tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post6506524793342377798..comments2024-03-19T23:03:01.685-05:00Comments on Beis Vaad L'Chachamim: Noach, Breishis 8:1. Changing Middas Hadin to Middas Harachamim. היפוך מדת הדין למדת הרחמיםEliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-72611183941021677292011-10-28T11:41:52.800-05:002011-10-28T11:41:52.800-05:00I changed #3.I changed #3.bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-86685529286219306562011-10-28T03:10:50.035-05:002011-10-28T03:10:50.035-05:00I have little experience in R. Kook's writings...I have little experience in R. Kook's writings, but I think he not talking about perspectives, and does not deny the real possibility of זעם החצוני ההורס ומכלה. Rather he says that it needs to be connected to its rachamim Shoresh to be limited and controlled, and that's what we ask hashem for.<br><br>Coming to think of it, I don't understand #3 at all, as an interpretation of this Tefilla. How does pointing out that what hashem does is rachamim by definition helps us in asking Him to do A and not B?Elihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12793717193734899866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-1285477354966142752011-10-27T19:55:44.273-05:002011-10-27T19:55:44.273-05:00Ach, of course, the tefillos of the Taanis Tzibur ...Ach, of course, the tefillos of the Taanis Tzibur echo zichronot. <br><br>As for Rav Kook, I was referring to his <br>הכעס האלהי..... איננה משחיתה, אינה מהרסת וגם איננה זועמת, כ"א מלאה היא גבורה מפוארה לרומם את המעשים, להדרם לשכללם ולפארם. וכאשר לא הוכנו הנפשות לאותה הקליטה הרוממה, של כוון מהותם לעומת השרש העליון של הגבורה, ששם רחמי הקודש הם הם ההומים ומתגברים, אז נפגשות הן ונכשלות בהזעם החצוני ההורס ומכלה.<br><br>which I understood to mean that what we perceive as destructive only appears that way because of our limited perspective, but is actually a means of access to rachamim.bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-20561180964884974222011-10-27T14:28:27.962-05:002011-10-27T14:28:27.962-05:00I'm not sure where it started. Simple reading ...I'm not sure where it started. Simple reading of the Mishna seems to say that the first Barcha in taanit is just Zichronot with a modified chatima. So it's one and the same in RH and Taanit, and both were later formulated by Rav. The interesting thing is that the Tur takes this part of ותראה לפניך out of Zichronot and puts it in the Bracha before, probably because he wanted this part to be samuch to מי שענה לאברהם which according to his shita is not the end of Zichronot.<br><br>I understood Rav Kook not like #3 at all. He doesn't say just that we don't know what is din and what is rachamim. Rather he says that the mida of din, which by itself leads to destruction, becomes bearable, tolerable and constructive when intermixed with rachamim:<br>יכבשו רחמיך את כעסך מעלינו, שיתעלה כח קדוש זה (that is, ka'as of hashem) למקור תפארתו (which is rachamim, as he said before), שיביא בכנפיו מרפא וגבורת חיים וברכת עולמים. <br>This he compares to rachamim of Avraham that become superior and more pure, by being subordinated to retzon hashem:<br>ובזה הרחמים בעצמם קנו להם את המקום היותר עליון, את מקומם במציאות העליונה, ברצונו של מקום<br><br>So in both cases, an important power is being refined and improved by being qualified by a higher, more basic, principle. So it goes with the theme of כבישת רצון מפני דבר נעלה יותר but goes on to say that in both cases this actually puts the רצון הנכבש on a higher level (which by itself, I don't understand at all, but that's what he says)Elihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12793717193734899866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-20147902304983582442011-10-27T13:20:22.147-05:002011-10-27T13:20:22.147-05:00I had a hard time finding the makor in the Tur, si...I had a hard time finding the makor in the Tur, since it's not where it belongs, in the first siman or soon thereafter. I suppose that it started out in the tefilos of Taaneisim, moved to Rosh Hashanna/Yom Kippur, and then was imported to the tefillos before pesukei d'zimra.<br><br>From what I see in Rav Kook, the first paragraph is like #2, and the second like #3.bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-70242265610701013972011-10-27T12:54:51.753-05:002011-10-27T12:54:51.753-05:00side-remarking (as usual) - this Tefilla is part o...side-remarking (as usual) - this Tefilla is part of Zichronot (in all nuschao't, as far as I know, starting with Seder Rav Amram, 9th century), thus probably goes back at least to the times of Rav. <br><br>The equivalnece כמו שכבש... כן יכבשו seems to point towards option #2, or Rav Kook's version of it.Elihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12793717193734899866noreply@blogger.com