The Secret of the Whisper
ויקרא יעקב אל בניו, ויאמר האספו ואגידה לכם את אשר יקרא אתכם באחרית הימים.[i]
And Yaakov called to his sons, and he said, ‘Gather and I will tell you that which will happen to you in the End of Days.’
Question
“We all know the custom: we recite שמע out loud, but the next line, ‘ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד,’ is whispered. I’ve heard this is related to Yaakov Avinu, but I don’t understand the connection. Why do we say it? And if it’s important enough to say, why do we hide it in a whisper?”
Background
The Gemara[ii], in discussing the reason why we recite the statement[1] of ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד during the recital of שמע states that this follows the teachings of Reish Lakish, who taught:
בקש יעקב לגלות לבניו קץ הימין, ונסתלקה ממנו שכינה – Yaakov wanted to reveal to his sons the [timing of] קץ הימין – the End of Days, and the Divine Presence left him.
אמר, שמא חס ושלום יש במיטתי פסול, כאברהם שיצא ממנו ישמעאל, ואבי יצחק שיצא ממנו עשו – He said, ‘Perhaps, Heaven forbid, there is an unfit descendant [in my bed] – like Avraham from whom Yishmael came, and my father Yitzĉok from whom Esav came.’
אמרו לו בניו: שמע ישראל ה’ אלקינו ה’ אחד. אמרו: כשם שאין בלבך אלא אחד, כך אין בלבנו אלא אחד – His children responded, [with the verse[iii]] ‘שמע ישראל ה’ אלקינו ה’ אחד – Just as there is only one [G-d] in your heart, so too in our heart there is only one [G-d].’
באותה שעה פתח יעקב אבינו ואמר: ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד – At that time, our father Yaakov opened with and said, ‘ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד’.
The Gemara continues to explain how this teaching shaped the Nusaĉ of Davening:
אמרי רבנן: היכי נעביד? נאמרוהו, לא אמרו משה רבינו. לא נאמרוהו, אמרו יעקב. התקינו שיהו אומרים אותו בחשאי – Our Rabbis said, ‘what should we do: to say this, Moshe Rabeinu didn’t say it. Not to say this, Yaakov did say it. So, they enacted that it should be recited quietly.’
To explain this further, Rabbi Yitzĉok in the name of the school of Rabbi Ami offered a parable:
משל לבת מלך שהריחה ציקי קדירה. אם תאמר, יש לה גנאי. אם לא תאמר, יש לה צער. התחילו עבדיה להביא לה בחשאי – A parable for this is a princess who smelled [and desired] the burnt spicy residue on the sides of the pot. If she states [her desire for the spices] out loud, that would be embarrassing. If she doesn’t state [her desire for the spices] then she will suffer. So, her servants began to unobtrusively bring her [the burnt spices].
Rabbi Avahu clarified the practical application of the Halaĉa:
אמר רבי אבהו: התקינו שיהו אומרים אותו בקול רם, מפני תרעומת המינין. ובנהרדעא, דליכא מינן, עד השתא אמרי לה בחשאי – Rabbi Avahu said, ‘it was enacted that this should be said in a loud voice, due to the heretics’ propaganda. (Rashi: so that they [the heretics] will not be able to say that improper things are being recited quietly.) And in Naharda’a, where there are no heretics, until now we still say it quietly.’
QUESTIONS
DISCREPANCY IN TERMINOLOGY
The term used in the Torah, אחרית הימים, is not the same term discussed in the Gemara, namely קץ הימין.
In fact, קץ הימין appears only once throughout Tanaĉ, in the final words of the book of Daniel[iv] ואתה לך לקץ, ותנוח ותעמד לגרלך לקץ הימין – and you, go to [your] end, and rest, and rise to your lot at the קץ הימין, while the term אחרית הימים appears many times in Tanaĉ[v], including earlier in Daniel. And yet, Reish Lakish uses the term קץ הימין.
One might think that קץ הימין is interchangeable with אחרית הימים, where קץ and אחרית are synonymous – both meaning at the end of. And the word הימים, was shifted by the Aramaic influence to become הימין, as we often find that Aramaic simply changes a few letters or syllables from the Hebrew rather than using an entirely new word.[2]
However, Rashi in his commentary on the Gemara notes a different meaning to קץ הימין; ‘that he [G-d] will return his right hand, which was pulled back[3] due to the enemy’. This implies the meaning of קץ הימין is the end of the [withdrawal of the] right hand.
- Is there a difference between אחרית הימים and קץ הימין, and if so, why does Reish Lakish not use the term in the verse instead of incorporating the term used by Daniel.
