And
I
Pleaded
with
the
Lord
Article
No.
34,
1985
“And
I
pleaded
with
the
Lord.”
RASHI
interpreted
that
in
all
the
places,
Hanun
[gracious]
from
the
root,
Hanan,
the
same
root
as
for
Etchanan
[pleaded]
means
Matnat
Hinam
[free
gift].
Although
the
righteous
can
refer
to
their
good
deeds,
they
are
only
asking
the
Creator
for
a
free
gift.
It
is
written
in
Midrash
Rabbah:
“‘And
I
pleaded
with
the
Lord.’
Out
of
all
of
them,
Moses
prayed
only
with
a
language
of
pleading.
Rabbi
Yohanan
said,
‘You
learn
from
this
that
one
has
nothing
with
one’s
Maker,
for
Moses,
the
greatest
of
the
prophets,
came
only
with
words
of
pleading.’
Rabbi
Levi
said,
‘Why
did
Moses
come
only
with
words
of
pleading?’
The
allegory
says,
‘Take
care
that
the
place
of
your
words
will
not
be
caught.’
How
so?
The
Creator
said
so
to
Moses:
‘I
will
be
gracious
to
whom
I
will
be
gracious.’
He
said
to
him:
‘With
one
who
has
in
My
hand
I
will
be
merciful;
I
work
with
him
with
the
quality
of
mercy.
And
one
who
has
not
in
My
hand
I
will
pardon;
I
work
with
him
with
a
free
gift.’”
We
should
understand
the
above
said:
1)
How
can
it
be
said,
“I
will
be
merciful”
in
relation
to
someone
who
has
in
My
hand?
The
words,
“One
who
has
in
My
hand”
come
from
the
words
of
our
sages,
“Count
for
Me
in
your
hand,”
meaning
that
he
should
be
paid
a
debt.
Thus,
what
does
it
mean
that
the
Creator
said
that
one
to
whom
the
Creator
is
indebted,
the
Creator
tells
him,
“I
will
be
merciful.”
He
should
have
said,
“I
will
pay,”
as
it
is
written,
“Who
has
preceded
Me
and
I
will
pay
him?”
Therefore,
how
can
it
be
said
that
paying
a
debt
has
to
do
with
being
merciful?
2)
We
should
understand
how
it
is
possible
to
have
two
such
conflicting
views,
where
one
view
is
that
he
deserves
a
debt
from
the
Creator,
as
he
says,
“One
who
has
in
My
hand,”
and
the
other
is
that
he
has
nothing
in
his
hand.
In
what
way
are
their
arguments
so
remote
from
one
another?
What
is
the
point
from
which
they
come
to
such
opposite
views?
To
understand
the
above
we
should
discern
two
kinds
in
those
who
engage
in
Torah
and
Mitzvot
[commandments].
Although
there
is
no
difference
between
them
in
the
actions,
meaning
that
in
terms
of
actions
it
cannot
be
recognized,
but
there
is
a
huge
difference
in
the
intention
between
the
two
above
kinds.
The
purpose
that
the
first
kind
wants
to
achieve
through
their
engagement
in
Torah
and
Mitzvot
is
to
receive
reward
for
the
labor,
since
there
is
a
rule
in
our
nature
that
it
is
impossible
to
work
without
reward.
Thus,
what
compels
them
to
keep
Torah
and
Mitzvot
is
the
fear
of
not
getting
the
fulfillment
for
the
deficiencies
that
they
are
feeling.
They
are
deficient
of
this
and
that
and
have
a
strong
desire
and
great
craving
to
satisfy
it.
Therefore,
they
do
everything
they
can
in
order
to
obtain
what
they
want.
For
this
reason,
this
fear
compels
them
to
engage
in
Torah
and
Mitzvot.
This
is
regarded
as
not
observing
the
fear
because
of
the
commandment
of
the
Creator,
but
because
of
self-benefit,
as
presented
in
the
Sulam
[commentary]
(“Introduction
of
The
Book
of
Zohar,”
item
191):
“It
follows
that
his
own
benefit
is
the
root,
and
fear
is
a
branch
derived
of
his
own
benefit.”
It
turns
out
that
this
kind
engages
in
Torah
and
Mitzvot
so
the
creator
will
pay
them.
