Musar על יבמות 126:6

We now need to explain why both the blessing and the commandment to be fruitful and multiply had to be recorded twice, both to Adam and to Noach. I will endeavour to explain this as best as I can, and in the process I hope to deal with several puzzling aspects of the deluge, the rainbow and the building of the Tower. I also hope to clarify what is meant by the statement that failure to procreate diminishes G–d's image in the world. I will explain the apparent inaccuracy of Rabbi Yaakov in Yevamot 63 when he speaks about diminishing G–d's דמות, whereas the verse cited in support of his observation mentions צלם, not דמות. The fact is that the Torah's report when describing man's creation mentions both צלם, and דמות.

If one understands the deeper meaning of this commandment, one also gains an insight into the mysteries of Creation. We find a statement by Rabbi Eliezer in Yevamot 63 that anyone who neglects to fulfill the commandment to be fruitful is considered as having the sin of spilling innocent blood on his hands, the reason being that the Torah says in Genesis 9,6: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed." Since the Torah goes on to say : "Be fertile, increase, etc.," it is clear that failure to do so is considered a mortal sin. Rabbi Yaakov says: "Failure to try and have issue is a way of diminishing G–d's image in this world, since the Torah (still in verse 6 of this chapter) adds: 'For in His image did G–d make man.' Immediately afterwards follows the commandment to be fruitful." The Rabbis taught in Yevamot 64 that Numbers 10,36 ובנחה יאמר: שובה ה' רבבות אלפי ישראל, "When the ark came to rest, Moses would say 'return O Lord, You who are Israel's myriads of thousands,'" teaches that G–d's Presence is not found when Israel numbers fewer than 22000 souls." If Israel would number 21999 at any time and one of those Israelites failed to perform the מצוה of פרו ורבו, that person would be responsible for preventing the whole people from enjoying the Presence of the שכינה in their midst. We have now had three separate statements on the seriousness of failing to comply with the commandment to be fruitful. A) Failure to try and reproduce is equivalent to committing bloodshed; B) Failure to try and produce issue diminishes G–d's image in the world; C) Failure to fulfil this injunction prevents Israel from enjoying the Divine Presence in its midst. Prior to the statement quoted in the name of Rabbi Eliezer, the same Rabbi Eliezer is on record saying that a person who fails to marry is not an אדם, seeing that the Torah says of man (אדם) that "G–d created him male and female. He called their name Adam." (Genesis 5,2). You should appreciate that the statement of Rabbi Eliezer is to be understood as a general rule, whereas the subsequent statements are פרטים details, i.e. applications of the כלל. We must first understand Rabbi Eliezer.

According to this, the homiletical meaning Rashi speaks about, namely the comparison of someone who fails to carry out that commandment to a murderer as stated by Rabbi Eliezer in Yevamot 63, is based on the verse immediately prior to that in which the Torah proclaims: שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed." He apparently holds that only males are commanded to fulfil this commandment, and disagrees with Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka. The latter holds that the line "He blessed them," applied to both man and woman. The reason that the other scholar disagrees is that he holds that just as only males are in the habit of conquering, a condition in Genesis 1,28, so only males have to fulfil the condition of being fruitful. Clearly then he must hold that the words "He said to them, etc." must be understood as a commandment. The same reasoning applies to the first time the words פרו ורבו appear in Genesis 9,1. Rabbi Yochanan would then be in disagreement with Bar Kappara and the Talmud Sanhedrin 59, who both hold that the commandment is only found in Genesis 9,7, i.e. ואתם פרו ורבו. Nonetheless he interprets these verses homiletically on the basis of Rabbi Eliezer who believes that a homiletical explanation based on matters which appear side by side in the Torah is almost a commandment in itself [words are mine. Ed.]. Rabbi Eliezer bases his approach to exegesis on Psalms 111,8: סמוכים לעד לעולם, that words next to one another always, i.e. under all conditions, have an exegetical significance. Rabbi Eliezer applies that principle even when the verses in question are not "free" for homiletics but have already been explained as necessary in a different context.

