Kol Hamevaser The Jewish Thought Magazine of the Yeshiva University Student Body

Prayer

Volume X, Issue 2 February 2018

FEATURING: "I Have Set God Before Me Always...": An Example of the Maimonidean Approach to Jewish Law and Philosophy Rabbi Shalom Carmy Page 6

Piyyut: The Story of the Poetry of Jewish Prayer Leah Klahr Page 10

Symposium: Addressing Contemporary Struggles with Prayer Dr. Deena Rabinovich, Rabbi Dr. JJ Schacter, & Rabbi Ezra Schwartz Page 22

Revisiting Classical Essays: David Rubinstein Page 26 2 KOL HAMEVASER www.kolhamevaser.com David Rubinstein Jewish TraditionJewish 26 Halakha?" of Independant Ethic an Recognize Jewish Tradition onEthics BeyondtheLaw:RevisitingR.Aharon Lichtenstein'sEssay, "Does Racheli Moskowitz Racheli Revisiting ClassicalEssays: Rabbi EzraSchwartz Personalized Prayer 25 Prayer Personalized Elana Rabinovich Dr. Jacob J.Schacter Can PrayerBeMeaningful?:FeelingthePresence ofGod 24 Doniel WeinreichDoniel Dr. Deena Rabinovich Hashem Sifatai Tiftach Sifatai Hashem E ypsu: drsig otmoay tuge wt Prayer with Struggles Contemporary Addressing Symposium: W L vent Natan Oliff ayout The ClashofTheoryandRealityin ebmaster Between HeavenandEarth:

David Selis Reuven Herzog c Jonah andtheParodox ofPrayerandRepentance 16 Mindy Schwartz Mindy oordinators Eitan Lipsky E Ilan Lavian Reuven Herzog Context Context ditor "And C A Brielle BroderBrielle op Ilan Lavian Ilan Yehuda Fogel ssociate Antecedents Avraham Wein And ManLaughed:R'MenachemFroman's Torat y

Leah Klahr editor E Piyyut: TheStoryofthePoetryJewishPrayer7

I ditors WillBlessThem":Understanding Rabbi MichaelRosensweig Leah Klahr Mi-Darkei Ha-Teshuva Mi-Darkei

E Rabbi ShalomCarmy ditors Maimonidean Approach toJewishLawandPhilosophy

"I HaveSetGodBefore MeAlways...":AnExampleofthe

-I

: PayingMore ThanLipservicetoTefila n Leah Klahr Letter from theEditor -C

hief 10 14 Masekhet Hagigah Hagigah Masekhet :

The AuthenticRepentance

Birkat Ha-Kohanim Birkat P rayer

Ha-Sechok 22 initsScriptural

andits Volume X Issue2

3 5 4 18

Prayer

By leah klahr

My God My God May these never end... The sand and the sea The rustle of the water The lightning of the Heavens The prayer of man (Hannaa Szenes, “Eli, Eli”)

Like the sand and the sea, human prayer is both eternal and ever-changing; it transcends the barriers of time, language, and religion. Some of the earliest texts found by archaeologists are texts of prayer, pointing to the innate inner movement within humanity to respond to the call of the Infinite, and to call out in response. “The soul is in constant state of prayer,” wrote the influential Jewish thinker and leader, Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook. Similarly, in Tikon Tefilati, Rav Dov Zinger’s book on prayer, he writes, “The call to prayer is the call to life, a call to open ourselves to the fundamental and deep voice whispering within us and within all of reality at all times.” And yet, despite this innate call to prayer, prayer has become an almost taboo topic in our community. When we shared with fellow students that the theme of this issue would be prayer, many students responded with a sense of hesitation and even discomfort: “I just don’t really connect to that topic, but I’d love to write for future topics,” was the response we most commonly received. This issue of Kol Hamevaser aims to create a space for dialogue about prayer within our community: about the meanings of Jewish liturgy and its laws, but also about the simple, personal, and dynamic ways in which our prayers move us, challenge us, and change us. In this issue, Ilan Lavian examines the Scriptural context of Birkat ha-Kohanim, and how this context changes our understanding of the blessing. Reuven Herzog explores

Letter from the Editor Letter from the paradoxical nature of repentance through the story of Jonah, and his prayers. In an article on the Rambam’s Hilkhot Tefillah, Rabbi Shalom Carmy presents an analysis of the necessity of kavvanah in prayer, which has significant implications for the debate surrounding the original purpose of the Brisker method. Similarly, Rabbi Dr. Michael Rosensweig reveals the implications of Maimonides’ terminology in Hilkhot Teshuva by analyzing the talmudic source Maimonides draws from. In a symposium on the challenges of prayer, Dr. Deena Rabinovich, Rabbi Dr. J.J. Schacter, and Rabbi Ezra Schwartz discuss the role of prayer in our community, and how it can be a greater source of meaning in our lives. Finally, in our revisiting classical essays section, David Rubinstein revisits Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein’s essay “Does Jewish Tradition Maintain an Ethic Independent of Halakha?”, explaining and further exploring its ideas. We would like to thank the Bernard Revel Graduate School of Jewish Studies and the Yeshiva College Student Association (YCSA) for sponsoring this issue. It is our prayer that the ideas in this publication will reach the hearts and minds of readers, uniting Torah and tefilla, so that words of Torah can serve as words of prayer, and that words of prayer can serve as words of Torah.

Leah Klahr is a junior at Stern College, majoring in English literature and Jewish studies.

Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 3 4 KOL HAMEVASER Berakhot intention, required for prayer. In Tractate to e find in the Talmud two sources concerning the A. T B Maimonidean Approach to Jewish LawandPhilosophy "I HaveSetGodBefore Me the Always...": An Exampleof h suet o Rben Ynh i the is Yonah, purity of heart which is expressed through Rabbeinu of students the referent of Psalms10:17, as explained by to thecontentofprayer. Indeed,theprimary first and foremost, attention and concentration mean, must heart” one’s “Directing substantively different typesofkavvanah two teachings will observe that they denote 16:8). The Gemaracontinues: “I havesetGodbeforemealways”(Psalms is as asortofamulet, asitissaidinScripture, king the opinion, supposed tobindhis Torah scroll to hisarm one to scroll. According Torah personal king’s Jewish the Sanhedrin (22a)dealswiththelawof prostrations. corner due to his customary kneeling and him afterward in an entirely different find and corner one in Akiva, pray to him leave Rabbi of concerning whom it is said that one might practice distinctive www.kolhamevaser.com ransla y

kavvanah rabbi (Psalms 10:17). an hearts, let yourearpayheed” (takhin “Direct says: verse], Sha’ul indication to thiseffect is [the Heavenward. Abba heart one’s engages in prayer must direct who One taught: Rabbis Our always” (ibid.). “I have set God facing me is beforeoneself,asitsaid, Presence Divine the though must visualize oneself as One whoengagesinprayer Hasida Shimon [who teachesasfollows]: Rabbi of name the in Bizna bar Hana Rabbi of manner the in verse other opinion must interpret that This interpreted? the be to aforementioned verse to according other opinion,howisthe And ted S In contrast,the In supportofthis W One 31a,welearn: halom

by , the Talmud refers tothe who reflects deeply upon these : Y C aakov army kavvanah S chiff , ) their Talmud in approach conscious . she is saying, ruling that maintaining this praying individual to the words that he or deals withtherequisite concentration Tefilla Hilkhot action of prayeratall.Inchapter ten of Presence; Divine without thisrecognitionthere canbeno the before standing is of theprayingindividualthat heorshe kavvanah prayer. Inchapter fourof two different classifications of by way of resolution that there must be two rulings of Maimonides, and innovated an apparent contradiction between these more is necessary.” Rav Hayyim perceived during the first blessing [of the [of blessing first the during kavvanah; [however]ifonepaidattention attention must returnandprayagainwith one’s direct not did “and prayed who one TefillaHilkhot 10:1,Maimonidesrulesthat God’s Presence.” Seemingly, by contrast, in oneself asthoughoneisstandingbefore his heartofallinterfering thoughts “andsee anyone who engages in prayer must empty TefillaHilkhot 4:16,Maimonidesrulesthat Hayyim distinction conceptual famous according to the thought of Maimonides. In Rav great between two typesofkavvanah the Soloveitchik of Brisk poses by a differentiation posited B. required ofanindividualturningtoGod. to themannerofintensiveconcentration on Psalms 108), each time in relationship (e.g. at theendofParasha16;andMidrash literature Rabbinic Berakhot Yerushalmi in other several locations in appears Sha’ul Abba of the meaning of the words. This statement include, at minimum, an awarenessof concentration for the sake of Heaven must rather than aconcrete source. Nonetheless, Sha’ul cites this verse only as Abba an indication therefore and prayer, of course the the King,facingDivinePresence. see oneselfasthoughoneisstandingbefore upon theindividual engaged in prayer to before God. The obligation is incumbent individual approaching in supplication kavvanah which arethefocusofthissecondtype different sort.Itisnotthewordsofprayer by contrast,welearnabout

From theGemarain A , buttheessentialstatureof spoken of is the consciousness , bycontrast, Maimonides air Rabba 5:5;Vayikra Hilkhot Tefilla kavvanah kavvanah amida], no Sanhedrin, in prayer

of the , the of a in still stands. Itemerges that the two Gemara and the language of Maimonides the distinction in both the language of the Taking allthisintoaccount,theessence of long astheindividual is standinginprayer. minimum level ofsubconscious intentas Ish, decidedthattheremust alwaysbea the considerations raised by the Hazon before the Divine Presence, but in line with the explicit consciousness ofstanding never meanttodisqualifyprayerlacking Maimonides bethat may It classification. legal Maimonides’ of standpoint the from Hilkhot Tefilla Maimonides in chapters four andten of – the contradiction between the rulings of the declared basis of Rav Hayyim’s opinion Hazon Ishiscorrect in hiscontention that mind. Indeed,itseemsasthoughthe and heart one’s directing about speaking he relied uponthe wording ofthe teachings Presence, Divine whereas inchaptertenof the before standing as which defines the defines which the wordingofGemarainSanhedrin, chapter Tefilla, in conceptual four ofHilkhot Maimonides, out, turns it As fundamental distinction may gainadditional support. Rav Maimonides, of Hayyim’s language the and attention to the language of the Gemara C. which appliestotheentireprayer. amida is sufficient to constitute a concentration during the first blessing of the to this Maimonides delineates the lawspertaining Tefilla, bycontrast, chapter ten of Hilkhot is obligatedtomaintain general rulethatanyoneengagedinprayer Tefilla Hilkhot Ish, Hazon the to resolution. According no contradiction at all,andthereforedemands no fact in is instance this in Hayyim Rav supposed contradiction pointed outby that the in whichtheHazonIshcontends Hayyim’s Rav to appraisal of theHazonIshinhisglosses of theamida. blessing first the least at for concentration sustained one as long so fulfilled is prayer in one’sobligation basis, factum post a on

kavvanah However No lesswell-knownisthe 4:16merelyestablishesa – invitesasimpleresolution , and there he explains that truh aig close paying through , on Rambam, on Hiddushim kavvanah Volume X Issue2 chose toemploy iko Tefilla, Hilkhot kavvanah of prayer kavvanah . In obligations of kavvanah exist not only By contrast, several students of diyyuk” in Rambam’s choice of phrasing. Prayer from a phenomenological standpoint, but Brisker methodology have argued that it is From a pedagogical point of view, the also within the linguistic framework of the primarily about conceptual analysis rather distinction is more easily rammed home primary sources. than the relief of textual problems. See through R. Hayyim’s discovery of the the work of R. Elyakim Krumbein most apparent contradiction rather than by concisely available in his essay and that of elaborating on the more “microscopic” R. Avraham Walfish in the Orthodox Forum insight I wrote about. Afterword volume on Lomdut edited by R. Yosef Blau. R. Krumbein claims that the Brisker Whether or not the above The piece was written for Kutonet approach evolved. While R. Hayyim argument indeed captures the evolution of Yosef, a memorial volume for my dear himself remained focused on answering R. Hayyim’s new idea in this case, it may be friend and teacher R. Yosef Wanefsky. My textual problems, later generations moved applicable in other cases. In my contribution eulogy for him was published in the Fall to a more purely conceptual orientation. He to the Orthodox Forum volume on Lomdut, 2000 issue of Jewish Action. The second traces this development through the work I quoted R. Isser Zalman Meltzer’s half of the article examines Rambam’s of maran ha-Rav zt”l, relying primarily on observation that written presentation of treatment of Psalm 16:8 in his Guide. Shiurim le-Zekher Avi Mori and the fully lomdut often differs significantly from conceptual framework of our mentor R. oral presentation for pedagogical reasons. The section ably translated by Aharon Lichtenstein zt”l. It is possible then that R. Hayyim’s own Yaakov Schiff has a bearing on the current methodological consciousness may have debate about R. Hayyim’s methodology The implication of my discussion been more “advanced,” i.e. closer to the and the development of the Brisker school. here is that there may be a gap between later generations, than is reflected in the On the face of it, the style of Hiddushei the implicit methodology of an analysis writing style of his major work. This Rabbenu Hayyim haLevi on Rambam is and its literary presentation. In the case at hypothesis could be tested by reviewing typical of the yeshiva culture from which hand, R. Hayyim may have developed a notes of R. Hayyim’s students or letters he he emerged. That is to say, the trigger for cogent phenomenological and conceptual wrote. R. Hayyim’s analysis is a difficulty in the distinction between levels of intention in Rambam’s text and the ostensible purpose prayer. This distinction would be valid of his discussion is to resolve the difficulty. independent of textual evidence. If R. If that is the case, then showing that the Hayyim had noticed my reading of the Rabbi Shalom Carmy is a professor of difficulty can be more plausibly resolved texts he could have adduced it. Of course, Jewish Studies at Yeshiva College and obviates the need for the analysis. This is the argument in print is more “dramatic”— serves as the Editor-in-Chief of Tradition indeed the brunt of Hazon Ish’s frequent rising from a supposed contradiction journal. marginal criticisms of R. Hayyim. in Rambam, whereas I merely “made a

Mi-Darkei Ha-Teshuva: The Authentic Repentance By Rabbi Michael Rosensweig compiled by: Yehoshua katz

