Was Na'aseh ve-Nishma really a good idea?

[Dani Schreiber]

Another one I really didn't see coming. As an introduction to the brit at har grizim and eival, Malbim points out a few differences between the brit at har Sinai and the one at arvot moav. 1. Moshe says that they are now a nation - so they weren't before? 2. It says ושמעת and then ועשית - the reverse of נעשה ונשמע.    He explains that at Sinai, the kabbala was initiated by Hashem, and we only accepted out of fear, but at arvot moav we had been inspired to accept out of love. Therefore, at Sinai, we were like children, afraid of a parent, and willing to do anything they say without even understanding (or caring) about why. But at arvot moav, we were like a nation that had committed to following a King and wanted to understand everything the wise King was demanding.  (I think this is the first time I've ever seen נעשה ונשמע represented as a deficient form of avodah, as opposed to the opposite.) Malbim goes on to weave this into his perush of the rest of the parasha as well.

Anybody ever see anything like this in terms of approaching Na'aseh ve-Nishma in an almost negative fashion?

[Ezra Goldschmiedt]

While not zeroing in on na'aseh venishma, the Gemara in Shabbos about the reaccepting of the Torah in the days of Megillas Esther would seem to support such an idea.

- Ezra

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 6:20 AM Dani Schreiber <big...@gmail.com> wrote:

Another one I really didn't see coming. As an introduction to the brit at har grizim and eival, Malbim points out a few differences between the brit at har Sinai and the one at arvot moav. 1. Moshe says that they are now a nation - so they weren't before? 2. It says ושמעת and then ועשית - the reverse of נעשה ונשמע.    He explains that at Sinai, the kabbala was initiated by Hashem, and we only accepted out of fear, but at arvot moav we had been inspired to accept out of love. Therefore, at Sinai, we were like children, afraid of a parent, and willing to do anything they say without even understanding (or caring) about why. But at arvot moav, we were like a nation that had committed to following a King and wanted to understand everything the wise King was demanding.  (I think this is the first time I've ever seen נעשה ונשמע represented as a deficient form of avodah, as opposed to the opposite.) Malbim goes on to weave this into his perush of the rest of the parasha as well.

Anybody ever see anything like this in terms of approaching Na'aseh ve-Nishma in an almost negative fashion?

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "iChabura" group.
To post to this group, send email to cha...@googlegroups.com
Any questions, email iChabur...@gmail.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
chabura+u...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/chabura?hl=en

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "iChabura" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chabura+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[mordy]

Indeed.

See the Michilta which brings down that the proclamation of Na'aseh ve-Nishma was a form of geneivas daas on the part of klal yisrael 

וכן מצינו באבותינו כשעמדו על הר סיני בקשו לגנוב דעת העליונה, שנאמר כל אשר דבר ה' נעשה ונשמע, כביכול ונגנב לב בית דין בדין, שנאמר מי יתן והיה לבבם זה להם, ואם תאמר שאין הכל גלוי וידוע לפניו, תלמוד לומר ויפתוהו בפיהם ולבם לא נכון עמו, ואף על פי כן והוא רחום יכפר עון. 

There is a lot to unpack in this Medrash. See the Michtav Me-Eliyahu (3rd chelek) who explains that external motivations expressed as pure, internally driven, desire for connection to kedusha can be a form of geneivas daas and impededes spiritual growth. A frightening thought as we begin period of selichos and teshuva. I take inspiration from the concluding line of the Medrash though

ואף על פי כן והוא רחום יכפר עון