Bereshit Rabbah 24,6 comments on Genesis 5,1 זה ספר תולדת אדם, "This is the book of the descendants of man," that those mentioned now are descendants, whereas the previous ones were not descendants. What then were the earlier ones? Were they deities perhaps? [sarcastically] The answer given is that the generations אדם-שת-אנוש were indeed תולדות. [The Midrash goes on to elaborate on all the changes that took place on earth during Enosh's lifetime, indicating a radical decline in man's spirituality. Ed]

At any rate the statement in Sanhedrin 59 that the commandment to be fruitful and multiply is stated in פרשת נח, which is not attributed to any particular scholar but seems unanimous, is fully justified. The Talmud cites 9,7 because more than any other of the verses discussing the commandment this verse lends itself to the interpretation of the nature of the punishment for its non-fulfillment. All Rashi wants to tell us is that 9,1, according to its plain meaning, can be understood as a blessing only, whereas 9,7 is clearly a command. Since Nachmanides accepts the method of exegesis of Rabbi Eliezer, there is no conflict betweeen his view and that of Rashi.

The reason that Moses separated from his wife, i.e. from family life and the fulfilment of the commandment to be be fruitful and multiply, is that משה עלה אל האלוקים, "Moses ascended to G–d" (Exodus 19,3). Having reached such a stage, further "upward" motion was not necessary. This is the deeper significance of someone becoming איש האלוקים, as described in the Zohar^{Author's comment}If Ben Azzai refused to marry and procreate because "his heart cleaved to the Torah," this may have been due to his being descended from a root such as that of Moses (cf Yevamot 63)..

Let us now look at the legislation of the levirate marriage or its alternative חליצה, removal of the sandal from the foot of the potential second husband by the widow qualifying for such a levirate marriage. I have explained earlier that the Torah's statement that man was created in the image and form of G–d means that there is a comparison between man and G–d in seven separate areas. We explained that man, i.e. the male, possesses six of these aspects, the seventh being his wife. It is required of man that he "build" a replica or replacement of himself by employing his G–d-given assets and thus preserve the דמות of G–d granted him; should he fail to create all the conditions that facilitate procreation he would thereby become guilty of diminishing G–d's דמות. [the word must be understood as portraying that man's physical faculties represent all the physical forces G–d created in the macrocosm. (cf. Kuzari 4,25) Ed.] דמות is the "final" attribute (emanation). [In Pardes Rimonim described as דמות אדם=מלכות. Ed] It is known as תמונה, "picture," because its numerical value equals the numerical value פרצוף אדם, =501. [The word פרצוף in Kabbalistic terms generally refers to the manifestation of abstract concepts. Ed.] The "feet" of this attribute descend to the domain of death, i.e. anything which is lower than this attribute is part of the domain of death. Above that domain is Mattatron, another name for the emanation מלכות. This domain may be understood as having a lower and a higher section. The lower section is below one's loins, a part connected with death, whereas what is above the loins is connected, i.e. cleaves to the objective "good." Concerning the area above the loins we are told in Proverbs 18,22: מצא אשה מצא טוב, "he who found a (suitable) wife has found (objective) good." Anything below this dividing line of מתניו, his loins, is the domain of death.

Let us return to my earlier statement that ההולך בלא בנים מת הוא בעולם הזה ולא יחיה בעולם הבא, "anyone who is childless is considered dead in this word and will not live in the World to Come." There is a way to overcome this handicap posthumously by means of the levirate marriage. The first thing one has to bear in mind is that every husband deposits part of his רוח, spirit, during marital relations with his wife. This is so because he has only acquired the seventh part of his צורה or דמות by union with her. The spirit he has deposited within her remains within his wife even after he has died, especially during the first twelve months after his death. All this has been explained by the Zohar on פרשת משפטים where the subject is discussed. This residual spirit of her deceased husband is at war with the second husband whose spirit is also deposited within her by their union in marriage. During the struggle between these two spirits either one may emerge victorious on different occasions.

To come back to the three views expressed in the Talmud concerning the severity of the sin of failing to procreate. The three sages refer to different elements in the basic interrelationship between G–d, Torah and Israel.