Pisqa’ 36111H:67-69; JN1:101-104 1. “And inscribe them (ketavtam)” (Dt.6:9)— with perfectly-formed letters (ktav shalem).112The exegsis is achieved by dividing uchtavtam (“and write them”) into two words, ktav tam (“with perfect letters” or ktav shalem). Word plays of this type, dependant more on the ear than the eye, are the stock-in-trade of rabbinic midrash. This particular derivation from uchtavtam appears throughout the post-tannaitic, amoraic and Geonic sources. See F:65, l.9-66, ls.2-3. On this basis they taught: If the copyist of a Torah-scroll wrote alephs as ayins or ayins as alephs; or bets as kaphs or kaphs as bets; or gimmels as tzaddis or tzaddis as gimmels; or dalets as reshes or reshes as dalets; or hehs as khets or khets as hehs; or vavs as yods or yods as vavs; or zayins as nuns or nuns as zayins; or tets as pehs or pehs as tets; or bent letters as straight letters or straight as bent; or mems as samekhs or samekhs as mems; or closed letters as open letters, or open as closed— if he wrote a closed paragraph as an open paragraph,113Thus leaving too large a gap between two paragraphs. or an open paragraph as a closed paragraph;114Thus leaving too small a gap between two paragraphs. or if he wrote without using black ink, or if he inscribed the Song [at the Sea (Ex.15)] like the surrounding [prosaic] verses; or if [contrary to scribal conventions,] he inscribed the Divine Epithets115These are the various names and titles of God found in the ‘scriptures, e.g., ‘elohim, HASHEM, ‘el. with gold— indeed, any scroll so inscribed should be hidden away.
2. “And inscribe them on the doorposts of your house” (Dt.6:9). Shall I infer that the inscription may be carved in stone? Look—you can reason: Here it is stated : “inscribe” (Dt.6:9), and elsewhere it is stated: “and inscribe on those stones all the words of this Torah” (Dt.27:8). Just as there, inscribe implies carving in stone, so here, as well, inscribe implies carving in stone! Or, let’s try this approach [yielding the opposite conclusion]: Here it is stated: “inscribe” (Dt.6:9), and elsewhere it is stated: “He shall inscribe . . . this curse” (Nu.5:23). Just as there inscribe implies writing on a scroll with ink, so too here, inscribe means writing on a scroll with ink.116Cf, M. Sotah2:4; Sifre Nu 16. You can reason in this fashion, but I follow the reasoning of the original disputant:117The anonymous tanna at 36.2 namely, here it is stated: inscribe (Dt.6:9), and elsewhere it is stated: inscribe (Dt.27:8). Just as there, inscribe implies carving in stone, so too here, inscribe implies carving in stone.118These are the stone tablets, coated with lime, that Israelites erected after crossing the Jordan, containing “all the words of this Torah” (Dt.27:3). So you insist on drawing distinctions? Then I insist that we derive rulings from analogous cases, and draw inferences from similar facts! I would derive a matter which is a custom for the generations [like writing the Torah in a scroll]— from another matter which has been a custom for the generations. But I would not derive a matter which has been a custom for the generations from a matter, [like carving the Torah in stone], which is only a temporary arrangement. [Accordingly, I derive matters as follows:] Here it is stated: inscribe (Dt.6:9), and elsewhere it is stated: inscribe (Nu.5:23). Just as there, inscribe means on a scroll with ink, so too here, inscribe means on a scroll with ink!119As at M. Sotah 2:5, Sifre Nu 16. Even though there is no proof for the matter, there is a hint of it: “From his mouth he recited to me all these words, and I wrote them on a document with ink” (Jer.36:18).
3. “On the doorposts” (Dt.6:9)— shall I infer [from the plural, doorposts,] that inscriptions should be affixed to two doorposts? In a second reference, the Teaching also states: on the doorposts (Dt.11:20)— an inclusionary clause [such as a plural noun,] followed by another inclusionary clause [such as a plural noun] implies a restriction to a single doorpost]: words of R. Ishmael.120//Sifre Nu 124.
