Parshas Ki Sisa
1. On the verse "זה יתנו גו'" ("This they shall give…")1 (in the command of the half-shekel), our Sages say: "כמין מטבע של אש הוציא הקב"ה . . והראהו למשה ואמר לו זה יתנו, כזה יתנו" ("The Holy One, blessed be He, took out a kind of coin of fire . . and showed it to Moshe, and said to him: 'This they shall give' — like this they shall give").2
What is the difficulty in the "half-shekel," to the point that the Almighty needed to show Moshe Rabbeinu a "coin of fire" on its account? Tosafos explain that "תמה (משה) על הדבר מה יוכל אדם ליתן כופר נפשו" ("[Moshe] wondered at the matter: what can a person give as a ransom for his soul?").3
But this requires explanation:
What was the wonder and amazement for Moshe Rabbeinu, that the giving of the half-shekel can be "a ransom for his soul"? Any ordinary town preacher [whose intellect bears no comparison whatsoever to the intellect of Moshe Rabbeinu — the one "נבחר מכל מין האדם אשר השיג . . יותר כו'" ("chosen from all of mankind, who attained . . more etc."),4 the ultimate perfection in intellect] explains it quite simply: when a Jew fulfills a mitzvah, he receives a reward for it, and sometimes a very great reward, as it is written, "אם בחוקותי תלכו גו' ונתתי גשמיכם בעתם גו'" ("If you walk in My statutes… I will give your rains in their season…")5 — all the blessings that are enumerated there. And similarly6 in our case: as a reward for fulfilling the mitzvah of the half-shekel, one receives "a ransom for his soul."
So what is the wonder — and a great wonder7 on the part of Moshe Rabbeinu — that through the mitzvah one is given the "reward" of "a ransom for his soul"?8
The answer of the Almighty — "He showed him a coin of fire" — is also not understood:
(a) What is the precision of "a coin of fire" specifically? Whichever way you look at it:
If the precision of "fire" is because all matters Above are "of fire" ("משרתיו אש לוהט" — "His ministers, a flaming fire,"9 and the like), and therefore, when the Almighty shows a particular thing, it is in the form of "fire" — then there is no need to emphasize this specifically here (since all matters Above are of fire);
and if one were to say that without the emphasis "a coin of fire" one could have thought that the Almighty showed an actual coin, a coin of silver (and not of fire) — similar to "והקמות את המשכן כמשפטו אשר הראית בהר" ("And you shall erect the Mishkan according to its manner that you were shown on the mountain"),10 where he was shown the form of a physical Mishkan (according to the plain meaning of Scripture)11 — this requires explanation (on the other hand): in what way is the half-shekel different, that in its case it was necessary to show "a coin of fire" specifically?
(b) And mainly: where is the answer to Moshe Rabbeinu's wonder (how can the giving of a half-shekel be a ransom for his soul) in the fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him "a coin of fire"?
2. Seemingly, one could say that the two above questions (on the answer of the Almighty) are answered one by means of the other:
The answer to the wonder of how the giving of the half-shekel can be "a ransom for his soul" is — the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him "a coin of fire": when a Jew fulfills a mitzvah ("כה דברי כאש" — "Is not My word like fire"12) by means of a physical coin, and all the more so when he fulfills the mitzvah with vitality and enthusiasm (the "fire" of his soul), it becomes a matter of "fire," and therefore the giving can be "a ransom for his soul."
But according to this, the (first) question mentioned above (section 1) becomes even stronger — what was Moshe Rabbeinu's wonder in the first place? This reasoning (that by fulfilling a mitzvah it becomes a matter of "fire") is (a) a common homily of every preacher, and (b) applies to all mitzvos — that by doing a mitzvah one draws down and brings about in the object of the mitzvah a matter of "fire" (spirituality).13 So what is Moshe Rabbeinu's wonder, and specifically regarding the half-shekel?
Moreover: if this were the reason, it would have sufficed for the Almighty to tell Moshe that through the mitzvah the coin would become a matter of "fire"; on the contrary, it should have been specifically (and only) by telling him — for that is how the giving of the entire Torah and its mitzvos to Moshe took place! Why did the Almighty need here to take out and show a "coin of fire" and say "This they shall give"?
From the fact that specifically in this matter the special action of the Almighty was required — to show a "coin of fire" and say "This they shall give" — one is compelled to say that in the half-shekel there is a special element that does not exist in all other mitzvos.