THE DEPARTURE OF THE DIVINE PRESENCE
Why did the divine presence depart when Yaakov wanted to reveal information. There’s no indication that this information was a sudden revelation to Yaakov; the implication is that Yaakov already possessed this knowledge, and for whatever reason, decided to impart the knowledge to his sons at that moment.
Which means, that G-d was willing to share this information with Yaakov[4], but not with Yaakov’s sons. Furthermore, this means that while Yaakov felt the information would be beneficial for his sons, G-d determined he did not want to be a part of the transmission of this information. G-d did not cause Yaakov to forget the information and continued to allow Yaakov to relay the information should he have chosen to do so. G-d just didn’t want to be a part of that revelation to Yaakov’s sons.
- What is the purpose[5] of revealing information about the אחרית הימים to Yaakov, especially if G-d didn’t want to be a party to the transmittal of that information to his sons.
THE TIMING
If, as we have said, Yaakov had previously received this information, and, as indicated in our verse, Yaakov determined that he wanted to transmit that information to his sons presumably because it would be beneficial for them, then why did Yaakov wait until his pending passing before calling his sons together to reveal this.
- Why then did Yaakov wait until now in order to determine to reveal the information.
THE DISCONNECT IN THE DIALOGUE
The flow of the conversation between Yaakov and his sons is puzzling. Initially, Yaakov suspected that there was a defect in his children. They responded with the שמע, declaring their belief in the unity of G-d. While this proves that they were not idolators, how would this address the specific issue of the divine presence leaving Yaakov for wanting to transmit information about the אחרית הימים to his children.
Also, Yaakov’s response of ברוך שם upon hearing this seems like a generic praise of G-d. How does his response address his concern.
Furthermore, his response of ברוך שם does not align with a previous teaching by Rashi and our sages. When Yaakov is finally reunited with Yosef, the verse[vi] notes ויבך על צואריו עוד – and he [Yosef] cried for a long time on his [Yaakov’s] neck. Rashi comments there that Yaakov is not mentioned as crying because he was reciting the שמע. Which implies that Yaakov’s typical response is the שמע itself. And instead of repeating the declaration of his son’s he introduces a new phrase.
- What is the connection between the verse of שמע, which the sons recited, to the indicate that they were worthy of receiving the information about the אחרית הימים.
- How does Yaakov’s response relate to the situation at hand.
THE PHRASING IN THE GEMARA
Reish Lakish uses a strange phrase when he states באותה שעה פתח יעקב אבינו ואמר – at that time, our father Yaakov opened up, and said…
Generally, the term פתח ואמר – he opened up [a new topic] and said, is used when introducing a completely new topic. The narrator, to ensure that the reader understands that this is a new conversation, adds the word פתח to indicate that this is a new topic.
Spiritually, when this term is used in the Zohar, it is meant to indicate a new light from G-d is being introduced to the world with this new concept under discussion, where the word פתח – open is meant literally – the opening up of a new pipeline from G-d.
Here, though, Yaakov is seemingly responding to his sons’ statement. Why would Reish Lakish use the word פתח. Especially when he also notes that this was ‘באותה שעה – at that time’. What is Reish Lakish stating by using that unusual turn of phrase.
- Why does Reish Lakish use a strange phrase in prefacing Yaakov’s response.
PREFACE / FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES
Based on the teaching of the prophetess Ĉana, in the verse[vii] כי א-ל דעות ה’, we are taught that there are actually two (2) perspectives with which G-d is to be approached:
- The perspective of G-d is that this world is a non-existence. The only true existence is G-d, and nothing else exists.
In Ĉassidus this is paraphrased as דעת עליון – Upper knowledge, where the world is “nothing” and is created from the ultimate “something” – למעלה יש ולמטה אין – above is something and below is nothing. This perspective is that which is referenced in שמע, which states that ה’ אחד – G-d is One. This is not just a statement of monotheism, it is a description of reality: there is nothing else besides G-d and his unity.
- The perspective from this world: that this world is a tangible created existence. And while the creator speaks, this world continues to exist.
In Ĉassidus this is paraphrased as דעת תחתון – Lower knowledge. Meaning, from our bottom-up perspective, the world is a “something” and is created from “nothing” [commonly stated as ex nihilo] or in Ĉassidic phrasing – למטה יש ולמעלה אין – below is something and above is nothing [that we can understand].
This perspective is referenced in the statement of ברוך שם which blesses [draws down] G-d’s sovereignty within a world acknowledging that there is a world in which there are subjects and a kingdom for G-d to rule over.
It is crucial to note that in Ĉana’s prophecy, these dual perspectives are both described as דעות ה’ – the perspectives of G-d. They are dually perceptible to G-d, and neither is a more accurate perspective since they both derive from G-d’s ultimate and infinite power.
