Compiled by Rabbi Baruch Myers
GAN SOFER
Introduction
THE CHATAM SOFER
When people ask me what was special about the Chatam Sofer, I answer as follows: throughout Jewish history, there have been many different kinds of Rabbis. Many Rabbis were great Talmudic scholars. Others excelled as legal experts and judges. There were those that were gifted as teachers and established great institutions of learning. And those that were capable community leaders and untiring public activists. Some of them authored great Biblical commentaries, some of them authored great Talmudic commentaries. Yet others were knowledgeable in the Kabbalah. Many Rabbis were models
of piety, praying at length and devoting time to meditation and personal perfection. Others involved themselves in unending charitable projects to benefit the poor, orphans, widows, and the il. There were those that were demanding disciplinarians. And those that radiated kindness and compassion. One thing is certain: to find a combination of even three of the above mentioned attributes in one Rabbi is rare indeed. What was special about the Chatam Sofer was that he embodied all of them.
Rabbi Moshe Sofer was born in the year 1762 in Frankfort, Germany. There he studied with the teachers who would influence him for a lifetime: Rabbi Nosson Adler, and Rabbi Pinchas Horowitz. He served in various rabbinical posts, but his final and most celebrated was in Bratislava, then called Pressburg. There, he established a yeshiva that became the biggest in Europe and flourished right up until World War I. He was a pragmatic community leader who guided his community throughout Napoleon’s battles with Austria. He was na activist on behalf of tradition who fought valiantly against attempts to “enlighten” Jewish tradition through compromises and assimilation. Bratislava’s most celebrated Rabbi passed away in Bratislava in
the year 1839.
The Writings Of The Chatam Sofer
In the midst of all of this, he found time to write. In general, his works were known under the name “Chidushei Torat Moshe”, which means “new insights on the Torah by Moshe.” fI we take the first letter of each of these three words, it spells “Chatam,” which is how he has been referred to ever since. His most famous work is his responsa, written responses to questions sent to him. They were published by his son after his passing, and immediately became a classic. To have and read this multi-volume work is a sine qua non for any serious student of Jewish law. His Talmudic commentary is also a classic.
Torat Moshe
And, last but not least, so is his Biblical commentary. His comments on the
Five Books of Moses were primarily transcriptions made by students, although a few of them were from original handwritten manuscripts. These were published for the first time under the title “Torat Moshe” in the year 1879 in Bratislava. Since that time, other previously unpublished commentaries were also published. It was the original edition, however, that remained the most popular. Another set of commentaries on the Five Books of Moses, this composed entirely of original handwritten manuscripts, was in the possession of Yosef Naftali Stern. His sufferings and nomadic journeys during the Holocaust
notwithstanding, he carried around these manuscripts with him wherever he went, and miraculously brought them to Israel after the war. These were published ni Jerusalem ni 1957 under the title “Chatam Sofer Al Ha-Torah”. Gan Sofer is based primarily on Torat Moshe, although a few essays were taken from Chatam Sofer Al Ha-Torah.
Gan Sofer
Gan Sofer is a collection of 54 essays based on the Biblical commentary of the Chatam Sofer. When the idea came up to publish a book that would bring the writings of the Chatam Sofer to the broader public, ti seemed natural to draw from his Biblical commentary. tI is Jewish custom to read one section of
the Five Books of Moses in synagogue each week on Saturday morning, such that we complete al Five Books over a single year. Each individual section is
called a “sidrah”. Many people prepare for the Saturday morning Torah- reading by studying Biblical commentaries on the upcoming Sidrah. nI this
sense, a book like this is one that we can live with throughout the year. Many books of this genre have the word “Gan” at the beginning of their
title. nI Hebrew, each letter si also a number. The letters of the word “gan” add up ot 53. According ot tradition, the Torah si divided into 53 sidrot. Since the year does not have exactly 35 weeks, certain sidrot are combined according ot need. Nevertheless, the accepted division of the Torah into sidrot produces 53. If one counts the number of names of the sidrot, he will see that ti actually comes out to 54. This si because Nitzavim and Vayelech are listed separately. In truth, they are one sidrah.