Thus,
the
Creator
is
indebted
to
them,
since
they
made
great
efforts
in
the
engagement
in
order
to
yield
fruit.
For
this
reason
they
come
to
the
Creator
with
a
demand:
“Pay
us
for
our
labor.”
By
this
we
can
interpret
the
words
of
the
above
homily
[Midrash],
when
Rabbi
Levi
said
that
the
Creator
said,
“With
one
who
has
in
My
hand,”
meaning
who
deserves
to
be
paid
a
debt,
namely
that
from
the
beginning,
his
intention
was
for
the
Creator
to
pay
for
his
labor
in
Torah
and
Mitzvot.
It
turns
out
that
he
comes
with
a
complaint,
as
it
is
said
by
our
sages,
“Count
for
Me
in
your
hand.”
By
this
we
can
explain
the
words
of
the
above
homily.
However,
we
should
still
clarify
why
the
Creator
said
about
this
argument,
“I
will
be
merciful.”
What
mercy
is
there
here
if
he
deserves
to
be
paid
a
debt?
How
can
it
be
said
here,
“I
work
with
him
with
the
quality
of
mercy”?
The
second
kind
is
those
who
have
a
completely
different
intention,
since
they
want
to
serve
the
Creator
in
order
to
bestow
contentment
upon
the
Maker
without
any
reward.
According
to
the
rule
that
man
was
created
with
a
desire
to
receive
for
himself,
how
can
he
work
without
any
reward?
As
I
said
in
the
previous
articles,
there
are
those
who
work
in
order
to
later
receive
a
reward,
and
there
are
those
who
work
because
they
regard
the
work
itself
as
reward
and
payment,
and
they
have
no
greater
reward
than
to
be
allowed
to
work.
This
is
similar
to
serving
an
important
person.
It
stems
from
nature
that
there
is
no
greater
reward
than
to
serve
an
important
person.
This
means
that
he
can
give
everything
he
has
in
order
to
have
the
privilege
of
serving
the
King.
It
follows
that
the
work
itself
is
the
reward,
and
he
expects
no
other
pay.
Rather,
he
expects
to
have
the
privilege
of
always
serving
the
King,
ceaselessly,
and
this
is
his
whole
life,
the
whole
purpose
of
his
life,
and
it
is
imprinted
in
nature.
However,
we
should
understand
why
the
Creator
created
such
a
nature,
where
if
the
lower
one
knows
the
importance
of
the
upper
one
he
wants
to
serve
Him
without
any
reward.
Baal
HaSulam
said
about
this
that
since
the
Creator
created
the
worlds
in
order
to
delight
His
creatures,
He
created
in
the
creatures
desire
and
craving
to
receive
delight
and
pleasure.
Otherwise,
without
a
desire
to
enjoy,
the
creature
cannot
receive
delight
and
pleasure,
since
there
is
no
fulfillment
without
a
lack.
However,
along
with
it
came
the
matter
of
the
bread
of
shame—that
there
is
no
Dvekut
[adhesion]
here
due
to
the
disparity
of
form
that
has
been
born.
For
this
reason,
there
was
the
correction
of
Tzimtzum
[restriction],
meaning
not
to
receive,
unless
it
is
because
he
wants
to
bring
contentment
to
the
Creator.
This
is
why
he
receives
from
Him,
and
otherwise
he
waives
the
pleasure.
However,
this
brings
up
the
question:
If
he
was
born
with
a
will
to
receive
and
this
is
his
nature,
from
where
can
he
receive
a
desire
to
bestow?
This
is
against
nature!
This
is
why
He
has
created
a
second
nature—that
the
smaller
one
annuls
before
the
greater
one
and
derives
delight
and
pleasure
from
serving
the
greater
one.
Then,
when
he
has
a
desire
to
bestow
upon
the
greater
one,
he
thinks,
“What
can
I
give
to
the
Creator
so
the
Creator
will
enjoy?”
since
he
wants
to
impart
Him
with
pleasure
so
He
will
enjoy.
At
that
time
he
sees
that
all
he
can
give
to
the
upper
one,
which
you
could
say
that
the
upper
one
lacks,
is
only
one
thing:
that
the
lower
one
derives
delight
and
pleasure.
This
gives
pleasure
to
the
Creator
because
this
was
the
purpose
of
creation,
which
is
to
do
good
to
His
creations.