3. The point of the explanation in this — it can be said:
The reward of a mitzvah can come in two ways:14 (a) Performing the mitzvah is an action which, by virtue of its content, brings a certain reward; the reward is a "result" of the action of the mitzvah. (b) The content of the action of the mitzvah bears no relation (according to reason, at least) to a certain reward; rather, such is the will of the Holy One, blessed be He, to give this reward for the fulfillment of that particular mitzvah.
For just as regarding the mitzvos themselves there are mitzvos15 that are performed not on account of the reason, but because "גזירה גזרתי חוקה חקקתי" ("I have decreed a decree, I have engraved a statute")16 — so too regarding the reward of the mitzvos: it is possible that for certain mitzvos (even of the category of mishpatim) a reward will be given that is great relative to the mitzvah, because such is the will of the Holy One, blessed be He — "I have engraved a statute."
And similarly in our case — the "reward" of "a ransom for his soul" for the mitzvah of giving the half-shekel:
Since the half-shekel (a physical coin) and "a ransom for his soul" (spirituality) bear no relation to each other, to the point that they are opposites from one extreme to the other
[as one sees with regard to the purpose of man's creation — "לשמש את קונו" ("to serve his Maker")17: money — silver and gold — is (among physical things themselves) the lowest thing,18 as one sees tangibly with "the lust for money," how low it can bring a person down,19 to the point that our Sages established that "אין אדם מעמיד עצמו על ממונו" ("A person does not restrain himself where his money is concerned")20 and "אדם בהול על ממונו" ("A person is agitated over his money");21
(for this is expressed also in the location of actual silver and gold: within the category of the inanimate itself, their place is (mostly) specifically in the depths of the earth,22 the lowest, with nothing lower beneath it; and afterwards there must also be "מצרף לכסף וכור לזהב" ("a refining pot for silver and a furnace for gold")23)],
and on the other hand, the soul ("a ransom for his soul") — every soul — is a most lofty thing, and all the more so the soul of a Jew, which is "חלק אלקה ממעל ממש" ("truly a part of G‑d Above")24 —
there is no room, according to reason, for the action of giving physical money (the ultimate descent) to bring about, by virtue of its content, "a ransom for the soul" of "truly a part of G‑d Above" (the ultimate elevation)!25
And although, being a mitzvah, it becomes, like all mitzvos, "fire" (as mentioned above, section 2) — spirituality — this is not a change connected with the physical coin itself,26 for the "fire" comes from the "mitzvah" (spirituality) within it, while the coin itself remains a physical coin. It follows that the action of the mitzvah (the giving of a physical coin) itself is not at all commensurate (by virtue of its content) to be able to purchase "a ransom for his soul."
4. And this was the wonder (and doubt) of Moshe Rabbeinu:
From the standpoint of Moshe's intellect — the intellect of Torah — it emerged that the "reward" of "a ransom for his soul" for giving the half-shekel is in the category of a chok: according to reason it is a puzzling thing and there is room to question it etc., but since this is the will of the Holy One, blessed be He, "חוקה חקקתי — אין לך רשות להרהר בהן" ("I have engraved a statute — you have no right to question them").27
But on the other hand: from the fact that the Almighty did not define the mitzvah of the half-shekel as a chok and did not call it one, it is certain that there is an explanation for it.28 And therefore — "[Moshe] wondered . . what can a person give as a ransom for his soul": how can there be an explanation and rationale for this according to reason, that the giving of a physical coin (the half-shekel) is an action that can accomplish "a ransom for his soul"?
To this the Almighty answered him by "showing him a coin of fire . . and saying to him, 'This they shall give.'" The Almighty showed him that when Jews give the half-shekel, the coin itself then becomes (not only by virtue of the spirituality of the "mitzvah" within it) a "coin of fire"; consequently, even according to reason one understands the connection between the "content" of giving the half-shekel and the "reward" of "a ransom for his soul."
In contrast, with tzedakah, the coin itself does not accomplish it at all; rather, it is as our Sages say29 (which is a simple rationale): "You revived the soul of the poor man and the members of his household — therefore his reward is his own soul and the souls of the members of his household," measure for measure.
But from the half-shekel the sockets of the Mishkan were made30 — so how can anything whatsoever — "what," even the sockets — be a ransom for the soul?
