אֶרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲבָנֶיהָ בַרְזֶל
and please see Taanis 4a.
Showing posts with label Eikev. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eikev. Show all posts
Friday, August 7, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Eikev, Devarim 10:12. Mah Hashem Sho'eil- 100 Brachos a Day
וְעַתָּה, יִשְׂרָאֵל--מָה ה' אלהיך, שֹׁאֵל מֵעִמָּךְ: כִּי אִם-לְיִרְאָה אֶת-ה' אלהיך לָלֶכֶת בְּכָל-דְּרָכָיו, וּלְאַהֲבָה אֹתוֹ, וְלַעֲבֹד אֶת-ה' אלהיך, בְּכָל-לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל-נַפְשֶׁךָ.
תניא היה רבי מאיר אומר חייב אדם לברך מאה ברכות בכל יום שנאמר (דברים י) ועתה ישראל מה ה' אלהיך שואל מעמך
Menachos 43a– 'mah' is a remez to Mei’ah, (one hundred,) mei’ah brachos bechol yom, that a person should see to it that he says one hundred Brachos every day.
The Baal Haturim (andTosfos there dh Shoeil) explains that this drasha is not just based on the similarity in pronunciation of Mei'ah to Mah, but also on a Gematria, because in the Aht Bash system, mem hei equals yud tzadi, and the gematria of yud tzadi is 100.
But why is this idea alluded to specifically in this passuk? What is the connection between the literal meaning of the passuk, which is that one must develop his Yiras Shamayim, and the idea of mei'ah brachos?
The answer has to be that saying brachos brings to Yir’as Shomayim. Why is this true? Because hakoras hatov is the key to yir’as shomayim, and brachos teach hakoras hatov.
Along the same lines:
The Baal Haturim in 8:6 says the following:
וְשָׁמַרְתָּ אֶת-מִצְוֹת ה' אלהיך לָלֶכֶת בִּדְרָכָיו וּלְיִרְאָה אֹתוֹ.
|
.
|
The first pasuk says you should have yir’ah. Then, "ki ...." What's the Ki about? What is the "because?" He explains that if you learn to recognize that the good things in your life are God's gifts to you, and you will not be kofui tov, this will bring to yir’ah.
Coincidentally, the Ohr Hachaim in this Parsha, in 8:18, uses exactly this idea: the passuk says
וְזָכַרְתָּ אֶת ה' אלהיך כִּי הוּא הַנֹּתֵן לְךָ כֹּחַ לַעֲשׂוֹת חָיִל לְמַעַן הָקִים אֶת בְּרִיתוֹ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ כַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה.
The Ohr Hachaim says (free translation):
Be sure to take to heart all the good things you experience, and remember that this all comes from God. This will awaken you to the recognition of your Creator and His constant involvement in your life. The first step in the strategy of the yeitzer hara is to desensitize a person to this, ultimately bringing his destruction. Perhaps this is why the following passuk says
וְהָיָה אִם שְׁכֹחַ תִּשְׁכַּח אֶת ה' אלהיך וְהָלַכְתָּ אַחֲרֵי אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים וַעֲבַדְתָּם וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתָ לָהֶם
because if you forget that Hashem is your benefactor, eventually you will forget God entirely and finally follow other gods, not just in thought, but in deed as well.... Learn from here that remembering God's graciousness to you is a great wall that protects a person's service of God, and its absence invites the Satan to push him down from level to level to his ultimate perdition.
Similarly: the Chovas Halevavos, introduction to Shaar Avodah– avodah is ke’ni’ah (Hach'na'a, recognition of the debt of gratitude,) of the beneficiary to the benefactor.
And to put an exclamation point on this idea, see the Baal Haturim in Vayeilech, 31:16–
וְקָם הָעָם הַזֶּה וְזָנָה אַחֲרֵי אֱלֹהֵי נֵכַר הָאָרֶץ
The Ba'al Haturim points out that there is a tahg, an anomalous crown, on the letter 'kuf' of ve'kam; This, he says, is meramez that they will come to do avoda zarah because they will be mevateil the mitzvah of mei’ah (kuf) brachos bechol yom. The one strong shemira that protects us from falling into the trap of Avoda Zara is the Crown of the Kuf, the mitzva of Mei'ah Brachos.
Elul is around the corner. Elul, the lead-up to and preparatory period for the Ye'mei Hadin, ought to be symbolized by fear, a lion, a frightening thing. But the most famous siman of Elul is "Ani Le'dodi Ve'dodi Li," I am my beloved's, my beloved is mine. That's a broad span, isn't it? What’s the shaichus of love to the yom hadin? The answer is that the key to yir’ah is recognizing Hashem’s love. That’s why Moshe said “mah...” and the Gemora asks, mili zutrisa, etc. Pshat is that Moshe was giving us the key to the treasure. Mah Hashem sho'eil mei'imach? Ki im le'yir'a oso. Be aware of Hashem’s chesed, the opportunity to make a malach of yourself, to do good in this world. Once you learn to do that, once you learn to thank Hashem for the gift of life and all that life entails, and for all the things He does for us, then yir'as shamayim will be 'ki im,' it will be easy to come to yir’as shomayim, it'll be practically inevitable. As my son Harav Mordechai Shlita once said, after Vayosha Hashem es Yisrael, then Vayir'u ha'am es Hashem. Seeing the yeshua brought them to Yiras Shamayim. (Mordechai's pshat was that when you love someone, and certainly when you love them and realize all they have done for you, you are afraid to do something that will hurt them.)
After posting this, I got the following email message:
Nope...sorry..... Don't think so............take a look at the headlines..........XXXXXXXXX arrested in Israel on Tax Fraud..how many Brachos you think he said every day.............Talk is CHEAP.......even Brachos........ONLY actions count...........
He has a point. I welcome your opinions, especially constructive criticism; have I become a pileous monotreme that vents both life and waste from the same portal, and broken my promise to not post superficial platitudes? And if I did, is this because I didn't understand the deeper meaning of the Baal Haturim and the Ohr Hachaim? For the sake of argument, let's assume for a moment that the alleged malefactor is guilty, that the relevant person is an Orthodox Jew who is mekayeim mitzvos assei and lo sa'aseh to any standard that defines Orthodox Jewish behavior, and that his actions express an anti-social and anti-Torah world view. Does his, and the proliferating similar cases, prove that religious behavior doesn't prove holiness? Is there any reliable indicator that a person is doing mitzvos out of yiras shamayim as opposed to simply maintaining a religious lifestyle as the course of least resistance out of habit or indoctrination?
One person suggested an answer connected to the Magen Avraham in OC 1:sk7. The Magen Avraham brings from Rabbeinu Bachay that Chazal's dictum "whosoever recites Ashrei thrice daily is surely a Ben Olam Haba" doesn't mean mere recitation. It means deep meditation on the meaning of the words and the truths they relate. Similarly, he said, there's no benefit from merely reciting the hundred brachos. The benefit comes from awareness of hashgacha pratis and reinforcement of hakaras hatov. Without these elements, it's just, as the letter writer put it, talk, and talk is cheap.