Of the many novel insights place, for exile absolves sin to Hashem in distress, and that are presented in Rambam’s Hilkhot as it causes him to humble He would deliver them from Teshuva,1 Rambam’s development of himself intensely. their distresses” (Tehillim the “darkei ha-teshuva,” “the ways of 107); changing one’s name, repentance,” emerges at their forefront. Rambam’s formulation raises a variety of as the verse states, “Sarai Rambam (Hilkhot Teshuva 2:4) states: challenging questions. your wife, no longer call her Sarai but Sarah,” and it It is mi-darkei ha-teshuva, Firstly, what is the source for is written, “And I will bless of the ways of teshuva, Rambam’s description of “darkei ha- her and also give you a son for the repentant to shout teshuva?” Kesef Mishneh assumes that from her” (Bereishit 17); continuously before God with Rambam’s position is anchored in a changing one’s deeds, as the cries and supplications, for comment of Rabbi Yitzchak in Masekhet verse states, “And God saw him to give charity according Rosh ha-Shanna (16b): their deeds,” and it is written, to his ability, for him to “And God regretted the evil distance himself significantly And Rabbi Yitzchak said, He said He would do to them from the matter with which ‘Four things uproot a man’s and did not do it” (Yona he sinned, for him to change fate, and these are the four: 3).’ And some say that even his name, as if to say, ‘I am charity, shouting, changing changing one’s place uproots a different person and not the one’s name, and changing his fate, as the verse states, person who committed those one’s deeds. Charity, as the “And God said to Avram, transgressions,’ for him to verse states, “And charity will ‘Go forth from your land,’ transform all of his ways into save from death” (Mishlei and then He promises, “I will the good and straight, and for 10); shouting, as the verse make you into a large nation” him to exile himself from his states, “And they cried out (Bereishit 12). Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 5 6 KOL HAMEVASER (16b), Rambam’s apparentsource: Rambam’sand comments another critical discrepancy between ofthe understanding concept of his about reflect ha-Shanna (16b) interpretation of Rosh Rambam’s does What but alsoteshuva? its scope toinclude notonly broaden and statement Yitzchak’s R. diverge from the simple interpretation of Rambam altersitsmeaning. is Rambam a verbatimquotation. The sourcefor therefore, and Rambam’s words, comments cannot be considered Yitzchak’s R. application the of reinvents Rambam it. to hints Yitzchak’sonly rather but instruction R. quote not does Rambam that recognizes ee Msnh i fc, accentuates Yitzchak R. fact, when hestates: from deviation in Rambam’s Mishneh, Kesef in character from the act of repentance. uprooting one’s troubling destiny is distinct act ofarepentant! To besure,theactof the concerns statement Rambam’s verdict, one’s of changing the concerns which heissubject: divorces onefromtheastrological harm to particular, the in name, one’s fate; changing of one’sact uproot can that methods are things” “four Yitzchak’s however, R. explains, so, Ritva As arises. If question central one then source. Rambam’s as R. identifies Mishneh Yitzchak’s statement Consequently, it records. is not surprising that Kesef Rambam that ha-teshuva darkei various the of five all delineate omerim” www.kolhamevaser.com And all five ways are ways five all And things withthesewords. five these to hints (Rambam) explains about Abraham. the Gemara (Shabbat his that and removedfromhimas nullified is is fate astrological name one’s changing of benefit this, another from aside And, him. speaking negatively about thereby prevent others from committed sins in the past and he isnotthe same personwho that declare to is name one’s The purposeofchanging Moreover, LehemMishnehnotes Rambam does basis what On Clearly R. Yet, while R. Yitzchak’s statement teshuva? izhk n te “ the and Yitzchak oh ha-Shanna16b,but Rosh n or Rabbi our And Ksf Mishneh Kesef , keri’at gezar din gezar keri’at Rosh ha-Shanna Rosh 156a) gezar din, gezar yeish implications of concept and ideal. What are the full sin. Rather, it is indicative of some broader is notmerely a methodology for absolving of hisbroader rationalistic proclivities astrological significance, especially in light emphasizing from away shy may Rambam two R. suggest distinct, yetconsistent,approaches. of and understanding comments Yitzchak’s simple o unpackthemeaningof the veering Rambam’sfrom explaining by begin Rambam’s is necessarytouprootone’s fate! behaviors R. five the Yitzchak,of one only to according all, After ha-teshuva? darkei are indispensable to theaccomplishment of all that five of the behaviors argue detailed in the Gemara Rambam does why (16b), is source Rambam’s If proper methodology and reaction to sin. is notjustaconvenient way ofdescribing a and meaning significant carries phrase the Teshuvah and phrase ineachcontext, both but alsoin phrase appears not only in merely coincidental, we mustnote that the is phraseology Rambam’s that assume we ha-Teshuva, reformulates this din.Lest in Meiri, Even concept. same the discussing when it utilize not do Rishonim in MishnahorGemara,andevenother himself Rambam coins thisterminology; it does notappear ha-teshuva?” “mi- phrase, darkei Rambam’s of meaning the should beconfrontedaswell. What is one’s fate). the five is sufficient (to uproot even Shanna words though the Gemara (Rosh ha- rabbi’s our (Rambam) in mentioned upon them. remove thesuffering from 5), and this will cause them to (Yirmiyahu stray…” you to cause have sins “Your distressed, as the verse states, bad deeds,theyhavebeen know thatbecauseoftheir blow trumpets,allwill Yisrael) shoutand (Kellal suffering arisesandthey of repentance, that when ha-teshuva, of the ways is thing this And First, T abms sg o te same the of usage Rambam’s Perhaps amorebasicquestion Hilkhot Ta’anit (1:2): aki ha-teshuva,wemight darkei Hilkhot Ta’anit, suggeststhat in contradistinction to Ritva, 16b) saysthat one of darkei ha-teshuva oh ha-Shanna Rosh mi-darkei Hilkhot Teshuva ? Hilkhot Hibbur 2 It Hashem andfacilitates one that transformsapersonintoan process, vital independently an is finest, its neutralizing of pastsins;rather, teshuva,at his facilitates it because only life man’s to Mada, isnotindispensable climax of Sefer encompassing fashion. the processofrepentance in amostall- interprets and defines Rambam mei-ahava, Laws of Teshuva that are the prerequisites for stance Rambam’s As God. by for evinced love his to due God serves ,” mei-ahava on the “oveid Teshuva, the section’s final chapter, centers For thisreason,chapter ten of the proper legal Mada. philosophy of Sefer service motivated by ahavaandrootedin accentuate the ideal service of God,a Ahava.They with theideasofSefer Teshuva bridge the ideas of of section the final As transition. climactic a constitutes Rambam, For Teshuva. to broaden andexpandthroughout tendency Rambam’s reflects Teshuva to statement Yitzchak’s Rabbi of one’s personalityandvaluesystem. share incommontheneedtotransform din gezar since repentance and keri’at formula tomethodology of repentance Yitzchak’s R. apply to Rambam for natural was it Therefore, fate. mystical or astrological one’s of alteration personality, and merit rather than the demands the transformation of values, method employed touproota one’s of uprooting the on focus does Yitzchak discipline. R. Rambam, of this For rejection specific and

vd mei-ahava,then man towards avoda only to counteract sin but alsoto propel anomalies. If teshuvaisnecessarynot ha-teshuva, explains these apparent darkei of two! repentance as outlined in chapters one and seems relevanttothecorecomponentsof character and personality; such discussion repentance focusing on seven todiscuss chapter until waits Rambam why question justify his position? Additionally, we might unsourced. anger, hatred,andjealousy, thisassertionis of certain emotions and traits, such as records that true repentance includes the uprooting Rambam Although repentance. corroborates hisbroadunderstandingof traits, values, andbeliefs further Teshuva 7:3) of repentance for corrupting teshuva, ascapturedbyhisthesis of Second, Rambam’ Perhaps, Rambam’s understanding 6 n ht ai de Rambam does basis what On ee Mada,theLawsof Sefer dsuso ( discussion s abms application Rambam’s Volume X Issue2 avoda mei-ahava. ea din,butthe gezar eia gzr din gezar keri’at Teshuva, asthe iko Teshuva Hilkhot 4 the one who ee Mada Sefer ea din gezar 3 Hilkhot Hilkhot Hilkhot Hilkhot avoda oveid 5

Prayer perhaps chapter seven, a chapter dedicated kocho,” “according to his ability.” He must Teshuva, the Ten Days of Repentance, he to ma’alat ha-teshuva, the greatness of not only distance himself from evil, but he adds that the practice includes as well “eisek repentance, is the most appropriate context must distance himself greatly- “u-mitraheik be-mitzvot,” “involvement in mitzvot.” For to present repentance from traits. Rambam harbei.” Finally, Rambam emphasizes that Rambam, it is not just altruistic action informs us that the greatness of repentance one must be “meshaneh ma’asav kulan”; that should pervade the Ten Days; rather, is, precisely, its transformative potential, he must be one who “changes all of his the ba’al teshuva must make extra effort but for teshuva to achieve this ambition, ways.” Rambam’s intensification of Rabbi to increase his punctiliousness regarding it must be comprehensive; it must address Yitzchak’s instructions reflects Rambam’s all commandments. Rambam’s expansion both action and thought. Once teshuva, attitude towards them. For Rambam, they of the scope of proper activity throughout in its most pristine form, is the laying of are part of darkei ha-teshuva. They are Aseret Yemei Teshuva coheres precisely groundwork for service of God mei-ahava, ways of motivating man towards and with his characterization of “darkei ha- then no source is necessary to conclude that assisting him in self-evaluation and self- teshuva.” If teshuva is to be not just an such teshuva must encompass repentance transformation. While for keri’at gezar din, accumulation of merits but also a process that holistically addresses the entire less intense shouting or charity or changing of personal transformation, one that directs personality. of deeds may be sufficient, for concrete and facilitates avoda mei-ahava, then it repentance that leads to avoda mei-ahava, must include intense involvement in all Given Rambam’s broad intensification is necessary. mitzvot. understanding of teshuva, his reading of Rosh ha-Shanna (16b) emerges lucid and Furthermore, not only must these Thus, while they may seem sensible. R. Yitzchak’s statement advises acts be strengthened qualitatively, but innocuous on their surface, the “darkei one as to how to change his gezar din. they must be bolstered quantitatively as ha-teshuva” are indeed the means, both Rambam then intensifies and transforms well. Rambam, as Lehem Mishneh notes, quantitative and qualitative, that guide R. Yitzchak’s statement into “darkei ha- requires all five actions as part of darkei one on his path towards avoda mei-ahava. teshuva”; he expands its relevance beyond ha-teshuva. For keri’at gezar din, one They are not just an itemized list of actions the uprooting of decrees and applies it to action may be sufficient; but, for teshuva to take to achieve forgiveness. On the the institution of repentance as a whole. that leads to avoda mei-ahava, all five are contrary, the phrase “darkei ha-teshuva,” in Rambam adds that as part of “darkei ha- necessary. its intensified form, signifies Rambam’s all- teshuva,” one should not only shout, as R. encompassing understanding of teshuva.7 Yitzchak advises for keri’at gezar din, but The motif of “darkei ha-teshuva” he should be “tzo’eik tamid,” “shouting as a window into teshuva dominates constantly.” Moreover, he should not only much of Rambam’s Hilkhot Teshuva. yell, but he should yell “be- bechi ve- Interestingly, as Rambam (Hilkhot Teshuva Rabbi Dr. Michael Rosensweig is a Rosh tachanunim,” with cries and pleas. And, 3:4) articulates the well-known practice Yeshiva and Rosh Kollel at the Rabbi Isaac one should not only give charity, as Rabbi to increase giving of charity and multiply Elchanan Theological Seminary. Yitzchak instructs, but he should do so “ke-fi acts of kindness throughout Aseret Yemei

1 This article is an adaptation of a kappara for one’s sins. As we have suggested 6 See Migdal Oz (Teshuva 7:3) who series of shiurim given by Rabbi Rosensweig in for Rambam, Rashba also does not limit the suggests that Rambam’s source is the concept 2015. The article was reviewed by R. Rosensweig application of Rabbi Yitzchak’s advice to shinui of “hirhurei aveira kashin mei-aveira” (Yoma and is part of a future volume of essays edited by mazal but rather includes attainment of kappara 29a). This suggestion, however, seems difficult Itamar Rosensweig and Avraham Wein. as well. if not untenable; Rambam is explicit in his assertion that repentance must address not only 2 See also Hilkhot Teshuva (4:2) where 4 Hilkhot Teshuva (10:2). thoughts of sin but also midot ra’ot. Rambam uses the term “darkei ha-teshuva” and mentions that which prevents one from 5 For a more extensive analysis of 7 See Sefer Likutim (Teshuva 3:3), who accomplishing darkei ha-teshuva. the tenth chapter of Hilkhot Teshuva, see my formulates the notion of repentance as “tachlit “Ahavat Hashem and Talmud Torah: The Telos be-fnei atzmo,” “a purpose in and of itself.” 3 See Shu”t ha-Rashba (1:19). Rashba of Teshuva,” CJF Torah To-Go (Rosh Hashana Such a characterization highlights the approach argues that exiling oneself from his locale, and Yom Kippur 5778), 28-31. to repentance not as, solely, a reaction to sin, as R. Yitzchak advises, is beneficial not only but as a proactive effort to achieve avoda mei- towards shinui mazal but also towards attaining ahava.

Piyyut: The Story of the Poetry of Jewish Prayer By Leah Klahr

Jewish prayer is caught between embodies this continuous dialogue within creative within Jewish prayer. Piyyutim the two poles of keva and kavvanah, Jewish thought and practice. Piyyutim often feature anthropomorphic ideas, the the fixed nature of prayer, and the role have ancient roots, tracing as far back as presence of angels, midrashic themes, of intentionality in one’s prayer.1 While the early first century 3CE. Payytanim, and the unique voices of the payytanim, Jewish law ultimately prescribes fixed Jewish poets who authored piyyutim, echoing the historical and personal formulas of liturgy, the dialogue between composed prayerful poems that expressed realities of their lives.4 Yet, with time, keva and kavvanah continues to echo and ideas beyond the ones within the statutory these creative piyyutim were integrated evolve. The role of piyyutim,2 poems of prayers. Thus, piyyutim came to represent into prayer services, and often served as prayer or liturgical poetry, perhaps best the voice of the personal, dynamic, and a source of keva, rather than kavvanah. Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 7 8 KOL HAMEVASER spiritual proclivity.” and thepayytanim as “Palestinians by Piyyutim as a“Palestinian phenomenon,” in Palestine. In this sense, Hoffman defines as a Palestinian in Egypt, or as a Babylonian Thus, Hoffman explains that one couldlive readings from the Torah one observed. one chosetofollow, andwhatcycle of or Babylonian responsum the legal Talmud,which Jerusalem upon depended one markers included choices suchaswhether hn ayoin rgn, onig o the Palestinian rootsofearlypiyyutim. to pointing origins, Babylonian than rather Palestinian of were Genizah Cairo the piyyutim and poetic texts found in the music.” and especially in laterperiods,choral expression throughthemodesofpoetry, vehicle that allowed for change and artistic liturgy, thePalestiniansynagogue hada predictable totally and fixed a of “Instead particular days.” the public prayer ofthesynagogueon be presented by the to thestandard texts oftheprayers,to piyyutim, of [of piyyutim] were created as alternatives scholar a explains, “The most important early genres Langer, prayers, Ruth fixed the to additions as recited Jewish into prayer. Though somepiyyutimwere ingrained became piyyutim between thefourthandsixthcenturiesthat in the land of Israel, or Byzantine Palestine, composed acrossoceansandcenturies,itis Piyyut asanEretz Yisrael Creation another. opposing ideasoverlap and speaktoone minhag, and the waythat these seemingly keva Jewish history reveals the interplay between The development of piyyutim throughout Palestinian or Babylonian.” cultural traits that marked one asbasically influence, of spheres rather,spiritual were, There term. the define we that sense the in borders did not really exist then, at least not sense. Hoffman writes, “Of coursenational importantly, inthe cultural and spiritual the geographic sense, but perhaps more are not only a product of Palestine in scholar of liturgy, explains that piyyutim soil of Palestine reflects that within the within dialogue between that reflects Palestine of soil poetry, inthegeographic and cultural Halakhic ObjectionstoPiyyut was www.kolhamevaser.com and kavvanah 7 Similarly, Lawrence Hoffman, a While piyyutim have been The birth of piyyut, prayer- kavvanah, between halakha and ht h Plsiin Jews Palestinian the that 6 Thus, Langerwrites, keva 9 of Additionally,most hla tzibburas sheliah and 8 These cultural These kavvanah,

