Parshas Vayishlach
1. On the verse1 "ויקחו שני בני יעקב שמעון ולוי אחי דינה איש חרבו גו'" ("And two of Yaakov's sons, Shimon and Levi, Dinah's brothers, each took his sword…"), our Sages say that they were then thirteen years old2. And from this one derives3 the law of "בן שלש עשרה למצות" ("At thirteen, one becomes obligated in mitzvos")4: since at thirteen years one is called an "ish" ("a man")5, which denotes maturity*5 [as it is written6, "מי שמך לאיש גו'" ("Who made you a man…"), and "וחזקת והיית לאיש" ("Be strong and become a man")] — that is, at thirteen years he attains the level of an adult, of one who is mature in (intellect and) understanding7 — he therefore becomes obligated in all the mitzvos.
And although8 it is possible for him to be intelligent even before thirteen years, nevertheless, since he lacks completeness of understanding and feeling — he does not yet have the recognition and feeling both of the preciousness and virtue of fulfilling the mitzvos, and of the deficiency in failing to fulfill them
[as one gives9 the example of this also from "מילי דעלמא" ("worldly matters"): even when the minor (before thirteen years) understands well the virtue of wealth and greatness, nevertheless, "אמיתת הענין של ממון וגדולה רחוק ממנו" ("the true nature of wealth and greatness is far from him") — he is still far from having a true recognition and feeling of them as an adult does. And so too regarding their opposite, "lowliness and poverty": although he understands their deficiency, it is not with him as with an adult, who "truly feels the deficiency of lowliness and poverty, etc."]
— therefore he is not responsible for his deeds and conduct, and the obligation of the mitzvos cannot be placed upon him.
2. Our Rebbeim, our Nesiim, many times10 said at a Bar Mitzvah celebration a maamar beginning with the verse11 "נעשה אדם" ("Let us make man")12. From this it is understood that the matter of a Bar Mitzvah is connected also with the level of "adam" ("man"), which is a higher level than (the title) "ish"13 — as explained in several places14 regarding the four names by which a person is called (adam, ish, gever, enosh), that the highest of all these names is the name "adam," which denotes his completeness.
This is not understood: since for the obligation of mitzvos of a thirteen-year-old the level of "ish" suffices — why is the matter of Bar Mitzvah connected (also) with the level of "adam"?
3. The difference between "ish" and "adam" is: the title "ish" relates to the level of intellect that is connected with the emotions (the feeling of the heart)15 [and within this itself there are very many levels, until the completeness of this level comes when he reaches twenty years of age16], whereas the title "adam" denotes the virtue of intellect that is above being connected with the emotions17.
According to this, it becomes even more difficult [the above-mentioned connection of "Let us make man" with Bar Mitzvah]: how can one connect the virtue of "adam" with someone who has only just turned thirteen years old?
One must say that the intent here is that (although the essence of a Bar Mitzvah is that he becomes an "ish," as above, nevertheless) in fulfilling the mitzvos one must arrive also at the influence of the level of "adam."
4. The source of this (that the level of "ish" is not sufficient) is the verse "And they took… each man his sword" itself. For seemingly it is difficult: the novelty that comes to a thirteen-year-old, on account of which he becomes obligated in mitzvos, is (not in the emotions, but) in intellect and understanding (that relates to the emotions) — the fact that he becomes a person of understanding, fit to comprehend and consequently to take upon himself the yoke and the responsibility of Torah and mitzvos —
so how can this be learned from the verse "ויקחו גו' איש חרבו גו' ויהרגו כל זכר" ("And they took… each man his sword… and they killed every male"), whose content is an action ("And they took… and they killed…") that comes from the intensity of the emotions*17?
It follows from this that the content of the verse "And they took… and they killed…" contains within it a virtue that is not necessarily present in the level of "ish," but through which that level becomes complete — and therefore one can learn from this verse [not only that at thirteen one is obligated in mitzvos because he is an "ish" in the plain sense, but also] that the level of a plain "ish" is not enough, and one must also arrive at the virtue that is alluded to in "And they took…."