Most regular Jews spend their lives serving G-d only through the second perspective of דעת תחתון. They are incapable of truly perceiving the world and themselves as “nothing”, and they must endeavor to discover G-d’s presence. Existence is felt strongly, and the mission is to take this created “something” and dedicate it to the service of G-d.
However, צדיקים like our forefather Yaakov have a completely different baseline. For them, the truth of G-d’s unity is the obvious reality, and it is the world that needs to be constantly verified.
This would explain why the brothers’ chose the statement of שמע to respond to Yaakov’s concern about their belief in G-d’s unity. They were reassuring him that while they themselves were not on the level of Yaakov – and in fact, no Jew, not even Moshe, is on that level, as we know[viii] אין קורין לאבות אלא שלשה – only these three (3) [Avrohom, Yitzĉok and Yaakov] are called Forefathers – nevertheless, they and all Jews since, accept upon themselves this statement as G-d’s unity as the ultimate truth. G-d is One. Regardless of whether they, or we, are capable of perceiving that perspective.
ANSWER
YAAKOV’S INTENT
Yaakov gathered his sons together to give them blessings, instructions and encouragement before his passing. And it was only at that point that Yaakov wanted to share the information about אחרית הימים.
To understand Yaakov’s intent, we must appreciate his spiritual standing. Yaakov was a מרכבה – chariot, for the divine presence in this world. A chariot has no will of its own; it moves only where the driver guides it. As it says in the verses[ix] describing G-d’s chariot אל אשר יהיה שמה הרוח ללכת ילכו לא יסבו בלכתן – where the divine will [desires] to go, that is where they go. They do not turn aside while going.
Yaakov had no independent interests. He “did not turn aside [even] while going”. For him knowledge of the divine plan equaled the ability to implement it and the action taken to do so. So long as G-d revealed the divine plan to Yaakov, Yaakov would go ahead and act his part in it, without any reservations or even any sense of self.
This stands in contrast to Moshe Rabeinu. When Moshe later[x] witnessed the suffering of his people, he cried out to G-d,למה הרעתה לעם הזה למה זה שלחתני … והצל לא הצלת את עמך – why are you causing evil to this people, why are you sending me… you haven’t saved your people.
G-d’s response to Moshe illustrated this difference in service between Moshe and the forefathers. As it says in the verse וארא אל אברהם אל יצחק ואל יעקב בא-ל שד-י, ושמי ה’ לא נודעתי להם – and I revealed myself to Avrohom, to Yitzĉok and to Yaakov with [the name] א-ל שד-י, but my name ה’ I did not make known to them. Even though he had only revealed himself with a lesser revelation to our forefathers, that of א-ל שד-י, they never questioned his ways. Whereas with Moshe, who [perhaps because he] perceived G-d at a much more intimate level, demanded to know “Why?!”.
Yet, it is precisely because our forefathers were Chariots to the divine will that regardless of what level of G-d’s presence was revealed to them, that is what they implemented.
Yaakov, whose service to G-d was at the level of דעת עליון, the complete negation of anything other than G-d, wanted to impart to his sons the same sense of mission that he had experienced throughout his life; being completely devoted and subservient to G-d to the point where nothing else existed. In other words, he wanted to reveal the perspective of the אחרית הימים, a state of being where daytime ends because there is no darkness[6], when the world will be filled with G-d’s presence[xi] כמים לים מכסים – as the water covers the sea.
G-D’S INTENT
However, when Yaakov sought to do so, the divine presence left him. This perspective of דעת עליון is not aligned with the service of Yaakov’s sons, the Jewish people, throughout the ages that followed, especially not during the times of exile, which the children of Yaakov had begun to experience then.
Instead, their service was meant to be aligned with the perspective of דעת תחתון – accepting the world as a created thing, and seeking, from within the parameters of the world to change it by incorporating the knowledge of the existence of דעת עליון and that even דעת תחתון is a perspective of G-d’s.
In other words, their (our) service was meant to be primarily in the field of ברוך שם, a type of service that had not been known of before then. Before that point, the primary service to G-d was performed by the Chariot of G-d, our forefathers (and foremothers). But now, with the passing of Yaakov, a new era of service to G-d had begun, the era of the Jewish nation working throughout the obfuscation of exile.
This is what Reish Lakish teaches us when he uses the phrase באותו שעה פתח. He is explaining that Yaakov wasn’t just responding conversationally to his sons. “At that time” he “opened up” a new pathway in service to G-d. Yaakov inaugurated the era of ברוך שם.[7]
קץ הימין vs. אחרית הימים
This shift in mission explains why initially, as used in the verse, Yaakov wanted to tell them about אחרית הימים, but the Gemara (as does Rashi) changes that term to קץ הימין.