I saw that Rav Sternbuch says this here. He says that it's not a din in saying the Brachos, it's a din in saying the brachos with hakaras hatov and yirah of the Sheim Hashem. I would add that it's not just the Sheim with Yirah, because then every mention of the Sheim should count. It must be the combination of Yirah and hakaras hatov/ahava that a bracha ought to embody.
מה ה׳ אלקיך (י. יב). מכאן דרשו חז״ל שצריך לברך כל יום מאה ברכות, (מנחה מג:) והכונה דע״י מה שמרגיל עצמו לברך כל יום מאה פעמים ומזכיר שם ה׳ באימה וביראה, מתעורר האדם לזכור לפני מי הוא עומד, ומשריש בלבו יראת ה׳ והיינו ״מה ה־ אלקיך שואל מעמך כי אם ליראה את ה׳ אלקיך ״ ומכאן שסגולה נפלאה לאיש המעלה ברצותו לירא ולפחד את ה׳ שידקדק לומר מאה ברכות בכונה הראויה, ועי׳ ב״אור החיים״ להלן פ׳ כי תצ א (כב, יג) מה שדרש דרש בהאי קרא לס׳ כי אין עתה אלא לשון תשובה , שראוי לבעל תשובה להשתדל לברך ק׳ ברכות בכל יום, כי עי״ז יתעורר לירא את ה׳ ונמצאת תשובתו שלמה.
But I think there is another answer, and this answer highlights the interesting connection of this vort specifically to this week's parsha.
Ba'alei Mussar say "Adam nivdak be'kal," that you can only tell what a person is like from his attitude towards things that are not considered important. Doing the big things proves nothing. But if you do the little things, the things that you could avoid without your conscience bothering you, that does prove something about your sincerity.
And that is precisely what the first words of this week's parsha teach us: Eikev tishme'un, the mitzvos that adam dash be'akeivav. Mei'ah brachos is a way to generate and maintain yir'as shamayim; but only as long as it is a davar kal. Once it is made into a Mivtza, a Mei'ah Brachos cult, like, with all due respect, the amein society, it will prove nothing and accomplish nothing.
NOTE:
Assuming that Mei'ah Brachos is obligatory, is it a Biblical or Rabbinic mandate? And general information for the inquiring mind.
- According to the Bahag and Rav Shlomo ibn Gabirol, the fact that the Gemara in Menachos (cited above) derives the obligation from the passuk here proves that the mitzva is Biblical in nature.
- The Rambam and Ramban hold that it is mi'derabanan, and the drasha in Menachos is an asmachta (like Shnayim mikra ve'echad Targum hinted at in the word 'Shemos.') This opinion is accepted le'halacha.
- Rabbeinu Bechaye and the Sefer HaManhig write that this was one of the earliest Rabbinical ordinances, (like Kri'as Hatorah Shabbos afternoon,) dating back to the times of Moshe Rabbeinu. However, it was essentially forgotten over time until, in response to a plague in Yerushalayim which was R'L killing 100 Jews a day, (Medrash Rabba Bamidbar [Korach] 18:21) David HaMelech reemphasized the takana. (The Medrash there also associates this with the passuk in II Shmuel 23:1,נְאֻם דָּוִד בֶּן-יִשַׁי, וּנְאֻם הַגֶּבֶר הֻקַם עָל, since עָל is Gematria 100. Others see it in the Passuk in Tehilllim 128:4 הִנֵּה כִי-כֵן יְבֹרַךְ גָּבֶר יְרֵא ה since כִי-כֵן is also gematria 100. )
- Women have no such obligation. Sources: Lechem Mishna 2 Taanis 5 and Reb Shlomo Zalman Aurbach in Halichos Shlomo page 272 based on very different reasons. (Reb Elyashiv and Rav Ovadia Yosef Sheyichyu hold that women should say mei'ah brachos, but this is my blog, and I can be soseim the way I want to.)
- Does the night go with the following or preceding day? This question is too OCD for me* to deal with, like where are you supposed to stop and do Targum by Shnayim Mikra? At each perek, or only at the psuchos, or at the aliyos? Just decide in your mind which makes more sense to you and stick with it.
- The Bach in OC 46 says that this still works as a shmira from sickness and things like that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Yahrtzeit, Kaddish, and Aveilus.
The hook to hang this on the Parsha is the mention of Birkas Hamazon in Parshas Eikev. The last of the Brachos of Birkas Hamazon is called Birkas Hatov Ve'hameitiv, and it was instituted (Berachos 48) after the failed rebellion of Beitar, when, after several years, the government allowed us to bury the dead rebels, who had been left where they died. The ability to bury the dead is a great chesed, both for them and for us. In a sense, it is then that new life begins to spring forth from the bones of our ancestors. Along those lines, here is a discussion about certain halachos of Aveilus.
Particularly in a leap year, questions often arise about the duration of the aveilus, the date of the Yahrtzeit, and the calculation of the eleven months for Kaddish. Despite the numerous sefarim that discuss these matters, some halachos remain unclear, and even careful reading of these sources often results in errors. I was an aveil this year; (in my case, my father HK'M was niftar on the first day of Tishrei, the local funeral was on 4th, and the burial was in Israel on 6th day of Tishrei.) I researched the following questions carefully, and I am satisfied with my analysis. My Semicha documents allege that I am entitled to pasken questions of Jewish Law; if, however, you have an Orthodox Rabbi with whom you consult on Halach issues, do so. If no such Rabbi is available to you, then here are the relevant halachos.
THE IMPORTANT POINT HERE IS THAT THE CALCULATION OF THE STARTING POINT FOR THE ELEVEN MONTHS OF KADDISH, FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS OF AVEILUS, AND FOR THE YAHRTZEIT EACH HAVE DIFFERENT RULES AND BEGIN ON DIFFERENT DAYS.
May Mashiach come soon and render these issues irrelevant.
1. Kaddish is recited for eleven months. What comprises eleven months? Eleven months from when? In my case, I was saying kaddish for three days before the funeral, because my father, HK’M, was niftar on Rosh Hashanna morning, and Rosh Hashanna was followed by Shabbos. So I was not an onein for those three days, and I said kaddish.
Another complication: the funeral was local, but the burial was in Israel. I did not go to Israel, so my aveilus began when I saw the coffin off and returned home, before the actual burial.
So when does the eleven month period end?
The eleven months are counted NOT from the time of death, and NOT from the time of the local funeral, and not from the first time I said Kaddish. The eleven months begins at the time of the actual burial. In my case, this means that I said kaddish for eleven months and five days, since the first three days really don’t mean anything, and the two days between the local funeral and the burial in Israel don’t count either. (Igros Moshe YD III 160 and others.)
2. When does the aveilus end? At the Yahrtzeit, or after twelve months?
The aveilus lasts twelve months after the local funeral for people who didn't go on to the burial. Even though it is a leap year, and the Yahrtzeit is a month later, my aveilus ends a month before the Yahrtzeit.