With this it is also understood why our Rebbeim, our Nesiim, said at a Bar Mitzvah celebration a maamar beginning "Let us make man" — for although the general matter of thirteen for mitzvos is due to the fact that one then becomes an "ish" and a person of understanding, as above, nevertheless, this alone is not enough, and one must also arrive at the influence of the mode of service of "(Let us make) man," which is similar to the service of "And they took…," as will be explained.
5. The explanation of this:
Regarding the source of the law of thirteen for mitzvos, we find two opinions: a) as above, that it is learned from our verse; b) it is one of the measures that are "הלכה למשה מסיני" ("a law given to Moshe at Sinai")18.
The difference between the two derivations: according to the first opinion, it is because of the change in nature — that such is the nature (of most people), that at thirteen years one becomes mature in intellect and understanding; according to the second opinion, it is a halachic law (one of the measures that are a law given to Moshe at Sinai), and not because of the (change in) nature19.
The practical halachic difference — when do the Children of Noach become obligated in fulfilling the commandments in which they are obligated20:
According to the first opinion, that the reason for thirteen for mitzvos is the nature of human beings, the age of thirteen years obligates the Children of Noach as well in the fulfillment of their commandments;
whereas according to the other opinion, that the rule of thirteen for mitzvos is a law given to Moshe at Sinai, it is understood that for the Children of Noach, to whom "לא ניתנו השיעורין" ("the measures were not given")21, maturity depends on each individual22 according to his intellect and understanding, in accordance with his natural disposition23.
6. These two opinions, in terms of a person's service of G‑d, are two modes in the order in which a Jew's service in fulfilling Torah and mitzvos must begin:
According to the first opinion, it is a mode of service based on reason and understanding — that is, since his obligation to fulfill mitzvos depends on the natural completeness of intellect and understanding, so that when he*23 has recognition and feeling in the matter of mitzvos, the yoke of mitzvos is placed upon him — it is understood that the beginning of his service is in a mode of reason and understanding;
according to the second opinion, however, the fact that a thirteen-year-old must accept upon himself the yoke of mitzvos is a law given to Moshe at Sinai, because such is the command of the Holy One, blessed be He — it follows that his initial approach to fulfilling the mitzvos is according to the order of service of kabbalas ol (accepting the yoke)24.
7. But also according to the first opinion, that from the verse "And they took… each man his sword…" one learns that the beginning of service (thirteen for mitzvos) is based on reason and understanding — nevertheless, from the very fact that it is learned from the verse "And they took… each man his sword…" (an act of self-sacrifice), it is proven25 that also according to this opinion, the matter of fulfilling the mitzvos is bound up with the service of mesiras nefesh (self-sacrifice), which is above intellect.
And there is no contradiction to what was explained above, that according to this opinion it is a service based on intellect and understanding — for although the service itself must be with recognition and comprehension of the matter of Torah and mitzvos, nevertheless, the foundation of the service is specifically kabbalas ol (which is above reason and understanding), because only when the foundation is kabbalas ol can the service of fulfilling the mitzvos with comprehension be as it should be26.
8. Among the proofs for this: in the general exhortations regarding the fulfillment of Torah and mitzvos it is written27, "ראה נתתי לפניך היום את החיים ואת הטוב גו' ובחרת בחיים" ("See, I have set before you today life and good… and you shall choose life"). Seemingly, a person already "sees" with the eyes of his intellect that the path of Torah and mitzvos is "life and good" — why must he still be told to choose life?
The explanation of this, however: if a person's choice of Torah and mitzvos will be founded only upon his intellect, comprehension and knowledge that they are life and good — he is thereby still not a servant of G‑d. For the matter of serving G‑d is like the service of a servant to his master28: everything a servant does is because of the yoke that his master has placed upon him. And therefore a person's choice of Torah and mitzvos must be because of the command of the Holy One, blessed be He, "And you shall choose life."