10

5 it the very place that had initially resisted the rm aetn t Babylonia. to Palestine from the center ofpiyyutcomposition migrated period, postclassical the Fleischer,by Ezra to theIsraeli poet andscholar ofpiyyut, the according that, culture infiltrated Babylonian Jewish greatly so Piyyutim as well. culture Babylonian Jewish the of part a becoming slowly ways, various in Jews Babylonian Palestinian reached piyyut The of institution Jews. Babylonian and cultural exchange between Palestinian toward permitting piyyut relates to the Langer suggests that this halakhic shift piyyutim withintheirownprayers. embracing begin to Jews Babylonian for aahc epne pnd h floodgates the opened response halakhic standard blessingitsupplemented. themes of thebeginningandending the being recited for, andthatitincludesthe of the blessing or the occasion it was that thepiyyutrelate to thecontent in prayerservicesunderthelimitations Gaon permitted the inclusion of piyyutim piyyutim, by the ninth century, R’ Natronai of Jewishprayer. to markpiyyutim asforeigntoidealmodes attempts Baboi ben persecution, of forces by attributing its creation to the external of thecreation and integration of piyyut; wariness Babylonian the reflects argument in therightplacesorder.” This the proper texts established by the sages “forbidden to recite anything other than were Jews Palestinian the that explained recitation of formalized prayers, ben Baboi under Islamic rule, which allowedthe Jews Palestinian were forbidden from praying. However, the when persecution, piyyutim developed as a result of Christian argues that the Palestinian custom ofreciting also Baboi Ben blasphemous.” is obligations” and that “to add to the text prayer his fulfill to fails blessing ordained writes Baboi that “anyone who alters a talmudically Rav ben on teachings, Based Yehudai’s piyyutim. to his describes objections Baboi, ben Pirkoi student, Rav Genizah, Cairo the in found Yehudai’s eighth-century Rav Yehudai Gaon. In a letter recorded come from the school of the mid- and more.” against piyyutoverthenextmillennium of thehalakhicarguments thatwouldecho customs, early Geonim introduced many establish thepredominance of theirown Langer writes,“Intheirstrugglesto community. Jewish the within establish to the statutoryprayerstheywereattempting prayer service, arguing that it threatened to theintegration ofpiyyutim into the objected strongly Geonim Babylonian the sought withinprayer. Unsurprisinglythen, e, ept ti rjcin of rejection this despite Yet, 11 The earliest responses that are 13 Ironically, 12 This among the congregation. prayer service, causing a loss of as a source of “amusement” within the and melodiesofmanypiyyutimserved the “improper” content, poeticmeters, For example, Maimonides maintained that a loss,ratherthanincrease of kavvanah. authorities claimed that piyyutim caused stir inspiration; rather, manyhalakhic into theprayerservice, they ceased to time, as ancient piyyutim were integrated creative expression within prayer, with be instituted as asourceof to continued questioned. While piyyutim were originally prayer Jewish within Jewish of element prayer bythemedieval period, their role universal a become hub oftheircontinuedcreation. institution of piyyutim later became the invalid. this deemed the entire prayer halakhically piyyutim integrated into statutory prayers, a congregation does notunderstandthe problems withpiyyut.Hewrotethat if himself, described this as one of the main payytan influential an Ezra, Ibn Abraham as ameaningfulpart of prayerservices. them, andthattheytherefore failed toserve that congregantsoftendidnotunderstand One ofthemainobjectionstopiyyutwas during the recitation of the piyyutim. congregants wouldoftenresorttotalking abolished fromtheprayerservicebecause the Tur argued thatpiyyutimshouldbe oh h Aia ad h Hd maintained Hida the and Arizal the both time, same the prayers. at fixed Yet, the of the precisenumbers ofletters and words divine names and secrets hidden within into statutoryprayersinterfered with the Hida, ruledthat theinsertionofpiyyutim further Hayyim Yosefthe as David known Azulai, ideology influenced acceptance Kabbalistic of piyyut when Rabbi errors.” with “filled were piyyutim their therefore they wereunfamiliar with kabbalah, and rejected the piyyutimoflaterpayytanim because Arizal the However, blessings. even be addedinto the text of the statutory could piyyutim these Arizal, the to knew thesecretsofkabbalah; according they because Hakanah ben Nehunia Rabbi ben and Elazar Arakh, Rabbi Rabbi Akiva, recited piyytuim attributed to Tananim like only Arizal the that Vital’srecords Vital Hayyim Hayyim Rabbi codification of of the Arizal’s teachings, Rabbi volume one Hakavvanot Lurianic kabbalah.InShaar attitudes toward piyyut was the influence of piyyutim. problem by writing commentaries on the and well, as Jews German and French by aie Ashkenazrespondedtothis Hasidei 16 However, though piyyutim had nte ky atr n shaping in factor key Another This argument wasemployed Volume X Issue2 kavvanah, and 14 Similarly, kavvanah 15 ,

that individual Jews should maintain their led to the gradual loss of piyyut from most music mysticism, history, legend, Prayer ancestral prayer minhagim, even if this Ashkenazi communities. While some philosophy, and prayer, as well as personal, included the recitation of certain piyyutim. deeply ingrained piyyutim continued to family, and national stories and emotions. be recited and printed in siddurim, many The singing of piyut makes it possible to By the late eighteenth and piyyutim quietly slipped out of Jewish experience this totality in its deepest sense.” nineteenth centuries, in Western Europe, prayer services. In a way, the piyyut was exiled together the role of piyyut within Jewish prayer with the Jewish people from the land of became a political, as well as halakhic Israel, and the return of Jewish people to question. On the one hand, some leaders the land where piyyutim were first created attempted to maintain the role of this The Rebirth of Piyyut in Eretz Yisrael has released a new meaning and life within ancient custom within prayer. For example, Today Jewish prayer-poetry. Especially with the Rabbi Abraham Lowenstamm argued that rebirth of Hebrew as a spoken language and especially in the age of the printing press, Though piyyut had transformed culture, piyyutim have once again become when piyyutim could be printed in the over time from a symbol of kavvanah a source of kavannah within prayer. siddur and studied by the congregation, and poetic creation to one of minhag, and they should not be abandoned. Other rabbis perhaps even keva, recently, piyyutim have Just as piyyutim were a product saw piyyutim as representative of the role once again begun to serve as a source of of the Eretz Yisrael culture that slowly of minhag within prayer, which was being renewed inspiration within the Jewish spread to the Babylonian and diaspora threatened by the creation of the Jewish community. It is in Israel, the place where communities, Israeli culture’s renewed Conservative and Reform movements.17 they were first created, that piyyutim have connection to piyyutim is slowly spreading Thus, in 1892, Rabbi Yosef Zekharia Stern become most powerfully re-integrated into to Jewish communities around the world. wrote that despite legitimate reasons to Jewish prayer and culture. Popular Israeli For example, Piyut North America is a joined eliminate the integration of piyyutim, they music artists, such as Ehud Banai, Yishai project of Hazmana L’Piyyut in Israel and must be maintained because of their status Ribo, Amir Benyon, and others, feature B’nai Jethrun in New York which works to as a minhag. Langer explains, “Sages who piyyutim in their music; piyyutim like spread knowledge of piyyutim to American might have otherwise jettisoned the custom “Yedid Nefesh,” “Okhila L’El,” and “El communities. Like Hazmana L’Piyyut, The felt that such a move was dangerous in a Adon,” are regularly broadcasted on public Open Siddur Project provides an archive world where traditional practice was being radio, especially before Jewish holidays. of piyyutim, but it also features various increasingly challenged.”18 However, “The Piyyut Ensemble,” of the Ben Zvi Jewish prayers composed throughout while some opinions argued to preserve Institute is an Israeli band that performs history that model the dynamic, creative, the institution of piyyutim—for their own North African and Middle Eastern piyyutim and personal initiative of piyyutim.19 As sake, or for political motives—others and melodies. The groundbreaking project Jewish communities across the world argued that they no longer played the same Hazmana Le-Piyyut, or the Invitation find relevance and meaning in the prayer- role for the Jewish community as they to Piyut website, founded by the Israeli poems written throughout Jewish history, once did. For example, Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch Avi Chai Foundation, features an archive the dialogue between keva and kavvanah, Chajes wrote that piyyutim were no longer of ancient and modern piyyutim and between halakha and minhag, and between being recited by many communities, and their melodies. It presents the historical Eretz Yisrael and Diaspora continues to no longer held meaning. Yet, rather than background, commentary, and varying flourish and grow. formally eliminating them from Jewish perspectives of each piyyut, along with a prayer and causing division over the issue, list of melodies used for each piyyut. The Leah Klahr is a junior at Stern College, Chajes argued that with time, they would website’s homepage states, “The piyut majoring in English literature and Jewish become organically extinct from Jewish purifies and refines key components of studies prayer. These various dissenting voices Hebrew culture into a totality: language,

1 For a formative discussion of this Zemirot,” or formally called “Shir Ha-Kavod” 12 Hoffman explains that Natronai’s tension within Jewish prayer, see BT Berakhot deviates from the form and content of the halakhic stance stems from the talmudic 29b: “R’ Eleazar said, ’If one makes one’s statutory prayers through its poetic structure concept of me’ein ha-berakha [the essence of prayer fixed [keva] it is not true supplication and elaborate anthropomorphism. the blessing]; R’ Natronai Gaon expanded this [takhanunim].’” While the meaning of the concept to permit the inclusion of thematically word kavannah is interpreted in various ways, 5 The halakhic opinions presented here appropriate piyyutim within statutory blessings, this article uses it in the sense of takhanunim, are all drawn from Ruth Langer, To Worship as long as the piyyut incorporated transitions or prayer that emerges from the heart. See also God Properly (Cincinnati, Ohio: Hebrew Union out of and back into the statutory blessings. Rabbi Shimon’s statement in Mishna Avot 2:13: College Press, 1998), 117-187. “...When you pray, do not make your prayers 13 Wout Jac. Van Bekkum, “The Hebrew fixed [keva], but rather prayers for mercy and 6 Langer, To Worship God Properly, Liturgical Poetry of Byzantine Palestine,” in supplication before the Omnipresent, blessed be 113. Prooftexts, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Spring 2008): 232- He.” 246. 7 Ibid. 2 The word piyyut stems from the Greek 14 At the same time, Maimonides word for poem, poites. 8 Lawrence Hoffman, The Canonization encouraged the preservation of certain of the Synagogue Service (Notre Dame, London: piyyutim, and even ruled that some of the 3 Wout Jac. Van Bekkum, “The Hebrew University of Notre Dame Press, 1979), 66. Shabbat piyyutim should be maintained in Liturgical Poetry of Byzantine Palestine,” in order to prevent dissention within the Jewish Prooftexts, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Spring 2008): 232- 9 Hoffman, 67. community. 246. 10 Ibid. 15 Tur on Shulkan Arukh, OH 68. 4 For example, the 12th century piyyut attributed to Rav Yehuda Ha-Chassid, “Anim 11 Langer, 117. Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 9 10 KOL HAMEVASER his passingis titled thought: humor. Onebookpublished after fascinating element of his personality and I willfocushereonone particularly speaking world can learn from Rav Froman, published. come to light as hisideasareincreasingly a loaded spiritual world that is beginning to world ofIsraeli geo-politics, but was rather interesting deviation from the oft-vitriolic However, Froman’s path was not merely an (the founder of Hamas)asclose friends. Yassirof Sheikh YassinAhmed and Arafat spoke also Froman but wing, Israel’sright with identified often movement settlement a movement, Emunim Gush the of founder a and Kook Ha-Kohen Yehuda Tzvi Rav religious experience. He wasa student of was notthroughpoliticians but shared Tekoa,and also a believer that the way to peace settlement, Bank West a of thechief rabbi both was Froman Rav figure. a Rav world. nonsensical Menachem Froman (1945-2013)wassuch a of cracks the sense andnonsense,whobringslightinto who standsat the crossroads between that combines the tworoles,insomeone figure a with blessed is world the occasion either the scholaror jester, butupon other, the or one are figures Many laughs. comedic relief,theescapefromreality, the to theforefront,and jester for the noted fortheinsightandtruth(s)hebrings distinction between thetwo. The formeris roles; there would rather be a hierarchical as occupyingsimilar, orevenoverlapping scholar and the jester would rarely be seen Within manyanormativeculture,the a major gap between the two opposites. antithetical, with eachofthepairingshaving the irrational, is often understood to be and nonsense,betweentherational William – Shakespeare prophets prove oft do Jesters Koestler Arthur – sage the to brother is jester The additions further for inspiration the as served and Reform movements, the institution of piyyut 17 16 and its Antecedents and And Man Laughed: R' Menachem Froman's www.kolhamevaser.com B

y

Y

ehuda

While The

e, rncly fr h Conservative the for ironically,Yet, Langer, 150. F relationship between sense ogel there is much the English- the much is there h Rgtos Will Righteous The Background and Kook Rabbi NahmanofBreslov. Rav of influences the in particular style Froman’s for roots the at look some examplesofthistrend,andwillthen delivers weighty ideas. We will first look at Froman which with flair humorous a edge, constant throughouttheworkisacomedic creativity of thought is exciting, and one The Zohar. the and Breslov of Nachman Rabbi as pages same the in Sartre and Oz Amos mentioning profane, and profound thoughts andanecdotestouchupontopics This, and the assorted pithy from Laugh 95. s togt edr n a writer a and leader thought (1865- a As Kook 1935). Ha-kohen Isaac Abraham modern Israel with the personality of Rabbi trend dates back to the very beginning of Le’umi) population. This general Religious (Dati National the to Torah Hasidic Elecha” that serves largely “Karov hesder, aswellaweeklypublication phenomenon of Hasidut-influenced in recent years, marked by afast-growing world ofIsraelispirituality has exploded the contextwithinwhichhetaught. The understand to first important is it Froman, Hadassah Froman, He Rabbanit teacher and artist Otni’el. to married was and Kohanim, Ateret Meir, including Mekor Hayim,Ha-kotel,Machon Tekoa and a teacher in various Shapiro, eventually becoming the rabbi of Avrahamand Goren Shlomo Rabbis from ordination rabbinic received He Merkaz Ha-Rav. Yeshivat Yehuda his in Tzvi Kook Rabbi Ha-kohen under studying up he beganhisteshuvaprocess,andended the Hebrew University. at Itwashere that thought Jewish study to on went War, Six-Day the during Brigade Paratroopers the in serving after and Hasidim, Kfar in born intoanonreligiousIsraelifamily passing in2013. untimely continuing hismissionafter Hasidut,insomeways and Zohar teach and changestothestatutoryprayers. 19 18

In Rabbi

Langer, 184. For example, it features the full texts full featuresthe it example, For re t udrtn Rav understand to order eahm rmn was Froman Menachem 1 andshecontinuesto yeshivot yeshivot , most easilypresent. is flair comedic Froman’s that work titled Tzohakim,asit is inthisaptly Hasidim serious consideration, we willfocuson otoens ad Judaism. and whom Postmodernism of many are drawntohisinterfacing between readership, American among renown gaining are Shagar’sworks to his Talmud translationandcommentary, attention due heretoforth withintheU.S. While Steinsaltz has received themost Hayim. Mekor and Otni’el, Tekoa, Arba, Religious Kiryat Yitzhak, Siah National as such framework, Hasidic the within (1949-2007), Each impacted the opening of new Shagar Froman, andSteinsaltz (1937-present). Rabbis namely emphasized the necessityforspirituality, influentially have that thinkers core fifty few a than more years ago, in recent years there have been community Religious spirituality into the then-nascent National on emphasis greater a brought while Kook Rav However, works. Kabbalistic and land, and drew frommuch earlier Hasidic a profound spirituality and connection to the emphasized he community, Religious with anoversized presence in the National (Give Me Time).(Give Adamah (Land), and the new Shalom Land): This), From Laugh Will Righteous M’Zeh (The Tzohkim his teachings, suchasHassidim traction due totheincreasedpublication of media, his thoughtandideasaregaining religious?) it is work hasbeenwidely publicized by Israeli (or political Froman’s oa. u hw s t osbe o marry Zohar?” to learning possible without it is how But Zohar. is saidthatonemustbemarried tolearn understandable, such aswhenhewrites,“It charm canbedisarmingyet intimately counterintuitive comedic edge. This ironic religious coercion, andspirituality, andmanysharea bachelorhood, Zionism, Israel, array ofthemes, includingthelandof thoughts andideas,covering abroad Tzohakim isbrokenupinto 180 small doing something elseentirely. Hasidim esnl ryr fr aiu occasions, various the seventeenthandnineteenthcenturies. for composed by Ashkenazic women prayers mostly between tkhines, Yiddish of personal translations English and Torat Ha-Sechok ohk Aez (ag M Beloved My (Laugh Aretz, Sokhaki o Rv rmn hmr a be may humor Froman, Rav For 3 Am (Peace), While all threemerit Volume X Issue2 4 lehr he Elsewhere Ten Li Zeman 2 Although (People), yeshivot