3. When the funeral is three or more days after the death, people are told that the first Yahrtzeit is on the anniversary of the funeral, and the subsequent Yahrtzeits are on the anniversary of the death. Is this true on a leap year?
No. In a leap year, where the Aveilus period included two Adars, and so the Yahrtzeit is a month after the aveilus ends, the Yahrtzeit even the first year is the anniversary of the death, not the anniversary of the funeral. (Pischei Teshuva YD 520.)
For a discussion of the minhag of Tikkun on a Yahrtzeit, please see the comments.
Particularly in a leap year, questions often arise about the duration of the aveilus, the date of the Yahrtzeit, and the calculation of the eleven months for Kaddish. Despite the numerous sefarim that discuss these matters, some halachos remain unclear, and even careful reading of these sources often results in errors. I was an aveil this year; (in my case, my father HK'M was niftar on the first day of Tishrei, the local funeral was on 4th, and the burial was in Israel on 6th day of Tishrei.) I researched the following questions carefully, and I am satisfied with my analysis. My Semicha documents allege that I am entitled to pasken questions of Jewish Law; if, however, you have an Orthodox Rabbi with whom you consult on Halach issues, do so. If no such Rabbi is available to you, then here are the relevant halachos.
THE IMPORTANT POINT HERE IS THAT THE CALCULATION OF THE STARTING POINT FOR THE ELEVEN MONTHS OF KADDISH, FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS OF AVEILUS, AND FOR THE YAHRTZEIT EACH HAVE DIFFERENT RULES AND BEGIN ON DIFFERENT DAYS.
May Mashiach come soon and render these issues irrelevant.
1. Kaddish is recited for eleven months. What comprises eleven months? Eleven months from when? In my case, I was saying kaddish for three days before the funeral, because my father, HK’M, was niftar on Rosh Hashanna morning, and Rosh Hashanna was followed by Shabbos. So I was not an onein for those three days, and I said kaddish.
Another complication: the funeral was local, but the burial was in Israel. I did not go to Israel, so my aveilus began when I saw the coffin off and returned home, before the actual burial.
So when does the eleven month period end?
The eleven months are counted NOT from the time of death, and NOT from the time of the local funeral, and not from the first time I said Kaddish. The eleven months begins at the time of the actual burial. In my case, this means that I said kaddish for eleven months and five days, since the first three days really don’t mean anything, and the two days between the local funeral and the burial in Israel don’t count either. (Igros Moshe YD III 160 and others.)
2. When does the aveilus end? At the Yahrtzeit, or after twelve months?
The aveilus lasts twelve months after the local funeral for people who didn't go on to the burial. Even though it is a leap year, and the Yahrtzeit is a month later, my aveilus ends a month before the Yahrtzeit.
3. When the funeral is three or more days after the death, people are told that the first Yahrtzeit is on the anniversary of the funeral, and the subsequent Yahrtzeits are on the anniversary of the death. Is this true on a leap year?
No. In a leap year, where the Aveilus period included two Adars, and so the Yahrtzeit is a month after the aveilus ends, the Yahrtzeit even the first year is the anniversary of the death, not the anniversary of the funeral. (Pischei Teshuva YD 520.)
For a discussion of the minhag of Tikkun on a Yahrtzeit, please see the comments.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
UPDATE Brachos that are Mi'de'oraysa
I received the following email comment on the last piece, and I think it's very worth seeing in its entirety, other than changing a name to initials. If you will look at the aforementioned post, you will see how Reb Meir Simcha deals with the question.
(Letter begins:)I submitted this question to the Kollel Iyun Hadaf back when we were learning Brachos and received this reply.
--------------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------------
Subject: Berachos 35: Basis for berachos From: "Mordecai Kornfeld" Date: Mon, May 16, 2005 11:27 am To: "G S" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.) _________________________________________________________________ THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld daf@dafyomi.co.il ________________________________________________________________ Berachos 35: Basis for berachos
G S asked:
Tosfos concludes that bracha rishona is an asmachta (ie d'rabanon). However, why wouldn't we say its doraisa? The gemara concludes that bircas hanehenin are derived from a sevara and we see elsewhere that the gemara considers a sevara as even a stronger reason than a drasha
G S, chicago IL ----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:
An excellent question, one, to be honest, that has bothered me for ages. Incidentally, Tosfos merely concludes that the Pasuk first quoted is an Asmachta, not The B'rachah Rishonah, which could be d'Oraysa, if not for the Gemara in 'Mi she'Meiso', which considers it de'Rabbanan. The Rashba, commenting on the S'vara 'Asur le'Adam ... ', connects it with the Pasuk cited shortly "la'Hashem ha'Aretz u'Melo'ah". If the land belongs to Hashem, he explains, how can one possibly benefit from it without permission? Were it not for this Pasuk, we would presumably have thought that, having created the world for our benefit, it is now ours to do with as we please, and no B'rachah is necessary (interestingly enough, Chazal do say, with regard to Torah, that Hashem gave it to us in its entirety). Now the Pasuk under discussion is in Tehilim, and not in the Torah. Consequently, even though the B'rachah Rishonah is a S'vara, it can only be mi'de'Rabbanan, since the S'vara's source is a Pasuk in Nach.
R. E C
(Letter ends.)
I would like to point out that the common assumption that only Bracha Achrona on bread and Bracha Rishona on Torah are De'oraysa is not correct.
First, there's Kiddush. Yes, I know Reb Akiva Eiger in OC 271 says that you're yotzei Kiddush Mi'deoraysa when you tell someone Good Shabbos. I don't care. The point is that the whole nusach of Kiddush is De'oraysa when you say it at the proper time, and part of it is a bracha..
Second, there are Rishonim that hold that Bracha Rishona on all mitzvos is De'oraysa, based on the passuk in Vidui Ma'asros "Velo shachachti," as Rashi there says, "Lo shachachti milevareche'cha," which means that some kind of acknowledgment of gratitude to Hashem for giving us the opportunity to do mitzvos is a chiyuv De'oraysa. (see note.)
Third, see the Gemara in Brachos there on 48b where Reb Nassan brings the passuk in Shmuel 1:9 that says that they did not eat the Korban before a Bracha was made. Rashi there DH Ki says that the Bracha was asher kidshanu... le'echol es hazevach. The Maharsa there argues, because we're looking for Birkas HaNehenin, and that's a Birkas Hamitzvos. So he says it's the She'hakol, in which case it's not an example of a Bracha Deoraysa.
Fourth, see the Teshuvos Ri Migash in the next paragraph, who says that She'Hechiyanu is De'oraysa.