R. Isaac says: There’s no need [for this exegesis]! Look! He says: “Take from the blood and place it on the two doorposts and the lintel” (Ex.12:7). This creates an interpretive family of similar verses— wherever doorposts are mentioned, we assume the reference is to one unless Scripture specifies two doorposts.
4. “Your house” (Dt.6:9)— at the right of the entrance. You say, at the right of the entrance! Or, perhaps, it means to the right of the exit? The Teaching states: “On the doorposts of your house” (beitechah)— upon your arrival (bi’ateichah),121Note the exegetical paronomasia based upon the assonane of beitecha (“your house”) and bi’atechah (“your arrival”). at the right of the entrance.
“And on your gates” (Dt.6:9)— shall I infer reference as well to the gates of houses, roosts, cattle sheds, haystacks, cattle pens, silos, wood sheds, wine cellars, grain bins, and oil reservoirs? The Teaching states: “Your house” (Dt.6:9)— just as your house is a residence [requiring a doorpost inscription], so too your gates require an inscription when they serve a residence.
Shall I infer reference as well to the gates of civic buildings, public halls, and bath houses? The Teaching states: “Your house” (Dt.6:9)— just as your house is a place of honor and a residence, so too your gates [require an inscription only when] they open access to a place of honor, and serve a residence.
Shall I infer reference even to the gates of the Holy Shrine? The Teaching states: “Your house” (Dt.6:9)— just as your house is a common space [that requires an inscription], the Holy Shrine too contains common space [requiring a doorpost inscription]. On this basis they taught: The chambers that opened out to the sanctified space, were [themselves considered] sanctified, those that opened to common space, were [themselves considered] common.122//M. Maaser Sheni 3:8; cf. Sifra, tzaw, par. 2:11. [and inscriptions were affixed only to the doorposts of those common spaces].
5. Beloved is Israel! For Scripture has surrounded them with commandments— the prayer-amulets on their heads and arms [are two], the doorpost-inscriptions on their entrances [count as one], the fringes on their garments [count as four]. And of them, said David: “Seven times a day do I praise You for your righteous laws” (Ps.119:164). When he entered the bath house, he saw himself naked and said: Woe is me! For I am naked of commandments! Contemplating his circumcision, he began to arrange hymns of praise for it, as it is said [regarding the day of circumcision]: “To the Leader: for the eighth, a song of David” (Ps.12:1)
2. Does the verse really speak in praise of the Land of Israel? Or, perhaps, it speaks in praise of the Land of Egypt! The Teaching states: “And Hebron was built seven years before Zoan of Egypt” (Nu.13:22).3The verse might suggest that Hebron, being built before Zoan, is deemed superior. This suggestion is now dismissed. As a political capitol, Zoan of Egypt is superior to the “trash-heaps of Hebron!” What was Zoan? The center of government.4Cf.Pisqa’ 3.3 with regard to Edrei (Dt.1:4), which is also labelled a “center of government” (maqom malchut). And, similarly He says: “Its officials were in Zoan” (Is.30:4). What was Hebron? The trash-heap of the Land of Israel, for it is stated: “Rebellious5Heb: mamrei. “Mamrei” is another name for Kiryat-arba. The midrashic reading exploits the fact that the root, m-r-y, from which “Mamrei” is formed, means “rebellious” (cf. Dt.9:7: mamrim) Kiryath-arba, which is Hebron” (Gn.35:27). Now, look— doesn’t it follow logically: If Hebron is the trash-heap of the Land of Israel, yet the Land of Israel is praised with praises worthy of the land of Egypt— which, you see, is more praiseworthy than all other lands [as at Gn.13:10]— the logical conclusion is that the Land of Israel is most praiseworthy of all lands!