The term אחרית הימים means ending the days. A phrase that can reference the conclusion of time itself. A state off being that can only be experienced by G-d himself about whom we say אחרית וראשית שלו – the ending and the beginning are his. After time ends, the only thing existing will be what was always the only thing existing – G-d himself – which could be the ultimate expression of דעת עליון.
קץ הימין, however, is the term used at the end of Daniel. As noted earlier, Rashi explains that this describes the end of the time period in which G-d withdrew his right hand for the sake of the enemy.[8] The word קץ though is a word that adds the connotation of a goal.[9] Therefore, קץ הימין is literally the goal of the right hand.
In order to allow the enemy of the Jewish people, and by extension the enemy of G-d himself, the ability to conduct their evil actions throughout all of history, G-d withdraws his ‘right hand’ the hand of[xii] ימינך ה’ תרעץ אויב – your right hand, G-d, shatters the enemy. It is this withdrawal that allows freedom of choice.
It is the mission of the Jewish people throughout these past ages to work by means of their service in making ברוך שם the slogan of the world, the perspective of דעת תחתון, towards this era, when G-d will make his presence known and automatically all evil will be[xiii] בלע המות לנצח – death will be swallowed forever.[10]
AND THEREFORE…
While this answers our questions regarding the verse, and Yaakov’s interaction with his sons, we are still left with an unresolved dichotomy which the Gemara wrestles with.
From the perspective of the Torah[11] – as represented by Moshe the giver of the Torah to whom the name of הויה was revealed – we seek to perceive the world and serve G-d from the perspective of דעת עליון, G-d’s absolute unity. The concept of serving G-d with ברוך שם, the acknowledgement that there is a kingdom for G-d to rule, is incompatible. It implies that there is some kind of separation between G-d and the world that simply does not exist. ‘How then can we recite this’.
On the other hand, Yaakov, as the מרכבה of G-d, and the father of our Jewish soul, is the one who introduced this concept of service from the perspective of דעת תחתון. ‘How then can we not recite this’.
Therefore, the sages enacted that we should recite this quietly. Speaking something quietly is a form of suppression of what would be otherwise natural. This is an echo of the service of ברוך שם itself, the suppression of the world’s feeling of selfness to the will of its creator.
To explain this in a way that can be understood, the Gemara offers the parable of the princess who wants something embarrassing. We would like to serve G-d as Moshe did. We would like a relationship with G-d that is face-to-face without the distractions of the physical world. We’ll even take a lower form of prophecy and be ecstatic at having had the opportunity to have prophecy rest on the Jewish people again. Asking for the spicy scraps stuck to the side of the pot, (which can be likened to finding G-d’s presence in the grit and scraps of the mundane world) is embarrassing and seemingly a lower form of service. So, we whisper it.
And while this desire to know G-d like Moshe is laudable, it is not reflective of G-d’s will. When Yaakov wanted to share the perspective of דעת עליון, the divine presence departed. It is specifically our service through דעת תחתון that creates the kind of world that is a דירה בתחתונים – a dwelling place for G-d in the lowest levels. G-d wants a connection with down-to-earth people, who, while remaining “regular” Jews still manage to invert the world.
THE HERETICAL EXCEPTION
The exception to this is the presence of heretics. People who claim that the physical world is devoid of G-dliness, and that it is impossible to find G-d in the mundane. It is only in their presence, in the presence of Jews who have taken this down-to-earthiness too far, that we recite ברוך שם out loud. To declare to them that their heresy is counter to G-d’s will.
Ultimately, as the Alter Rebbe says, a Jew does not desire and cannot, separate himself from G-d. To bring even heretics back, all that they need to understand is that their service as regular Jews is on par with the service performed by Tzaddikim who appreciate דעת עליון. That ברוך שם is recited just as loud as שמע.
THE RIVER OF KNOWLEDGE
And the Gemara concludes with a fascinating historical note: that in so-called נהרדעא there are no heretics.
The name of the city, נהרדעא, is actually an Aramaic conversion of a Hebrew portmanteau of נהר דעה – the river of knowledge The river of the knowledge of G-d which flows to all and all draw from to quench their thirst.
One might think that the more Torah studied, the more one immerses into this River of Knowledge, the closer one gets to the abstract דעת עליון and the further one drifts from דעת תחתון. One might assume that in נהר דעה they would do away with ברוך שם altogether.