Mar'ei makomos for Birkos Hamitzvos being De'oraysa: Rashi in Ki Savo, Devarim 26:13, and in Brochos 40b, says that "lo avarti...lo shachachti....refers to the birkas hafrasha. Tosfos Yomtov in Bikkurim 5:11, says that the whole Gemora is just an asmachta and the bracha is for sure not De'oraysa. The Tzlach in Brochos 40 brings the TYT, and argues. The Satmerer in his Vayo’el Moshe here says the same thing without bringing the Tzlach. R’ Akiva Eiger in Brochos 15 agrees with the Tzlach, but points out that the Tzlach means that the chiyuv De’oraysa to be meshabei’ach for the mitzvah is after doing the mitzvah, not before. The Shai LaTorah in Ki Savo brings the Griz and R Dovid Soloveitchik that the Gemora in Brochos is mashma that it’s a normal brochoh. The Rogotchover there brings and explains a Sifri and a Yerushalmi on this matter. The Shem Mishmuel brings from his father that he saw a Teshuvas Ri Migash that the bracha Rashi is referring to is She'hechiyanu, and that is a de'oraysa.
(I came across this from Rav Yosef Gavriel Bechoffer: Maybe someday I'll work it into this discussion, but at least it's here.
Shehechiyanu: When D'Orysa Does Not Mean D'Orysa — Eruvin 40b
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף מ/ב
והלכתא אומר זמן בראש השנה וביום הכפורים
Teshuvos Ri MiGash (§203) writes that the recitation of the berachah of Shehechiyanu on Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur is only D'Rabbanan — but that on Sukkos it is D'orysa!
R' Yosef Engel (Gilyonei HaShas here) notes that this clearly cannot be taken literally. The only berachah which may be D'Orysa is Birchas HaTorah. Rather, states R' Yosef Engel, Ri MiGash must mean that the Shehechiyanu of Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur is optional; while the Shehechiyanu of Sukkos is obligatory — but, ultimately, both are D'Rabbanan. Other instances of such usage, cited by Gilyonei HaShas, are in Teshuvos Ri MiGash §89; Teshuvos Tashbetz 2:182.
Nevertheless, writes R' Yosef Engel, even taken non-literally, Ri MiGash's ruling seems at odds with our sugya, which seems to conclude that the Shehechiyanu of Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur is obligatory. In resolution of this contradiction, he cites Tanya Rabasi, Hil. Rosh HaShanah §73 (in the name of Yerushalmi) that the Shehechiyanu of Kiddush is D'Rabbanan while the Shehechiyanu of Shofar is D'Orysa. Similarly, Maharil, Hil. Rosh HaShanah, writes that the Shehechiyanu of Kiddush does not cover the Shehechiyanu of Shofar because Kiddush is D'Rabbanan while Shofar is D'Orysa.
But, asks R' Yosef Engel, why do we not recite Shehechiyanu on Rosh Chodesh? Perhaps, he suggests, Kiddush Levanah is in lieu of Shehechiyanu.)
If so, then, it is possible that the Svara of Bracha Rishona does entail a Chiyuv De'oraysa, but not for specifically a nusach of Bracha, just some statement of gratitude, some expression of hakaras hatov.
Anyway, after writing this, Reb Chaim B sent me an excellent mareh makom to the Pnei Yehoshua in Brachos in the beginning of Keitzad Mevorchim.
Towards the beginning of the perek, the Pnei Yehoshua d'h Ella Svara, says a pshat in the Gemara that will have your eyebrows bumping up against your hairline. You have to see it inside, but in short, this is what he says:
1. He, too, says that he was always perplexed by the Gemara saying bracha rishona is a svara, and then saying it's only a derabanan and the passuk is an asmachta. All over Shas, Svara means de'oraysa. He asks exactly the kashe G S asked, in fact, even with the same tone.
2. He says that it is possible that what the Gemara, and Tosfos, mean, is that yes, the svara makes it a de'oraysa, but the PASSUK is only an asmachta.
3. If so, he asks, why do we hold that safek bracha rishona le'hakeil? He answers, because of the counterfactor of bracha she'eina tzricha or birchas shav.
4. Why, he then asks, does a ba'al keri not make bracha rishona? Doesn't the Gemara say that if it were De'oraysa, the chiyuv Bracha would be docheh the ba'al keri problem?
5. He answers that yes, it's de'oraysa, but it's not de'oraysa. It is the equivalent of a de'oraysa, but it stems from svara, not a passuk. So the same way it's de'oraysa based on svara, the idea that a ba'al keri should not make a bracha is also a svara. It is a svara of Ke'vod Hashem that he shouldn't be making brachos. So svara B outweighs svara A. This would not be the case if it were a passuk-based de'oraysa; a svara would never outweigh a din that is derived from a passuk, contrary to what a lot of people like to tell themselves and their temple-goers.
5. A person who doesn't make the bracha rishona, but who says a bracha achrona, is also not guilty of being ne'heneh from olam hazeh without a bracha.
Here's the Pnei Yehoshua:
On the topic of De'oraysas that are not exactly like other De'oraysasas, this is also worth knowing:
(Letter begins:)I submitted this question to the Kollel Iyun Hadaf back when we were learning Brachos and received this reply.
--------------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------------
Subject: Berachos 35: Basis for berachos From: "Mordecai Kornfeld" Date: Mon, May 16, 2005 11:27 am To: "G S" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.) _________________________________________________________________ THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld daf@dafyomi.co.il ________________________________________________________________ Berachos 35: Basis for berachos
G S asked:
Tosfos concludes that bracha rishona is an asmachta (ie d'rabanon). However, why wouldn't we say its doraisa? The gemara concludes that bircas hanehenin are derived from a sevara and we see elsewhere that the gemara considers a sevara as even a stronger reason than a drasha
G S, chicago IL ----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:
An excellent question, one, to be honest, that has bothered me for ages. Incidentally, Tosfos merely concludes that the Pasuk first quoted is an Asmachta, not The B'rachah Rishonah, which could be d'Oraysa, if not for the Gemara in 'Mi she'Meiso', which considers it de'Rabbanan. The Rashba, commenting on the S'vara 'Asur le'Adam ... ', connects it with the Pasuk cited shortly "la'Hashem ha'Aretz u'Melo'ah". If the land belongs to Hashem, he explains, how can one possibly benefit from it without permission? Were it not for this Pasuk, we would presumably have thought that, having created the world for our benefit, it is now ours to do with as we please, and no B'rachah is necessary (interestingly enough, Chazal do say, with regard to Torah, that Hashem gave it to us in its entirety). Now the Pasuk under discussion is in Tehilim, and not in the Torah. Consequently, even though the B'rachah Rishonah is a S'vara, it can only be mi'de'Rabbanan, since the S'vara's source is a Pasuk in Nach.
R. E C
(Letter ends.)
I would like to point out that the common assumption that only Bracha Achrona on bread and Bracha Rishona on Torah are De'oraysa is not correct.
First, there's Kiddush. Yes, I know Reb Akiva Eiger in OC 271 says that you're yotzei Kiddush Mi'deoraysa when you tell someone Good Shabbos. I don't care. The point is that the whole nusach of Kiddush is De'oraysa when you say it at the proper time, and part of it is a bracha..
Second, there are Rishonim that hold that Bracha Rishona on all mitzvos is De'oraysa, based on the passuk in Vidui Ma'asros "Velo shachachti," as Rashi there says, "Lo shachachti milevareche'cha," which means that some kind of acknowledgment of gratitude to Hashem for giving us the opportunity to do mitzvos is a chiyuv De'oraysa. (see note.)
