayer provides a conceptual framework for understanding the punishments of the Tokhahah: by God accompanying his people during these punishments, He is laying the foundation to restoring the covenantal relationship between God and Israel by strengthening his people, thereby enabling them to atone for their transgressions.
This argument is further supported by Leviticus 25:23. There, the Torah states, “ki li ha-aretz, ki geirim ve-toshavim atem immadi,” “for the land is Mine; you are strangers and sojourners with Me.” Commenting on this formulation, R. Jacob ben Asher cites a midrash which teaches that, during Israel’s exile from the Land, the divine presence, the Shekhinah, accompanies the Jewish people.[25] This is reinforced by the conversation between Moshe and God in Parashat Shemot.[26] When God appears to Moshe in the burning bush, He introduces Himself as Ehyeh asher ehyeh, which can be loosely translated as “I will be who I will be.” The sages explain that, through this name, God communicated, “I am with Israel in their current struggles, and I will be with Israel in their future struggles.[27] These textual examples, in synergy with the discussion in the previous section, collectively suggest that God accompanies Israel in times of exile, a distress produced as a negative consequence of her incapability to stand in the covenant, so that the Jewish people can succeed in teshuvah.
Similarly, when God revealed the 13 Attributes of Mercy to Moshe after the Golden Calf incident, when divine judgment seemed imminent, these attributes began with “Adonai, Adonai, Eil rahum ve-hanun…”[28] The four-letter divine name appears twice at the beginning of this revelation. The sages identify these two appearances of the ineffable four-lettered name as two different attributes of divine mercy. Tosafot, in Rosh Ha-Shanah 17b, explain that each occurrence of God’s ineffable name represents a different aspect of the divine relationship with humanity. The first represents God’s desire for human existence, which led the Almighty to create humanity. The second represents the continued divine desire for human existence even after transgression.[29] This enduring desire for human existence (despite human transgressions against the divine will) serves as a theological foundation for God’s companionship. It is because God continues to desire humanity’s existence, even in a state of transgression, that He remains with (im) them to provide the divine help necessary for atonement.
At this point, the Torah has already reinforced repeatedly the idea of God sustaining and empowering the Jewish people, by describing the divine companionship during the punishments of the Tokhahah. The climax arrives in Leviticus 26:44, when God states that, “Even when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them to destroy them completely and annul My covenant with them, for I am the Lord their God.” The sages understand this verse as a reference to five periods in history when God protected the people of Israel.[30] In this verse, God states that, despite the failure of Israel to uphold the covenant, He does not sever the relationship with the people. The rabbinic interpretation on this verse, found in Megillah 11a, reinforces the idea that, through different exiles, God protects the people of Israel. Hence, the principle of God protecting Israel during the fulfillment of the Tokhahah by accompanying them can be seen in action. Even after transgression, God does not reject Israel. We can exemplify this idea with R. Yehuda Ha-Levi’s explanation in his book Sefer Ha-Kuzari,[31] that even after the Golden Calf incident, the Jewish people never ceased being God’s people, nor did the clouds of glory cease to protect the Israelites. Despite transgressions, the Almighty remained their God.
In Leviticus 26:45, God states: “I will remember My covenant with their ancestors whom I brought out of the land of Egypt before the eyes of the nations, to be their God; I am the Lord.” This is the divine loving-kindness shown to Israel during the time of punishment. And it serves a specific purpose: R. Moshe Hayyim Luzzatto (Ramhal) explains that, by the letter of the law, a transgressor should be punished immediately after the transgression; however, the divine loving-kindness provides time to engage in a proper teshuvah and make a rectification of their wrongdoings (tikkun).[32] This explanation leads to a logical conclusion: this divine loving-kindness embedded within the divine judgement of the Tokhahah is the mechanism divinely designed to empower and allow Israel to survive during the punitive period, in order to do teshuvah and rectify their wrongdoings, and, eventually, bring the exile to an end.
Conclusions
The analysis presented in this article suggests that the Tokhahah is not merely a catalog of punishments for disobedience, but a powerful affirmation of enduring divine presence. Beneath the language of rebuke lies a theology of covenantal loyalty in which God does not abandon His people, even in exile or in moments of failure. The exile, which is the ultimate punishment in the Tokhahah, is not only a geographic reality that affects the Jewish people as a nation, but it can be understood, homiletically, as a psychological or spiritual state that can affect each individual, in which the absence of truth destabilizes the mental state of a person, making them a prisoner of their own mind.[33] As Abir Ya’akov taught regarding psalm 23, divine companionship empowers the ones who descend into darkness for the sake of redemption. The Tokhahah operates on this same principle, when, in those moments of internal disconnection from God, whether caused by missteps or compounded by inner struggle, the divine presence remains nearby, inviting one to do teshuvah.