(דברים ו ט) וּכְתַבְתָּם, כְּתָב שָׁלֵם, מִכָּן אָמְרוּ: כָּתַב לְאַלְפִים עַיְנִים וּלְעַיְנִים אַלְפִים, לְבֵיתִים כָּפִים וּלְכָפִים בֵּיתִים, לְגַמְלִים צָדִים וּלְצָדִים גַּמְלִים, לְדָלְתִים רֵישִׁים לְרֵישִׁים דָּלְתִים, לְהֵיהִים חֵיתִים לְחֵיתִים הֵיהִים, לְוָוִים יוֹדִים לְיוֹדִים וָוִים, לְזַיְנִים נוּנִים לְנוּנִים זַיְנִים, לְטֵיתִים פֵּיפִים לְפֵּיפִים טֵיתִים, לִכְפוּפִים פְּשׁוּטִים לִפְשׁוּטִים כְּפוּפִים, לְמֵימִים סָמְכִים לְסָמְכִים מֵימִים, לִסְתוּמִים פְּתוּחִים לִפְתוּחִים סְתוּמִים, כָּתַב לְפָרָשָׁה סְתוּמָה פְּתוּחָה לִפְתוּחָה סְתוּמָה, כָּתַב שֶׁלֹּא בִדְיוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב שִׁירָה כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהּ, אוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב אֶת הָאַזְכָּרוֹת בְּזָהָב – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יִגָּנְזוּ.
Pisqa’ 36111H:67-69; JN1:101-104
1. “And inscribe them (ketavtam)” (Dt.6:9)—
with perfectly-formed letters (ktav shalem).112The exegsis is achieved by dividing uchtavtam (“and write them”) into two words, ktav tam (“with perfect letters” or ktav shalem). Word plays of this type, dependant more on the ear than the eye, are the stock-in-trade of rabbinic midrash. This particular derivation from uchtavtam appears throughout the post-tannaitic, amoraic and Geonic sources. See F:65, l.9-66, ls.2-3.
On this basis they taught:
If the copyist of a Torah-scroll
wrote alephs as ayins or ayins as alephs;
or bets as kaphs or kaphs as bets;
or gimmels as tzaddis or tzaddis as gimmels;
or dalets as reshes or reshes as dalets;
or hehs as khets or khets as hehs;
or vavs as yods or yods as vavs;
or zayins as nuns or nuns as zayins;
or tets as pehs or pehs as tets;
or bent letters as straight letters or straight as bent;
or mems as samekhs or samekhs as mems;
or closed letters as open letters, or open as closed—
if he wrote a closed paragraph as an open paragraph,113Thus leaving too large a gap between two paragraphs.
or an open paragraph as a closed paragraph;114Thus leaving too small a gap between two paragraphs.
or if he wrote without using black ink,
or if he inscribed the Song [at the Sea (Ex.15)]
like the surrounding [prosaic] verses;
or if [contrary to scribal conventions,]
he inscribed the Divine Epithets115These are the various names and titles of God found in the ‘scriptures, e.g., ‘elohim, HASHEM, ‘el. with gold—
indeed, any scroll so inscribed should be hidden away.
וּכְתַבְתָּם, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי עַל גַּבֵּי אֲבָנִים? הֲרֵי אַתָּה דָן: נֶאֱמַר כָּאן כְּתָב וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (דברים כז ח) כְּתָב, מַה כְּתָב הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן עַל גַּבֵּי אֲבָנִים אַף כְּתָב הָאָמוּר כָּאן עַל גַּבֵּי אֲבָנִים! אוֹ כְּלָךְ לְדֶרֶךְ זוֹ: נֶאֱמַר כָּאן כְּתָב וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (במדבר ה כג) כְּתָב, מַה כְּתָב הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן עַל הַסֵּפֶר בִּדְיוֹ אַף כְּתָב הָאָמוּר כָּאן עַל הַסֵּפֶר בִּדְיוֹ! אַתָּה דָן בַּלָּשׁוֹן הַזֶּה וַאֲנִי אָדוּן בְּלָשׁוֹן שֶׁבַּעַל דִּין חוֹלֵק, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן כְּתָב וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן כְּתָב, מַה כְּתָב הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן עַל גַּבֵּי אֲבָנִים אַף כְּתָב הָאָמוּר כָּאן עַל גַּבֵּי אֲבָנִים. אָמַרְתָּ, הֶפְרֵשׁ: אֶלְמוֹד דָּבָר מִדָּבָר וְאָדוּן דָּבָר מִדָּבָר, אֶלְמוֹד דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִנְהָג לְדוֹרוֹת מִדָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִנְהָג לְדוֹרוֹת וְלֹא אֶלְמוֹד דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִנְהָג לְדוֹרוֹת מִדָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְשָׁעָה! נֶאֱמַר כָּאן כְּתָב וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן כְּתָב, מַה כְּתָב הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן עַל הַסֵּפֶר בִּדְיוֹ – אַף כְּתָב הָאָמוּר כָּאן עַל הַסֵּפֶר בִּדְיוֹ. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין רְאָיָה לַדָּבָר זֵכֶר לַדָּבָר (ירמיה לו יח): ״וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם בָּרוּךְ מִפִּיו יִקְרָא אֵלַי אֶת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַאֲנִי כּוֹתֵב עַל הַסֵּפֶר בַּדְּיוֹ״.
