‫בס“ד‬

In this week’s Torah

Portion in Chapter 12 it
says:
23. However, be strong not
to eat the blood, for the
blood is the soul; and you
shall not eat the soul with
the flesh.

Rashi quotes two

different opinions from
the Midrash to explain
this:
 ‫בס“ד‬

However, be strong not to eat the

blood: Since it is stated “be strong”
[i.e., resist temptation], you learn
that the [Israelites] were inclined to
eating blood. Therefore, it is
Rabbi Simeon
necessary the son strong.”
to state,“be of Azzai,
however,
[These says:
are] the Scripture
words of Rabbi
comes only to caution you and
Judah.
to instruct you as to what
extent you must be steadfast
in [fulfilling] the
commandments: If regarding
blood, which is easy to watch
out for, since a person has no
desire for it, [the Torah]
needed to strengthen you with
its admonition, how much
more so [must one strengthen
oneself] for all other
 ‫בס“ד‬

Looking at the verse on a

simple level, it would seem to
be pretty obvious what is
bothering Rashi here.
We do not find the Torah
telling us to “be strong”
regarding other Mitzvot! We
find this term used regarding
Mitzvot in general, but not for
an individual Mitzvah.

Rashi is explaining why the

Torah uses this word only
regarding the prohibition
against eating blood.
 ‫בס“ד‬

This leaves us with a

number of questions, as is
to be expected.
1. We have already discussed
the reason that Rashi
sometimes gives two
answers to a question is
because the first answer is
close to answering the
question, but it has some
difficulty. The second
answer takes care of that
problem, but isn’t as good
as the first.
(Continued)
 ‫בס“ד‬

This leaves us with a number

of questions, as is to be
expected.

We need to understand
what is lacking from the
first answer. We also
need to understand why
the first answer is better
than the second.
 ‫בס“ד‬

2. The argument between Rabbi

Yehudah
and Rabbi Shimon Ben Azzai
regards the facts.
We always try to avoid such
arguments,
especially here where they both
Rabbi Yehudah says that the
say the exact opposite!
Jews were inclined to eat
blood, and according to
Rabbi Shimon Ben Azzai no
one was interested in
drinking blood!
 ‫בס“ד‬

3. Rabbi Shimon Ben

Azzai says that no one
desired blood, while
Rabbi Yehudah says
that they were inclined
to eat blood.

Why does Rashi change

the expression from one
to the other?
 ‫בס“ד‬

4. A little further on (Verse

25) says that, “You shall
not eat it, in order that it
be good for you.”

Rashi explains that “If [in

the case of] blood, which
disgusts a person, he who
abstains from it earns
merit [both] for himself
and for his children after
him.” To say that blood
disgusts a person is not in
accordance with either
opinion!
 ‫בס“ד‬

5. We know that Rashi

only quotes a teaching
in someone’s name if it
adds something to the
understanding!

What do we gain from

knowing what Rabbi
Yehudah said and what
Rabbi Shimon Ben Azzai
said?
 ‫בס“ד‬

We know that Rashi

brings his
explanation from the
Sifri – which is a
Midrash.
Nevertheless, Rashi
makes a number of
noteworthy changes in
the version presented
by the Sifri!
 ‫בס“ד‬

Change # 1:

In the Sifri Rabbi

Yehudah’s words are “that
we were inclined to eat
blood before the Giving of
the Torah.” According to
this both versions of Rabbi
Yehudah are totally
different.
 ‫בס“ד‬

Change # 2:

The Sifri quotes Rabbi

Yehudah’s words in brief –
“this teaches that they
were inclined to drink
blood.” Rashi, on the other
hand, goes on at length –
“From the word ‘be strong’
you learn…
 ‫בס“ד‬

Change # 3:

In the Sifri it explains the

opinion of Rabbi Shimon
Ben Azzai that there is no
Mitzvah that is easier than
not eating blood, while
Rashi says that no one
desires blood.
 ‫בס“ד‬

It is possible that
Rashi had a different
version of the Sifri
than what we have.
The question remains
why Rashi chose that
version rather than
the more common
version!
 ‫בס“ד‬

We finally come to
the answer!
Rashi could not quote
the Sifri’s version of
Rabbi Yehudah,
because the prohibition
against eating blood
was always stated a
number of times.
If the Jews were
inclined to eat blood
before the giving of the
Torah (because of the
 ‫בס“ד‬

There are a number

of answers to this
question!

The Torah should have

said to be strong the
first time the prohibition
against blood was
stated. Why wait until
the end of the 40th
year?
 ‫בס“ד‬

That’s why Rashi

gives a long
explanation of Rabbi
Yehudah’s opinion:
Because it says to be
strong here, we see
that the Jews were still
inclined to eat blood at
the time this
commandment was
given.
 ‫בס“ד‬

Nevertheless, Rabbi
Yehudah is not
arguing a fact with
ItRabbi Shimon
is possible thatBen
one
should not Azzai!
desire blood,
or even be disgusted by
it, and still be inclined
to drink it because they
think it has a medicinal
benefit or some other
sort of benefit. This is
because they became
accustomed to it in
 ‫בס“ד‬

However, this is not

enough of a reason
to say “be strong”
here only!
1. Since they were inclined to
eat blood, the Torah should
have said to be strong earlier,
in Vayikrah. That was even
closer to the time that we left
Egypt! Why wait until the 40th
year?
 ‫בס“ד‬

Moreover

2. Since the Torah already

warned us a number of
times not to eat blood
before the 40th year, why
should we still be inclined
to eat it?
 ‫בס“ד‬

Finally:

The Jews who were

entering Israel were not
even the generation
that lived in Egypt. After
all of the prohibitions
against eating blood,
they certainly should
not have been so
inclined!
 ‫בס“ד‬

This explains why

Rashi needs another
answer!

But this cannot be the

only answer. Because it
implies that the “be
strong” has nothing to
do with blood per se.
Especially because of
the way it fits in.
 ‫בס“ד‬

First the Torah gives us

permission to eat meat
when we desire it. It
continues and says “just
be strong and don’t eat the
blood.” This implies that
there is a connection
between desiring to eat,
and the prohibition against
blood.
 ‫בס“ד‬

Why does Rashi

name both Rabbis?

A very sharp student

will ask why there is
such a great difference
between Rabbi Yehudah
and Rabbi Shimon Ben
Azzai! The reason is
because each follows
his own opinion as we
find elsewhere.
 ‫בס“ד‬

When the Torah says that

an animal carcass should
be “given to a stranger or
sold to a gentile,” Rabbi
Yehudah takes it literally.
The same applies here –
we take the fact that the
Torah is discussing blood
literally, and don’t look at
the possibility that it refers
to teaching us about other
Mitzvot.
 Rabbi Shimon Ben
Azzai is quite different.

We find in Pirkei
Avot that he
teaches that we
must fulfill an easy
Mitzvah the same
way as a difficult
one. He means
even an easy
The deeper teaching of
Rashi here is:

The prohibition
against eating blood
is because “the blood
is the soul.” Even
though the soul of an
animal is contained
within its flesh as well,
the blood is the soul.
 Whatever a person eats
becomes his own blood and flesh.

Meat doesn’t have

quite the strength to
make such a big
difference, and needs
to be digested, etc.
before it becomes a
part of the person.
Blood doesn’t need
any process. It goes
straight to the