5. The explanation of this:
By the very fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him "a coin of fire" and said "This they shall give," the Almighty brought about and accomplished something new: the half-shekel that Jews gave then (and this continues in the mitzvah of the half-shekel — always, for all time) is not only a physical coin, but also a "coin of fire." That is, it was then newly established that the coin which the Almighty showed Moshe — the coin as it is (in its root), fire from beneath the Throne of Glory — "this they shall give," the Children of Israel: a coin exactly like this.31
In addition to the fact that through the mitzvah one draws down and brings about in the coin a matter of "fire" (which is so with all mitzvos, as mentioned above), there is in the half-shekel a special novelty — that the coin itself is a "coin of fire."
The novelty in this is not that in its root it is a "coin of fire" — that is so with all physical things, all of which devolve from their spiritual root, but their source is found and remains Above, while they, below, are a physical thing —
but rather that even after the coin has devolved and descended into this physical world, by fulfilling with it the mitzvah of the half-shekel a change is brought about in the coin, so that it becomes (as it exists in physicality) a "coin of fire."
6. Accordingly, one will also understand the special novelty of the half-shekel — which required a special action of the Almighty, "He showed a coin of fire . . and said, 'This they shall give'" — compared to all other mitzvos:
What one finds with all mitzvos, that a mitzvah draws spiritual vitality ("fire") into the physical deed,32 is all in a manner in which the physical thing itself is and remains below its source, below the spiritual; it is only that spiritual vitality is drawn into the physical thing (which is the concept of hishtalshelus — that within the "lower" there is present (and sometimes even shines) something of the "higher," but the lower remains below the higher);
whereas with the half-shekel, the novelty is that the physical coin that Jews give itself becomes a "coin of fire," a joining of two opposites.
Even the physical fire of this world is the opposite extreme of a "coin": a "coin" is earth33 (and within earth itself — in the depths of the ground, as mentioned above), the lowest element; while fire is the highest and loftiest element.34
And all the more so in their content (in spirituality) — as is known35 that the four elements, fire, air, water and earth, correspond to the four worlds of Atzilus, Beriah, Yetzirah and Asiyah: earth corresponds to the world of Asiyah, the lowest world, and fire corresponds to the world of Atzilus, the highest world —
and the joining of these two opposites, a physical coin with a coin of fire (and all the more so since this is not the fire of this physical world but, etc. — the fire from beneath the Throne of Glory), is contrary to the entire concept of the order of hishtalshelus (for "hishtalshelus" means, as mentioned above, that the "lower" "devolves," and is consequently below the higher).
Furthermore: this is contrary even to the order of Torah (which is higher than the world), even to its order in matters of Torah itself — for the order in Torah is in a manner of "hishtalshelus": the level of pshat (which corresponds to the world of Asiyah36) devolves (through three stages) from the level of sod (which corresponds to the world of Atzilus), and is consequently lower than it — and by far.
And therefore this joining (of "coin" with "fire") cannot be accomplished by an angel etc., and not even, as it were, by Torah,37 all of which are in a manner of hishtalshelus (and consequently limited within the bounds of hishtalshelus), but only by the Holy One, blessed be He, in His glory and in His Essence, Who chose by His will (not, G‑d forbid, by compulsion) the order of hishtalshelus; and being "omnipotent," "נמנע הנמנעות" ("[able to bring about even] the impossible"),38 it is within His ability to nullify the order of hishtalshelus and to join the two opposites39 of physicality and spirituality, so that the physical coin should actually become, in this world as well, a "coin of fire."
7. And this is the answer (of the Almighty) in the Midrash — and precisely in the wording of the Midrash: "The Holy One, blessed be He, took out a coin of fire . . and said to him, 'This they shall give'" — "the Holy One, blessed be He" specifically, and through a statement:
The union of physicality and spirituality (that a physical coin should also become a "coin of fire") — both actually at once, silver and a ransom for the soul — can be made only by "the Holy One, blessed be He" Himself (as mentioned above), Who chose by His will the order of hishtalshelus, and it is obvious that He is not limited by hishtalshelus (and can nullify it).