Third, see the Gemara in Brachos there on 48b where Reb Nassan brings the passuk in Shmuel 1:9 that says that they did not eat the Korban before a Bracha was made. Rashi there DH Ki says that the Bracha was asher kidshanu... le'echol es hazevach. The Maharsa there argues, because we're looking for Birkas HaNehenin, and that's a Birkas Hamitzvos. So he says it's the She'hakol, in which case it's not an example of a Bracha Deoraysa.
Fourth, see the Teshuvos Ri Migash in the next paragraph, who says that She'Hechiyanu is De'oraysa.
Mar'ei makomos for Birkos Hamitzvos being De'oraysa: Rashi in Ki Savo, Devarim 26:13, and in Brochos 40b, says that "lo avarti...lo shachachti....refers to the birkas hafrasha. Tosfos Yomtov in Bikkurim 5:11, says that the whole Gemora is just an asmachta and the bracha is for sure not De'oraysa. The Tzlach in Brochos 40 brings the TYT, and argues. The Satmerer in his Vayo’el Moshe here says the same thing without bringing the Tzlach. R’ Akiva Eiger in Brochos 15 agrees with the Tzlach, but points out that the Tzlach means that the chiyuv De’oraysa to be meshabei’ach for the mitzvah is after doing the mitzvah, not before. The Shai LaTorah in Ki Savo brings the Griz and R Dovid Soloveitchik that the Gemora in Brochos is mashma that it’s a normal brochoh. The Rogotchover there brings and explains a Sifri and a Yerushalmi on this matter. The Shem Mishmuel brings from his father that he saw a Teshuvas Ri Migash that the bracha Rashi is referring to is She'hechiyanu, and that is a de'oraysa.
(I came across this from Rav Yosef Gavriel Bechoffer: Maybe someday I'll work it into this discussion, but at least it's here.
Shehechiyanu: When D'Orysa Does Not Mean D'Orysa — Eruvin 40b
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף מ/ב
והלכתא אומר זמן בראש השנה וביום הכפורים
Teshuvos Ri MiGash (§203) writes that the recitation of the berachah of Shehechiyanu on Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur is only D'Rabbanan — but that on Sukkos it is D'orysa!
R' Yosef Engel (Gilyonei HaShas here) notes that this clearly cannot be taken literally. The only berachah which may be D'Orysa is Birchas HaTorah. Rather, states R' Yosef Engel, Ri MiGash must mean that the Shehechiyanu of Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur is optional; while the Shehechiyanu of Sukkos is obligatory — but, ultimately, both are D'Rabbanan. Other instances of such usage, cited by Gilyonei HaShas, are in Teshuvos Ri MiGash §89; Teshuvos Tashbetz 2:182.
Nevertheless, writes R' Yosef Engel, even taken non-literally, Ri MiGash's ruling seems at odds with our sugya, which seems to conclude that the Shehechiyanu of Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur is obligatory. In resolution of this contradiction, he cites Tanya Rabasi, Hil. Rosh HaShanah §73 (in the name of Yerushalmi) that the Shehechiyanu of Kiddush is D'Rabbanan while the Shehechiyanu of Shofar is D'Orysa. Similarly, Maharil, Hil. Rosh HaShanah, writes that the Shehechiyanu of Kiddush does not cover the Shehechiyanu of Shofar because Kiddush is D'Rabbanan while Shofar is D'Orysa.
But, asks R' Yosef Engel, why do we not recite Shehechiyanu on Rosh Chodesh? Perhaps, he suggests, Kiddush Levanah is in lieu of Shehechiyanu.)
If so, then, it is possible that the Svara of Bracha Rishona does entail a Chiyuv De'oraysa, but not for specifically a nusach of Bracha, just some statement of gratitude, some expression of hakaras hatov.
Anyway, after writing this, Reb Chaim B sent me an excellent mareh makom to the Pnei Yehoshua in Brachos in the beginning of Keitzad Mevorchim.
Towards the beginning of the perek, the Pnei Yehoshua d'h Ella Svara, says a pshat in the Gemara that will have your eyebrows bumping up against your hairline. You have to see it inside, but in short, this is what he says:
1. He, too, says that he was always perplexed by the Gemara saying bracha rishona is a svara, and then saying it's only a derabanan and the passuk is an asmachta. All over Shas, Svara means de'oraysa. He asks exactly the kashe G S asked, in fact, even with the same tone.
2. He says that it is possible that what the Gemara, and Tosfos, mean, is that yes, the svara makes it a de'oraysa, but the PASSUK is only an asmachta.
3. If so, he asks, why do we hold that safek bracha rishona le'hakeil? He answers, because of the counterfactor of bracha she'eina tzricha or birchas shav.
4. Why, he then asks, does a ba'al keri not make bracha rishona? Doesn't the Gemara say that if it were De'oraysa, the chiyuv Bracha would be docheh the ba'al keri problem?
5. He answers that yes, it's de'oraysa, but it's not de'oraysa. It is the equivalent of a de'oraysa, but it stems from svara, not a passuk. So the same way it's de'oraysa based on svara, the idea that a ba'al keri should not make a bracha is also a svara. It is a svara of Ke'vod Hashem that he shouldn't be making brachos. So svara B outweighs svara A. This would not be the case if it were a passuk-based de'oraysa; a svara would never outweigh a din that is derived from a passuk, contrary to what a lot of people like to tell themselves and their temple-goers.
5. A person who doesn't make the bracha rishona, but who says a bracha achrona, is also not guilty of being ne'heneh from olam hazeh without a bracha.
Here's the Pnei Yehoshua:
משמע מלשון כל הפוסקים דלפום הך
מסקנא דהכא כל ברכת הנהנין הן מדרבנן
לבר מברכת המזון לחוד ולרשב״א ברכת ז׳
מינין דלאחריו נמי מדאורייתא אבל בשאר
ברכות מודה ולענ״ד יש לתמוה דהא בכל
הש״ס משמע דמידי דאתיא מסברא הוי
מדאורייתא ואדרבה מקשה הש״ס הא למה
לי קרא סברא וכו׳ מיהו נראה לענ״ד דאפילו
את״ל דסברא זו הוי נמי מדאורייתא אפ״ה
אתי שפיר הא דקיי״ל דספק ברכות להקל
משום דלא שייך להחמיר דכיון דאסור לברך
ברכה שאינה צריכה משו״ה ממילא אזלה
לה הך סברא ומהאי טעמא גופא נמי א״ש
דבעל קרי על המזון אינו מברך לפניו דכיון
דלא מחייב אלא מסברא והוא מונע עצמו
משום כבוד דשם אינו שייך הך סברא
*****************************************************************On the topic of De'oraysas that are not exactly like other De'oraysasas, this is also worth knowing:
Reb Meir Simcha in the Rambam Hilchos Mamrim asks the following question. The Rambam defines one of the cases of Bal Tosif as one who presents a din Derabanan as if it were a De’oraysa. He asks, if so, how do we understand the numerous drashos in the Sifri and the Toras Kohanim that are presented as De’oraysos and are really asmachtos? And what about the many Gemaros that discuss drashos as if they were De’oraysa, and ask many kashes, and end up saying “ello Derabanan ukro asmachto be’almo.” This indicates that the din was passed off as a De’oraysa until it was demonstrated that it was only a Derabanan! This should be Bal Tosif! (I would think that the answer is that when the drosho was given, it was stated that it was Derabanan, like the Ritva in Eiruvin, and that caveat was forgotten. But RMS apparently holds that this is not mistavra, because if it were presented as a Derabanan, what was the point of hanging it on a drosho, if not to scare people into believing it was really a De’oraysa.) So he answers with a remarkable chiddush: there are two kinds of drashos. One is gufei Torah, and one is a drasha gemura, but it’s not as chamur as gufei Torah. To claim that a drasha is gufei Torah is Bal Tosif. To claim that a drasha is a drasha gemura but not gufei Torah, even if you say that it is a De’oraysa and it’s really not, is not Bal Tosif.