2. “And inscribe them on the doorposts of your house” (Dt.6:9).
Shall I infer that
the inscription may be carved in stone?
Look—you can reason:
Here it is stated :
“inscribe” (Dt.6:9),
and elsewhere it is stated:
“and inscribe on those stones all the words of this Torah” (Dt.27:8).
Just as there, inscribe implies carving in stone,
so here, as well,
inscribe implies carving in stone!
Or, let’s try this approach
[yielding the opposite conclusion]:
Here it is stated:
“inscribe” (Dt.6:9),
and elsewhere it is stated:
“He shall inscribe . . . this curse” (Nu.5:23).
Just as there inscribe implies writing on a scroll with ink,
so too here, inscribe means writing on a scroll with ink.116Cf, M. Sotah2:4; Sifre Nu 16.
You can reason in this fashion,
but I follow the reasoning of the original disputant:117The anonymous tanna at 36.2
namely, here it is stated:
inscribe (Dt.6:9),
and elsewhere it is stated:
inscribe (Dt.27:8).
Just as there, inscribe implies carving in stone,
so too here, inscribe implies carving in stone.118These are the stone tablets, coated with lime, that Israelites erected after crossing the Jordan, containing “all the words of this Torah” (Dt.27:3).
So you insist on drawing distinctions?
Then I insist that we
derive rulings from analogous cases,
and draw inferences from similar facts!
I would derive a matter
which is a custom for the generations
[like writing the Torah in a scroll]—
from another matter
which has been a custom for the generations.
But I would not derive a matter
which has been a custom for the generations
from a matter,
[like carving the Torah in stone],
which is only a temporary arrangement.
[Accordingly, I derive matters as follows:]
Here it is stated:
inscribe (Dt.6:9),
and elsewhere it is stated:
inscribe (Nu.5:23).
Just as there, inscribe means on a scroll with ink,
so too here, inscribe means on a scroll with ink!119As at M. Sotah 2:5, Sifre Nu 16.
Even though there is no proof for the matter,
there is a hint of it:
“From his mouth he recited to me all these words,
and I wrote them on a document with ink” (Jer.36:18).
עַל מְזוּזֹת, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שְׁתֵּי מְזוּזוֹת! תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר בַּשְּׁנִיָּה (דברים יא כ) ״מְזוּזוֹת״; רִבּוּי אַחַר רִבּוּי – לְמַעֵט, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל.
3. “On the doorposts” (Dt.6:9)—
shall I infer [from the plural, doorposts,]
that inscriptions should be affixed to two doorposts?
In a second reference,
the Teaching also states:
on the doorposts (Dt.11:20)—
an inclusionary clause [such as a plural noun,]
followed by
another inclusionary clause
[such as a plural noun] implies a restriction to a single doorpost]:
words of R. Ishmael.120//Sifre Nu 124.
