1. The Gemara’s Discussion of the Angel Appointed Over the World
Sometimes when learning a Toystvus—a Tosafist commentary—one expects a deep analytical question on the Gemara, but occasionally, a fascinating agadita—an aggadic passage—appears. In today’s learning, we encountered such a Toystvus in Chullin 60a, where the Gemara mentions the concept of the Sar HaOlam—the angel appointed over the world. Rashi explains this as a malach memuneh, an angel who is given charge over worldly matters.
The Gemara relates that when Hashem commanded grass to grow, He did not specify that each species should grow separately, whereas with trees, He did command each species to be distinct. The grass, using their own reasoning, deduced that if trees (which are usually spaced apart) must grow separately, then certainly grass (which grows together) should also maintain separation by species. Thus, even without an explicit command, each type of grass grew according to its kind. The Gemara discusses whether the laws of kilayim—forbidden mixtures—apply to grasses as well. Ultimately, it teaches that Hashem rejoices when His creations act wisely and independently in accordance with His will.
2. Toystvus’ Identification of the Sar HaOlam as Matatron
Toystvus raises an intriguing question: Who exactly is this Sar HaOlam? He notes that while we may not pay much attention to various liturgical poems (piyutim)—especially in Chabad where many are not recited—these piyutim often originate from very ancient and holy sources and are sometimes referenced by Toystvus as authentic proofs.
In one such piyut, Toystvus explains that there is an angel named Matatron (Matatrin). This name appears frequently in various contexts throughout Torah literature. Some explain that Matatron is actually Chanoch (Enoch), based on the Torah’s account of Chanoch among Adam’s descendants. The Torah describes how Chanoch “walked with G‑d” and then “was no more,” which Rashi interprets to mean that Hashem took him away before the flood because he was a tzaddik.
3. Chanoch’s Transformation into Matatron According to Piyutim
The piyut elaborates that Chanoch did not simply disappear; rather, he underwent a transformation from flesh to fire and became an angel—specifically Matatron. This interpretation suggests that when the Torah says Chanoch “walked with G‑d and was no more,” it means he became spiritualized and ascended as an angelic being.
This leads Toystvus to propose that Chanoch and Matatron are actually one and the same: Chanoch was transformed into this angel after his earthly life ended.
4. Matatron as Both Sar HaOlam and “The Nar”
Toystvus takes this idea further by referencing another piyut which implies that Matatron is not only an angel but specifically the Sar HaOlam, the officer appointed over the world. In this liturgy, Matatron is referred to as a “Nar”—a youngster or youth.
This connects to another Gemara which discusses who said the verse “Nar hayisi gam zakanti—I was young and now I am old” (from Tehillim 37:25). Someone once asked me about this verse because in some communities it is omitted from liturgy; I looked it up and found it in Tehillim 37:25.
The Gemara in Yevamos says this verse was said by the Sar HaOlam, since only someone who sees all generations could truthfully say they have never seen a righteous person forsaken. Since humans have limited lifespans, only an angelic being like the Sar HaOlam could make such a statement.
5. Reconciling Timelines: Was Matatron Present at Creation?
This connection leads Toystvus to ask: If Matatron is both called “Nar” and identified as Chanoch who became an angel after his earthly life, how could he have been present at creation? The story of grass growing according to its kind takes place at creation, yet Chanoch was born many generations later.
If Matatron is indeed both Chanoch and Sar HaOlam—the one who praised Hashem at creation—how could he have been there before his own birth? This apparent contradiction fascinates Toystvus, who draws from multiple piyutim and Gemaras in search of clarity.
6. Multiple Opinions Regarding Matatron’s Identity
This discussion highlights how questions we might think are novel or unique often already appear in classic sources like the Gemara. Many contradictions or doubts we encounter are addressed somewhere within our tradition’s texts.
Toystvus ultimately offers several possible answers: perhaps there are different opinions about whether “Nar” always refers to Matatron or whether there could be another angel known by this title. Just because one source calls Matatron “Nar” does not necessarily mean every reference to “Nar” points exclusively to him; there may be other angels with similar titles or roles.