It seems to me that Rashi in Yevomos towards the beginning of Ha’isha, on 90b, addresses this in the context of the afke’inhu rabbanan le’kiddushin minei sugya, and Rashi says it is 100% wrong, and there is no difference between a be’feirushe passuk and a drasha like kiddushei kesef.
See also the Brisker Rov in Megillas Esther where he explains why Ploni was worried that a later beis din could overturn the ruling that was mattir Rus and his children would be passeled. He says that even a drosho of the yud gimmel middos can be overturned by a later beis din. He brings that the Rambam in Mamrim 1:4 says that the double loshon in Lo Sasur of mishaot asher yomru and davar asher yagidu refer to drashos based on yud gimmel middos and kabbalah ish mipi ish, and the difference is that the former can be overturned while the latter cannot.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Parshas Eikev, Devarim 8:10. Ve’achalta vesavata uveirachta. Counterbalancing Satiation.
R’ Meir Simcha here brings the Gemara in Brachos 35 that initially argues that if you are obligated to make a bracha when you have already eaten and are savei’ah, then kal vachomer you should be chayav to make a preliminary bracha before eating, when you are still hungry. But the maskana of the Gemara is that of the two brachos that are De’oraysa, birchas hatorah is specifically required before beginning to learn, while the Bracha on food is only required min hatorah after eating, and the bracha before eating is not De'oraysa but only De'rabanan. Why does the Gemara disregard the kal vachomer?
He explains that the reason the Gemara ultimately rejects the kal vachomer is because the Amora'im decided that the function of birchas hamazon is to prevent the bad effect of svi’ah, the ram levavcha, the shamanta avisa kasisa, the kochi ve’otzem yadi. Thus, there is no kal vachomer from Bracha Achrona that would obligate a Bracha Rishona, because the logic of Bracha Achrona does not apply at all to Bracha Rishona.
(I know I’m going to get complaints about this, but I say that Senator John Edwards said a very profound thing this week. After admitting that he had lied, and that he had indeed been unfaithful to his wife, Edwards said. "In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic.” He realized that ga’ava is the threshold of sin, and the feeling of satiety and confidence can blind people to the deadly consequences, both moral and personal, of infidelity. And what is infidelity other than denial of your obligation to others?)
Le’havdil, back to Reb Meir Simcha. The context of the mitzva of Birkas Hamazon supports his pshat. Immediately preceding the mitzvah of birkas hamazon, the Torah indicates that the miracle of the forty-year daily delivery of mahn in the desert served to highlight to the Jewish People the fact that "Man does not live by bread alone, but through the word of G-d, does Man live" (8:3) which (among other meanings) can be read as: it is not your efforts alone that bring about the bread, but, just as the mahn from the sky was clearly Divinely granted, so too bread from the ground is also Divinely granted through the mask of the natural order created by G-d. After the mitzvah to bless Hashem after eating, the Torah warns us: "v’rahm l’vavcha v’shahachta es Hashem... who has fed you mahn in the desert ... and you will say: “kochi v’otzem yadi asso li es hachayil hazeh...v’zacharto es Hashem Elokecha ki hu hanosein l’cha ko’ach laasos chayil.”(14-18).
The function of the birchas hatorah, on the other hand, as the Gemora in Nedorim 81 indicates (lo birchu batorah t’chiloh, as the Ran there and the Bach in OC 47 explain), is to prevent a person from learning lekanteir, as a kardom lachpor bo. This must be prevented before the person starts learning— so there is no problem of “lo birchu batorah techilla.” If a person begins his learning with this awareness, he will not come to the sin of l’kanteir or view the Torah as a science like other sciences or philosophies. In fact, R Chaim Volozhiner in Nefesh Hachayim 4:6-7 says that a person should stop occasionally during learning and contemplate the fact that he is learning the r’tzon Hashem and connecting to Hashem through his learning “ki hu uretzono echad.”
In order to better understand R Meir Simcha’s vort, we have to think about poshut pshat in the hava amina of the kal vachomer of the Gemora in Brochos. The Gemara says “if he is m’vareich when he is full, kal vachomer he should make a bracha when he is hungry.” What’s the kal vachomer? The teretz is that there are two concepts people tend to conflate in brachos, and those are birchas hoda’ah and birchas hashevach. Hoda’ah expresses gratitude for what we have received, while Shevach expresses recognition and appreciation of, and trust in, Hashem’s being the only One that provides sustenance. So the Gemara says that if after we are full and satisfied we make a bracha to express our recognition of Hashem as the sole provider of sustenance in the past and our faith that he will provide in the future, certainly we ought to do so when we are hungry and the food is in front of us. On this, as RMS explains, the Gemara says that the logic of the bracha is not just shevach, or hoda’ah; instead, it is to help us to deal with the problem that comes from having a full stomach-- to prevent us from forgetting about Hashem. As long as you are hungry, you are naturally receptive to hakaras hatov. The problem only begins when you are no longer hungry. This problems is what Birkas Hamazon addresses.
I feed a cat that was born under our porch eighteen years ago. (UPDATE: After around twenty years of dispatching countless sparrows, the cat passed away in January 2009.) The kids named it Saddle because of a black spot on its back against a white background. This extraordinarily venerable alley cat never comes into the house, and is very leery of human contact.
I have been feeding it for its entire life, and it gets whatever we don't eat, from week-old chicken to left-over roast. While it welcomes the occasional mouse or bird eaten with fur and feather, (or at least did when it was young enough to catch something,) it is a picky eater; it won't touch liver or cholent meat. That stuff he leaves for the raccoons and opossums who will, inevitably, consume him too. When he's hungry, he is the most loving animal; he comes over to me and meows, he rubs himself against my leg, he extends his front legs and bows. Once he's eaten, though, he's the classic alley cat-- distrustful, untouchable, and almost invisible. The point is, that as far as I can tell, this cat actually loves me-when he's hungry. As soon as he's full, he sees me as just another pest and nuisance. The idea of Birkas Hamazon is, don't be like my cat.