It
therefore
follows
that
all
that
man
lacks
in
order
to
have
the
desire
to
bestow
is
the
greatness
of
the
Creator,
for
as
soon
as
he
obtains
the
greatness
of
the
Creator
he
immediately
wants
to
bestow
upon
Him
due
to
the
nature
that
the
lower
one,
who
is
smaller,
is
annulled
before
the
greater
one.
This
is
why
we
were
given
the
matter
of
wailing
over
the
exile
of
the
Shechina
[Divinity].
This
means
that
the
whole
matter
of
spirituality
is
degraded,
which
is
called
“Shechina
in
the
dust,”
when
her
importance
is
as
that
of
dust,
which
is
stepped
on
and
is
meaningless.
This
is
the
meaning
of
what
is
presented,
that
with
each
Mitzva
[commandment]
we
must
intend
to
raise
the
Shechina
from
the
dust.
That
is,
with
every
action
one
should
intend
that
by
this
the
glory
of
the
Shechina
will
grow.
It
is
as
we
say
(In
the
Eighteen
in
the
Supplementary
Prayer
of
Rosh
Hashanah
[beginning
of
the
year]),
“Our
Father,
our
King,
reveal
the
glory
of
Your
kingdom
upon
us,”
namely
that
the
kingdom
of
heaven
will
not
be
to
us
as
dust,
but
rather
glorified.
It
follows
that
what
this
kind
of
people
demands
of
the
Creator
is
that
He
will
reveal
to
them
the
glory
of
His
kingship,
and
have
nothing
with
the
Creator
since
they
do
not
require
any
reward
from
the
Creator.
Rather,
all
they
want
is
to
serve
the
King
and
please
Him.
They
ask
that
the
Creator
will
show
them
the
glory
of
the
kingdom
of
heaven.
Thus,
they
have
nothing
in
the
hands
of
the
Creator
that
they
can
say
that
they
gave
something
to
the
Creator
for
which
they
are
demanding
that
He
will
satisfy
their
need,
since
anything
they
can
do
in
order
to
bestow
is
only
because
the
Creator
has
revealed
to
them
with
some
importance,
when
they
feel
a
little
bit
of
the
sublimity
of
the
Creator.
It
follows
that
those
people
who
have
nothing
of
theirs
in
the
hands
of
the
Creator,
whatever
He
gives
them
is
only
because
“I
will
pardon,”
“I
work
with
him
with
a
free
gift.”
But
those
who
work
in
order
to
receive
reward
say
that
they
have
something
in
the
hands
of
the
Creator.
That
is,
they
give
Him
work
and
ask
of
the
Creator
to
pay
the
reward
for
their
work
in
return.
And
since
the
Creator
does
not
deny
the
reward
of
any
being,
He
pays
them
according
to
their
work.
However,
we
must
understand
the
words,
“I
will
have
mercy,”
“I
work
with
him
with
the
quality
of
mercy
[Rachamim],”
since
the
Creator
is
saying
that
He
feels
mercy
toward
those
who
are
walking
on
this
path.
And
yet,
the
Creator
does
not
deny
the
reward
of
any
being,
therefore
He
pays
them
according
to
their
demand.
By
this
we
will
understand
what
we
asked,
“How
can
there
be
such
a
big
difference
between
the
two
above
views.
The
thing
is
that
from
the
perspective
of
the
Creator,
we
learn
that
the
purpose
of
creation
is
to
do
good
to
His
creations,
but
the
creatures
themselves
turn
it
into
two
discernments,
since
those
who
cannot
understand
the
importance
of
the
greatness
of
the
Creator
have
no
way
to
begin
the
work,
except
in
order
to
receive
reward,
as
our
sages
said,
“One
should
always
engage
in
Torah
and
Mitzvot,
even
if
Lo
Lishma
(Pesachim
50).”
They
feel
that
they
are
giving
something
to
the
Creator.
But
those
who
want
to
work
in
order
to
bestow
see
that
they
cannot
give
anything
to
the
Creator.
This
is
regarded
as
not
having
anything.
It
follows
that
what
they
want
is
for
the
Creator
to
show
them
a
little
of
His
greatness.
They
ask
this
for
the
purpose
of
pardoning,
and
then
the
Creator
tells
them,
“I
will
pardon,”
“I
work
with
him
with
a
free
gift.”