This is similar to40 the matter of creation ex nihilo, which can come only from "מהותו ועצמותו של המאציל ב"ה שמציאותו הוא מעצמותו ואינו עלול מאיזה עילה" ("the Being and Essence of the Emanator, blessed be He, Whose existence is of His own Essence and Who is not caused by any cause") that preceded Him, G‑d forbid, "and therefore He alone has the power and ability to create something from nothing etc."41
And just as in the matter of creation ex nihilo the coming into being of the work of Creation was specifically through statement and speech — "בעשרה מאמרות נברא העולם" ("With ten utterances the world was created"),42 "בדבר הוי' שמים נעשו" ("By the word of G‑d the heavens were made")43 — so too regarding the "coming into being" of a physical coin also becoming fire: this is accomplished through the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He.44
The speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, "This they shall give" — that the physical coin which Jews give ("they shall give") will also be "fire" ("this")45 — "brought into being" this novelty, just as the creatures came into being in the six days of Creation through the speech and utterance of the Holy One, blessed be He.
8. Seemingly, one could ask:
Moshe Rabbeinu certainly knew (even before the Almighty showed him "a coin of fire") that it is within His ability, may He be blessed, to join two opposites46 — from which it is understood that the Almighty can join the physical coin with (its root in) spirituality. And the question returns to its place: what is Moshe's wonder, "what can a person give as a ransom for his soul"?
There are several answers to this, among them:
a) In holy wisdom and intellect — Moshe — such a thing must be puzzling47 (only, being a chok, he does not question it etc.); but one cannot say that it is a "mishpat" or an "eidus."
b) Since the Almighty did not define the half-shekel as a chok48 — it is certain that there is an explanation for his wonder, and that the mitzvah of the half-shekel enters into the "hishtalshelus" of Torah and mitzvos, and moreover — within that itself, not into the category of "chok."
And this is also the precision in the answer (in the Midrash) — "a kind of coin of fire . . He showed it to Moshe": to remove Moshe's wonder, it was not enough to tell Moshe the matter (for then it would remain a wonder that cannot be understood intellectually); rather, it had to be "He showed him" — that the action (how the physical coin also becomes a "coin of fire") should be in a manner of sight. The thing is truly revealed, in a manner of "This they shall give" — "מראה באצבעו ואומר זה" ("pointing with his finger and saying 'this'").
And furthermore: the revelation is (not only for Moshe, but) for all Jews — that their giving is in a manner of "This they shall give," that in the coin they give it stands revealed that it is "this," a "coin of fire" ("להבחין היטב (ועי"ז) להודיע לישראל" — "to discern well (and thereby) to make it known to Israel"49).
9. And one can add an explanation of the content of "a coin of fire" — fire specifically. For seemingly:
To emphasize that the coin Jews give is (not only a physical coin, but also) the coin Above that is beneath the Throne of Glory,50 it is not necessary to show a coin of fire specifically. For we find that Above there is also51 the matter of water ("מיכאל שר של מים" — "Michael, the minister of water") etc. Why, then, was "a coin of fire" specifically shown?
It can be said that with this the Almighty (showed, and thereby) brought about that the giving of the half-shekel should be not only a spiritual matter, but within spirituality itself — a matter of "fire":
The difference between fire and the other elements, earth, water and air (in their plain sense below, from which one understands also regarding their spiritual root), is that the other elements descend downward, or at most remain in their place; whereas the nature of fire is to rise upward,52 to such an extent that a special effort is required (by means of a wick etc.) for the fire to remain below.
And this is what the Almighty showed Moshe with "a coin of fire" — that the giving of the half-shekel by Jews is (not only the giving of a spiritual coin, but within that itself) in a manner of "fire": it has the quality of fire, to always rise upward, to ascend in holiness, elevation after elevation.
And with this it is all the more understandable how a physical coin can accomplish "a ransom for his soul" — since it has within it the quality of "fire," which signifies elevation upward, distancing oneself from coarse materiality and striving toward spirituality.