And you don't really need proof from my cat. Anyone that lends money knows that when you agree to lend, or when you hand over the money, the other person is so grateful, so effusive. Once the money has been deposited in the other guy's account, and certainly once he spends it, you suddenly don't exist, and you will see the borrower far less than you used to. He becomes scarce. This is not just because he's nervous about paying the loan back; it's also because his gratitude turns into resentment for the fact that he owes you the money.
He explains that the reason the Gemara ultimately rejects the kal vachomer is because the Amora'im decided that the function of birchas hamazon is to prevent the bad effect of svi’ah, the ram levavcha, the shamanta avisa kasisa, the kochi ve’otzem yadi. Thus, there is no kal vachomer from Bracha Achrona that would obligate a Bracha Rishona, because the logic of Bracha Achrona does not apply at all to Bracha Rishona.
(I know I’m going to get complaints about this, but I say that Senator John Edwards said a very profound thing this week. After admitting that he had lied, and that he had indeed been unfaithful to his wife, Edwards said. "In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic.” He realized that ga’ava is the threshold of sin, and the feeling of satiety and confidence can blind people to the deadly consequences, both moral and personal, of infidelity. And what is infidelity other than denial of your obligation to others?)
Le’havdil, back to Reb Meir Simcha. The context of the mitzva of Birkas Hamazon supports his pshat. Immediately preceding the mitzvah of birkas hamazon, the Torah indicates that the miracle of the forty-year daily delivery of mahn in the desert served to highlight to the Jewish People the fact that "Man does not live by bread alone, but through the word of G-d, does Man live" (8:3) which (among other meanings) can be read as: it is not your efforts alone that bring about the bread, but, just as the mahn from the sky was clearly Divinely granted, so too bread from the ground is also Divinely granted through the mask of the natural order created by G-d. After the mitzvah to bless Hashem after eating, the Torah warns us: "v’rahm l’vavcha v’shahachta es Hashem... who has fed you mahn in the desert ... and you will say: “kochi v’otzem yadi asso li es hachayil hazeh...v’zacharto es Hashem Elokecha ki hu hanosein l’cha ko’ach laasos chayil.”(14-18).
The function of the birchas hatorah, on the other hand, as the Gemora in Nedorim 81 indicates (lo birchu batorah t’chiloh, as the Ran there and the Bach in OC 47 explain), is to prevent a person from learning lekanteir, as a kardom lachpor bo. This must be prevented before the person starts learning— so there is no problem of “lo birchu batorah techilla.” If a person begins his learning with this awareness, he will not come to the sin of l’kanteir or view the Torah as a science like other sciences or philosophies. In fact, R Chaim Volozhiner in Nefesh Hachayim 4:6-7 says that a person should stop occasionally during learning and contemplate the fact that he is learning the r’tzon Hashem and connecting to Hashem through his learning “ki hu uretzono echad.”
In order to better understand R Meir Simcha’s vort, we have to think about poshut pshat in the hava amina of the kal vachomer of the Gemora in Brochos. The Gemara says “if he is m’vareich when he is full, kal vachomer he should make a bracha when he is hungry.” What’s the kal vachomer? The teretz is that there are two concepts people tend to conflate in brachos, and those are birchas hoda’ah and birchas hashevach. Hoda’ah expresses gratitude for what we have received, while Shevach expresses recognition and appreciation of, and trust in, Hashem’s being the only One that provides sustenance. So the Gemara says that if after we are full and satisfied we make a bracha to express our recognition of Hashem as the sole provider of sustenance in the past and our faith that he will provide in the future, certainly we ought to do so when we are hungry and the food is in front of us. On this, as RMS explains, the Gemara says that the logic of the bracha is not just shevach, or hoda’ah; instead, it is to help us to deal with the problem that comes from having a full stomach-- to prevent us from forgetting about Hashem. As long as you are hungry, you are naturally receptive to hakaras hatov. The problem only begins when you are no longer hungry. This problems is what Birkas Hamazon addresses.
I feed a cat that was born under our porch eighteen years ago. (UPDATE: After around twenty years of dispatching countless sparrows, the cat passed away in January 2009.) The kids named it Saddle because of a black spot on its back against a white background. This extraordinarily venerable alley cat never comes into the house, and is very leery of human contact.
I have been feeding it for its entire life, and it gets whatever we don't eat, from week-old chicken to left-over roast. While it welcomes the occasional mouse or bird eaten with fur and feather, (or at least did when it was young enough to catch something,) it is a picky eater; it won't touch liver or cholent meat. That stuff he leaves for the raccoons and opossums who will, inevitably, consume him too. When he's hungry, he is the most loving animal; he comes over to me and meows, he rubs himself against my leg, he extends his front legs and bows. Once he's eaten, though, he's the classic alley cat-- distrustful, untouchable, and almost invisible. The point is, that as far as I can tell, this cat actually loves me-when he's hungry. As soon as he's full, he sees me as just another pest and nuisance. The idea of Birkas Hamazon is, don't be like my cat.
And you don't really need proof from my cat. Anyone that lends money knows that when you agree to lend, or when you hand over the money, the other person is so grateful, so effusive. Once the money has been deposited in the other guy's account, and certainly once he spends it, you suddenly don't exist, and you will see the borrower far less than you used to. He becomes scarce. This is not just because he's nervous about paying the loan back; it's also because his gratitude turns into resentment for the fact that he owes you the money.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Eikev, Devorim 10:13. What Does Hashem Ask? Only That You Fear Him. Mah Hashem Elokechoa shoeil mei’imach ki im le’yir’ah Osso.
The Gemora in Brochos 33b asks, what does the passuk mean to say “All Hashem asks....” Is the attainment of the fear of God a little thing? The Gemora answers that from Moshe Rabbeinu’s perspective, this was, indeed, a minor request. This answer is difficult to understand; Moshe was our leader, and he should have understood that his people were not like him. But the truth is, the Gemora's question is even harder to understand than the Gemora's answer, as Reb Eliahu Lopian points out.
Rav Lopian, in Lev Eliahu, asks, why does the Gemora only ask about Yiras Shomayim? Yiras Shamayim is only the first of a long list of requirements in this passuk! “Laleches bichal derachav”, to walk in all His ways, which means to be behave in a manner that reflects the traits of God, to be domeh to Hashem in His mercy, etc, mah hu rachum, about which the whole sefer Tomer Dvorah was written, “uleahava oso”, which means to develop a love for Hashem through limud haTorah, “vela’avod...bechal levavcha” which means to convert the evil inclination into a tool that serves God, so that we serve Him with both the yeitzer tov and the yeitzer ra, “uvechol nafshecha”, which includes the mitzva of martyrdom, mesiras nefesh for kiddush Hashem. So, the end of the passuk is a list of requirements which demand every ounce of our strength and every moment of our time. So why does the Gemora ignore them all and simply ask about the fact that the Torah seems to minimize the difficulty of developing Yiras Shomayim?