writes that “the world of Torah is full of In this radical piece, Froman Strikingly, some Talmudic passages align Prayer debate…Torah scholars argue about almost associates the “jest of Purim” with “Torat the Babylonian Talmud with darkness, and everything. How do we know that Chazal Eretz Yisrael” and the Messianic Torah, the Jerusalem Talmud with light.13 had a sense of humor? Because they said which Rav Froman saw as dominant during that ‘Torah scholars increase peace in the this era of history. These are marked in the Traditional rabbinic commentaries world.”5 In a fascinating piece, he notes that presence of God, or at least in the mindset largely relate the aforementioned passages “To be dati (usually translated as religious) of life in front of God. The antinomian to methodological distinctions between the is to be deep….in which case Amos Oz merges with the counterintuitive in the two schools, as the Babylonian school is (the famed secular novelist) is dati.” To formation of this radical theology of redolent with logical casuistry and folio- be clear, this isn’t to say that every single humor, a theology that places Purim over long debates, and is the usual touchstone piece in Hasidim is humorous as much Pesach and laughter over solemnity. when people reference “Talmudic logic”, as there is a thread of counter-intuition in contradistinction to the Jerusalem present throughout much of the work. In an These ideas may seem distant school’s emphasis on clarity and brevity. extremely telling passage, he writes that: from many readers on a number of planes: This clarity is often attributed to the more the very notion of a “new Torah” can seem easily attainable wisdom of the Land of There are many places that dangerously similar to previous attempts Israel, which thus mitigates the necessity R’ Nahman stops something to supersede the Torah, as the eternality of for complex abstract argument.14 As the in the middle, but in one the Torah is a necessary component of the Babylonian Talmud was and continues place he stops in the middle religious Jew’s belief system. Additionally, to be significantly more disseminated in of a sentence: “At first while there are previous instances of humor traditional Jewish circles, it is interesting all beginnings were from in the Jewish literary corpus, Froman’s that its writers highlighted the beauty of the Pesah, and therefore all formulation is astounding in its raising of Jerusalem Talmud.15 Although the passages mitzvot are in memory of the theological stakes of humor. Although seem to portray the latter in a more positive the departure from Egypt. Froman is not explicit about his sources, light, perhaps due to a discomfort with the But now.” The intention here I argue that he is utilizing and combining negative portrayal of the primary source of is that in classic Judaism all two concepts: an emphasis on theological rabbinic learning, some seek to mitigate the mitzvoth are in memory of components of divine jest, developed by hierarchal portrayal.16 the departure from Egypt, Rabbi Nahman of Breslov (1772-1810); and now we have reached and the idea of a new Torah, or at least a Enter Rabbi Abraham Isaac a new era – the time of jest new style of Torah, developed by Rabbi HaKohen Kook onto this intellectual (tzehok) and freedom. Until Abraham Isaac HaKohen Kook (1965- backdrop. As the first Ashkenazic chief now, all of the mitzvot were 1935). This text presents a fascinating rabbi of British Mandatory Palestine, a serious matter. Passover is blend of the respective thoughts, merging this thinker, halakhist, mystic, and poet pathos; the Torah is pathos- the two into a composite whole. par excellence often strove to reveal the driven, full of seriousness. positive implications in seemingly negative And now we have reached a trends, revealing the light in a (seeming) new era, a new Torah: Torat religious darkness. In their defense of Eretz Yisrael, the Torah of the Torat Eretz Yisrael the avowedly secular new Judaism of messiah. All the mitzvot are the time, his writings drew criticism a remembrance to the jest of The notion of a style of Torah- from the trenchant hardline religionists. Purim and not the pathos of learning distinct to Eretz Yisrael is not a For example, he writes positively about Pesah. ‘To be or not to be?’ modern invention, as roots of this idea exercise17, art18, and Theodore Herzl19, in is a very serious and heavy may be evident in the stylistic differences each circumstance drawing the ire of some consideration, but in that very between the Jerusalem and Babylonian of his coreligionists. Shakespearean play (sic) Talmuds. In addition to the famous dictum it’s also written that “all the that “the air of the land of Israel increases In this vein, Rav Kook put a lot 7 world’s a stage,” everything wisdom,” this distinction is made explicit of thought into the transition from exile to is a play. You hear me say in several places, such as in the midrash’s Israel as a shift not only in space, but in that the most important comment on the verse, “And the gold of thought and identity. The notion of Torat 8 question in life is to live the land is good,” that “this teaches that Eretz Yisrael gains importance, as it is a or not to live? This whole there is no Torah like the Torah of the lens through which to view the theological question is jest, it’s jest…it’s Land of Israel, and there is no wisdom impact of this shift on Torah-learning and 9 a joke…it’s a joke… There like the wisdom of Land of Israel.” Later, thought.20 He argues that the movement is something that is above to the Talmud records that R’ Zeira, upon to the Land of Israel necessitates a live or not to live, even above moving to Israel, fasted 100 fasts in order broadened perspective, as the Torat Eretz 10 (the principle) “saving a life to forget the Babylonian Talmud.” The Yisrael comprises a broadened, whole- pushes off Shabbat;” what is medieval commentator Rashi (1040-1105) picture perspective, in contrast to the above saving lives? To be in explains that the scholars of Babylon particularistic, individualistic Torat Chutz front of God, in front of God, argued more than the scholars of Israel, La-aretz. He writes that Torat Eretz Yisrael to be before God in this world who seemed to come to conclusions with “worries constantly on behalf of the whole, 11 and in the next, to be before greater harmony, in line with a different the whole soul of the entire nation. The God and to know that all that passage in which the scholars of Israel and details enter the whole, they are elevated in we do until now was jest. In of Babylon are directly contrasted. The its elevations, crowned in its crowning…”21 life, in death, all is jest in former are characterized as “being gracious This isn’t simply a shift in “the Torah in its front of God.6 to one another in halakha,” whereas the understanding in learning, in the four cubits latter “injure each other in halakha.”12 of halakha, but rather an enlightening of Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 11 12 KOL HAMEVASER had inexile. broader, whole-focused thinking, than they shifts orienting the Jewish nation towards a view ofthe heightened need for paradigm front ofthe Torah ofMoshiach.” in thisworldwillbenothingness(hevel) Midrash that states “the Torah one learns Torah foranewage,basedoff wordsinthe old-new Kook, an of notion Rav the affirms similarly of companion and Charlop, student a Moshe Yaakov Rabbi wholes. the nation, allparticulars in their respective and individual the halakha, and Aggadah binaries: many so of unification inner the of thisrealization process,onerealizes fathers didn’t merit.” powerful thing,abrandnew Torah thatour was assuch: We are meriting to a great and spirit of matters in Yeshivat Merkaz Ha-rav than “Torat that Yisrael isanentirely differentEretz thing writes Froman Kook’s. byR. A.I. influenced significantly is Yisrael and thushisconception of student of its leader, R. Tzvi Yehuda Kook, close a was and Ha-rav Merkaz Yeshivat from topic,area toarea…lessen.” Yisrael, theboundariesthatseparatetopic renewal, which prepares for all of life… From the depth of spiritual well onlyhereonholyland…” the Torah….is available to beunderstood that “this broad divine flow…of all areas of everything is realized to beone.Henotes all intoaholisticcomposite,inwhich whole-oriented perspectiveencompasses to themoretraditional looks at the “national factors” in addition Yisrael in such a scenario Eretz Torat versus the pain of an individual man, and Shalit wasaquestionofthegreatergood deal to freecaptive Israeli soldierGilad noting thattheconversationsregarding particular. He connects this to on thestrengthofwholeinstead entire idea of ToratEretzYisrael isafocus then-young Froman.Hethenwritesthatthe the on influence its to testament are Ha-rav of theoverwhelmingculture of Merkaz humor.” methods, andIovercomethem through Kook overcomes them through harmonistic Rav that is Kook Rav and myself between internal contradictions. The difference is “In truththeworldisfulloftragedies… This that statement formulations. Froman’s in apparent made Kook’s R. from and Purim-esque merriment seems absent identically, astheemphasis of divine jest of nefesh. www.kolhamevaser.com parallels R. Kook’s R. parallels Yisrael EretzTorat Torat Chutz La-aretz. Inmytime the ToratChutz This isn’t to say that Froman’s view 26 Froman However, they do sharethe tde i te Kookian the in studied 25 Hisstrongmemories halakhot oa Eretz Torat oa Eretz Torat of 24 23

A part As halakha, 22 pikuah This standards. critique; and embraceegalitarian social self- honest in engage moral Judaism; of the values highlight community; Jewish ability to empathize with the tragedy of Jewish the underscores humor Jewish that Unconscious the to Relation their had and little other control. Freud, inhisJokes have may Jews the where situations grants aformofintellectual control of and powerlessness,ascomedic appraisal coping mechanism for constantoppression rabbinic literature mayhavebeenusedasa Eastern European context, humor outside of DivineJest uh s eua Alharizi’s the Yehuda as such to imitate the style of rabbinic literature, later In literacy. Jewish eras, therewereevenparodybookswritten of level high a perhaps meant to mock,buttheydemand and bizarre scenarios; all of these are humor may be complex wordplays, insults, ed w wns o fly.” to wings two need can’t just be right wing or left wing, as you quality, suchashisdeclaration that “one a profound message cloaked in comedic carry to seems humor Froman’s instances n h world?” the in state that “Torah scholars increase peace a senseofhumor, forhowelse could they rabbinic world it is clear that that given the degree of argument in the portions, his humor is biting: he points out Jewish-Muslim as dialogue andpeace-building. In yetother well as the settler community both in figure important views an political as own Froman’s of telling his reciting a joke he appreciates; incidental, as inonepiece whose entirety is some places,hishumorseemslighter and he started the shiur.” the joke, they would soon“sit in aweas students’ Rabbah’shearts were open with joy upon hearing although Tellingly, history. The Talmud rabbinic literature makes for aninteresting lot a receives of attention, and theroleofthishumorin humor” of sense “Jewish Torat Eretz Yisrael andTorat Mashiach. apparent in his equating of humor with both seems to be theologically laden, as is te tdns] ers ih happiness.” with hearts open students’] “to is [the this that explains Rashi and would openhislectureswithajoke, Talmud, to identifywhatconstituteshumorinthe of abanteringdiscussion. other movements; or, occasionally, aspart tool tomaximize engagement; to mock literature tends to be used asa pedagogical aeht Purim, Masekhet 30 Froman’ assome examples of Talmudic 32

In any case, humor in rabbinic 36 n n cs, Froman’s case, any In s humor, while disarming, The notionofthe 27 29 records that Rabbah that records It isn’t always easy always isn’t It and others. 35 This isdeeply Takhemoni, Hazal had 34 31 inother , Inthe posits 33 In 28

oneclua Jws msi wt a with mystic penchant forjest:RabbiNahman. Jewish countercultural must gobacksome200yearstoadifferent we position, this of roots the find to order In Humor.” of “TorahFroman’s of import refer tohumorwiththesortoftheological funny rabbis,there have been fewthat seen already. While there have been many have we the that humor Jewish isn’t of type this same that suggest Yisrael Eretz from herexile.” to is similar the risingofsparks which rectification, major di-shtuta),hecreatesa absurdity (mila man rejoiceshimselfthroughmattersof Jewish a “when that say to as far so goes a garlic peel.” the sagesofIsraelareinmyestimation like comedic edge, asinhisopinionthat“all wisdom.” far youarefrom wisdom istorealize how piece ofwisdom,suchas,“Theessence attempt to impartaparticular message or seeming a Froman’s, like are, statements here. Someofthesecounterintuitive embrace of the ridiculous, is most relevant so-called contemporary reader, his embracing of the a numberofthemes that are relevant to the Although movement. on speaks to, referred is he as “Rabbeinu,” Hasidic Breslov and mystic and the founder ofthe (1772-1810) wasanearlyhasidicmaster that in order to know the essenceofthis that inorderto know delving the values of this nation, decides of values there. The wise man,intent on country in order toreport back on the state king’s latter the to man wise a sends king, wishing tohaveaportrait of acertain other In this complex tale, a mythical king ridiculous. the the of significance at theological hints Nahman Rabbi the Man,” and Wise King Humble the of Story “The the medium of fantastical tales; in one, profound teachings were taughtthrough as hisaligning overcoming internal contradiction, as well statement that humor is his method of the rectification of the of rectification the to risehappiness,whichisdepicted as ridiculous is certainly important in order only) through matters of absurdity.” “it ispossibletocomejoyeven(alt. saying withdifferent formulationsthat humor isimportant toliftonetowardsjoy, depression, insome places he writesthat his writingsareexhortations against his teachings. our understanding of the role of humor in aspects of Rabbi Nahman’s stance broadens consideration of the following additional Rabbi Much 37 “sechok,” whichseemsto be an Inothers,hesharesabiting 38 ToratHa-sechok with As a major component of component major a As f ab Nha’ most Nahman’s Rabbi of 40 amn f Breslov of Nahman This embracing ofthe Volume X Issue2 Shekhinah Shekhinah , buta 39 Torat He country he would listen to the country’s comedy describes God, the Infinite, as the realization that everything is nothing Prayer jokes, because “when one has to know changing His mind because of the bribe of and nothing, everything. This laughter something, one should know the jokes a calf. While this sentiment may seem to be inducing paradox comprises the divine jest related to it.” This is the joke he heard: on the border of heresy, Gelman points out of our time. that this statement of divine humor need Among all countries, there is not detract from the gravity nor legitimacy With this intriguing perspective one country which includes of the Temple nor G-d’s worship. Instead, in hand, we can revisit R. Froman’s own all countries…in that country this serves to remind us of the simultaneous so-called “Torat Ha-sechok.” Froman there is one city which ridiculousness of all attempts of limited wrote that the Torah of our time is a Torah includes all cities of the whole human action in the face of an Infinite beyond questions of life-or-death, beyond country which includes all G-d, as the aforementioned limited humans yetzi’at mitzrayim, and is rather found in countries…in that city there continue their worship. This demands an the ridiculous absurdities of Purim. These is a house that includes all embracing of paradox, and is in line with absurdities comprise all of human life houses of that city which a statement of Rebbi Nahman in which he in the face of the supernal “before G-d” includes all cities…. And says that “the main thing is the will and that surpasses the gravitas of human life. there is a man who includes yearning…And in this way to pray, study, By utilizing the notion of a “new Torah everyone from that house…. and perform the commandments. (And in for a new generation” of Rav Kook, and there is someone there truth, according to His greatness all of these and the existential absurdity-embracing who performs all the jests and services are nothing, but everything is “as perspective of Rabbi Nahman, Froman jokes. though,” for it is all just a joke compared forges an eminently enjoyable theology of to His greatness.)”42 The paradox of Jewish humor. Definitions of this theology aren’t Although there is much to life, within this perspective, is that it easy, as one gets the sense in reading be gained from this fascinatingly demands us to concurrently worship to the Chassidim Tzochkim that Froman would profound story, the symbolism of the all- best of our abilities, while recounting that laugh at the very notion of a definition of encompassing country/city/house/laughter all of our attempts are a joke in the face of Torat HaSchok, but it does call for a radical is most relevant to us. Nahman of Cherin, the all-present Ein-Sof that is beyond our appreciation for the immediate intimacy of a Breslover hasid suggests that the country own human comprehension. 43 God. This intimacy calls all human action in question is the land of Israel, the city into comedic contrast, as any activity is Jerusalem, the house the Temple, and “this This is to say that part of the story nothing in the face of the infinite. should be understood without explaining, of Judaism, or perhaps all religion, calls for since one cannot explain so much in such us to acknowledge the grand absurdity of With a smile on his face and matters.”41 In Zvi Mark’s stunning analysis the presumption that any human activity a witticism fresh from his tongue, R. of the story, the man who then lives in can change the will of the all-encompassing Menachem Froman brought down a Torah this “house” would be none other than the God, while still behaving and acting of laughter and joy to the Jewish people, Kohen Gadol, the high priest, who finds as if it could. By God’s command, we inundated with a seriousness beyond its a form of jest in the Temple. What is this must believe that our actions and beliefs years. Rav Froman sought to replace a jest? Mark writes that: matter, while by God’s existence and love lachrymose view of Jewish history with a we must understand that the notion of humorous one, with trails of jest and joy In the Temple, people give human initiative is ultimately laughable. instead of tears. Whether in joy or pain, presents to the sublime Infinite God, atone Characterized here by the Kohen Gadol’s from its truth or falsehoods, one thing is before Him with a meal offering of fine laughter at the peak moment of human clear: the righteous will most definitely flour, see in the smell of the incense of His religious observance of the year, Rabbi laugh from this. being pleased, and the Levites sing to Him Nahman isn’t suggesting that the Kohen to make His time pass pleasantly. Is there Gadol stop his weighty divine service, but a greater comedy than that?...The divine rather that it must be held in balance with