10. From this we learn a wondrous lesson in man's service of G‑d:
Although the command of giving the half-shekel applies mainly when the Beis HaMikdash stood,53 when the half-shekel had to be given for the communal offerings of the entire year,54 nevertheless, in the present time too there is the Jewish custom55 "ליתן56 קודם פורים (בלילי57 פורים קודם שמתפללים מנחה) מחצית מן המטבע הקבוע באותו מקום ובאותו זמן, זכר למחצית השקל שהיו נותנין באדר. ומאחר ששלשה פעמים כתיב תרומה בפרשה, יש ליתן שלשה" ("to give before Purim (on the night of Purim, before Minchah is prayed) half of the coin that is standard in that place and at that time, in remembrance of the half-shekel that was given in Adar. And since 'terumah' is written three times in the passage, one should give three").58
In addition: since every Jew has a spiritual Mishkan and Mikdash, as it is written, "ושכנתי בתוכם" ("And I will dwell among them")59 — "it does not say 'within it,' but 'within them' — within each and every60 Jew"61 — it is understood that there is the matter of giving the half-shekel (spiritually), from which one makes the sockets of the Mishkan62 (of the spiritual Mishkan "within them").
And regarding this, the lesson of "This they shall give" — a coin of fire — is that when Jews give a perutah for a mitzvah, for tzedakah (and likewise when one "appeases a poor person with words,"63 physical speech by means of the five physical organs of articulation of the mouth), this is not merely a physical coin (or physical speech), but (also) "a coin of fire" — a matter of spirituality and holiness, and within that itself, with the quality of fire, whose nature is that it always rises upward.
And from the half-shekel one learns also regarding all mitzvos64 — that every action of a Jew in matters of Torah and mitzvos, although they have become enclothed specifically in physical things (tzitzis in physical wool, tefillin in physical parchment, and similarly with all the other mitzvos), is not merely a physical action, but is also "a coin of fire," a matter of spirituality and holiness.
And from this one understands the great elevation and wondrousness of vitality, warmth and enthusiasm — holy "fire" — in a Jew's service in all matters of the Torah and its mitzvos, to the point that in every one of his actions the "coin of fire" is discernible,
to the point that he fulfills the command: "אש תמיד תוקד על המזבח65 (הלב66) לא תכבה" ("A constant fire shall burn upon the altar (the heart); it shall not go out").
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Mishpatim (Parshas Shekalim), 5745)
Notes
1) Our parsha, 30:13.
2) Yerushalmi, Shekalim 1:4. Tanchuma, our parsha, 9; Naso 11. Bamidbar Rabbah 12:3. Cited in Rashi on the verse. See Likkutei Sichos vol. 16, p. 381, and the sources cited there.
3) Tosafos, s.v. "Zos," Chullin 42a, end. See the Midrashim cited in Likkutei Sichos ibid., note 2 (and see there, pp. 383, 389ff.).
4) Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Sanhedrin, Perek Chelek, the seventh foundation.
5) Beginning of Bechukosai.
6) And we find a reward stated explicitly, particularly with regard to the life of one's soul, in the mitzvah of tzedakah, which is performed with money — Tanchuma, Mishpatim [OCR unclear]. Moreover — Moshe had already been commanded regarding acts of kindness etc. before the mitzvah of the half-shekel — [OCR unclear].
7) Especially according to the wording of Tosafos, that his wonder was "what" — that anything whatsoever cannot be a ransom for the soul.
8) Compare the statement of our Sages that a person says simply (and with certainty): "This sela is for tzedakah so that my son will live" (Pesachim 8a, end, and the sources cited there).
9) Tehillim 104:4.
10) Terumah 26:30.
11) See Menachos 29a.
12) Yirmeyahu 23:29.
13) See Likkutei Sichos vol. 3, p. 925ff.; vol. 15, p. 390ff.; and elsewhere.
14) See Likkutei Amarim of the Maggid, sec. 227 (55a); Ohr Torah, Acharei (38c–d).
15) Compare the Shelah, Beis Acharon (12a–b).
16) A phrase cited in many places. It is in Midrash Tehillim (Buber) 60:2. In Tanchuma, Chukas (3; ibid., 8), Bamidbar Rabbah (19:1; ibid., 8) and elsewhere: "I have engraved a statute, I have decreed a decree."
17) Kiddushin 82a (in the Mishnah).
18) It can be said that (also) for this reason money is called "the substance that is at their feet" (Eikev 11:6, and Rashi there — from Pesachim 119a; Sanhedrin 110a; Bamidbar Rabbah 18:13; and the sources cited there) — in the category of feet.
