Musar על מכות 19:24

2) זרוז מצוה a display of eagerness to perform the commandment. That this is a higher level of performance is based on the verse אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם, "that man should do them and live (come to life) thereby," (Lev. 18,5). It means that performance should be joyful in order that a person may qualify for this level. One way of proving this is to perform the part of the מצוה one is capable of fulfilling even if one is fully aware that one will never be able to perform the מצוה in its entirety. An example of such זרוז was Moses establishing three cities of refuge on the East Bank of the Jordan, though these would not become operative until they would be matched by three more such cities on the West Bank. Moses could have left even the first three such cities to be set aside by his successor since he was aware that he would not be alive when they would begin to fulfil their designated purpose. Compare the Torah on this in Numbers 35,14-15, and Deut. 4,41.

In this portion the Torah discusses matters that help perfect one's body. The body viewed as the sheath of the soul, has also been created in the image of G–d (Genesis 1,27). This is why if someone kills another creature created in G–d's image he himself will be killed as an appropriate act of retribution. By his deed he has separated a soul from its body, (sheath), hence his own soul will be separated from its sheath. The act of murder is viewed as if the murderer had also severed the life of the soul in the Celestial Regions from its "body" in those regions. Although such separation would have occurred sooner or later anyways [by the natural death of the victim. Ed.], the murderer is punished for having brought this about prematurely. Hence his own soul will not find its resting place until the murder has been avenged. This principle explains the strange story related in Kings I chapter 21 of the judicial murder of Navot through Jezebel and king Achav. We are told in Kings I 22,21, that the "spirit" of the slain Navot volunteered to seduce king Achav into sinning by listening to his false prophets and that the Heavenly Tribunal concurred in this act of deviousness by the "spirit" of Navot. As a result, Achav was killed in a battle with Aram which served the ostensibly patriotic purpose of recapturing the city of Yavesh Gilead (which the Aramites had wrested from the Jewish state some considerable period earlier). Clearly, the soul, i.e. רוח, of Navot had not been able to come to rest due to the premature death of its body, and this may be why the רוח was permitted to act in its own personal interest. Avenging the murdered person is the only means to restore the harmony that existed between body and soul prior to the murder. We can now understand why, even if the family of the victim or the court were to agree to it, payment of a ransom would not restore the equilibrium which had been upset previously.. As long as the victim of the murder has not been appeased, there can be no question of the deed having been atoned for. When the death of the victim is due to an unintentional act however, the Torah does not consider him guilty of bloodshed. Clearly, the death of the victim was an act of G–d, i.e. the attribute of Justice chose as its instrument someone who had committed some other undetected offense. The killer had unconsciously carried out G–d's design in all those cases where he had not planned to kill the victim with a lethal instrument. The killer has to flee to the city of refuge, one of the cities of the Levites. Those cities are regarded as sites of judgment. The Levites themselves represent the emanation גבורה in the pattern חסד-גבורה-תפארת, a pattern that corresponds to the respective levels of כהן-לוי-ישראל. This unintentional killer must remain in the city of refuge until the death of the High Priest (35,25). This is because when the body of the victim was slain, also his soul was taken from him and had to remain in exile until a time when G–d is in a favorable frame of mind. At the time the High Priest dies, when his soul ascends to the Celestial Regions, the soul of the murder victim is then also allowed to proceed to those regions.

Esau ridiculed this, saying that Adam had been able to reproduce other human beings of whom the Torah testifies that they were "in His image and form," i.e. of equal or greater worth. Thereby he had restored the damage Cain had wrought (Genesis 5,3). This occurred when Shet was born, who provided the strain of mankind that survived the deluge. Esau vowed not to repeat Cain's mistake, but to ensure that no one could be sired by Isaac to replace Jacob. He particularly wanted to destroy one of the pillars supporting the universe, i.e. the Torah, which was represented by Jacob, the יושב אוהלים, the dweller in tents (a euphemism for Torah academies). On Genesis 25, 27, Rashi explains the plural as comprising the academies of Shem and Ever respectively. Esau reasoned that during the days of mourning for their father Isaac Jacob would have to interrupt his Torah study and the angel of death, Esau's guardian angel, would be able to claim him at such a time. We know from king David that the angel of death could not touch David while he was immersed in Torah study. He had to be distracted so that the angel of death could claim his soul. The Talmud relates a similar occasion when the angel of death tried to claim the soul of Rabbah. The latter had to be distracted through some tremendous noise (Baba Metzia 86).

