Given that in the laws of Shabbath, if one performs the same מלאכה (work) twice (example: pruning two branches), one is only responsible to bring one offering (to atone for both of the acts); How is it that if someone performs a single act, which embodies two separate מלאכות (works), (example: (1)lighting a fire under a pot that is full of food which will now (2)cook.) how is it that he must bring two offerings? (one to atone for each) [paraphrased by me -- someone please. correct if I've made mistakes]This question really bothered me. In the real world, we always see cases of people accomplishing multiple tasks with a single action. That is called acting efficiently and we hope that everyone does this as often and as much as possible. In view of this, why would the MaBiT be shocked that one action can have two resulting disparate benefits? He was a wise Torah scholar, far far far wiser than me, so how come I have no trouble with this statement, while he found it so difficult.
Here is my (some might say homiletic) interpretation:
The MaBiT (can be said to have) assumed that the acts of men are similar to angels--as we know angels cannot do two tasks on a single mission. Therefore, if men are like angels, we cannot be held accountable for multiple results of a single action. Instead we discover that we are more closely related to God than to angels: Just as God, with one word creates many things, so too does (God invest the ability within) man (to) perform multiple tasks with a single action. [If you have sharp eyes you may have noticed that the word for work on Shabbath מלאכה, actually contains the world מלאך, angel. The basis for such a question. The answer can similarly be found in the word מלאכה- which can be broken into מלא כה (full of "כה") when God tells Avraham that his children will be many like the sands, he uses the word כה. "Such" will be your children. כה יהיה זרעך. We are full of the speaking spirit (רוח ממללה) midah of God who says "such" will be this and that.]
Comments