19) Note that the sin of the Golden Calf — for which the half-shekel was the atonement (Yerushalmi, Shekalim 2:3; Tanchuma, our parsha, 11; and elsewhere) — came about through their abundance of silver and gold, as it is written (Hoshea 2:10; see Rashi at the beginning of Devarim, s.v. "Ve-Di Zahav"): "And I gave them abundant silver, and gold which they made for Baal." See also Rashi on our parsha, 32:31.
20) Shabbos 153[OCR unclear]. The Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, beginning of sec. 266; [OCR unclear], par. 7.
21) Shabbos 117b, and elsewhere. Rambam, Laws of Shabbos, [OCR unclear]; 23:20.
22) Compare what is explained (Sefer HaMaamarim 5700, p. 114; see Torah Chaim, Shemos 112b) that a mountain signifies the elevation of the inanimate.
23) Mishlei 17:3; ibid. 27:21. See Iggeres HaKodesh, sec. 2; the discourse for Parshas Shekalim (supplements to Torah Ohr, 111c); Sefer HaMaamarim 5630, p. 112; and elsewhere.
24) Tanya, beginning of ch. 2 (based on Iyov 31:2).
25) Especially according to the meaning of "a ransom for his soul" in the writings of the Arizal (Shaar HaMitzvos, our parsha; Sefer HaLikkutim, ibid.). See Likkutei Levi Yitzchak on verses of Tanach, end of p. 52.
26) Compare the principle that matters of holiness do not change the substance of a thing, but only its form (a Torah scroll etc. — see Mefaneach Tzefunos ch. 1, sec. 5, and the sources cited there).
27) Yoma 67b (see Rashi there, s.v. "Shema"). See Rashi at the beginning of Chukas; Rambam, end of Laws of Me'ilah.
28) Especially since the half-shekel's being "a ransom for his soul" is not only the reward of the mitzvah, but also the cause and reason for the mitzvah (the opposite of a chok).
29) Tanchuma, Mishpatim 15.
30) Rashi at the beginning of Terumah; our parsha (30:15) — based on the statement of our Sages in Yerushalmi, Shekalim 1:1.
31) Accordingly, the view of the halachic authorities (Rambam, beginning of Laws of Shekalim) that the half-shekel differs from all other donations in that it must be given specifically all at once is all the more readily understood. See Likkutei Sichos vol. 16, p. 386ff.
32) As is known, this was the novelty of the Giving of the Torah, when the decree that "the higher shall not descend to the lower, and the lower shall not ascend to the higher" was annulled (Shemos Rabbah 12:3; Tanchuma, Va'eira 15) — and thereby the bond between physicality and spirituality was made (so that through a physical action a spiritual effect is brought about).
33) And within the element of (earth) — the inanimate — itself, there is what is called "dust of gold" (Iyov 28:6).
34) See Rambam, Laws of the Foundations of the Torah, end of ch. 3 and beginning of ch. 4 — based on Bamidbar Rabbah (14:12) and the holy Zohar (vol. 2, 23b, end, ff.; and elsewhere).
35) Likkutei Torah, Shir HaShirim 4d. Ohr HaTorah, Yisro, p. 826. The discourse beginning "Zeh HaYom," 5660. "VeHar Sinai," 5662, near its beginning.
36) See Nagid U'Metzaveh at its beginning, citing Etz Chaim; Nahar Shalom, in the introduction to Rechovos HaNahar, at its end; Mishnas Chassidim (Tractate Chiyuv HaNeshamos 1:2) — cited and explained in Likkutei Dibburim vol. 4, 691a. See also the introduction of R. Chaim Vital to Shaar HaHakdamos (reproduced in Kuntres Etz HaChaim (supplement [OCR unclear]), p. 62ff.); Ramaz [OCR unclear] vol. 1, 4b, end; and elsewhere.
37) Although in general the Torah rules over creation and changes it, even the past — as in the Yerushalmi (Kesubos 1:2, and elsewhere) on the verse (Tehillim 57:3) "To the G‑d Who completes for me."
38) See Responsa of the Rashba, vol. 1, sec. 568; cited in Sefer HaChakirah of the Tzemach Tzedek, p. 68; Sefer HaMaamarim 5678, p. 402.