רַבִּי יִצְחָק אוֹמֵר: אֵין צָרִיךְ, הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר (שמות יב ז): ״וְלָקְחוּ מִן הַדָּם וְנָתְנוּ עַל שְׁתֵּי הַמְּזוּזֹת וְעַל הַמַּשְׁקוֹף״, זֶה בָּנָה אָב: כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר מְזוּזֹת, – הֲרֵי בִּכְלָל אַחַת, עַד שֶׁיִּפְרֹט לְךָ הַכָּתוּב שְׁתֵּי מְזוּזוֹת!
R. Isaac says:
There’s no need [for this exegesis]!
Look! He says:
“Take from the blood and place it on the two doorposts and the lintel” (Ex.12:7).
This creates an interpretive family of similar verses—
wherever doorposts are mentioned,
we assume the reference is to one
unless Scripture specifies two doorposts.
בֵּיתֶךָ, עַל יָמִין בַּכְּנִיסָה. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר עַל יָמִין בַּכְּנִיסָה, אוֹ עַל יָמִין בַּיְּצִיאָה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: עַל מְזוּזֹת בֵּיתֶךָ, עַל בִּיאָתְךָ, עַל יָמִין בַּכְּנִיסָה.
4. “Your house” (Dt.6:9)—
at the right of the entrance.
You say, at the right of the entrance!
Or, perhaps, it means to the right of the exit?
The Teaching states:
“On the doorposts of your house” (beitechah)—
upon your arrival (bi’ateichah),121Note the exegetical paronomasia based upon the assonane of beitecha (“your house”) and bi’atechah (“your arrival”).
at the right of the entrance.
וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שַׁעֲרֵי בָּתִּים וְהַלּוּלִים וְהָרֶפֶת וּמַתְבֵּן וּבֵית הַבָּקָר וּבֵית הָאוֹצָרוֹת וּבֵית הָעֵצִים וְאוֹצְרוֹת יַיִן וְאוֹצְרוֹת תְּבוּאָה וְאוֹצְרוֹת שֶׁמֶן בַּמַּשְׁמָע? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: בֵּיתֶךָ, מָה בֵּיתֶךָ בֵּית דִּירָה – אַף שְׁעָרֶיךָ בֵּית דִּירָה.
“And on your gates” (Dt.6:9)—
shall I infer reference as well to the gates
of houses, roosts, cattle sheds,
haystacks, cattle pens, silos,
wood sheds, wine cellars,
grain bins, and oil reservoirs?
The Teaching states:
“Your house” (Dt.6:9)—
just as your house is a residence
[requiring a doorpost inscription],
so too your gates require an inscription
when they serve a residence.
שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי אַף שַׁעֲרֵי בָּסִילְקָאוֹת וְדִמְסָאוֹת וּמֶרְחֲצָאוֹת בַּמַּשְׁמָע? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: בֵּיתֶךָ, מָה בֵּיתֶךָ מְקוֹם כָּבוֹד וּבֵית דִּירָה – אַף שְׁעָרֶיךָ מְקוֹם כָּבוֹד וּבֵית דִּירָה.
Shall I infer reference as well to the gates of
civic buildings, public halls, and bath houses?
The Teaching states:
“Your house” (Dt.6:9)—
just as your house is a
place of honor and a residence,
so too your gates [require an inscription only when]
they open access to a place of honor, and serve a residence.
שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי אַף שַׁעֲרֵי מִקְדָּשׁ בַּמַּשְׁמָע? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: בֵּיתֶךָ, מָה בֵּיתֶךָ חוֹל אַף מִקְדָּשׁ חוֹל. מִכָּן אָמְרוּ (מע״ש ג ח): ״הַלְּשָׁכוֹת פְּתוּחוֹת לַקֹּדֶשׁ – קֹדֶשׁ, פְּתוּחוֹת לַחוֹל – חוֹל״.
Shall I infer reference even to the gates of the Holy Shrine?
The Teaching states:
“Your house” (Dt.6:9)—
just as your house is a common space
[that requires an inscription],
the Holy Shrine too contains common space
[requiring a doorpost inscription].
On this basis they taught:
The chambers that opened out to the sanctified space,
were [themselves considered] sanctified,
those that opened to common space,
were [themselves considered] common.122//M. Maaser Sheni 3:8; cf. Sifra, tzaw, par. 2:11.