Reb Eliah answers that once a person is a true Yorei Shomayim, all these other things follow naturally. So the real point of the passuk is that Hashem asks us to learn to be yerei’ei shomayim, which will lead to our developing all these other important qualities. In fact, the words of the passuk show this pshat to be correct. So the possuk is saying, all Hashem asks is that you strive toward yir’ah. If you do that, all these other things will follow. On that the Gemora asks, although all you have to do is strive towards yir’ah, that itself is an extremely difficult task.
When I made the second Siyum haShas for my shiur at my house in August ‘01, I gave an example of this. What baalabusteh would think that it makes sense to arrange a siyum for 60 people the night before the siyum? I had taken my boys on a Charter fishing trip, and we walked in at night with 50 pounds of half-cleaned just-caught fish. My wife said, Perfect. We are going to make a grand siyum tomorrow. Period! So at 9:30 that night, we got on the phone and start calling people. Then we had to move the furniture out of the living room and dining room. But that was that, and boruch Hashem it worked out beautifully— the fish was the best I ever tasted, moist and fresh and full of flavor (when guests began arriving at six, I was still out back scaling the last of the fish and rinsing them with the garden hose, and then cutting them into pieces, so it was served right out of the oven), to say nothing of the zucchini kugel and fruit salad that she made from scratch. This is because, as Rav Eliah Lopian says, the threshold issue is yiras shomayim, dedication. Once a person has yiras shomayim, once your mind is in the right place, all the difficulties become less important, the obstacles don’t appear insurmountable.
Yiras Shomayim is like the Annan in the Midbar— that it smoothed all the obstacles in front of the Bnei Yisroel. Ve’halach lefanecha tzidkecha means the same thing. Your own Tzedek is like the Annan, which travels before you and smooths the way.
I don’t like to be the bearer of gloom, but the fact is that Ellul is on the horizon. R’ Schwab here brings a Medrash Shocheir Tov that says that when Dovid Hamelech said in Ledovid Hashem Ori “Achas sho’alti...shivti..., lachzos..., ulevakeir..., ki yitzp’neini...etc., Hashem asked him, “are you asking ‘achas’ or for a whole bunch of things? (My mother likes to say that when she reads Le’dovid, she thinks that it is like someone saying “I’m not asking for much, I’m only asking for everything.”) The Medrash says that Dovid answered, Ribbono shel Olam, I learned how to ask from You-- You, too, said "Mah Hashem sho'eil...." R’ Schwab explains that just as in our parsha the other things flow from the first, Dovid was asking for ‘shivti,’ and that his shivti, his presence in the Beis Hashem, will result in all its natural concommitants. Everything looks different when your frame of reference, your point of view, is that of a person who is sitting in the Beis Hashem, just as everything is different when your frame of mind is Yiras Shamayim. Reb Meir Simcha said of the Rogotchover, he doesn’t have an unusual memory, it’s just that he’s always holding in middle of every sugya you talk to him about: the same can be said of certain askanim and gomlei chassadim– they’re not really so great. They just have this one little thing– their whole lives they feel that they are sitting in the Beis Hashem, so it’s just natural that they do what they do.
Rav Lopian, in Lev Eliahu, asks, why does the Gemora only ask about Yiras Shomayim? Yiras Shamayim is only the first of a long list of requirements in this passuk! “Laleches bichal derachav”, to walk in all His ways, which means to be behave in a manner that reflects the traits of God, to be domeh to Hashem in His mercy, etc, mah hu rachum, about which the whole sefer Tomer Dvorah was written, “uleahava oso”, which means to develop a love for Hashem through limud haTorah, “vela’avod...bechal levavcha” which means to convert the evil inclination into a tool that serves God, so that we serve Him with both the yeitzer tov and the yeitzer ra, “uvechol nafshecha”, which includes the mitzva of martyrdom, mesiras nefesh for kiddush Hashem. So, the end of the passuk is a list of requirements which demand every ounce of our strength and every moment of our time. So why does the Gemora ignore them all and simply ask about the fact that the Torah seems to minimize the difficulty of developing Yiras Shomayim?
Reb Eliah answers that once a person is a true Yorei Shomayim, all these other things follow naturally. So the real point of the passuk is that Hashem asks us to learn to be yerei’ei shomayim, which will lead to our developing all these other important qualities. In fact, the words of the passuk show this pshat to be correct. So the possuk is saying, all Hashem asks is that you strive toward yir’ah. If you do that, all these other things will follow. On that the Gemora asks, although all you have to do is strive towards yir’ah, that itself is an extremely difficult task.
When I made the second Siyum haShas for my shiur at my house in August ‘01, I gave an example of this. What baalabusteh would think that it makes sense to arrange a siyum for 60 people the night before the siyum? I had taken my boys on a Charter fishing trip, and we walked in at night with 50 pounds of half-cleaned just-caught fish. My wife said, Perfect. We are going to make a grand siyum tomorrow. Period! So at 9:30 that night, we got on the phone and start calling people. Then we had to move the furniture out of the living room and dining room. But that was that, and boruch Hashem it worked out beautifully— the fish was the best I ever tasted, moist and fresh and full of flavor (when guests began arriving at six, I was still out back scaling the last of the fish and rinsing them with the garden hose, and then cutting them into pieces, so it was served right out of the oven), to say nothing of the zucchini kugel and fruit salad that she made from scratch. This is because, as Rav Eliah Lopian says, the threshold issue is yiras shomayim, dedication. Once a person has yiras shomayim, once your mind is in the right place, all the difficulties become less important, the obstacles don’t appear insurmountable.
Yiras Shomayim is like the Annan in the Midbar— that it smoothed all the obstacles in front of the Bnei Yisroel. Ve’halach lefanecha tzidkecha means the same thing. Your own Tzedek is like the Annan, which travels before you and smooths the way.
I don’t like to be the bearer of gloom, but the fact is that Ellul is on the horizon. R’ Schwab here brings a Medrash Shocheir Tov that says that when Dovid Hamelech said in Ledovid Hashem Ori “Achas sho’alti...shivti..., lachzos..., ulevakeir..., ki yitzp’neini...etc., Hashem asked him, “are you asking ‘achas’ or for a whole bunch of things? (My mother likes to say that when she reads Le’dovid, she thinks that it is like someone saying “I’m not asking for much, I’m only asking for everything.”) The Medrash says that Dovid answered, Ribbono shel Olam, I learned how to ask from You-- You, too, said "Mah Hashem sho'eil...." R’ Schwab explains that just as in our parsha the other things flow from the first, Dovid was asking for ‘shivti,’ and that his shivti, his presence in the Beis Hashem, will result in all its natural concommitants. Everything looks different when your frame of reference, your point of view, is that of a person who is sitting in the Beis Hashem, just as everything is different when your frame of mind is Yiras Shamayim. Reb Meir Simcha said of the Rogotchover, he doesn’t have an unusual memory, it’s just that he’s always holding in middle of every sugya you talk to him about: the same can be said of certain askanim and gomlei chassadim– they’re not really so great. They just have this one little thing– their whole lives they feel that they are sitting in the Beis Hashem, so it’s just natural that they do what they do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)