The Gemara counters this and concludes ‘there are no heretics in נהרדעא.’ The study of Torah does not separate a Jew from the world, or cause heretics to attempt to separate from Judaism. It empowers us to refine the world by connecting it to G-d’s presence, in a visible way; not only are heretics unable to deny G-d’s presence, but that there are no heretics at all.
Currently though we are still in the process of this whispered form of service. We are working towards קץ הימין and every day, every time we recite ברוך שם, that goal becomes more and more of a reality. But still we whisper.
Until the time when, like we do on Yom Kippur, we will recite ברוך שם out loud. Not because there are heretics, but because, with the open revelation of G-d’s presence and the return of G-d’s right hand, it will be revealed that in fact there are no left hands. Both hands are in fact the ‘right hand’, as the verse[xiv] notes ימינך ה’ נאדרי בכח ימינך ה’ תרעץ אויב.
- The service of שמע – דעת עליון, is equal to that of ברוך שם – דעת תחתון, because כי א-ל דעות ה’.
As the verse continues (ולא) ולו נתכנו עללות – and before him [G-d] all human deeds are [a]counted.
[1] Perhaps the verse in Tehillim 72:19 וברוך שם בכודו לעולם וימלא כבודו את כל הארץ אמן ואמן paraphrases this concept.
[2] For example, in Hebrew, the word מטר is changed in Aramaic to מטרא.
[3] Paraphrasing the verse in Megilla Ayĉa [2:3] גדע בחרי אף כל קרן ישראל השיב אחור ימינו מפני אויב.
[4] We can assume that the knowledge itself is not bad for a person of Yaakov’s caliber, since, instead of removing the divine presence from him, G-d could just as easily have caused Yaakov to forget. Instead, Yaakov was left with the information, but chose not to share it, because the divine presence did not want to rest on him while he would do so.
[5] There are some commentaries who want to say the information he wanted to reveal was the timing of the redemption, and the purpose in doing so would be to make the exile easier. For the purposes of this essay, we can ignore such ideas for several reasons.
We, in hindsight, now know what Yaakov knew then – that it would 3,548 years until the redemption. How would that knowledge make it easier. That knowledge does not make it easier to bear the exile even now, and certainly not then.
But most importantly, when G-d told Moshe that his name was אהי-ה אשר אהי-ה, Moshe countered that G-d should not tell them about the future exiles, and G-d agreed. Which implies that G-d wanted to tell the Jewish people about the future exiles – why then would the divine presence leave when Yaakov wants to talk about this with his sons.
[6] יום – day is divided into two time periods: there is daytime and nighttime. It is the nighttime that defines when the daytime is. In other words, when it gets dark (nighttime), that is when we know the daytime ends. As it says, ויהי ערב ויהי בקר etc. A euphemistic translation of אחרית הימים can mean therefore, the end of day(times). Which would occur when there is no nighttime to define the end of daytime.
[7] It should be noted that for Moshe, to whom the name הויה was revealed, this service was not applicable. While he wasn’t capable of being a מרכבה to G-d’s will like our forefathers, he still achieved the perspective of דעת עליון.
This ability to retain his own identity while being also perceiving and understanding דעת עליון is unique to Moshe. No other prophet was capable of maintaining complete control of himself and his body while G-d was talking to them.
[8] Midrash Rabba explains the verse השיב אחור ימינו מפני אויב graphically; referring to the idea of G-d putting his ‘hands behind his back’, as if he was shackled like a prisoner, in order to join the Jewish people in their suffering in exile.
[9] For example, in the Maĉzor we use the phrase קץ מחילה וסליחה.
[10] And the verse of קץ הימין is the source for Rav Ashi proof [Gem. Sanhedrin 92a] of the pending resurrection of those who have ‘gone to rest and will rise to [receive] their portion at the End of the withholding of the Right Hand.’
[11] and this is in fact the first positive Mitzva.
[i] Beraishis 49:1
[ii] Gem. Pesaĉim 56a
[iii] Devarim 6:4
[iv] Daniel 12:13
[v] Beraishis 49:1, Bamidbar 24:14, Devarim 4:30, 31:29, Yeshayah 2:2, Yirmiyahu 23:20, 30:24, 48:47, 49:39, Yeĉezkel 38:16, Hoshaya 3:5, Miĉa 4:1, Daniel 10:14
[vi] Beraishis 46:29
[vii] Shmuel I 2:3
[viii] Tractate Semaĉos 1:13
[ix] Yeĉezkel 1:12. See further descriptions there.
[x] Shemos 5:22-23 … 6:1-3. See Rashi on Shemos 6:9
[xi] Yeshaya 11:9
[xii] Shemos 15:6
[xiii] Yeshaya 25:8
[xiv] Shemos 15:6