Mishpatim: The Totafos of the Desert and the Totafos of the Land | Rabbi Yechezkel Sofer

00:04 Good evening, as we approach Shabbos Nachamu. On behalf of all the Anash here, I send our condolences to the Lifsh family on the loss of their dear son, the tamim Sholom Ber Lifsh, in connection with the tefillin campaign. Today I want to dedicate this class, which deals with the mitzvah of tefillin and a sicha of the Rebbe, to the elevation of his soul. May they be comforted—“Comfort, comfort.” In our parsha, chapter 6, verse 6, we have the familiar verse from Shema: “And these words that I command you today shall be upon your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children and speak of them when you sit in your home, when you travel on the road, when you lie down and when you rise.” Then comes the mitzvah of tefillin: “You shall bind them as a sign upon your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.” In Sefer Hamitzvos, the Rambam counts the mitzvos of the hand tefillin and the head tefillin as two separate mitzvos, mitzvah 12 and mitzvah 13. A simple question arises: What led the Rambam to count two parts of the same mitzvah separately? They are the same tefillin, the same name, the same passages—one mitzvah with two parts. Why count them as two separate mitzvos? Take the Four Species, for example. We don’t count them as four mitzvos, a mitzvah of the esrog and a mitzvah of the lulav. It is one mitzvah with four components. Why not say the same here—one mitzvah with two parts, the hand tefillin and the head tefillin? Why count them as two mitzvos? It is very puzzling. Interestingly, when citing his source—in Sefer Hamitzvos he gives a source for every mitzvah—the Rambam cites Parshas Va’eschanan. He says that we were commanded to put on the head tefillin, as the verse says, “And they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.” He adds: “This commandment concerning this mitzvah has already been repeated four times.” It already appears in Parshas Bo: “And it shall be for you as a sign upon your hand.” So why does the Rambam cite Parshas Va’eschanan? Usually he cites the first verse in the Torah that speaks about the mitzvah. Those are two questions about the Rambam. But that was only an introduction. The Rebbe does not discuss

03:16 that in the sicha, but in light of the Rebbe’s sicha, this Rambam will also become clear. Now the Rebbe focuses on Rashi in the parsha. If you can, have the source sheet I attached to the class in front of you; it will be easier to follow the wording. “You shall bind them as a sign upon your hand.” Rashi quotes all four of those words and says: “These are the tefillin of the arm.” He continues in a second comment, beginning, “And they shall be as frontlets between your eyes”—“These are the tefillin of the head. They are called totafos after the number of their passages.” In other words, he explains why they have such an unusual, rare name: totafos. He says it comes from foreign languages. There is a place called Katfei, where “two” is tat. There is a place called Afriki, where “two” is pat. Tat and pat: two plus two is four. The name alludes to the number of passages, since tefillin contain four passages. That is why they are called totafos. That is Rashi’s comment. The Rebbe asks questions about the plain meaning of the verse. First, what is Rashi trying to explain here? At first glance, he wants to explain what the verse is talking about, because it does not say what to bind. A “sign”—what is the sign? What is it made of? The verse does not say. So Rashi wants to tell a five-year-old learning Chumash: You should know that these are the tefillin of the arm. “And they shall be as frontlets”—what shall be? So he says: these are the tefillin of the head. That is what one would naturally think. The Rebbe asks: This is interesting. One verse earlier it says, “Speak of them when you sit in your home, when you travel on the road, when you lie down and when you rise.” What do we do when we lie down and when we rise? We recite Shema. There, Rashi does not say that “speak of them” means reciting Shema. Why not? Because he assumes that every five-year-old learning Chumash knows what text we recite when we lie down and when we rise. Shema—who doesn’t know that? So why doesn’t he assume that the child knows what is bound to the hand and the head? Even though he is still only