As to the yetzer's second contention — "Since you cannot observe the din completely, it is best to distance yourself from this [(guarding your tongue)] altogether" — you can answer: "Would I allow myself to conduct my business in this way?" For example, If someone saw me running with alacrity to "make a deal" to support myself and he asked me: "Why are you running? Do you think that by doing so you will become the wealthiest man in the whole world, like Ploni?" would I not certainly answer him: "Because I will not become like him should I 'hide my hand in the dish' and not support myself?" And if this is so with the transitory body, what should I answer for the affairs of the [eternal] soul? Because I cannot observe this trait in all its details and aspects, by means of which I could rise to eternal heights of exaltedness and holiness — [as we find in the holy Zohar, Parshath Chukath, that one who guards his mouth and his tongue merits being clothed with the holy spirit, and also shining eternally in the secreted light that no angel or [Heavenly] creature can visualize, as Chazal say and as we find in Reshith Chochmah in the name of Maharam Kordovero of blessed memory, that Rav Shoshan was shown secrets in a dream in which he saw that every hair of his beard shone with a torchlike luminescence, the result of his abstinence from idle speech] — should I, therefore, forebear from guarding my soul by guarding my mouth with all my might and not being G-d forbid, of the class of "the speakers of lashon hara" and the like, of those evil classes of which Chazal state that they do not behold the presence of the Shechinah? It is this that King Solomon, may peace be upon him, intended when he wrote (Koheleth 9:10): "All that your hand finds to do with your strength — do!" To teach us that even if it enters one's mind that he will not have the strength to complete the mitzvah in all of its details, in spite of this, he should do everything that he can do. And along these lines Chazal have said on Devarim 4:41: "Then Moses would set apart three cities," that Scripture apprises us of this [to teach us] that even though the three cities across the Jordan could not serve as cities of refuge until those in the land of Canaan had been designated, and he knew that he would not enter Eretz Yisrael, in spite of this Mosheh Rabbeinu, may peace be upon him, said: "Everything that it is in my power to do, I will do," as Rashi explains there. All this we have written, with the help of the Blessed L-rd, in explanation of what is stated in Avoth d'R. Nathan, that one should not distance himself from "a trait that has no end." As to "a labor that has no completion," this applies to [the study of] Torah, as indicated by the analogy adduced there.

We know from Proverbs 14,30, "envy is iike rottenness of the bones," that ordinarily, jealousy is a natural cause of death. Greed, lust, cause man's death, while he remains unsated, since "man dies while half his desires remain unfulfilled" (Kohelet Rabbah 1,34). We also have the statement of our sages that "he who chases after glory and honour, glory and honour flee from him" (Jerusalem Talmud Avodah Zarah 3,1). On this the sages comment that he dies one hundred deaths from jealousy and not just one. Rashi explains the Mishnah in Avot by Rabbi Elazar Hakappor as applying to Adam; it was these negative virtues that caused him to become mortal. He describes the angels who had to serve him delicacies in גן עדן as becoming jealous of his status, his כבוד, honor. He cites Adam's greed to eat from the tree of knowledge as contributing to his death. The honour he enjoyed in Gan Eden caused him to be expelled. He quotes other opinions that apply this Mishnah to the jealousy displayed by Korach versus Moses and Aaron. Actually we have to view these three evils as the root causes of all impurities, i.e. טומאות, which include all negative virtues. When these three characteristics are used positively, they in turn are the root causes of all positive virtues. Concerning this fact, Ben Zoma asks at the beginning of that chapter in Avot "Who is a wise man? He who is willing to learn from any person. Who is a hero? He who is able to restrain his passions. Who is wealthy? He who is satisfied with his lot." "Heroism" is an aspect of "jealousy," as we know from Jeremiah 46,12, גבור בגבור כמותן, "for hero encounters a hero of similar stature" [the competitive element is the jealousy]. We also have Rashi's comment on Numbers 25,11, בקנאו את קנאתי בתוכם, "when he displayed jealousy on My behalf," that this "jealousy" displayed by Pinchas was the retribution G–d was entitled to exact from Zimri, i.e. it was נקמה. We know that קנאת סופרים, a competitive spirit between scholars is laudable, since it means that a person battles his evil urge, trying to excel in good deeds and character traits. This is the most important battle a person has to fight in his life. We have the story of the philosopher who encountered soldiers returning from a great conquest. He told them: "you did win a minor battle, but you have failed to win the major battle, namely man's battle with his evil urge." The reason it is called "the great battle," is that it is a never-ending battle. Concerning that battle, Ben Zoma said that the true hero is he who vanquishes his evil urge. The statement "who is wealthy, he who is satisfied with his lot," is the exact opposite of the negative virtue of תאוה, greed, i.e. never being satisfied. This is why the rabbis said that a person who is afflicted with the disease of being greedy dies before he has achieved even half of what he had hoped for. Lastly Ben Zoma described the חכם, wise person, as someone who is willing to learn from anybody else. The true meaning of honour is to be considered a wise man, as we know from Proverbs 3,35: "The wise shall inherit honour." When a person does not chase after glory it is liable to pursue him. Rabbi Yossi is on record as saying: "I have learned a great deal from my teachers; I have learned even more from my friends; but most of all have I learned from my students" (Taanit 7).