[and inscriptions were affixed only to
the doorposts of those common spaces].
חֲבִיבִים יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁסִּבְּבָם הַכָּתוּב בְּמִצְווֹת: תְּפִלִּין בְּרָאשֵׁיהֶם וּתְפִלִּין בִּזְרוֹעוֹתֵיהֶם, מְזוּזָה בְּפִתְחֵיהֶם, צִיצִית בְּבִגְדֵיהֶם. וַעֲלֵיהֶם אָמַר דָּוִד (תהלים קיט קסד): ״שֶׁבַע בַּיּוֹם הִלַּלְתִּיךָ עַל מִשְׁפְּטֵי צִדְקֶךָ״. נִכְנַס לַמֶּרְחָץ – רָאָה עַצְמוֹ עָרוֹם. אָמַר: אוֹי לִי שֶׁאֲנִי עָרוֹם מִן הַמִּצְווֹת! נִסְתַּכֵּל בַּמִּילָה, הִתְחִיל סוֹדֵר עָלֶיהָ אֶת הַשֶּׁבַח, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים יב א): ״לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל הַשְּׁמִינִית מִזְמוֹר לְדָוִד״.
5. Beloved is Israel!
For Scripture has surrounded them with commandments—
the prayer-amulets on their heads and arms [are two],
the doorpost-inscriptions on their entrances [count as one],
the fringes on their garments [count as four].
And of them, said David:
“Seven times a day do I praise You for your righteous laws” (Ps.119:164).
When he entered the bath house,
he saw himself naked and said:
Woe is me! For I am naked of commandments!
Contemplating his circumcision,
he began to arrange hymns of praise for it,
as it is said [regarding the day of circumcision]:
“To the Leader: for the eighth, a song of David” (Ps.12:1)
מָשָׁל לְמֶלֶךְ בָּשָׂר וָדָם שֶׁאָמַר לְאִשְׁתּוֹ: הֱוִי מִתְקַשֶּׁטֶת בְּכָל תַּכְשִׁיטַיִךְ, כְּדֵי שֶׁתְּהֵא רְצוּיָה לִי. כָּךְ אָמַר לָהֶם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְיִשְׂרָאֵל: בָּנַי, הֱיוּ מְצֻיָּנִים בַּמִּצְווֹת, כְּדֵי שֶׁתִּהְיוּ רְצוּיִים לִי. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר (שיר השירים ו ד): ״יָפָה אַתְּ רַעְיָתִי כְּתִרְצָה״, יָפָה אַתְּ כְּשֶׁאַתְּ רְצוּיָה לִי.
2. Does the verse really speak in praise of the Land of Israel?
Or, perhaps, it speaks in praise of the Land of Egypt!
The Teaching states:
“And Hebron was built seven years before Zoan of Egypt” (Nu.13:22).3The verse might suggest that Hebron, being built before Zoan, is deemed superior. This suggestion is now dismissed. As a political capitol, Zoan of Egypt is superior to the “trash-heaps of Hebron!”
What was Zoan?
The center of government.4Cf.Pisqa’ 3.3 with regard to Edrei (Dt.1:4), which is also labelled a “center of government” (maqom malchut).
And, similarly He says:
“Its officials were in Zoan” (Is.30:4).
What was Hebron?
The trash-heap of the Land of Israel,
for it is stated:
“Rebellious5Heb: mamrei. “Mamrei” is another name for Kiryat-arba. The midrashic reading exploits the fact that the root, m-r-y, from which “Mamrei” is formed, means “rebellious” (cf. Dt.9:7: mamrim) Kiryath-arba, which is Hebron” (Gn.35:27).
Now, look—
doesn’t it follow logically:
If Hebron is the trash-heap of the Land of Israel,
yet the Land of Israel is praised
with praises worthy of the land of Egypt—
which, you see, is more praiseworthy
than all other lands [as at Gn.13:10]—
the logical conclusion is that
the Land of Israel is most praiseworthy of all lands!