Psalm 121 reminds us that, when we lift our eyes to the mountains in search of help, our help comes from companionship (mei-im) with the Maker of heaven and earth. This help is a divine empowerment of the individual so that s/he may be able to come back to the divine way. The message is not merely one of comfort or consolation but of orientation, a message of return to the divine, to the source of life; in other words, it is a message of teshuvah. It is a path back from disconnection, a rejoining of the relationship with God that, despite the transgression, was never fully severed. R. Jonathan Sacks explains it as follows: “Exile is not an immutable fate. Returning to God, we find Him returning to us. We can restore the moral harmony of the universe.”[34]
The Tokhahah, then, should not be read as a passage of rejection and punishment, but as a deeply relational expression of divine concern. It becomes a profound testimony to God’s unwavering presence with His people in both blessing and suffering, obedience and failure, exile and return. The Tokhahah is, ultimately, an embodiment of the concept of hesed she-bigevurah, divine loving-kindness embedded within divine judgement itself.[35]
[1] The Tokhahah details the consequences of the Jewish people’s failure to uphold the covenant, which includes, but is not limited to, halakhic transgressions. While halakhic observance is implied in the text, its legal dimensions lie beyond the scope of this article, which focuses on theological themes developed from a textual analysis. Such failures can encompass broader moral and ethical lapses, spiritual apathy, a lack of trust in God, or a general breakdown in the holistic relationship with the Divine, such as a careful reading of the Prophets can prove.
[2] In Jewish exegesis, this methodology is called PaRDeS. This is an acronym for: (1) Peshat, the simple meaning of the Hebrew text, reflected in this article through the analysis of the Hebrew text; (2) Remez, translated as hint, shown in this paper through the finding of thematic similarities throughout the Tanakh with the passages under analysis; (3) Derash, the homiletic interpretation of the passage; and (4) Sod, represented by the interpretations done through Jewish mystical commentaries. In the present article, Jewish mysticism is kept to a minimum, and, when included, it’s done from a rationalistic standpoint. While this article draws from a range of rabbinic voices, it seeks to uncover a shared theological insight: that divine companionship is not severed by transgression, but mobilized through it toward teshuvah and covenantal restoration.
[3] R. Moshe Hayyim Luzzatto (Ramhal), in his work Mesilat Yesharim, and R. Aryeh Kaplan, in his work Inner Space: Introduction to Kabbalah, Meditation and Prophecy (Moznaim Publishing Corporation, 1990), explain that the attribute of divine mercy interacts with, and complements, the attribute of divine justice, balancing each other, in order to allow people who transgress to repent and prevent divine punishment. The reader may benefit by reading Middot: On the Emergence of Kabbalistic Theosophies (Ktav, 2021), by Moshe Idel, which surveys the interaction of divine loving-kindness and divine justice through rabbinic mystical literature.
[4] I translated “be-tokhekhem” as “within you,” based on the rabbinic understanding of the verse in Exodus 25:8, “Make me a sanctuary and I will dwell within them.” Unless the opposite is indicated, all translations of the mikra (Tanakh text) are my own.
[12] Targum Yonatan on Ruth 2:4. Targum states, “Yehei meimera de-Adonai be-sadekhon.” Here, the Aramaic root samekh-ayin-dalet (the root of “besadekhon”) means “to help” or “to assist.”
[13] Keter Shem Tob, Vol. 1, 244-245. R. Shem Tob Gaguine (1884-1953) was a Sephardic rabbi born in Jerusalem under Ottoman rule. He served as the av beit din (the head of the rabbinic court) of Egypt between 1911 and 1919. He eventually occupied several rabbinic positions in the Sephardic community of the United Kingdom. His magnum opus was Keter Shem Tob, an encyclopedic book in which he records, describes, and explains different customs and practices of Sephardic communities in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and India.
[14] This suggests that the concept of divine empowerment for human labor may be shared across cultures in the Middle East. The similarity between the Arabic greeting described by R. Gaguine and the biblical phrase in Ruth 2:4 may reflect common Semitic expressions of divine support in daily life. Determining whether this reflects a shared origin, mutual influence, or parallel development would require further cultural-anthropological study beyond the scope of this article.
[15] Rashi to Judges 6:12, s.v. “Hashem immekha gibor he-hayil.”.
[16] See Ibn Ezra to Isaiah 7:14, s.v. “lakhein”; Metzudat David, ad loc., s.v. “ve-karat.”