06:14 five and does not put them on himself, he sees his brothers and his father in shul. It is something familiar. Why does Rashi need to explain it at such length? Furthermore, the Rebbe asks, Rashi already explained this once. Where? In Parshas Bo. If you open Shemos, chapter 13, verse 16, it says: “And it shall be as a sign upon your hand and as frontlets between your eyes, for with a strong hand Hashem took us out of Egypt.” Let’s see what Rashi explains there. Rashi comments on “and as frontlets between your eyes.” What are totafos? Rashi says: tefillin. He does not say “of the head” or “of the arm”—just tefillin. He immediately continues: Why are they called totafos? “They are called totafos because they have four compartments: tat in Katfei means two, and pat in Afriki means two.” Interestingly, there Rashi does not stop at that; he adds another explanation. “And Menachem explained it” by linking the word linguistically to the verse “And speak toward the south,” or to the verse “Do not speak forth.” It refers to speaking, as when someone delivers a sermon, like “and as a remembrance between your eyes,” which appears in the first passage. What does that have to do with this? The idea is speaking forth. Rashi says that someone who sees them bound between the eyes—who sees the tefillin there—will remember the miracle. They prompt him to remember the miracle and speak about it. So this mitzvah leads a person to speak about it. That is why they are called totafos. Two explanations. The Rebbe asks: When I now learn this verse in Parshas Va’eschanan, either way there is a question. If Rashi relies on the student’s memory of Parshas Bo, he has already explained what these are: he said “tefillin.” He also explained how tat and pat allude to four. Perhaps, though, from Shemos until here the student may have forgotten a little, and his memory needs refreshing. So he says:

09:16 If so, why does Rashi omit Menachem ben Saruk’s second explanation? If that explanation was needed there—that totafos relates to speaking forth, because someone who sees the tefillin will speak about the miracle—why can we do without it here? What might someone else say? That he abbreviated it. When you explain something a second time, you keep it short. The Rebbe says: He did not merely shorten it. We will see that Rashi’s wording also changes between the two parshiyos. Let’s look at the differences. In Parshas Bo, Rashi brings Menachem ben Saruk’s second explanation. In Parshas Va’eschanan, he makes do with repeating the first explanation. In Parshas Bo, Rashi simply says “tefillin”; here he says, “These are the tefillin of the arm,” and “These are the tefillin of the head.” But there are more differences. In Parshas Bo, when explaining why totafos means four, Rashi says: “They are called totafos because they have four compartments.” Here, however, he says: “They are called totafos after the number of their passages.” What is the difference? In Bo, he explains that the four indicated by totafos refers to the compartments. In Va’eschanan, he says that totafos, meaning four, refers to the passages. Why? You would expect the opposite. Since the word totafos appears in the Torah only in connection with the head tefillin—it never says, “You shall bind them as frontlets upon your hand”—wherever totafos appears, it refers only to the head tefillin. It would make sense to assume that the number four alluded to by totafos applies only to the head tefillin, not to the hand tefillin. So it would be more reasonable to say it refers to the four compartments. Why? Because if you are talking about passages, the hand tefillin has only one compartment, so I understand why it is not called totafos. But in Va’eschanan, when he speaks about the number of their passages, the hand tefillin also contains four passages. Perhaps we should explain a little for those who are not familiar: the same four passages appear

12:36 Both in the arm tefillin and in the head tefillin. In the arm tefillin, they appear on one scroll, like a strip of film: one long scroll with four passages on it. In the head tefillin, they are divided among compartments. Inside the four boxes are four separate compartments. So if you’re talking about passages, the arm tefillin also have four passages. Why, then, do you say “corresponding to the number of their passages”? If that’s what it means, the verse should have said, “And you shall bind them as totafos upon your arm.” To explain this, the Rebbe raises an interesting idea. But first, another question. When Rashi quotes the opening words of the verse in Parshas Va’eschanan, he quotes, “And you shall bind them as a sign upon your arm.” After all, he’s only explaining what the verse is talking about—or so we thought. He’s explaining that “a sign” means the arm tefillin. So he should have quoted just “as a sign.” What is the sign? The arm tefillin. Then he should have quoted “as totafos”—that means the head tefillin. Why does he quote both “And you shall bind them as a sign upon your arm” and “and they shall be as totafos between your eyes”? He isn’t explaining what “you shall bind” means or what “they shall be” means. The Rebbe resolves all these questions with a very interesting explanation. It’s all based on differences in the wording of the verses themselves. Let’s see. In Parshas Bo, the verse says, “And it shall be for you as a sign upon your arm and as totafos between your eyes.” “It shall be”—what shall be? The tefillin? What is it that “shall be for you as a sign upon your arm”? Rashi says there that it’s the account of the Exodus from Egypt. That account will be as totafos between your eyes. So there Rashi explains that totafos means four boxes. Why doesn’t he explain it as four passages? Because there aren’t four passages that speak about the Exodus from Egypt. If the subject of the verse—“it shall be”—is the account of the Exodus from Egypt, that appears only in Kadesh and Vehayah Ki Yeviacha. It doesn’t appear at all