1 Rabbanit Froman appears in many 6 Ibid 28. Jerusalem Talmud, which shines with the light of pieces of Rav Froman’s works, and is often the Torah. After it is nullified, it is like being left referred to as “my master and rebbe, my wife…” 7 BT Bava Batra 158b. in darkness, as it is written “he made me dwell in dark places”, which refers to the Babylonian 2 Much of this imbalance may due to 8 Bereishit 2:12. Talmud.” availability of each writers’ thought: Steinsaltz has published more than 25 works, while 9 Bereishit Rabbah 16:4. 14 See Rivash to Ketubot 75. Shagar’s works have been mostly published after his death in 2007, and are thus less 10 BT Bava Metzi’a 85a. 15 It is also important to note that numerous. Professor David Weiss Halivni argues that 11 Rashi ad loc. much of the lengthy debates in the Babylonian 3 There have also been several smaller Talmud are comprised of later “Stammaitic” publications that have been distributed to 12 BT Sanhedrin 24a. redactions and if removed would reveal the two smaller audiences, such as Din Ve-cheshbon Al Talmuds to be much closer in text and style than Ha-shiga’on (Law and Thought on Madness), usually thought. and Kuf Acher Elokim. 13 See Sanhedrin 24a, which interprets “He has made me dwell in dark places, as those that have long been dead” (Eikhah 3:6) as a 16 R. Naftali Tzvi Berlin, Kadmat 4 Piskah 169. reference to the Babylonian Talmud. See also Ha’Emek, 1:9, writes that the distinction is Zohar Hadash Eikhah p. 93, also interpreting similar to “One that wanders in a dark palace 5 Ibid 144. a verse in Eikhah; “’And the light’: This is with many rooms, who can’t find his way out… Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 13 14 KOL HAMEVASER their own blessingasthe congregation is beings stepinto offer (whatappears tobe) stirs particular curiosity. Merehuman service, prayer Jewish Interview, Jewish Chronicle, 9 September 1935. is that light which G-d created on Genesis day.” paintings his of light the and them, of one was Rembrandt believe I light. hidden the of vision a with blesses time, G-d to whom men time great fromare there But come. to world the in it. of use What did he do? make He secreted it for the righteous would wicked the that feared other.the to world the fromof end one G-d And see to possible was it that luminous and strong so was it creationlight, the created the G-d When light. about of statement rabbinic the of me reminded they first paintings, Rembrandt’s saw I When saint. a I was Rembrandt that opinion, paintings my In the Rembrandt. the of those were most the loved visit and would Gallery, I London, National that in lived London I in “When Gallery National the seeing Self-Erasing a Letter: RavKookandtheEthicsofBelief”. and Doubters, “Dialectic, Carmy in Shalom by quoted 352, p. (Tel Aviv:1978), ve-Sippur Sofer Sefer, Agnon, See fear.” the fear of flesh and blood, and I don’t have this is it Rather Heaven? of fear the of because this instigation. their Rav Kook in responded to him: ‘Do you wish to do it and exploit many would by enemies misunderstood be likely would section this as insofar gymnastics, in engaging to Jews young worthwhile on Meanwhile section the be book the printer.from might omit it the that to remarked he it giving before examination entirefor the broughtwork he him memory, blessed of Kook Isaac Avraham Rav father his by Orot book the arranging was he Orot, “R. Zvi Yehuda Kook recounted that when discussions the of piece this of process editing of the surrounding that, tells Agnon account, 17 building the of much betterthanthefirst.” wisdom the understands and exit, the finds comes he until times many failing by and palace, the of wisdom the on reflecting by only escape can candle a seehis doesn’thave that to one but hand hard, as work his to doesn’thave out in way flame a has that One top of their…priorities the sanctity of G-d and the G-d of at sanctity the place their…priorities of not top do they their...enterprise, that fact of the namely failure fundamental the Herzl politely,and pleasantly “spoke revealdid but… opinion, his in that father-in-law his to later explained himself Kook Herzl.” Theodor Dr.of Death the On Jerusalem: in Lamentation “The Kook, See zealots. ultra-orthodox the of Israel, and Mashiach ben Yosef, drawing the ire that rebuild the physical structure of the Land of and in his remarks drew parallels between those 19 18 www.kolhamevaser.com in itsScriptural Context "And I Will Bless Them": Understanding B

y I lan Among

L o eape Rv ok ad about said Kook Rav example, For . ok aosy uoie Herzl, eulogized famously Kook R. e Oo, 03. n fascinating a In 80:34. Orot, See avian the rites that make up the up make that rites the Birkat

ha-Kohanim about toimploreGodforHis. s rgn i te ok of book the consider in first origins must ha-Kohanim’s irony this Hebraization offamilynames. the in clearly most actualized was conversion, history in the process, this evolution, or perhaps Jewish of elements from themselves detaching 30 29 28 27 26 25 Harim, Siman36. Hod Charlop, Moshe Yaakov R. See Kook. R. Charlop that this was the primary innovation of R. told then He Yerushalmi. the and Bavli the between difference the about him to spoke and Leib Diskin, appeared to R. Charlop in a dream in Elsewhere, R. Charlop 6:24. divulges quoted that Marom, R. Mei Yehoshua Charlop, Kohelet, Moshe Yaakov R. Midrash Torah the Moshiach,” of frontof in (hevel) nothingness be will world this in learns Torahone “the states that Midrash the in words fora off based age, Torah new anold-new of notion the affirms similarly Kook, Rav of companion and student 24 23 22 the truthandclarityofthisdivineland……” show specifically to need We life- Yisrael. Eretz Torat the of from antidote the need we this to Due strength. and desperation of light, and darkness of of time rebirth,the and disintegration generation the general, our in so more the Toratall Yisrael,the Eretzand love to need we generation every “In Similarly,writes, 13:3. he 21 Jew. New vibrant, strong, to Jew ghetto passive, weak, from nation, Jewish the of rebranding a for called which exile, the of negation ha-golah, shelilat of value Zionist 20 n te wud hn i i ae n h would he start thelecture.” and awe in sit then would they and a say would humorous thing, and he the scholars would rejoice, open scholars the would for lecture) he (the before Rabbah, “Like 117a: Aderet, 1904. the as known also Rabinowitz-Teomim, David homage to Dr. Herzl per se.” Letter to R. Elijah no offered I remarks, my In Name… Great His

Any

Abraham Isaac Kook, Orot Ha-Torah, Ibid. Ibid 13:4. Ibid. Comments onBT Shabbat30b. Ibid 115. Hasidim TzohakimMi-zeh,127. T hba 3b n B Pesahim BT and 30b Shabbat BT e “u I i Fny Identifying Funny? it Is “But See ab Yao Mse hro, a Charlop, Moshe Yaakov Rabbi hs a b i rsos t the to response in be may This tep a understanding at attempt

fe forcefully Often 1 Birkat Bamidbar. for the Torah’s juxtaposition of Torah’sjuxtaposition the for and the instructions pertaining to the gives it after only formula blessing’s the 37 36 Influence ofRabbiMenachemFroman.” 35 34 33 Pennsylvania Press. ISBN0-8122-7910-7. of Univ. Freud. Sigmund Oring of Jokes Elliot The (1984). also See 1905). (Original published Norton. work W. W. Unconscious York: New the Trans.). to Eelation 32 Commentary Themselves”, at Magazine, Vol 121, April 2006, No 4, pp. 47–54 self- Laugh the Jews on traditions deprecating theme in Jewish Arabic humor in his “Why medieval of 31 43 42 229. Breslov,of Nahman R. Workof the in Madness 41 4:5. 40 absurd matters(milad’shtuta)…” can’trejoiceto throughcome unless themselves his body, soul, and money, therefore most people the to many pains “due that a person has, that he carries deviation: on important an with but (Italics matter” similarly,writes he 20, ha-Ran Sichot In mine). major a is humor which and happiness, absurdity to come to order of in dancing, and jumping matters and do madman to a and like oneself make to absurdity, of to and constantly, happy rejoice in all that one can, even through be matters to is thing main 39 38 vol. VIII(winter5759). also Badad, (Hebrew), Bavli” be-Talmud See ve-Samuy 2010). Galuy Mutzhar, “Humor Engleman, Press,Binyamin University Greenspoon; Rabbinic J. Purdue Leonard in ed. 22; Civilization Parody and Literature”, Jews and Humor (Studies in Jewish Satire, Humor, Birkat Ha-Kohanim

nazir.

Likutei Maharan,2:83. Hasidim Tzohakim,148. Ibid 63. Hasidim Tzohakim,Piskah28. Ibid. Sichot ha-Ran34-35. Chayei Moharan,290. Quoted by Zvi Mark, Mysticism and Mysticism Mark, Zvi by Quoted Quoted by Raanan Mallek, “On the “On Mallek, Raanan by Quoted ill akn ok a te influence the at looks Halkin Hillel ru, . (1960). S. Freud, 3 2 e Lkti aaa 24: “The 2:48: Maharan Likutei See Likutei Halachot Nefilat Appayim Nefilat Halachot Likutei

lhuh uh a be said been has much Although There, the Torah introduces Volume X Issue2

Jokes

(J. sotah and n Their and Strachey, sotah nazir,4 the reason as to why Birkat ha- offering, places it in the nazir’s palms, and the congregants, themselves, invite the Prayer Kohanim appears immediately after these gives the remaining portion as a tenufah Kohanim to offer it. Not only is the Kohen two mitzvot seems less clear. Perhaps the offering. The ritual concludes with the not the source of the blessing; he is not the reason is simply due to chronology. Or, nazir drinking wine, illustrating that his source of its occurrence, either. perhaps, there exists a deeper reason for prior restrictions have been officially lifted. the juxtaposition, one which sheds light on The Rambam, in his Mishnah the meaning behind Birkat ha-Kohanim. Looking at the processes of the Torah, addresses another relevant law To uncover this meaning, we will first sotah and nazir,8 the parallels between pertaining to Birkat ha-Kohanim. He says: offer a comparative analysis of sotah and the two are striking. Both individuals take nazir. After having done so, we will relook a vow that is integral to their respective “Do not wonder: ‘What good at Birkat ha-Kohanim to suggest that its mitzvot, and both must bring an offering will come from the blessing placement after sotah and nazir is not only to the Kohen to undergo their respective of this simple [Kohen]?’ for deliberate, but also poignantly telling as to procedures. Both have their offering placed the reception of the blessings the nature of the mitzvah. in their palm, and both have a ritualistic is not dependent on the gesture performed to their hair. Lastly, both priests, but on the Holy One, The fifth chapter of Bamidbar drink liquids to finalize their procedures. blessed be He, as the Torah commences the book’s discussion of The role the Kohen plays in each process states: “They shall bestow mitzvot, and closes with the mitzvah of also warrants notice. The Kohen mediates My Name upon the children sotah. Sotah, Hebrew for one who has the process that permits the nazir to wine, of Israel, so that I will bless “gone astray,” is the term the Torah ascribes corpses, and haircuts, just as he meditates them.” The priests perform to both a woman suspected of adultery by the process that (potentially) permits the the mitzvah with which they her husband, as well as the process she husband to his wife. Furthermore, whereas were commanded, and G-d, undergoes. To outline the mitzvah briefly: the Kohen oversees the nazir‘s shift from in His mercies, will bless the suspicious husband brings his wife, as an elevated status to one of normalcy, he Israel, as He desires.”10 [My well as a minchah offering to a Kohen after oversees the sotah‘s (once again, potential) emphasis added] having ineffectively warned his wife about shift from a degraded status to a state of her illicit conduct with another man.5 The normalcy. Taking these parallels, as well As the Rambam would have it, the Kohen, in turn, “take[s] sacral water in an as the juxtaposition of the mitzvot into “reception of the blessing” is not dependent earthen vessel and, taking some of the earth consideration, we truly appreciate the on the Kohen, either. Such is the reason as to that is on the floor of the Tabernacle… Ramban’s suggestion that the sotah and the why even a “simple” Kohen has the right to put[s] it into the water.”6 He then uncovers nazir are direct contrasts of one another.9 bless an entire congregation. The Kohen’s the sotah’s head, thus exposing her hair, role in this mitzvah is thus minimized. He and places her husband’s minchah offering An important point that emerges is nothing more than a conduit. in her palms. Taking the sacral water, the from the parallel structure of these two Kohen recites an oath-curse that declares mitzvot is the prominent role that the That being so, we may now the punishment she will face if she actually Kohen has in each. Only through him suggest a reason for Birkat ha-Kohanim‘s did betray her husband, and proceeds may the sotah and her husband resume juxtaposition with the mitzvot of sotah to write the oath-curse onto parchment their marriage, and only through him and nazir. After the delineation of these that is thrown into the water. The sotah may the nazir resume a normal life. Such two mitzvot, the reader might have the subsequently drinks the water, and the a role on behalf of the Kohen entails his impression that too much of Israel’s Kohen offers the minchah. If the wife is substantial involvement in the spiritual spiritual world lies within the hands of the guilty, the water will harm her physically, world of another person. One may be left Kohen. After all, his presence is necessary and their marriage will be terminated; if wondering: Does not the Kohen’s sizeable to make the forbidden, permitted, and she is innocent, it will bless her womb with role interfere with one’s relationship with the sacred, profane. Lest one feel that the a child and re-allow the husband and wife God? It is precisely at this point that the immediacy of the man-God relationship is to cohabit. The fate of the sotah and her Torah saw it fitting to introduce Birkat ha- affected by the Kohen’s function, Birkat marriage is thus left in God’s hands. Kohanim. ha-Kohanim enters the picture to insist otherwise. The Kohen is the messenger After delineating the sotah Before God gives the wording for the blessing that offers an “intimate procedure, the Torah introduces the for Birkat ha-Kohanim, He has Moshe encounter in which we come face to face procedure for becoming a nazir. If a tell Aharon and the latter’s sons: “Thus with God”11; nevertheless, the blessing person so chooses, they may take the shall you bless the Children of Israel...” does not stem from him; its effect does nazarite vow, by which they temporarily (My emphasis added) This line, prima not lie in his hands, nor may he grant it at forbid themselves from grape derivatives, facie, indicates that the blessing of Birkat his own will. It is God, and God only, who cutting of the hair, and contamination HaKohanim stems from the Kohanim. Yet, “make[s] His face shine upon [Israel].”12 through a human corpse. In adopting these after God reveals the blessing’s wording, And, what better way for the Torah to restrictions, one effectively resembles a He says the blessing will “link My name exhibit this truth than to do so through the Kohen Gadol,7 earning the priestly title with the People of Israel, and I will Kohen, the one thought to be interfering! of “holy to God.” When one’s stipulated bless them.” (Once again, my emphasis term for nezirut ends, they are to bring an added) Apparently, although the blessing olah, shelamim, and chatat offering, along is delivered through the Kohanim, it with two grain offerings to the Kohen for nonetheless stems from God. It is also an official closing procedure. Notably, the significant, as Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Ilan Lavian is a junior at Yeshiva College, nazir is commanded to have his hair shaven Hirsch has noted, that the Kohanim do majoring in philosophy. and offered as an additional sacrifice. The not decide on their own accord to give Kohen then takes a portion of the nazir’s the blessing. The halakhah requires that Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 15 16 KOL HAMEVASER tell you.” that greatcity, andproclaim to itwhatI commanded is a secondtimeto“goatonce toNineveh, Jonah 3, Chapter of start the point, this At land. onto back then vomited is and God to prays Jonah fish, a of belly the In wrath. God’s with confronted command, this and hisbeingcastintothe seawhen from flight subsequent power ofrepentance.” because itincludesthegreatmeasureof Jonah with supplement we “and teshuva,” ha- koach godel ba she-yesh be-Yonahlefi simply, service YomKippur the comments ontheinclusionofbookin famously,most Beit repentance. The Yosef closeness toGod,sinandpunishment, and, with thethemes oftheday:distanceand The themesofthebookalignclosely liturgy.Yomthe Kippur in spot prominent on Abarbanel 5:6; Bamidbar on Ramban 4 outlined inthefollowingparagraphs. 3 is presented explicitly. would agree that this is the first time the blessing Torahthe in earlier (Vayiqraappears all 9:22), HaKohanim Birkat that believe who Ezra, Ibn 2 and lovingkindness, grace, mercy, God’s amongotherthings. for which blessing, asks Shalom Sim the before right 1 command and goestoNineveh. The restof and proclaim judgment uponit,” to “goatonceNineveh,thatgreatcity, relate the initial command to the prophet Chapter Three: Realistic Repentance? the absurd. and atonement appear tolieintherealm of repentance how see we words, final God’s and them, to Jonah’sresponse Nineveh, of actions the Through perspective. Jonah’s a clearresolution; Hemayevenendorse Nineveh, andGoddoesnotrespondwith known forhisangeroverthe repentance of an air of ludicrousness. The protagonist is the dayseemstopresentrepentancewith and on thedaydevotedentirelytoteshuva Jonah andtheParadox Prayer of andRepentance www.kolhamevaser.com

B y R a eta Bbia tx of text Biblical central a kappara, euven h Bo o Jnh cuis a occupies Jonah of Book The h frt w catr ofJonah chapters two first The It is surprising, therefore, that 3 These two mitzvot will be defined and Birkat HaKohanim, of course, comes course, of HaKohanim, Birkat Even for the commentators, such as such commentators, the for Even This time, Jonah accedes to the to accedes Jonah time, This e, o eape b Sth 5A; Sotah b. example, for See, H erzog 1