[17] R. Ya’akov Abuhatzeira, Teachings of the Abir Yaakov, Vol. 1 (Artscroll, 2021), 504. R. Ya’akov Abuhatzeira (1806–1880), was a leading Moroccan rabbi and kabbalist, author of over a dozen works on Jewish thought and Kabbalah and grandfather of the mystical sephardic sage R. Yisrael Abuhatzeira, better known as Baba Sali. His tomb, in Damanhour, Egypt remains a site of pilgrimage.
[18] Much of the prophetic messages of both Isaiah and Jeremiah revolve around the warning of Israel and Judah about the imminent exile due to the failure of the people to stand on the covenant and keep the mitzvot.
[19] Jonathan Grossman, Creation: The Story of Beginnings (Maggid, 2019), 437.
[20] The reader may benefit by reading Mircea Eliade, The Myth of the Eternal Return: Or, Cosmos and History (Princeton University Press, 1954), 195. Eliade brings the archetype of the “eternal return,” in which, he argues, that time is cyclical and repeats itself. In the case of the present article, the Torah shows the archetype of a person who sins, is displaced, and then receives an opportunity to return (teshuvah) to the place of origin. This motif is repeated throughout the Hebrew Bible, especially in the Prophets. This archetype is found recurrently through rabbinic literature. However, the reader should keep in mind that, while the archetype of the eternal return offers a compelling explanation of the motif being analyzed in the present article, it has been critiqued by contemporary scholars for being overly universalizing or reductive when applied across diverse cultures. In this article, the concept is employed narrowly and heuristically, following its use by R. Prof. Jonathan Grossman as a thematic frame for biblical motifs.
[21] Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Ceremony & Celebration: Introduction to the Holidays (Maggid, 2017), chapter 1.
From a legal standpoint, teshuvah is defined by Maimonides (Hilkhot Teshuvah 2:1) as the process of abandoning the transgression, in which the transgressor firmly resolves not to return to it, regretting the past wrongdoing, and verbally confessing before God. For a more detailed theological and philosophical discussion on the teshuvah process, see Sha’arei Teshuvah by R. Yonah Gerondi.
[22] This connection is powerfully demonstrated in the book of Daniel. Daniel 9:1-3 depicts Daniel reflecting on the prophecies of Jeremiah, in which the prophet stated that the people would be exiled for seventy years (Jeremiah 25:11-12, 29:10). Once Daniel realized that the seventy years were about to be completed, he prayed to have a proper understanding of Jeremiah’s prophecies. After this prayer, the angel Gabriel appeared to Daniel (in Daniel 9:21) and informed him that a period (490 years according to Ibn Ezra) was decreed over Israel. The sages stated that this period started at the moment of the destruction of the First Temple (Seder Olam Rabbah 28). This is a crucial point: while the physical exile lasted seventy years, the prophetic decree for atonement was a much longer, multi-stage process. The angel explicitly states that this period is set to “terminate the transgression, sin, [and] to atone iniquity.” The seventy years of exile correspond to seventy sabbatical years desecrated by the Israelites during the First Temple Era; this is in conversation with Leviticus 26:34, where God warns that the exile will serve to let the land rest to atone for these sabbatical years. Thus, Daniel and Leviticus, through prophetic intertextuality, connect the historical event of the exile to the theological process of atonement.
[24] Ezra Bick, In His Mercy: Understanding the Thirteen Midot (Maggid, 2010), 131.
[25] Kitzur Ba’al Ha-Turim to Leviticus 25:23, s.v. “ki geirim ve-toshavim atem immadi”; c.f. Rashi and Meiri to Psalms 91:1.
[29] For a detailed discussion on the first two appearances of the ineffable name in the first two attributes of mercy, I recommend to the reader the first chapter of In His Mercy: Understanding the Thirteen Midot by R. Ezra Bick.
[30] Megillah 11a.
[31] Sefer Ha-Kuzari, I:103..
[32] At the end of Mesilat Yesharim chapter 4, Ramhal explains how the attribute of divine judgment is balanced through the attribute of divine loving-kindness, and how this principle can be used by the people in order to obtain an awareness of the divine judgment and the severity of transgression (a concept called zehirut, loosely translated as vigilance).
[33] See Chapter 21 of Chaim Kramer, Mashiach: Who? What? Why? How? Where? When? (Breslov Research Institute, 1994), in which Kramer discusses the idea of the exile as a mental state, characterized by falsehood as a style of life in which the mind “journeys” from the truth and, as a consequence, ventures far from God.
[34] Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Ceremony & Celebration: Introduction to the Holidays (Maggid, 2017).
[35] The author thanks R. Yitzchok I.M. Yagod of Beth Avraham in Easton, PA, for his insights and feedback on the early drafts of this article.
Site Operations and Technology by The Berman Consulting Group.