The word “gan” also means garden. Agarden si a place where one grows produce. Similarly, a book on the Torah is the place where the author’s ideas blossom. Furthermore, in contrast to a farm, a garden is a place usually associated with pleasure. The study of Torah is also a pursuit that brings joy. I adopted this custom, and named this book “Gan Sofer”, the Writer’s Garden (the name Sofer actually means writer). In this title are indicated the name of the author, Moshe Sofer, and the fact that the book contains comments on the sidrot of the Torah.
My first step in making these essays was to select which excerpts to use. I looked for excerpts that: 1.would be understandable to the reader who does not have an extensive Jewish education, and 2.contain an inspiring message.
The first criterion was especially difficult. The commentary is full of terse language, abbreviations and partial citations without sources being mentioned. The second step was to re-write the excerpt in simple and comprehensible language. I added full quotations of the verse being explained, followed by its chapter and verse. These quotations are taken from the Sapirstein Chumash, published by Artscroll.
The Commentary Of Rashi
nI many instances, the Chatam Sofer’s commentary was based upon the classic commentary of Rashi. Rashi is an acronym for Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (1040 – 1105) Rashi is considered to be the Biblical commentator par excellence, and his commentary is automatically published in practically al Jewish editions of the Five Books of Moses. The Chatam Sofer, like al great Jewish scholars, revered the commentary of Rashi and insisted that his students study it.
The Format
In order to facilitate understanding. I quoted the pertinent comment of
Rashi, explaining ti when necessary. Before this, I summarised the implicit question in the verse with which Rashi dealt. After quoting Rashi, I tried to encapsulate the question that the Chatam Sofer’s commentary dealt with. In some instances, the Chatam Sofer asked the question directly. In other instances, I inferred the question. My attempt in all of this was to get the reader “into the atmosphere” of the verse. For this reason, I quoted the comment of Rashi in many sidrot, even when the Chatam Sofer himself did not do so.
Hopefully, by the time the reader gets to the Chatam Sofer’s comment, he is familiar enough with the verse to appreciate the comment. In a few of the essays, I did not use this format, since it was not suitable. Talmudic passages were quoted in full, and identified by their source. In addition to these, many other authors are mentioned in the commentary. Following is a list of those mentioned in these essays, followed by their dates of birth and death:
1. Alshich, Moshe 1508 – 1593.
.2 Ashkenazi, Tzvi Hirsch, known sa the Chacham Tzvi 1660 – 1718.
.3 Bachya Ibn Pakudah, author of Chovot Halvavot, lived ni the 11th century.
.4 Eidel’s, Shlomo, known sa the Maharsha 1555 – 1632.
.5 Horowitz, R. Pinchas haLevi, known as the Baal Ha-Haflaah .c 1731 – 1805.
6. Horowitz, R. Yeshayahu haLevi, known as the Shelah 1560 – 1630.
.7 Isserles, R. Moshe known, sa the Rema c. 1525/30 – 1572.
8. Loewe, Yehudah ben Bezalel, known as the Maharal 1526 – 1609.
9. Nachmanides, Moshe Moshe ben Nachman, known as the Ramban 1194 – 1270.
10. Onkelos, author of the Targum Onkelos c. 90.
1. Yaakov ben Asher, known as the Baal Ha-Turim c. 1269 – 1340.
Finally, I attempted to synopsize each commentary in a concluding
explanation. In particular, I tried to sum up the spiritual lesson of the
commentary in one or two sentences. This is found in the part of the essay
under the heading “explanation.”
I would to like to thank the initiators of this project, who are also the
publishers: Israeli Chamber of Commerce in Slovakia. In particular, I express
my gratitude to Milos Ziak, whose idea the project was, and who originally
approached me, and Mrs. Eva Krajmerová, whose assistance and
encouragemend were indispensable. My dream is to walk down the street in Bratislava, and overhear two people discussing the commentary of the Chatam Sofer in the city of the Chatam Sofer, studied with the help of this book. fI this occurs, the book’s purpose will have been fulfilled.