15:46 in Shema or Vehayah Im Shamoa; the Exodus from Egypt isn’t mentioned there. So if I say that the account of the Exodus from Egypt shall be as totafos—as four—four what? Passages? There aren’t four passages about the Exodus from Egypt. So there Rashi had to say it means four boxes. But Parshas Va’eschanan is different. Here it says “they shall be,” in the plural. Who are “they”? The Rebbe immediately points to “these words shall be.” What are “these words”? The passages I’m commanding you about. So what could I say here? Four boxes doesn’t fit. “The passages shall be”—what will they be? They’ll turn into four boxes? How do passages turn into boxes? So here Rashi has no choice but to say that totafos is “corresponding to the number of their passages.” “These words shall be”—these are the passages, these texts that I’m giving you now: Shema, Vehayah Im Shamoa, Kadesh and Vehayah Ki Yeviacha. These will be four. Four what? Four passages. The Rebbe points out another difference between Parshas Bo and Parshas Va’eschanan. In Parshas Bo, the Rebbe says, Rashi couldn’t explain totafos as referring to four passages. Why not? Because if we say that at the time of the Exodus from Egypt they were commanded to put on tefillin containing four passages—I hope you know that until the fortieth year, when Sefer Devarim was given, the passages Shema and Vehayah Im Shamoa had not been said at all. So how could they write passages that had not yet been said? Those passages didn’t exist yet. We would then have to say that since Hakadosh Boruch Hu commanded them to put on four passages, and they didn’t have them, they shouldn’t put on tefillin. It would follow that throughout the forty years in the desert, the Jewish people did not put on tefillin. Why? Because He commanded them. In Parshas Bo, He commanded them to put on tefillin: “And it shall be for you as a sign upon your arm and as a remembrance between your eyes.” And tefillin is not a mitzvah dependent on being in the Land of Israel. So why wouldn’t they do

18:41 it in the desert? But how could they, if they didn’t have four passages? The Rebbe says that this is why Rashi says there: Do you know what totafos means? Yes—four. Four what? Four boxes. They had four boxes then, but only two passages. So how did they put on tefillin? The Rebbe offers a tremendous insight: To explain how the Jewish people put on tefillin throughout their forty years in the desert, even though there were not yet four passages, he says that they did have four boxes. What did they do with the passages? The Rebbe says they put on tefillin with two empty boxes and two filled ones. Two of the four boxes contained Kadesh and Vehayah Ki Yeviacha, while the places for Shema and Vehayah Im Shamoa, which had not yet been said, remained empty. The commandment to make totafos referred to the boxes; it did not require four passages. But now a question arises. After such a beautiful explanation of Rashi, something is still missing. If there were only two passages then, and the boxes are obviously made to hold passages, why did the Torah already command them to make four boxes? If the Torah had told them then to make two boxes and had added another two in the fortieth year, fine. But already at the Exodus from Egypt, He said totafos—four. Tat and pat—four boxes, when there were only two passages. So the question is: Why did Hashem command them to make another two empty boxes? What purpose did they serve? The Rebbe says that this is why Rashi had to add Menachem’s explanation there, to complete the idea. How does Menachem’s explanation help? He says that one who sees them... Sees what? The boxes. Not the arm tefillin—you don’t see those under the sleeve. One who sees the four boxes on the head will remember the miracle and speak about it. What does that mean? To someone seeing them from the outside, it makes no difference at that moment whether the boxes contain