39) Compare the explanation of the statement of our Sages (Sotah 2a; Pesachim 118a; Zohar vol. 2, 170a) that it is as difficult (before the Holy One, blessed be He) to pair them (and the like) as the splitting of the Sea — for seemingly, how can difficulty apply Above? The explanation is that "this is contrary to the order of hishtalshelus" (Shaar HaEmunah of the Mitteler Rebbe, ch. 32; and in many places). Compare also Sefer HaMaamarim 5654 (pp. 133, 146), that the difficulty of the splitting of the Sea — and the fact that specifically regarding the splitting of the Sea it is said to be "difficult," whereas this is not said regarding the creation of heaven and earth — is because in the splitting of the Sea there was "a joining of two opposites in one subject"; see there. Accordingly, what Moshe had in mind is even more understandable — for the joining of the opposites of a (physical) "coin" and "fire" was something of difficulty Above, as it were.
40) It can be said that there is even more to it — that the joining of two opposites is difficult Above, whereas creation, after all, was "not with toil etc." that the world was created (Bereishis Rabbah 3:2). And plainly, this does not contradict what is explained in Tanya, Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 2.
41) [OCR unclear]
42) Avos 5:1.
43) Tehillim 33:6.
44) [OCR unclear]
45) One might seemingly cite the matter of the bush burning below at Mount Chorev without being consumed. However, there it was burning with "fire from Above," which "does not consume" (Shemos Rabbah 2:5), and it is not relevant to our case.
46) See above, note 39.
47) Similar to: "If it is a halachah, we will accept it; but if it is a logical inference, there is a refutation" (Yevamos 76b — in the Mishnah).
48) On the contrary, it emphasized a reason: "That there be no plague among them" (our parsha, 30:12).
49) The wording of Tosafos — Chullin ibid.
50) Although the Throne of Glory is of fire (Daniel 7:9; the piyut "Imru LeElokim" in Shacharis of Yom Kippur), in Yechezkel (1:26) it is "like the appearance of sapphire stone." And the world of the Throne is the world of Beriah, etc. This is not the place to elaborate.
51) See Tanchuma, Vayigash 6; Likkutei Sichos vol. 25, p. 260, and the sources cited there.
52) See Tanya, beginning of ch. 9 — based on the Bamidbar Rabbah cited in note 34. See also the Zohar (24a) and Rambam (Laws of the Foundations of the Torah, halachah 2) cited in that note.
53) Rambam, Laws of Shekalim 1:8.
54) Rambam, ibid., beginning of ch. 4.
55) Which is Torah.
56) Rema, Orach Chaim, beginning of sec. 694.
57) The wording of the Rema — from the Maharil. "On the night" — this is how it appears in the printings I have seen; it should be checked in other printings.
58) In this, too, the half-shekel differs from many things that are done as a remembrance or as a substitute etc. — for care is taken that it be specifically with a physical coin, [OCR unclear], a half, etc.
59) Terumah 25:8.
60) Shelah 69a; 201a; 325b; 326b. Reishis Chochmah, Shaar HaAhavah, ch. [OCR unclear], near its beginning. Likkutei Torah, beginning of Naso. And in many places.
61) See Kesser Shem Tov 42, sec. [OCR unclear] ff.
62) Cited above, note 30.
63) See Bava Basra 9b.
64) For in addition to the fact that each mitzvah includes all the mitzvos — and especially according to the explanation ([OCR unclear], Klalei HaTorah VehaMitzvos, entry "Osek BeMitzvah"; and in Chassidus — Sefer HaMaamarim 5655, p. 37; Hemshech 5666, end of p. 68; Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim vol. 2, 435b) of the principle that "one who is occupied with a mitzvah is exempt from another mitzvah" (Sukkah 25a, end; Sotah 44b) — since the sockets of the Mishkan were made from the half-shekel (as mentioned above), it follows that it is the foundation upon which the entire Mishkan is built: the totality of the service of "And I will dwell among them," which is accomplished through fulfilling Torah and mitzvos. From this it is understood that something of the half-shekel, a semblance and example of it, extends to all the mitzvos as well.
65) Beginning of Tzav (6:6).
66) See Likkutei Torah, Sukkos 78c ff.; see there.
Key Lesson
When Jews gave the half-shekel, G‑d made the physical coin itself into a "coin of fire," bringing together the lowest physical matter and the highest spirituality in a way only He can. In the same way, every coin a Jew gives to tzedakah and every mitzvah done with physical things becomes holy fire whose nature is to keep rising. So a Jew should serve G‑d with warmth and enthusiasm, until his heart is a constant fire that never goes out.