But before this the verse first states "See, I have set…" — and also in the command "And you shall choose" the verse emphasizes "And you shall choose life" — because the Al-mighty wants the matter of Torah and mitzvos to permeate a person's entire being, and therefore his intellect too must grasp and feel that Torah and mitzvos are life and good.
9. Based on all the above, the connection of a Bar Mitzvah with "Let us make man" will be understood:
In the explanation of the title "adam" we find two matters: a) the ultimate completeness of the level of intellect, as above, section 3; b) "adam" has the same letters as "me'od" ("very")29 — the level of the infinite, which is above intellect30. [And this level in a person expresses itself in the fact that he is a speaking being, for his power of speech comes from the infinite within his soul, which is above the virtue of intellect31.]
And since both matters are alluded to in the same title — "adam" — one must say that they are connected with one another.
And the matter in terms of service, it can be said: even when a person reaches the ultimate completeness of intellect, the level of the intellect of "adam," which is higher than the intellect of "ish" — he must arrive at mesiras nefesh that is above intellect32;
and so too, conversely: even when the power of mesiras nefesh that is above intellect shines within him, he should not be satisfied with this, but should endeavor that the mesiras nefesh permeate also his inner faculties (as above, section 8), whose beginning and first is the power of intellect.
And this is one of the allusions in the fact that the maamar "Let us make man" was said to a Bar Mitzvah — to show that even when one attains the virtue of intellect and understanding (that relate to the emotions), at which point he is called an "ish," it is not enough, and he must still arrive at the service of "each man his sword…," the service of mesiras nefesh that is above intellect33, which is bound up with the level of "adam," which has the same letters as "me'od."
(From a sicha of Tammuz 5711, at a Bar Mitzvah celebration)
Notes
1) Our Parsha, 34:25.
2) Bereishis Rabbah 80:10. Midrash Lekach Tov and Sechel Tov here (by calculation — and in a different manner, see there). As cited in the next note.
3) Rashi, Nazir (29b), s.v. "VeRabbi Yossi." Rashi and Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura on Avos 5:21 (according to the Alter Rebbe's version in his Siddur — 5:22). Machzor Vitri there. — The question is well known (Responsa Maharil, 51): from where do we know that one under thirteen is not an "ish"; and furthermore, the early generations had children at eight. — See below, note 22.
4) Avos, there. Rambam, Laws of Shevisas Asor 2:1. And in many places (see Encyclopedia Talmudis, entry "Gadol," p. 138, and the sources cited there).
5) In the wording of the Rambam, Laws of Ishus 2:10: "He is called a gadol (an adult) and is called an ish."
*5) In Rashi and Bartenura on Avos there: "As it is written, 'a man or a woman who shall do…,' and he is not called an ish until he is thirteen, etc." — and if so, the fact that specifically an "ish" is obligated in mitzvos is a derivation from Scripture. But there is no compelling reason at all to say that it is a Scriptural decree without a reason.
6) Shemos 2:14 (and as Rashi and Rabbeinu Bachya explain there — unlike what is stated in Shemos Rabbah there). Melachim I 2:2. See also Radak's Sefer HaShorashim, entry "Ish."
7) See Encyclopedia Talmudis, the above entry, at its beginning, and the sources cited there.
8) On all this, see Kuntres HaTefillah, ch. 5, p. 15ff. Sefer HaMaamarim 5670, p. 115. Hemshech 5672, vol. 3, p. 1227.
9) Kuntres HaTefillah, there, p. 16. Sefer HaMaamarim 5670, there. Hemshech 5672, there.
10) For example — the maamar "Naaseh Adam" 5660.
11) Bereishis 1:26.
12) My father-in-law, the Previous Rebbe, related that the Bar Mitzvah maamarim (among the Rebbeim) would begin "Naaseh Adam" (and when the maamar was given out to be copied, the beginning was sometimes omitted).