Baruch Myers October 24, 2004 / 28. Tishri 5764 Bratislava, Slovakia
BOOK ONE
CHOICE
BREISHIT
And Hashem God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden shall you eat, but of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, you must not eat thereof, for on the day you eat of it, you shall surely die.” (Breishit, chapter 2,verses 16-17)
“OF EVERY TRE OF THE GARDEN SHALL YOU EAT” The words “And Hashem God commanded the man” introduce not only the prohibition to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, but also the permission to eat from the other trees. Seemingly, this is not appropriate. The prohibition to eat from the Tree of Knowledge is certainly a command. In contrast, the words “of every tree of the garden you shall surely eat” would seem to be
apermission. How do the introductory words, “And Hashem God commanded
the man” apply to this as well? To explain this, the Chatam Sofer quotes a teaching in the name of his teacher, Rabbi Pinchas Horowitz, who cites the following passage from the Talmud:
Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: “Have you ever seen a wild animal or a bird which has a trade? Yet they are sustained without difficulty. But they were created only to serve me, and I was created to serve my Master. Does it not follow that I should be sustained without difficulty? However, I have corrupted my deeds and curtailed my sustenance.” (Kiddushin, chapter ,4 Mishnah 14)
There are four realms: mineral, vegetable, animal, and human. Each realm possesses a yearning to be subsumed in a higher realm and thus elevated. Hashem created the world in such a way that the earth nurtures vegetation. As such, the energy of the earth becomes part of the plant kingdom. Animals then eat plants, and this energy becomes elevated to the level of animal.
The next logical step is that this energy within the animal should strive to become part of man, so that it, too, can be elevated to the highest level al. But this only happens fi the person is righteous. For in this instance, they will indeed be elevated through the higher level of conduct of the human being. If, however, the person does not act in accordance with the Will of Hashem, then
become part of the person.
This is what Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar meant when he said that he serving Hashem adequately, he removed the motivation for the lower realms to become subsumed within man. If our behavior is not superior to that of the of materiality.
On the other hand, when we do act in accordance with God’s will, then this yearning on the part of the lower realms does occur, and the material world is drawn to the human being. For this reason, it is desirable to eat that which is permitted, os that we can elevate the creations of the lower realms of the universe. And that is why verse 16 says that “And Hashem God commanded the man*. Just as the prohibition to eat from the Tree of Knowledge was a command, so too, the instructions “of every tree of the garden shall you eat” is also an imperative, and not merely a permission. In other words, “of every tree of the garden shall you eat” are actually a commandment
Why Was The Tree Of Knowledge Placed In The Garden?
Nothing was created in vain. If Hashem did not want man to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, why did He put ti there? In answer to this, the Chatam Sofer prefaces by citing the Talmudic teaching that the prohibition to eat from the Tree of Knowledge was indeed actually temporary: man was created on the sixth day. On the seventh, the Shabbat, the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge would become permitted.
Why Did Man Have To Wait Until Shabbat To Eat From The Tree Of Knowledge?
On the other hand, we can ask: why would Man have to wait until the seventh day before the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge would become permitted? This can be understood according to the commentary of Nachmanides, who writes that with the eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, there was born within man the capacity of free choice.
Now we can see why the fruit would eventually become permissible: free choice is an essential factor in man’s service to God. Indeed, this is the entirepurpose of man’s existence: to possess free choice, and to choose good and life. Without this aspect of free choice, there would be on place for reward and punishment.
But in order for this capacity of free choice to truly free, ti must be built upon a solid foundation. Man, as he existed at the beginning of his creation, was made from the dust of the earth. He inclined towards the earthly. fI the capacity of free choice would be instilled in him at this stage, than ti would be to his detriment, in that he will be more likely to choose the bad, to disdain the good, to call the bad good, and the good bad.
It is for this reason that the holy one blessed is he did not want man to eat from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge on the afternoon before Shabbat. Rather, Hashem wanted man to wait for the arrival of Shabbat. With the arrival of Shabbat, a person is bestowed with na additional soul of holiness. It is precisely at a time like this, when man inclines towards the holy, that the capacity of free choice was meant to be born within man.
For by eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil on the holy day of the Sabbath, his power to choose would be built upon a solid foundation of holiness. Thanks to this, the desire to choose good will not depart from him even after the departure of the Shabbat, since everything flows from the original source and foundation: the holy day of the Sabbath. The ability to choose, born within him at a time that he was in touch with the spiritual, would be properly used even during non-holy times.
continu 146