21:41 passages or not. The very structure of four boxes is more striking than a structure of two boxes, like a monument. You can make a monument with one column, or you can make one with more elements; that’s more striking. If I may add something that isn’t in the sicha, the number four also recalls the Exodus from Egypt. Why? Because of the four expressions of Geulah, the four sons, the four cups and the four questions. So it’s understandable that when there are four boxes containing the account of the miracle—“and it shall be for you,” the account of the Exodus from Egypt within a structure of four—it makes a greater impression on the person who sees it and leads him to speak about the miracle more than two boxes would. In other words, Menachem’s explanation answers the question about the two empty boxes: Who needs them? Menachem’s insight is that the boxes serve not only to hold the passages. The boxes themselves, visible from the outside, recall the miracle of the Exodus from Egypt and lead people to speak about it. So now we understand why Rashi had to give Menachem’s explanation there as well. There’s another difference in wording that we don’t notice until the Rebbe opens our eyes to it: a difference in sentence structure between the verse in Parshas Bo and the verse in Parshas Va’eschanan. In Parshas Bo... Let’s look at it with screen sharing. No, we don’t have that. In Parshas Bo it says: “And it shall be for you as a sign upon your arm and as a remembrance between your eyes.” The same “it”—the same entity—will be both a sign upon your arm and, at the same time, a remembrance between your eyes. One entity shared by both. What does that mean in practical terms? That the arm tefillin and the head tefillin form one entity. As we asked at the beginning of the sicha about the Rambam: Why does he divide them into two mitzvos? It’s the same mitzvah, with one part on the arm and one part on the head. That is indeed what Parshas Bo seems to imply: “And it shall be”—that same entity shall be as a sign

24:51 “On your hand and as a remembrance between your eyes”—together. But in Parshas Vaeschanan, the verse divides them in two. “And you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand”—it does not say, “and as frontlets between your eyes,” as though the same binding applies both to the hand and to the head. It says, “And you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand.” Then there is something else: “And they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.” So the Rebbe offers an amazing insight. When Rashi says, “These are the tefillin of the arm, and these are the tefillin of the head,” he is not telling the child what the verse is talking about. First, he has already said that once: frontlets means tefillin. Second, the child knows what we put on the hand and the head: tefillin. Rashi is teaching us something new, which is why he also quotes the words “and you shall bind them” and “and they shall be.” Pay attention, Rashi is telling the student: the verse breaks its wording in two. “And you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand” is one thing. “These are the tefillin of the arm” stands on its own. “And they shall be as frontlets between your eyes”—“these are the tefillin of the head” stands on its own. In other words, the wording of the verse itself teaches me that these are two separate mitzvos. On this basis, the Rebbe also explains another question we asked. Why does Rashi need to repeat himself? What does “frontlets” mean? Tat in Katfi means two, pat in Afriki means two. You already told us that. All right, we said that there it refers to the compartments, whereas here it refers to the passages. That only tells us what the four are—the compartments or the passages. But you have already told me the basic point, that tat plus pat means four. Tat in Katfi, pat in Afriki. Why repeat it? I already know the arithmetic. The Rebbe gives an amazing explanation. Nobody asks themselves why the Torah needs to allude to four in two different languages. Why couldn’t the Torah write, “And they shall be four between your eyes”? Why two different languages? More than that: you want a foreign language? For some reason. Then tell me how to say four in Afriki—

27:48 ta, ta, ta. What difference does it make? Just tell me how to say four in Afriki, or how to say four in Katfi. But why take one word from Katfi meaning two and one word from Afriki meaning two? That makes it complicated. Not only is it not Hebrew but a foreign language—it is two foreign languages, each saying “two.” Say “four” in one of them. The Rebbe says there is an amazing hint here. The fact that the Torah divided it into two kinds of two, one Afriki and one Katfi, shows that each pair is a category of its own. Do not equate this pair with that pair. And this idea—that each pair stands on its own—has a twofold significance, both in Parshas Bo and again in Parshas Vaeschanan. Let’s see. In Parshas Bo, what did Rashi say? That “frontlets” refers to the fact that there are four compartments, because there were not yet four passages. There are four compartments. Now, is there a difference between one pair of compartments and the other pair? Yes. Two compartments are filled and two are empty. So I cannot simply say “four,” because this is not one set of four. It is two filled and two empty: tat and pat. But when we reach Parshas Vaeschanan, all four compartments are filled. So there is no longer any difference, as far as the compartments are concerned, between this pair and that pair. Both are filled. Here Rashi says it refers to the passages. True, there are four passages, but they form two groups, two pairs of passages. How is that expressed? Two passages deal with the Exodus from Egypt: Kadesh and Vehayah Ki Yevi’acha. The other two, Shema and Vehayah Im Shamoa, make no mention of the Exodus from Egypt. Another difference: two passages, Kadesh and Vehayah Ki Yevi’acha, were said before the Giving of the Torah, and two passages, Shema and Vehayah Im Shamoa, were said after the Giving of the Torah. So let us now draw out, in general terms, what we have learned—