“u-maftir 2 his Bamidbar 5:1. inhabitants ofthecity: text the lists the sequence of actions taken by the repentance. declaration, Jonah’s ideal Following of perception Jewish too doesnotseem to match the traditional people is the crux of the chapter, but it it! only accepting his wordbut responding to an extremely brief and vague message, not fidesand a foreignprophetwithnobona people of Nineveh instantly listen to Jonah, city, the the flee to convinced be not could relatives closest Lot’s even although Yet, making use ofthe language of divine wrath,eachdecreeuponthecities evil and faced a decree of destruction by Nineveh andSedom:bothcitieswere qualitative and textual similarities between strengthened further uponrecognizing the times aslarge asthecityofNew York! five and Island, Long than larger be would wide miles 45 is that city a miles, fifteen “day’sa approximately Assuming is walk” recorded intheOralTorah. the mention taking matters to the Kohen. This requirement is not before wife his warn does to husband’srequirement understood, plainly 5 nazir undergoes toterminatehisnezirut. 8 commentary onBamidbar6:6. 7 6 size is given as a “three days’ walk across.” as “enormously large.” lei-elohim,” roughlytranslated “gedolah starts developing. The city is describedas From the outset, a motif of exaggeration yields afeelingthatsomethingisoff. to notdestroyit. seeing theactionsofcityandchoosing God with concludes and message Jonah’s to response city’s the depicts chapter the

2. They proclaimedafast. believed God. 1. The people of Nineveh The “repentance” shown bythe is apprehension reader’s The

coe edn o ti chapter this of reading close A See Rabbi Shimshon Rephael Hirsch’s Bamidbar 5:17;NJPSTranslation. More specifically, the process the process the specifically, More h scin etiig o sotah, to pertaining section The 4 diinly its Additionally, “hafikhah.” 6 5

Numbers 6:25;NJPSTranslation. 12 p. 290. Parashah WeeklyYork, (New Press,2011),N.Y.:Union Orthodox the on Dov Yosef Soloveitchik Rav Halevi of Discourses Yosef: Darash 11 and underlining Touger’s emendations. Eliyahu Rabbi 10 9 ahv ih idro ha-ra’ah.” mi-darko ish yashuvu explicit find we do action f hi rpnac, n ol i te final the in only and repentance, their of between the people and God asan element arelationship see we that action fifteenth and internal repentance. It isnotuntil the the peoplealsoengagein introspection associated with penitence; it is unclear if demonstrative, external behaviors

from hisevilways. 15. Let everyone turn back God. 14. They shallcrymightily to beast. with sackcloth- man and 13. They shallbecovered water. 12. They shallnotdrink 11. They shallnotgraze. taste anything. shall herd- or flock of - beast 10. Hiswordsaid:Nomanor Nineveh. 9. Hehadwordcriedthrough 8. Hesatinashes. 7. Heputonsackcloth. 6. Hetookoff hisrobe. 5. Herosefromhisthrone. king ofNineveh. 4. They newsreached the on sackcloth. 3. Great and small alike put

These actsareprimarily Ramban onBamidbar5:6. Hilchot Tefilah 15:7, translation. 15:7, Tefilah Hilchot vsa C Dvd e., Darosh (ed.), David C. Avishai at f h besn’ wording; blessing’s the of Part Volume X Issue2 7

teshuva: 8 Even “ve- then, this teshuva is seen only in the king’s even if he lacks the appropriate intentions. The kikayon is an object that Jonah enjoys, Prayer command; the text does not record any The ritualization of the heart is what Jonah and Jonah is distressed by its destruction. account of the people doing this teshuva. cannot accept. The kikayon, however, does not seem to God notices “their actions,” but specifically deserve its existence. Humanity similarly only “that they had returned from their This understanding of Jonah’s may not entirely deserve its existence, evil ways,” ignoring the laundry list of complaint resolves a major difficulty but nevertheless God has pity on it. In penitential behaviors prior to this.9 found earlier in the book: Jonah’s prayer. the first two chapters God shows that He Although framed as a plea issued by Jonah does not have unlimited tolerance because The earlier motif of exaggeration from inside the depths of a fish, this prayer He is ready to destroy Nineveh and the resurfaces in this section as well. The actually reads like a giving of thanks: “In ship on which Jonah is travelling; sin and adults immediately call a fast and wear my trouble I called to the Lord, and He punishment have important roles in God’s clothes of mourning, and the children answered me; from the belly of she’ol relationship with the world. However, God mimic their actions. Furthermore, the king I cried out, and You heard my voice.”10 also takes pity. To earn this pity, the most not only extends his decrees to the children Here, Jonah thanks God for his salvation basic repentance is enough, even one that but, most shockingly, he includes animals and reflects on an earlier prayer. However, is only demonstrative and not authentic. At in the commanded actions as well. What we do not see any evidence of an earlier least the sinner is doing something. do children have to repent for, much less prayer, and though Jonah did not drown, he animals? Why are they included in this is hardly alive either, and certainly not in Jonah protests that this is not mass repentance? a position to claim, “yet I will look again entirely just. The sinner does not mean his toward Your holy Temple.”11 Puzzling, repentance; he did not earn his forgiveness! All told, one could be skeptical too, is when Jonah claims, “When my soul And God responds, “Ein hachi nami.” That of Nineveh’s repentance. It seems too wrapped around me, I remembered God; is correct; it is not just. But that is how God immediate, too staged, and too forced. my prayer came before You, into Your holy conducts the world. The people expend significant energy on a Temple.”12 Is Jonah in a position to assert performance to show God that they deserve definitively that his prayer will be heard? Yom Kippur seems almost His forgiveness and hardly any toward paradoxical. Supposedly we spend the returning from their evil ways, which is As we saw in chapter three and will entire month of Elul on repentance, working relegated to the end of the list; the people of see more explicitly in chapter four, a cause- to fix our mistakes from the previous year Nineveh believe that internal reflection and and-effect relationship exists between in preparation for the judgment on Rosh spiritual connection are less important than man and God. Man repents and God Hashana. The succeeding seven days we the other, more visible acts of penitence. forgives. Similarly, in chapter two, a causal devote to an intense repentance period. Yet The low esteem in which the people hold relationship is seen regarding prayer: Man the day itself is a day of atonement, a day inner growth is concerning: if they do prays and God listens. One explanation of when we appeal to God not by virtue of not truly value bettering themselves and this relationship is that the act of prayer our success in repentance, but by virtue of repairing their relationship with God, then reveals man’s dependence on God, and His mercy. We know we have not perfected their outward acts of repentance are not it is this sense of dependence that earns a ourselves, and we are similarly aware that real teshuva. The people’s drastic response response from the Creator. Jonah, however, we will falter during the coming year; there to Jonah’s declaration of destruction is not still does not embrace the direct causation is no self-aware penitent on Yom Kippur an acceptance of tochacha, but rather a last and instead issues a sarcastic commentary who does not think he will need another ditch effort to avoid annihilation. in protest. He prays to God, but doesn’t ask Yom Kippur the following year. But for help. Rather, Jonah’s prayer is a series despite our inadequacy, we feel confident In this light, it is suddenly much of remarks on how prayer is effectual. coming out of the service that we have more understandable why Jonah is so Jonah speaks with such confidence without been forgiven, cleaned, and healed. This is upset following the events of chapter three. actually making any requests because he the “unjust” message of Jonah, and why it Jonah proclaims that he knew exactly that knows that, even with obvious cynicism, earned a place in the Yom Kippur service. this would happen: he knew that God is prayers are answered; that is simply how To some degree, teshuva and forgiveness merciful and that He would forgive the the world works. Jonah is proven correct, are absurd. But, says God, “kach alah be- evils of Nineveh. This is the very reason he for, following his “prayer” for salvation, machashavah le-fanai.”13 fled the command in the first place: to avoid Jonah is returned to land, alive and well, taking part in a system he despised. We can able to complete his mission. understand Jonah’s appeal toward justice, toward sinners getting what they deserve. But why does the prophet so strongly hate repentance to the extent that he is willing Chapter Four: The Kikayon and God's Reuven Herzog is a third-year student to attempt an escape from before God? The Final Ein Hachi Nami majoring in Economics and minoring in events of chapter three indicate that it is not math and Jewish studies. repentance as a concept that is anathema to Just as Jonah protests acceptance Jonah’s belief system, but rather repentance of the undeserving prayer in chapter two, that is not genuine. He is not angry at God he protests again in the beginning of for including repentance in a system of chapter four. As opposed to God’s indirect reward and punishment; he is angry at God response after Jonah’s prayer, using the fish for accepting Nineveh’s specific form of as the intermediary, this time God responds repentance: performative and inauthentic. directly, attempting to teach him via the Jonah claims that God operates on a system kikayon. The message is not immediately of cause-and-effect: one who performs the clear and seems to end with a rhetorical proper acts of repentance will be forgiven, question that lacks a satisfactory conclusion. Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 17 18 KOL HAMEVASER the Sovereign, the Lord” in the Temple. before “appear and Jerusalem in celebrate would Israelites when Shavuot, and Pesaḥ, instituting the Torah,the declares 23:17), (Exodus Lord” shall appear before the Sovereign, the 5 4 3 2 1 laws of which the Talmud later derives from the encounter –suchasthedeafandmute different personalities exemptfromthe Hashem? Who canbe Worthy ofEncountering imperfection and character inconsistencies? considering thenuancedreality of human ideal character traits while simultaneously divine confrontation to those exhibiting glean how dowereconcile attempting tolimit we And Hashem? with can relationship our about insights What Hashem? Who canbeworthyofencountering Hagigah discussesthefollowingquestions: the encounter with Hashem – topic of the with Hashem. Thus, centeredaroundthe multiple questions about our relationship Such anawesomeencounter provokes entails theresponsibility of sharingand privy to divinity –directly or indirectly – Being vacuum. isolated an in occur cannot experience this Yet, experience. oriented an invigorating educational and growth- service or Torah learningoftenservesas Templethe through Hashem Encountering Torah. insight aboutthenatureoftalmud Torah. reveals aprofound This answer Hakhel from exemption mutes’ the that explains be exempted ( logical, for whatreasonshouldthemute – whocannot hear the Torah reading – is bothered: While theexemption of thedeaf www.kolhamevaser.com

in MasekhetHagigah Between Heaven andEarth: The Clashof Theory andReality B y N a t stems fromtheirinability to teach Hakhel. an “Three times ayearall your males ’s first Mishnah lists the lists Mishnah first Hagigah’s ibid. ibid. 3:3. ibid. 3:2. Jonah 1:2. Shulkhan Arukh, OrahHa’im622:2. O Shalosh Regalim Shalosh liff Shalosh Regalim Shalosh a? h Talmud The 3a)? Hagigah 3

1 Yt teTlu i still is Talmud the Yet, – specifically – ofSukkot, Masekhet 2

water. medium through which Torah can flow like the subjectandobjectofeducation,asa mitzvot, and vice-versa. Thus, todonone depends onthe performance of interpersonal some degree,thevalidity of ritual practices vertical and horizontal relational planes. To on aholistic level, encompassing boththe in a vacuum. The halakhic evaluate His relationship with humankind (Ibid.). Seemingly, Hashemrefusesto business dealings provoke Hashem’s wrath of wealth Torah, their immoral and untrustworthy citizens’ Jerusalem’s despite Yet, 14b). and hiscolleagues” (Hagigah TeimaYehudaben Rabbi as such Mishna, of masters are these ‘Staff’; Bible. the of area of Torah: “‘Support’; these are masters expertise inaparticular prophecy possesses exposition, each personality within Isaiah’s the diviner..”(Ibid.3:1-4)InHagigah’s man of war;the judge, and the prophet, and support ofwater;themighty man, and the support and staff, everysupportofbread,and Judah from and Jerusalem from Master, the Lord ofhosts,shall take away as expounded later on: “For behold, the merit deficient Israel’swithin therealm ofinterpersonal mitzvot from proceeds perhaps the ritual mitzvah Hashem’s reasoning for rejecting rejection Israelites’ the Hashem’s of on focuses chapter rams’ of offerings v.(ibid 11). Thematically,Isaiah’s opening burnt with sated am ‘I Lord. the says sacrifices?’ your all of I courts” (Isaiah1:12)and“‘What needhave you? Trampleof My that asked – Who Me of Isaiah: “That you cometoappearbefore that evoke tears, such asthe opening chapter multiple sages quote harsh biblical passages appears repeatedly in Hagigah.On4b, 10 9 8 7 6 teach. and creates Hashem teaches, so too,weshouldcreate and as Just educating.

4 5 Hashemdesiresustoservebothas The theme of righteousnessalso ibid. 2:3. ibid. 3:10. ibid. 3:8. Jonah 3:5-8. Genesis 19:25;Jonah3:4. korbanot. Interestingly, system operates par excellence par korbanot, , , attributing the shockingly Temple’s destruction to by Jews importance concept’s this hadin.Similarly, Hazal stress mishurat rather throughasensitivity to act observance of interpersonal mitzvot, but Hashem notbasedupon his rigorous encounter to merits YehudaRabbi HaNasi on Building seen.” not is and sees Who “One scholar, meriting the blessing ofgreeting the the letter ofthelaw, by visiting the blind Yet, mitzvot. he acted ritual or interpersonal any would nothaveconstituted a violation of renowned Torah scholar, remaining behind individual’s prayers. stains theauthenticity and validity of the but anotherwhileconversingwithothers, personality while conversing withHashem, blind.” Rabbi blind.” “There isa Torah scholarherebutheis said: city the of people The greet?” and go there a Torah scholar here whom we can they arrivedatacertain city, theysaid:“Is Hiyya were walking along the road. When law. The followingstoryiscited: hadin,beyondtheletterof mishurat and moral observance – acting conduct that exceeds legalistic halakhic interpersonal and ritualmitzvot – moral dimension to the interconnectedness of 13 12 11

sees andisnotseen”(Ibid.5b). may youbeworthytogreettheOne Who greeted one whoisseenanddoesnotsee; “You them: to said he him, leaving were they greeted the blindscholar. When they and went with him anyways, and together him grabbed HaNasi YehudaRabbi him.” beneath yourstature.Iwillgoandgreet as status dignified HaNasi: “You sit here; do not demean your

s hm o righteousness, of theme Hagigah’s Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi and YehudaHaNasi Rabbi Finally, For Menachot 29b. ibid. 2:8. ibid. 2:5. inm ihrt hadin,beyond mishurat lifnim