13) It is noteworthy that we find our Rebbeim said a maamar beginning "VeChazakta VeHayisa LeIsh" on the day of beginning to put on tefillin — 11 Iyar 5653 (Likkutei Dibburim, vol. 1, 107b); the second day of Chanukah 5696. Note also Sefer HaMaamarim 5701 (p. 246; Chanoch LaNaar, p. 10) — regarding the Rebbe Rashab: "Then he became an ish. When he became Bar Mitzvah, my revered grandfather, the Rebbe Maharash, blessed him that he should be an adam."
14) See Zohar III, 48a. Likkutei Torah, Shlach 35a. The maamar "VeIsh Ki Yimaret" 5629. Kuntres Toras HaChassidus, ch. 6. And elsewhere (see Sefer HaErchim–Chabad, entry "Adam," sections 8–9).
15) Peirush HaMilos (by the Mitteler Rebbe), ch. 20. See at length Likkutei Sichos, vol. 4, p. 1117ff.
16) Peirush HaMilos, there.
17) See at length Likkutei Sichos, there (and note 24 there).
*17) See our Parsha 34:7: "And they were very angry." Rashi, Vayechi (49:6), s.v. "Ki Ve'apam."
18) Responsa of the Rosh, beginning of Klal 16. Responsa Maharil, 51. The second explanation in Rashi on Avos, there.
19) Perhaps the reason for this view can be explained: because it holds that the signs (and the years) bring about maturity (and are not merely evidence of maturity) — see Tzafnas Paneach on the Rambam, Laws of Ishus 2:9.
20) See also Likkutei Sichos, vol. 5, p. 421; Likkutei Sichos, vol. 10, p. 70ff.
21) Rambam, Laws of Melachim 9:10.
22) Note Tosafos, s.v. "BeYadua" (Sanhedrin 69a): "In the early generations, who would quickly bring forth [signs of maturity], the time of maturity was much earlier."
23) So writes Responsa Chasam Sofer, Yoreh De'ah, end of siman 317 (regarding the view of the Rambam — see there, and there siman 184).
*23) And although there may be an exception, in which even then his understanding will not be complete — the Torah speaks of the majority. See also Moreh Nevuchim, part 3, ch. 34.
24) As our Sages say (Yevamos 77b): "If it is a halachah [received tradition], we will accept it," even though (if it is derived by reasoning) there is a refutation.
25) See Likkutei Sichos, vol. 5, p. 162, note 74; there, p. 421.
26) See Likkutei Sichos, vol. 2, p. 428; vol. 4, p. 1211ff. And elsewhere.
27) Nitzavim 30:15–19.
28) See Tanya, ch. 41.
29) Bereishis Rabbah 8:5, and the commentary attributed to Rashi on Bereishis Rabbah there. Torah Or 46d. Likkutei Torah, Shir HaShirim 29b. Hemshech VeKachah 5637, ch. 22.
30) Likkutei Torah, there. And elsewhere.
31) VeKachah 5637, there.
32) The matter in intellect — intellect itself compels the conclusion that there is something above intellect. See Hemshech 5672, vol. 1, ch. 100. And elsewhere.
33) Based on what is explained in Sefer HaMaamarim 5670 (p. 122ff.) and elsewhere regarding daas (knowledge), into which there is drawn from the level of will and the inner dimension of will — what is said above in the text (sections 1 and 9) becomes sweeter: that the matter of mesiras nefesh ("me'od," which has the same letters as "adam") that is above intellect, which must be present in a thirteen-year-old, is included in the fact that he becomes an ish and a person of understanding.
Key Lesson
Becoming Bar Mitzvah means reaching the maturity of understanding of an "ish," yet that alone is not enough: the foundation of Torah and mitzvos must be kabbalas ol and mesiras nefesh, which are above intellect. At the same time, this self-sacrifice should not remain apart, but should permeate one's intellect and inner faculties, so that one becomes a complete "adam."