30:43 from this Rashi. By saying “these are the tefillin of the arm” and “these are the tefillin of the head,” Rashi shows us that the verse itself split them into two separate clauses. Not like in Parshas Bo, where “and it shall be”—that one “shall be”—applies both to “a sign upon your hand” and to “frontlets between your eyes.” No. “And you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand”—these are the tefillin of the arm; “and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes”—these are the tefillin of the head. So here the Torah revealed that these are two separate mitzvos. This now becomes very clear. Not only did the Rambam count them as two mitzvos, but where did he find support for that? Specifically in Parshas Vaeschanan. We asked earlier: why didn’t he cite Parshas Bo? It comes earlier in the Torah. Parshas Bo, on the contrary, explicitly indicates one mitzvah. He wanted to show that at the end of the forty years, the Torah established that these are two mitzvos. Where is the proof? Only in Vaeschanan, because there it says “and you shall bind them” and “and they shall be”—two distinct clauses. What difficulty remains? In Parshas Vaeschanan, Rashi says that tat in Katfi means two and pat in Afriki means two, making four, and that this refers to the number of their passages. Now a question arises. If you want to teach me that these are two separate mitzvos, why tell me that specifically in Parshas Vaeschanan? Because if you say in Parshas Vaeschanan that this refers to the passages, how many passages are there by then? Four—both in the hand tefillin and in the head tefillin. But the word “frontlets” appears in the verse only in relation to the head tefillin. It is never used in relation to the hand tefillin. So if you said it referred to four compartments, I would understand why it applies only to the head: the hand tefillin has just one compartment. How could you call that tat and pat? It has only one compartment. But if you say that in Parshas Vaeschanan the “four” means passages, are there four passages only in the head tefillin? The hand tefillin also contains four passages. They are in one space, but there are four passages. The Rebbe had—

33:55 a wonderful insight. There is another difference we noted earlier between Rashi’s wording here and there. In Parshas Bo, when he explains “frontlets,” he says, “because they are four compartments.” In Parshas Vaeschanan, he does not say, “because they are four passages,” but rather, “because of the number of their passages.” Why did he not say in Bo, “because of the number of their compartments”? The Rebbe offers an interesting insight. What is the difference between the hand tefillin and the head tefillin? With the hand tefillin, the number four is not essential. There is no requirement in principle that it be precisely four, because the word “frontlets” is not used for the hand tefillin. It does not have to be four. The proof is that for forty years they put on tefillin with two passages. There were not four. The head tefillin are different. Wait, then why are there four passages in the hand tefillin today? With the hand tefillin, the requirement is only that all the passages that discuss the mitzvah of tefillin be included in the hand tefillin. Their number is not important. So in Parshas Bo there were two passages—then let there be two. When there are four passages, or if there were five, put in five. The number four is not important. As it happens, tefillin are mentioned four times in the Torah, so I put all the passages that mention tefillin into the hand tefillin. With the head tefillin, the Rebbe says, the requirement concerns the number four. Since the Torah used the word “frontlets,” tat and pat, specifically for the head, it intended to hint that regardless of how many passages there are, the number must be four. The proof is that even when there were not four passages, there were four compartments, because the verse says tat and pat. So in any case, the number four must be present in the head tefillin. That is why Rashi does not say “because they are four passages,” but “because of the number of their passages.” Here the number matters. By contrast, with the hand tefillin, the number of passages does not matter. Why are there four? Because that is

