העולם עומד וכו'. פירש הר"ב לא נברא העולם אלא וכו' ובמשנה שבסוף פרקין כתוב במדרש שמואל ביש ספרים נמצא דגרסי העולם נברא: THE WORLD STANDS. Rav understands this expression as “the world was only created for the purpose of.” Midrash Shmuel in his commentary to the last mishna in this chapter notes that he has found editions in which the text of our mishna has “for three things the world was created.”
על התורה. פירש הר"ב שאלמלא לא קבלו ישראל את התורה לא נבראו שמים וארץ. שנאמר אם לא בריתי וגו' ולפי שהוקשה לו דעבודה וגמילות חסדים היינו תורה. לכך מפרשה על קבלתה ויהיה פירוש הכתוב אם לא בריתי שקבלתם יומם ולילה. גם חוקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי. ועיין כיוצא בזה סוף פ"ג דנדרים. וקשיא לי שא"כ על התורה שאמר אינה אזהרה כלל ואינו דומה לאינך. ולכך נ"ל דהתורה היא ההגיון ולמוד התורה. והיינו דכתיב אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה. כענין שנאמר (יהושע א׳:ח׳) והגית בו יומם ולילה. ובפירש"י ליתא שאלמלא וכו' אלא על התורה. שנאמר אם לא וכו'. ON THE TORAH. Rav: had Israel not accepted the Torah, the heavens and the earth would not have been created, as per the verse “If not for my covenant, etc.” (Jeremiah 33:25). Rav was led to this interpretation because he was bothered by the superfluousness of “the sacrificial service, and acts of kindness” in the text, for both of these are commandments, the fulfillment of which is already included in “the Torah”; he therefore understood that the Torah must refer not to the Torah itself but to its acceptance. The verse in Jeremiah is now read as “if not for my covenant which you have accepted, I would not have established the day or the night, nor even the laws of the heavens and the earth.” See the mishna in Nedarim 3:11 for a similar interpretive turn.
The difficulty with this is that the mishna is using the expression “the world stands on three things” to convey the importance of doing those things, and in Rav’s reading “the Torah” refers not to anything that one ought to do but to a historical event, and is out of place here. It seems, therefore, that “the Torah” here refers to the study and learning of Torah as opposed to the act of following its laws. The verse in Jeremiah, then, reads “if not for the study of my covenant by day and night, etc,” as per the verse “You shall study it day and night” (Hosea 1:8).
The words “had Israel not accepted the Torah” do not appear in Rashi’s commentary, which simply reads: On the Torah, as per the verse “If not for my covenant, etc.”.
ועל העבודה. כתב הר"ב עבודת הקרבנות שכך שנינו במסכת תענית אלמלא מעמדות וכו'. וכ"כ רש"י. ולא דייקי שאינה לא משנה ולא ברייתא. אלא מימרת אמוראים. רבי יעקב בר אחא אמר רב אסי וכו'. בפ"ד דף כ"ז ע"ב. ויש לדקדק דלשון המאמר אלמלא מעמדות לא נתקיימו שמים וארץ. וא"כ אין זו ראיה לשבשבילם נבראו שהרי אפשר לומר שאחרי שהם נבראו לא היה להם קיום אילו אין מעמדות. אבל לא שהמעמדות סבת בריאותם שיהיו נבראיה לכתחלה בשבילם שאין כח המקיים הדבר שכבר הוא גדול ככח הממציא דבר שלא היה. וא"כ מנלן מזה המאמר שיהא כח העבודה גדולה עד שבשבילה נתהוה ונברא העולם. ומצאתי לזה המאמר דאיתא נמי בפ' בני העיר במסכת מגילה דף ל"א. והתם הכי אתמר אמר ר' אמי אלמלא מעמדות לא נתקיימו שמים וארץ. שנאמר אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי. וכתיב (בראשית ט') ויאמר ה' אלהים במה אדע כי אירשנה אמר אברהם אבינו ע"ה רבש"ע שמא ח"ו ישראל חוטאים לפניך וכו'. אמר לו קחה לי עגלה משולשת וכו'. ודריש בריתי ברית בין הבתרים ואמר לא שמתי. ש"מ שהעבודה סבת שימת העולם ובריאתו. וא"ת תינח בזמן שבית המקדש קיים. אבל משחרב מאי איכא למימר. י"ל שבשביל שצפה הזמן שבית המקדש קיים נברא. ועוד שהרי סיים המאמר הנזכר אמר לפניו תינח בזמן וכו'. והשיבו כבר תקנתי להם סדר קרבנות כל זמן שקוראין בהם מעלה אני עליהן כאילו מקריבין לפני קרבן. ובפירש"י דתענית כתוב גמגום דמנא יליף ליה להא: AND ON THE SACRIFICIAL SERVICE. Rav: the sacrificial service, as the tannaim taught in tractate Ta`anit, “if not for the shifts of priests offering sacrifices, etc.” So also Rashi. They used the term shaninu6Lit. “we have learnt,” a term used to indicate a tannaitic as opposed to amoraic text. loosely, however, for this text does not appear in a mishna or baraita, and is actually an amoraic memra in the Talmud, Ta`anit 27b: Rabbi Yaakov bar Acha said in the name of Rav Assi etc.
To be precise, the language of that memra is “if not for the shifts of priests offering sacrifices, the heavens and earth would not continue to exist”, and as such we cannot deduce therefrom that it is for the sake of these shifts that the heavens and earth were created. Granted, now that the heavens and earth have been created their continued existence is through the shifts of priests, but perhaps the shifts would not have been sufficient reason to have brought them into existence; for it is a greater feat to create something ex nihilo than to continue the existence of that which has already been created. So how does this memra show that the sacrificial service is so essential that the world was created and brought into being on account of it?
This memra also appears in Megillah 31b, and the passage there reads as follows: It was said: Rabbi Ami said, if not for the shifts of priests offering sacrifices, the heavens and the earth would not continue to exist, as per the verse “If not for my covenant, I would not have established the day or night, nor even the laws of the heavens and the earth (Jeremiah 33:25)”, and the verse “And he said, Lord, G-d, how can I know that I will inherit it? (Genesis 15:8)”. Our father Abraham said, Master of the world! Perhaps, G-d forbid, Israel will sin before you, and you will do to them as you did to the generation of the flood and the generation of the dispersion? G-d said to him, I shall not. Abraham said, “how can I know (Genesis 15:8)?” G-d said, “Take for me three calves, etc. (Genesis 15:9).”7The “covenant made between the pieces,” which itself was a sacrifice, is understood to represent all sacrificial service. This passage understands the “covenant” in Jeremiah as referring to the “covenant made between the pieces” in Genesis 15, and therefore the verse reads “If not for my covenant, i.e. the covenant made between the pieces…” And the end of the verse says “I would not have established,” so the sacrificial service must be sufficient reason for the establishment and creation of the world.
Should one object that this is all very well for as long as the Temple is standing, but what of when is has been destroyed? One answer is that it was the period of the Temple’s existence that G-d foresaw and which itself sufficed for him to create the world. Additionally, the passage there concludes: Abraham said, Master of the world! This is all very well for as long as the Temple is standing. What will be with them when the Temple is no longer standing? G-d said to him, I have already arranged the passages dealing with sacrificial law for them. Whenever they read these passages, I will consider it as if they had brought the sacrifices before me and I will forgive all their sins. Rashi’s commentary on Ta`anit ad loc., however, says, “This is a corrupted passage, for how do they see this?”