36:35 the passages in the Torah. If there were two, I would put in two; but the head tefillin must have the number four—“tat” and “pat.” So either that means four compartments or four passages; it means specifically four passages. That is why I say they are named for the number of passages. Heart to heart. That concludes the Rebbe’s explanation of Rashi’s plain meaning. Now the Rebbe goes a little deeper. Why did the Torah change the nature of the mitzvah of tefillin? At the time of the Exodus, in Parshas Bo, the Torah treated its two parts—the arm tefillin and the head tefillin—as one mitzvah. Suddenly, in the fortieth year, that changed, and Hakadosh Boruch Hu introduced a new provision: they are two separate mitzvos. What changed? The Rebbe offers an amazing idea. Our Sages describe two special effects of the mitzvah of tefillin, and the Rebbe would always mention them in connection with the tefillin campaign. First, the Gemara in Berachos 6a asks: “How do we know that tefillin are a source of strength for Israel? As it says, ‘All the peoples of the earth will see that the name of Hashem is called upon you, and they will fear you.’” Rabbi Eliezer the Great asks: Where do they see the name of Hashem called upon you? It is written on your forehead. So he says: This refers to the head tefillin. People see the head tefillin. They do not see the arm tefillin; those are covered by the sleeve. They see the head tefillin, “and they will fear you.” This has the special effect of striking fear into Israel’s enemies. That is what the Rebbe would always say when speaking about the tefillin campaign: it strikes fear and dread into Israel’s enemies. But he would also cite another source from our Sages. Rabbeinu Asher, the Rosh, has writings called Hilchos Ketanos. In his laws of tefillin there, he writes as follows—and these are his words: Through the merit of observing the mitzvah of tefillin and ensuring that they are properly made, the verse “He tears off arm and even the crown of the head” will be fulfilled for those who go to war. That verse is about the tribe of Gad. They were the commandos who entered the Land first.

39:43 Incidentally, they are also alluded to in the tefillin. On one side of the head tefillin is a shin with three branches, and on the other side a shin with four branches. Three and four spell Gad. What praise is said of Gad? “He tears off arm and even the crown of the head.” And the Rebbe asks: What is the difference between these two special effects? It is quite simple. The difference is how tefillin affect the nations of the world with respect to Israel’s security. Regarding the verse “For the name of Hashem is called upon you, and they will fear you,” our Sages tell us what causes “they will fear you.” Is it the arm tefillin or the head tefillin? The head tefillin. They see them. They see the head tefillin, and what happens then? “They will fear you.” Well, how will you fight them? You will not need to fight. It will deter them so powerfully that they will not even dream of fighting Jews. There will be no need for war at all. Where is this verse said? In Parshas Bo. We said that there they were one mitzvah, but which was primary? The head tefillin. “They will fear you.” So why do we need the arm tefillin? Our Sages say the arm tefillin merely support the head tefillin: whenever the tefillin are between your eyes, there must be two. You cannot put on the head tefillin without the arm tefillin. I gave an analogy. It is like a soldier standing behind a wall in Gaza, holding a machine gun above the wall that frightens the enemy. But he cannot hold the machine gun in the air. It needs a tripod. So there is a tripod supporting the machine gun. But which one threatens them? Not the tripod—the machine gun. The arm tefillin are only what enables me to put on the head tefillin. But which one projects fear and dread onto the enemy? “For the name of Hashem is called upon you”—the head tefillin—“and they will fear you,” and there will be no need for war. That is what is written in Parshas Bo. In Parshas Bo, the Rebbe says, the plan was for Moshe Rabbeinu to bring us into the Land. Moshe’s face shone like the sun.

42:45 The sun represents something above nature. Had Moshe brought us into the Land, everything would have happened miraculously. They would have fled before us. We would not have needed to fight at all. Rashi also says in our parsha that, had they merited it, they would not have needed weapons. That was in Moshe’s time. So that special effect fits there. But the Rebbe asks: What changed in Parshas Va’eschanan? Moshe has already recounted that he pleaded with 515 prayers, but his prayers were not accepted and he would not enter the Land. Moshe would pass away, and Yehoshua would lead them in. If Moshe’s face shone like the sun, above nature, Yehoshua’s face shone like the moon. In Yehoshua’s time they would still win, but they would win through natural warfare. They would have to fight and strike down the enemy. And when you have to strike, anyone who understands warfare knows that there is a military arm and there is the mind that organizes and plans. Here the verse promises us that we will not only strike down the military arm; we will also carry out a targeted strike against the head that does the planning. And in whose merit will these two things happen? He says: In the merit of the tefillin on the arm, “He tears off arm”; and in the merit of the tefillin on the head, there will be “even the crown of the head.” So the Torah needed to make them two separate mitzvos here, each accomplishing something different. That is when Yehoshua leads them in. This also helps us understand why, when the Rambam speaks of them as two mitzvos, another question arises that everyone asks. The Rambam lists the first one, mitzvah 12, as the commandment to put on the head tefillin. Mitzvah 13 is the commandment to put on the arm tefillin. Why does he put the head tefillin before the arm tefillin? Various explanations have been offered. The Rebbe explains it in one of his sichos—not this sicha—very simply. One difference between the arm and head tefillin is that, with the arm tefillin, the mitzvah is to tie them on. Once I have tied them, I have fulfilled the mitzvah. Even if I take them off now,

45:58 the mitzvah has already been fulfilled. So if I leave them tied on my arm, I am not continuously fulfilling another mitzvah; it is fulfilled only when I tie them. With the head tefillin, the verse says, “And they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.” There, every moment that the head tefillin are on my head is a mitzvah. So the Rebbe says: The head tefillin are considered constant, while the arm tefillin are not constant. When one thing is constant and the other is not, the constant one takes precedence. We could suggest another idea as well. It is known that the arm and head tefillin allude to “we will do and we will hear.” So at first, before the Giving of the Torah, when they are about to receive the Torah, they must first act: “And it shall be a sign upon your arm and frontlets between your eyes.” First comes “we will do,” and from doing we come to “we will hear.” After the Giving of the Torah, in the Book of Devarim—which deals with the fundamentals of faith—and when the Rambam, too, puts the head tefillin first, he does so in the section called the Book of Love. According to the Rambam, love does not come from deeds. It is not like the approach that says, “Hearts are drawn after actions.” That is an introduction; it is for beginners. But later, before Moshe enters the Land, he speaks to them about all the fundamentals of faith. There is a verse there that says, “And we will hear and do.” “We will hear” means faith and its deeper teachings. Contemplation by the mind comes first; from the mind it descends to the heart, which corresponds to the arm, and from there come love and awe of Hashem. So here we see Rashi’s remarkable precision and how it fits the different periods. In Moshe’s time, when everything was meant to happen miraculously, the head tefillin, supported by the arm tefillin, were enough. There was no need for the arm tefillin in their own right. There was no “He tears off arm”—no one needed to be struck down. “They will fear you”: they flee and leave before we even arrive. They clear the way. That is how it would have been had we merited to enter under Moshe. But now that we are entering under Yehoshua, war and struggle are needed. In a struggle there is the practical arm, and there is

49:00 the head, and both have to be struck down. Anyone who studies the Rebbe’s sicha in volume 9, Parshas Va’eschanan, will see that he goes into this wonderful sicha at length, explaining its deeper meaning in the Torah. We do not have time to expand on it now. The point is that the same is true within the soul. There are two kinds of service of Hashem. Sometimes a Jew brings out the light of chochmah in the soul, and then, as a matter of course, the animal soul [unclear]. He flees from anything sinful; he does not consent to it at all. It cannot interfere, because the power of chochmah is revealed so wonderfully. That corresponds to Moshe Rabbeinu. But the ultimate goal is interesting. At first, Yehoshua sounds weaker. The Rebbe says: If the enemy flees from you, on the one hand that is wonderful—it happened without a war. But you have not defeated him; he still exists. Tomorrow he will come back with the Gibeonites. By contrast, if you engage him, actively seek out the confrontation, and destroy the arm—the practical garments of the animal soul: thought, speech, and action—and also strike at the head, the desires and the faculties of the animal soul, then you eliminate him completely and conquer the Land, until we reach the time of Moshiach Tzidkeinu. Then “Awake and sing, you who dwell in the dust,” and we will merit to see again all those we mourn today, to be comforted, and to say, “I thank You, Hashem, for You were angry with me,” and “Comfort, comfort My people, says your G-d.”