Hiyya said to Rabbi to said Hiyya ab Yhd HNs, a HaNasi, Yehuda Rabbi Hagigah addsanother Nasi tovisitsomeone 6 Volume X Issue2 Yehuda lifnim lifnim Prayer who “insisted narrowly on strict Torah actively seeks Hashem, growing and Risk-aversion actualizes itself law, and didn’t judge beyond the letter of rejoicing in His presence, while at the in retreat and hiding from the source of the law” (Bava Metzia 30b). Adherence same time assuming the role of a passive uncertainty.8 Translated into Hebrew, the to Torah law only constitutes a portion of observer. Reish Lakish joins the debate, word “hidden” comes from the root g.n.z. a Jew’s duty. In-between periods of black advancing a fourth position. In regards to which appears in other places in Hagigah. and white exist grey areas specific and the world’s creation, Reish Lakish teaches For example, the Talmud describes the unique to each individual and situation. that Hashem created the heavens before the story of a child who dies while expounding Those moments force the individual to act earth, but implemented the earth before the Ezekiel’s esoteric merkavah prophecy proactively and decisively, guided by the heavens (Ibid. 12a). Here, Reish Lakish (Ibid. 13a). Consistent with their previous spirit of the law.7 differentiates between the idealistic and response, the sages propose to hide (lignoz) pragmatic. Ideally, the spiritual realm the Book of Ezekiel, a risk-averse position. exists as the highest, most coveted plane Yet, the sages are not alone in their conduct. of existence. Yet pragmatically, humanity The Talmud explains that even Hashem Humanity: Subjects or Objects resides in a physical world. Previously acts, so to speak, with risk-aversion. For, a gladiator, perhaps Reish Lakish is best after considering how the wicked might The blind scholar’s blessing suited to possess this worldview. To reach abuse the original light that was created, alludes to another central theme in great heights in the spiritual realm, it is Hashem conceals the light, dubbing it the Hagigah: seeing or being seen. Depending imperative to recognize the reality and “hidden light” (or haganuz) (Ibid.12a). on its punctuation, the word yirah assumes importance of the physical realm as a different meanings. When punctuated with necessary beginning and stepping-stone On the other hand, Hagigah a tzeireh, it becomes yera’e: “to be seen.” upwards. presents stances that hover around risk- However, when punctuated with a hirik, it neutral and even risk-seeking areas. For becomes yireh: “to see”. This grammatical Rabbi Meir, Aher’s former student, a distinction changes the entire meaning of turn towards heresy could not justify the encounter with Hashem. Does man Pragmatic Concerns abandoning Aher. Despite social pressure appear before Hashem as a passive object? from others, and even Aher himself, Rabbi Or, is he a proactive subject who actively Just like Reish Lakish, Hagigah Meir continues to follow Aher, hoping to seeks out Hashem’s presence? Throughout discusses the integration of idealism and glean teachings from his vast repositories Hagigah’s progression, Hillel and Shammai pragmatism. After devoting much text to of Torah knowledge. Aptly described continue to explore this topic and its related developing the ideal personality required as one who “found a pomegranate; ate themes. One such debate centers around to encounter Hashem, Hagigah turns its the inside and threw away the peel” whether Hashem began creation with the focus to the complexities and intricacies (Ibid. 15b), Rabbi Meir believed in the heavens, the angelic celestial realm, or with of the practical world. In reality, few possibility of exclusive contact with Aher’s the earth, humanity’s domain (Hagigah people maintain complete consistency positive traits. The ability to confront risk 12a). Each position reflects a philosophy and commitment and human beings are and uncertainty requires a level of self- behind Hashem’s intent in creation and on inherently imperfect, resisting placement confidence in one’s ability to reject the bad humanity’s purpose. According to Hillel, into neat boxes. Thus, Hagigah tackles and benefit from the good. Similarly, in who holds the latter, Hashem created the this tension, discussing personalities or the case of the child who studied Ezekiel’s world with emphasis on humanity and situations which transcend labels. The vision of the merkavah, a dissenting rabbi the physical, worldly realm. In contrast, heretical character of Aher strongly questions his fellow sages’ confidence in Shammai believes that the physical world personifies this tension. Aher, previously their ability to encounter divinity through assumes secondary importance in relation known as Elisha ben Avuya, entered His texts, exclaiming, “If he [the child] was to the afterlife and Hashem’s heavenly Pardes, a place of metaphorical closeness a sage, we are all sages!” (Ibid. 13a) kingdom. In a similar debate, the two to Hashem, with four fellow scholars schools discuss the relative merits of the (Tosafot to Hagigah 14b). While Aher’s In addition to complexity of human hagigah and olah korbanot. Shammai experience caused him to become a heretic, personalities, Hagigah also considers prefers the olah, as it goes up entirely to he still retained his Torah knowledge. the psychological and emotional nature Hashem, reflecting the conception that of people. Amei ha’aretz, ignoramuses, humanity exists to serve Hashem. In All of Hagigah’s possible stances characterized by their lack of Torah distinction, Hillel prefers the hagigah, of advanced in response to Aher lay upon a knowledge, presented a huge problem which both Hashem and man partake. In spectrum, ranging from complete rejection during the Temple pilgrimage. Entering this conception, humanity’s service should to acceptance. Generally, Hazal leaned Hashem’s Temple, an immensely holy benefit both themselves and Hashem (Ibid. towards the former tendency. Of the four place, requires a high level of prudence in 6a). sages who entered, only one returned regards to purity of body and possessions. unscathed. Of the others, Aher became a Amei ha’aretz, who are unlikely to be well- Hagigah enters the debate. heretic, one went insane, and another died. versed in, or careful regarding these laws, Explicating on the ambiguity of the word Within the story, the general populace present a tumah liability. Ideally, simply yirah, the Talmud expounds, “In the same rejects Aher, reflecting the aforementioned banning amei ha’aretz from entering the manner that one comes to be see, so too opinion that rabbinic credibility stems from Temple would fix the problem. However, he comes to be seen” (Hagigah 2a). In a holistic virtuousness. On a general level, doing so would open up the possibility of relational terms, if Shammai portrays the Aher dilemma represents a nuanced, enmity, as Rabbi Yossi explained, “For humanity as Hashem’s servants, and Hillel uncertain situation with potential for both what reason are all people, i.e., even portrays Hashem as humanity’s aid, then good and bad. Hazal’s position represents amei ha’aretz, trusted with regard to the Hagigah’s new formulation conceives a risk-averse approach, an unwillingness purity of their wine and oil that they bring of Hashem and humankind as entering a to gamble for rewards in light of potential to the Temple for sacrificial purposes partnership. In this worldview, humanity loss. Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 19 20 KOL HAMEVASER Reconciling Tensions for leniencyduetopragmaticconcerns. importance of avoidingtumah,Hazal,allow Jerusalem. Thus, despite all these stringencies and in ovens these of production as theconcernofpollutionprevented of upon obsolete rituals and customs,the from Tanakh are from JPS. areGemara from translations all and Steinsaltz Yehoshua 2 R. thank to like would ideas. & the Gruber, through masekhet work and develop some of these themes and me Max helping for Kelsen, Finkel Sam Jon R. Weisberg, 1 also and tensionbetweenavoidingenmitybut out multiple debatesdiscussingthenuances towards of pragmatismcomesintocompleteforce community, and pragmatism. The value acknowledging the valuesofcohesion, entrance to the Temple their in certain situations, allows Yossi Rabbi Here, ha’aretz. multiple options fordealingwithamei As 22a). in previousdilemmas, (Ibid. himself” for heifer red a build a private altar for himself and burn and every individual should not go off and schisms amongthepeople,sothateach avoid to order In purity? ritual for regard that theywerepreparedwiththenecessary these items not investigated to determine of status the is Why year? the throughout bring ovens from Jerusalem from ovens bring concerning suchutensils( and consequentlytheSageswerelenient earthenware vessels from outside the city, the city. Itistherefore necessary to bringin in Jerusalem, in order topreservethe quality of theairin made be not may potters’ kilns that principle a is there Because and vessels vessels? small for large all thewaytoModi’in for Jerusalem within waiving their regular decrees of impurity why did the Sages exhibit so much leniency, And ones. small only not sacrificial and food, for vessels earthenware large are deemed credibleevenwithregardto conclusion isrelated: following rendering them tamei.The trusted to bring ovens to Jerusalem without ha-aretz distance fromwhichamei www.kolhamevaser.com

tumah, Hazal tumah, I Despite While A s ls. fe fleshing After close. Hagaigah’s nes oe, l tasain from translations all noted, Unless tanna taughtinabaraita:They Hagigah debates the maximum

allowing possessed nootheroption, s focus Hagigah’s Hagigah presents mi ha’aretz amei Hagigah 26a).

poses dangers can be to the community. to backlash andeventually schisms within lead may elitist and selective overly Being the variable of enmity and division looms. settings, communal in Additionally, options, andresourcesindecisionmaking. and factoritslimited quantity oftime, situation. Any institution must acknowledge logistic and pragmatic concerns ofthe specific the to bend loss–must of fear and aversion–extending from perfectionism of their risk-aversion. However, risk- theextent determine and analysis benefit behooves theinstitution to engageincost- qualified talents, attitudes, and behaviors. Thus, it utmost candidates contain a complex package of most however, the Realistically, candidates. only comprise tensions. Preferably, any group should organizational group undergoes these noted inthecaseof pragmatics required non-ideal solutions, as people. Third, attimes,logisticsand Jewish the within rebellion and schisms of case, these externalities assumed the form related to limiting Temple access. Inour they considered the negative externalities Second, outcomes. potential situation’s a of analysis cost-benefit a around revolves Temple on the permission toencounterHashematthe and intellectual caliber should receive those ofthe highest halakhic either as objects or subjects. Theoretically, status only humanity’s and reality, stems twogeneraltensions: theory versus main theme–the encounter with Hashem– the present day. Thus, from and tensions carryimmense relevance for philosophical underpinningsofitsdebates however, Hazal s hr wo osse bt positive both possessed and negativequalities. The who – Aher as variable of complex personalities–such variables. First,theyconsideredthe “Halakhic man is a man who longs to create, to longs who man a is man “Halakhic R’in Soloveitchik’sidea Joseph Man: Halakhic similar to the idea I mentioned above, is a central 4 called reading Torah Hakhel everysevenyears. public a commence to (Devarim 31:10-12), the Jews were commanded 3 itself–a divinedemand–orasameans and Torah learning, should be an end in divine experiences,suchastheencounter of theword punctuation the with Beginning Hagigah. divides Shammai and Hillel

Similarly, any socio- Humanity’ a a a ocetr ih Hashem, with co-creator a as Man s omne i te Torah the in commanded As yirah, Shalosh Regalim Shalosh

Hagigah debateswhether accounted for multiple csi standing cosmic s Modi’in ovens.

Aher

throughout . Inreality, ’s Hagigah’s , ethical, debate is to behold the replenishment of the deficiency the of replenishment the behold to is real the man into halakhic of desirefervent most The world. domain, practical the into well as extends but domain theoretical the to solely ḥiddush, of creative interpretation, fromis not limited of notion The insights . . Torah). Torah(ḥiddushei definition, creative the new, by Torah, gleaning of means study The original. something new, something being into bring to categorized as a Virtue Ethics approach. Ethics Virtue a as categorized well, as elevation and refinement personal for or Imperative, Categorical Kant’s by Either of asenseobligation, as articulated philosophies. two deeds shouldbeperformedpurelyout these upon depend general, in actions any or specific, motivation behind hashkafic experience. towards aninvigorating,growth-oriented of Marylandstudyingcomputerscience Natan Oliff is a sophomore at the University the spiritualandphysicalrealms. the entiretyofourexistence: between both intended for us to seek His presence within serving Hashem.Or, perhapsHashem of which we should avoid on ourpath of as distractionsatbest,ordangersworst, around these worldviews. Either they serve involvement, athletics, and arts revolve as secularstudies,occupations, political U’Mitzvot of non-Torah as animportant topic. The importance Similarly, theroleofphysicalityserves Similarly, Shammai an obligation to spreadthe inspiration. elements, with thecaveat that itincludes the experience as encompassing both spiritual loftiness. Shammai the tension between physical reality and importance inreaching ha-zeh anditspractical reality of olam ha-bah opinions: presentingthespiritual both synthesize to attempts Lakish Reish degree, must contain purpose andmeaning. its physicality. Thus, physicality, to some of creation Hashem’s ha-bah. Hillel,however, acknowledges pulls us from the spiritual heights of the physical reality of as the goal, but acknowledges the These attitudes in modernity. The Hagigah ultimately presents important issues inform

and Hillel struggle with oa U’Mitzvotin Torah Volume X Issue2 olam ha-zeh simply olam olam ha-bah. lm ha-zehand olam activities, such

believes that 9

olam olam 10 of creation, when the real world will conform behavioral guidelines for a portion of one’s Thinking, Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Prayer to the ideal world.” See Joseph B. Soloveitchik, life, and it could be quite possible to be a Straus and Giroux, 2011). Halakhic Man, transl. by Lawrence Kaplan completely observant Jew yet still be act as a (Philadelphia, 1983), 99. scoundrel (Naval Birshut HaTorah): “ … 9 In Halakhic Man, R. Soloveitchik And the matter is [that] the Torah prohibited strongly advances the position that Halakhah, 5 The comparison of Torah to water sexual transgressions and forbidden foods, and in contradistinction to most religions and faiths, appears multiple times throughout the works of permitted sexual relations between husband and places a supreme importance on this world and Hazal. For example, “And Rabbi Ḥanina bar Idi wife and the eating of meat and [the drinking of] life. See Soloveitchik, Halakhic Man. said: Why are matters of Torah likened to water, wine. If so, a desirous person will find a place as it is written: ‘Ho, everyone who thirsts, come to be lecherous with his wife or his many wives, 10 Rabbi Yitzchak Blau, in his article for water’ (Isaiah 55:1)? This verse comes to or to be among the guzzlers of wine and the “The Implications of a Jewish Virtue Ethic,” tell you: Just as water leaves a high place and gluttons of meat. He will speak as he pleases provides a great explanation of this topic: flows to a low place, so too, Torah matters are about all the vulgarities, the prohibition of “Yeshayahu Leibowitz argues that the proper retained only by one whose spirit is lowly, i.e., a which is not mentioned in the Torah. And behold, motivation for conduct according to Jewish law humble person” (Taanit 7b). he would be a scoundrel with the permission most closely resembles the Kantian ethic. Of of the Torah. Therefore, Scripture came, after course, Kant saw autonomous human reason 6 This theme also appears in regards it specified the prohibitions that it completely as the source for determining our duty, while to fasting during the Haftorah on Yom Kippur, forbade, and commanded a more general [rule] a Jewish Kantian sees the Divine command where the people claim merit due to their fasting. - that we should be separated from [indulgence as the source. Nevertheless, the common Yet, Hashem explains that fasting only serves as of] those things that are permissible” (Ramban denominator is that both value a particular the means to the end of fostering righteousness to Leviticus 19:2). This position is only feasible motivation for behaving morally, namely the and destroying wickedness (Isaiah 58:1-14). based on the assumption that Torah and performance of one’s duty. However, according It also appears very poignantly in the first Halakha has a certain spirit or level of holiness to a Jewish virtue ethic, the cultivation of Mishnah of the second chapter of Taanit: that lies behind the mitzvot. a benevolent personality reflects the fulfillment “The eldest member of the community says to of a Divine directive. If so, one who successfully the congregation statements of reproof, for 8 “Loss-Aversion,” as termed by develops the trait of benevolence will want to example: Our brothers, it is not stated with psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos give charity or comfort a mourner irrespective regard to the people of Nineveh: And God saw Tversky, seems to dominate human cognition of the specific Mizvah to do so. A person’s need their sackcloth and their fasting. Rather, the and decision making. According to their to constantly struggle against inclination in verse says: ‘And God saw their deeds, they had “Prospect Theory,” given an equal probability order to adhere to these mizvot would indicate turned from their evil way’ (Jonah 3:10). And in of either gaining or losing and equal amounts that such a person has not adequately fulfilled the Prophets it says: ‘And rend your hearts and of money, most people will refuse to take the imitatio Dei.” For further explanation, see not your garments, and return to the Lord your gamble, as potential loss inherently holds more Yitzchak Blau, “The Implications of a Jewish God’ (Joel 2:13)” (Taanit 15a). weight and overshadows the possible gains. Virtue Ethic,” The Torah u-Madda Journal 9 Thus, humans prefer safety and certainty in (2000): 19-41. 7 Ramban firmly believed that the face of double-edged risks and gambles. Halakhah could only delineate specific For more on this topic, see Daniel Kahneman, What is BRGS?

The Bernard Revel Graduate School, YU’s world class graduate program in Jewish Studies, provides courses in Bible, Talmud, Jewish Philosophy, and Jewish History.

Undergraduate students have the opportunity to enjoy the rigor and depth of its classes by enrolling in the BA/MA program or applying for permission to take graduate courses for undergraduate credit.

Email [email protected] for more information.

Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 21 22 KOL HAMEVASER for tefilla often a battle just to get students to show up who workinourhighschools know, itis those talking. as stop And to and still sit to right page, but are constantly admonished no the on fingers are their keep to adjured students longer age, this By better. any setting but the results are not necessarily more likelytakeplaceinacommunal daydreaming. Seventh grade be reciting it. Others will be squirming or pointing to thecorrect line, and mayeven the place). Somestudentsmight actually be students “ open, andheartheteacher remind the find students seated at desks, with siddurim Modern Orthodoxschool,shewill likely enter a third grade classroom in a typical gets inourschools.Ifavisitorwereto That mightbeaboutasgooddavening alking intoapreschoolprogram songs like“ sitting in a circle, belting out the words to during Symposium "Davening: It's A Trip" whichisfeatured onourwebsite(kolhamevaser.com). dailyprayer,the meaning of seeDr. Rivkah Blau'ssymposiumresponse titled *Editor's Note:For afascinating presentation onemethodforteaching students of the followingpromptrelatingtoJewishprayer: to respond to contributors guest asked we Thus, people. Jewish the for prayer of impact and relevance more popular in the Orthodox community. Presumably, this reflects the continued attempt to maintain the for holiday, weekday, andShabbatprayers.Moreover, newformsorstylesofprayerserviceshavebecome In recent years, there has been a proliferation of neweditions of siddurim (with innovative commentaries) Contributors tothissymposiumwere askedtorespond tothefollowingprompt: Addressing Contemporary Struggles withPrayer Hashem Sifati TiftachHashem : Paying More Than Lipservice to Tefila www.kolhamevaser.com B y

dr . tefilla deena It is not(orshould not be) news W . ” (fingers on (fingers ba-makom” etzbah Modeh Ani” or“ Modeh , avisitorwillseechildren 2. 1.

rabinovich

promising atthismoment,andwhy? What meansortechniquetoenhancingprayerdoyouseeasthemost prayer onacommunal,institutional,orindividuallevel? What is yourassessmentofOrthodoxy'songoingstruggle with enhancing TorahTorah .” tefilla will artery. The more I hear of supposed new placing asingle bandaidoverasevered of thetime,overalleffect isnotunlike while some ofthechanges work forsome gradually to tuneoutof start may off aspassionatepractitioners, they tend students While Schools. Day that characterizes most ModernOrthodox that there is an ongoing struggle with tefilla kavvanot introducing musicduring tefilla They have tried new techniques like they haveshortenedthelength of they haveshiftedthestarttimeoftefilla experimented with different siddurim; to engagethedisengaged. They have and educators have tried various practices Administrators unnoticed. gone not mind highschool. the time middle school rollsaround,never is painful for both student and teacher by a struggle for attention and decorum that time ofsongfortheyoungeststudents,to deteriorates year by year, froma joyous The problem,ofcourse,has stig netos bfr. But before. intentions) (setting tefilla . tefilla Tefilla and ; .

the nature of tefilla about mindset in shift complete a but fix, quick a just not requires tefilla of subject the Addressing tricks).” (or shortcuts no patentim”or, Amital’s “thereare Yehudaobservation “ein Rav of reminded am I methods forsolvingtheproblem, themore it iseasyenough toseewhynot)-namely, is another crucial element that is not addressed (and there But tefillot). various the and knowing whattodoat read thewords to how (knowing skills and mean) tefillot content (understanding what thewordsand curriculum consists oftwoelements- the most frustratingissue? what canourschoolsdotoaddressthis absence ofone). Try, though,wemust.So, fundamental relationship with God (orthe and inourcommunities concerning our without somethingchanginginourhomes who make it a priority can do ontheir own, even dedicated teachers andadministrators siddur can do and probably not something God. That is not something that a new In manyschools,thetefilla andhowwerelate to Volume X Issue2

Prayer the affective or emotional side of davening. because I sincerely want to The mechanics of tefilla, which What should a student be feeling when pray. These are the times is now part of many curricula, includes praying? How do we teach feeling? What when I want to reach out and the skills of reading the words, the (if it is not impertinent to ask) do we feel talk to my Father in Heaven, understanding of what the words mean, when we daven? to my Maker, the Holy One, and a knowledge of the appropriate laws blessed by He. These are the regarding tefilla. Rather than teaching Tefilla, according to Rav times when I want to cry out these in separate lessons, it may be more Soloveitchik, is a means of communicating to the Supreme Being, to effective to incorporate those sessions into with God. While he describes other communicate with Him in a the tefilla experience itself (think the better ways in which man interacts with God way that I can communicate beginner minyanim). (the intellectual, the emotional, and the with no one else. I cannot volitional), prayer, according to the Rav, is see Him but He is real. He The relationship aspect of tefilla is unique because it is a dialogue. The other is there…. Whether God more difficult to teach. As is suggested by ways are: will accept my prayers and the metaphoric understanding of Shir Ha- affirmatively respond to Shirim, and as Rambam famously wrote (o)ne directional, unilateral them, I do not know. That about learning to love God, we learn about acts performed by man… He hears my prayers, I firmly relationships with God by analogy with where man transcends his believe!3 relationships we have with other people. finitude but God does not As such, one could begin by teaching the respond by meeting him Knowing that God hears our prayers is part art of human relationships- what it means halfway… (while prayer is of understanding that prayer is built on a to be a friend, how to talk to a friend, how a) dialogue which is bilateral relationship with God. Introducing a new to listen to a friend (elements that are part and reciprocal; a dialogue edition of the siddur, however student- of the Responsive Classroom curriculum, that exists when one person friendly, is not a solution on its own. What and specifically the Morning Meeting.) It addresses another, even if the we need to incorporate in the classroom is hard to develop a relationship with the other is silent.1 are lessons that teach students how to Divine, so incorporating lessons on grit and develop a relationship with God. It sounds developing an open and reflective mindset The Rav continues: quite “chutzpadic,” as Rabbi Nathan Lopes in the classroom would be helpful. And, Cardozo notes, “How does man dare to as always, one should model for one’s In praying, we do not seek speak to God, the Master of the Universe?” students- the difficulties in prayer, how you a response to a particular We dare, contends Cardozo, because: as an individual overcome them, and by request as much as we desire showing (not just saying) how important a fellowship with God… We just continue a tefilla is to you personally. when we pray, God emerges conversation of more than out of His transcendence and five thousand years, started Any new approach to tefilla will forms a companionship with by men and women who need to be paired with the realization us- the Infinite and finite really dared and knew the that meaningful prayer is a constant meet and the vast chasm is art of prayer… We can struggle and requires education, patience, 2 bridged. stand before God only when compassion and grit. Even once one learns we remind ourselves that how to daven, meaningful tefilla is hard A dialogue does not always presume that we continue this daring to achieve. Rav Amital used to say that both participants are talking, but does conversation because others he davened three times a day in order to assume that both are present and are started it.4 achieve that one meaningful tefilla a year. invested in the relationship. As Rabbi Schools need to invest a lot of resources Hayim Halevi Donin so eloquently and How do we teach our students the to making tefilla a major priority, and not honestly put it in his introduction of his To language of this conversation? How do we merely paying lip service to the notion. Pray as a Jew: teach them how to enter into a relationship with the Divine? Somehow, we need to Dr. Deena Rabinovich is the director of the It is true that at times I pray teach them not only the language and Legacy Heritage Fund Jewish Educator’s only because it is my duty the mechanics of this conversation, but Project at Yeshiva University’s Stern to obey the Jewish law that also need to provide them with tools for College for Women where she has also requires me to pray. But there developing a relationship. taught Tanach since 2004. are also times that I pray

1 Abraham R. Besdin, Reflections of 2 ibid. 4 Nathan T. Lopez Cardozo, “On the Rav: Lessons in Jewish Thought adapted Speech and Prayer” in Between Silence and from the Lectures of Joseph B. Soloveitchik 3 Hayim Halevi Donin, To Pray as Speech: Essays on Jewish Thought (Lanham, (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav Publishing House, 1990), a Jew: A Guide to the Prayer Book and the Maryland: J. Aronson, 1995), 198. 77. Synagogue Service (New York: Basic Books, 1980), 3.

Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 23 24 KOL HAMEVASER personally, would find necessary for necessary find personally,would individuals need todetermine what they, me, isamost personal experience, andall are mostpromisingatthistime. methods ofenhancingthe more meaningful. of reciting fixed texts.” and the performance of the ritual ofprayer, man, his absolute dependence upon God, experiencing the complete helplessness of mitzvah. Prayer, forhim,“consistsofboth the heart, what he calls the dimension that involves the emotions or requires aswellaninner, experiential mitzvah, aproper calls thema’aseh ha-mitzvah orpe’ulat ha- articulation constitutes the actof that Soloveitchik, B. Joseph Rabbi of formulation the in While, words. this alike. making rapid pace,allwiththegoalof,somehow, translations, arebeingproducedata size letters, fonts,colors,pictures,and as tefilla emotionally withwhatisbeingrecited? thousands oftimesandidentify words is itpossibletorecitethesameexact How it occasion, with any degree of sincerity. find I but hard toexpressthese sentiments, even on – thanks articulating and Amida– giving praise, stating requests, with the three-fold division of theweekday measure of authentic feelings. I amfamiliar it hardformetomusterevenasmall every day, withoutanybreak-oftenmakes the of nature required text-threetimesaday, atleast, repetitive sheer The Jew. trying tobearesponsibleandcommitted formidable challenge I faceassomeone omnt i srgln wt finding with meaning in struggling is community meaningful? times can onerecite bar issetveryhighindeed.Howmany of fulfillment the of component feeling or experiencing is an indispensable www.kolhamevaser.com B Can Prayer BeMeaningful?: Feeling thePresence God of y vdh she-ba-lev avodah , it is insufficient to just recite just to insufficient is it mitzvah,

rabbi 2 isdescribedbyHazal(Ta‘anit 2a) ifrn sdui, ih different with siddurim, Different tefilla It is hard for me to suggest which The problem arises because Tefilla No wondertheOrthodox

dr tefilla . more personal and, thereby, jacob presents,forme,themost , forboth young and old fulfillment

Ashreifind and j . T poel fulfill properly To . 1 schacter Ifthisisthecase,if mitzvah, whathe tefilla ofthe iym ha- kiyyum experience Tefilla tefilla mitzvah Ashrei tefilla , the , for

with Him. God, engaged in a personal conversation standing I worktotryimaginemyselfasifam Amida orevenjustforpartofthe if Icanachieve this state evenjustforthe way forthe entire davening, but Iam happy God. Itwouldbenice, of course,tofeel this initiate a private, intimate encounter with getting ready topray, that I amaboutto for me, and thatistofocusonrecognizing, asIam useful most find I what address to bemeaningful forthem. I canonly himself to his Maker, and to pray has one himself inthepresenceofandaddressing finding man of awareness “Prayer an basically presence. is God’s in actually, is, the wordswerecite),butawarethatone (this is,indeed,thesubstanceofmuch not just aware that one is addressing God God, of presence the in oneself finds one so far as to assert that when one prays, is anencounterwithGod.Heevenwent Soloveitchik repeatedly noted that prayer Rabbi known. well is experience Hashem from herthemost important thing inlife influence his mother had on him: “I learned their force andpower. Onedescribesthe but onlyinthelastfewyears haveIfelt time they were both first published in 1978, personal life. I wasaware of them from the he describedhavingfeltthisway inhisown which in Soloveitchik Rabbi of statements I beganpersonally to resonate withtwo with thisbutfounditeasier to dowhen struggled long have I master?” his before before the Divine Presence,” “like a servant can onedotofeel“asifheisstanding how tocultivate suchasensibility. What lifnei rabo servant before his master (ve-omed ke-eved Shekhinah ha- lifnei omed hu (ke-ilu Presence Divine himself as ifheisstanding before the his mindfromallthoughtsandenvision clear should One intention (kavannah)? tefilla underscored this as fundamental to the Rambam’s the precedent forthisimageryin There is connotation only: to stand before God.” experience: “What is meant by The real question is, ofcourse, The notionof lifnei 3 )” (4:16); he shouldstandlike a ) (5:4).

Hashem, in the presence of iko Tefilla wherehe Hilkhot tefilla asa Amida. lifnei 4

upon myfrailshoulders.” the gentle pressure of His hand resting and the Almighty of presence the feel to – Jewish Future, Yeshiva University Jewish Thought and Senior Scholar, and Center for the History Jewish of Professor University is Schacter J. Jacob Dr. Rabbi whom Iamdirectingmyprayers. when Ifeeltheclosenessof theGodto me to meaningful is Prayer don’t. I when sustains me, when Iengage in prayer and I that blessed achieve it once inawhileanditisthisthat very God’s feel I of But immediacy presence. the of awareness to teachothersachieve this levelof experience he hadwhileengagedinprayer: an describes specifically second The way. God in a direct, personal, and unmediated how hismother taught him to experience space atall. a small room, taking up no of confines narrow the in me ke-va-kakhol shoulder, Ihuggedhisknees, hand, dark room;Ifelthiswarm me; Hewasrightthereinthe despair, Hewasnotfarfrom in suchmoments of black close friend,brother, father: humble, a as rather but King, not as the exalted, majestic those moments,appeared and pray fervently. God,in to myroom,fallonknees returned home Iwouldrush this need. The moment I not live without gratifying for prayerwasgreat; I could nurses. However, theneed among theinternsand in the whitewashed, long corridors God find not could in the hospital; somehow I However, Icouldnotpray all I coulddowas to pray. I coulddoverylittle for her, day, hourbyhour;medically, watched her dying,dayby wife lay onherdeathbedandI my ago years Eleven ertul, d nt nw how know not do I Regretfully, ke-va-kakhol, onmy 6 . Hewaswith Volume X Issue2 5 Heportrayshere Prayer 1 Joseph B. Soloveitchik, “Marriage,” the Orthodox Union’s Jewish Action 78:1 (Fall Man of Faith (Lanham, 2004), 56. in Family Redeemed: Essays on Family 5778/2017): 18-37. Relationships (2000), 40. See also Rabbi Joseph 5 Joseph B. Soloveitchik, “A Tribute to B. Soloveitchik, ‘Al ha-Teshuvah (Jerusalem, 3 I do recognize that R. Chaim the Rebbetzin of Talne,” Tradition 17 (1978): 1975), 41-44; Joseph B. Soloveitchik, On Soloveitchik famously states that Rambam 77. Repentance (Northvale and London, 1996, requires that the awareness of standing lifnei 1984), 71-74; Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Worship Hashem extend for the duration of the entire 6 Joseph B. Soloveitchik, “Majesty of the Heart: Essays on Jewish Prayer (Jersey Amidah. See Hiddushei Rabbenu Hayyim ha- and Humility,” Tradition 17 (1978): 33. The City, 2003), in passing. Levi, Hil. Tefillah 4:1. first quote comes from a talk he delivered on January 30, 1977, the second from a talk he 2 See “Exploring the Power of 4 Joseph B. Soloveitchik, The Lonely delivered on April 14, 1973. Prayer,” the cover story of the current issue of

Personalized Prayer By rabbi ezra schwartz

Few can question that tefilla in prayer. Leaving aside the problematic bow. Unlike a sword that can be effective our communities is seriously lacking. name for these tefilla services, in practice whether or not the holder is skilled, a bow Our shuls leave us with davening that they enhance only prayers of secondary changes in effectiveness based on the skill is too often, even at its best, rushed and importance. Kabbalat Shabbat may be very of the holder. Great expertise is needed to uninspiring. At its worst, the experience beautiful, but subsequently, during ma’ariv, properly ascertain the force with which one can be downright painful to hear off- the shemone esreh, which is meant to be the pulls the bowstring and the proper angle at key mispronunciations of Hebrew and to spiritual apex of prayer, remains uninspired which to hold the bow. It is the effect of the witness the rampant talking and disrespect and rushed. In contrast to the communal bow, not the sword, that varies based on the for what should be avoda she-beleiv. Ask involvement experienced during Kabbalat skill of the holder. Therefore, the personal high school educators and you are likely Shabbat, ma’ariv lags behind, and tefilla, prayers added by the individual to reflect to hear that they dread tefilla and the in its pure form, remains lax. the deepest recesses of his or her heart are enforcement of what so many students find characterized as kashti, a bow. meaningless. As high-schoolers mature and So what, if anything, can be done? develop, both intellectually and spiritually, I would argue that we need to shift the way To my mind, we make a mistake and even when they return from Israel we teach and educate about tefilla. Too by only focusing on the fixed nature with a more intense approach to Torah and often, the focus is on the importance of of prayer and ignoring its personalized mitzvot, too often this does not translate the words themselves. However, students supplicatory nature. Students don’t find into a more meaningful tefilla. Therefore, are never trained to go beyond the text and prayer inspiring because they don’t find it it is no wonder that Yeshiva University are never introduced to the opportunity to personal. As adults, we never learned how is constantly experimenting with minyan personalize their prayers. and when to add our personal needs to times and locations; the most popular tefilla. Interestingly, in Rav Soloveitchik’s minyanim on campus are the most rushed. In Parshat VaYechi, Yakov Avinu essay Ra’ayonot al Ha-Tefilla,2 he speaks tells Yosef “Va-Ani hineh natati lekha of the personal supplicatory, individual There have been many significant shekhem ehad al ahekha, asher lakakhit nature of tefilla. The Rav describes how attempts at improving tefilla in our mi-yad ha-emori be-charbi u-bekashti.”1 tefilla is meant to reflect the crises which communities. Sadly, they have largely lie at the depths of an individual’s soul. failed. While new siddurim are published Yosef was given a double portion He speaks about the personal needs that with the aim of adding insight and including Shechem, which Yakov took one is meant to convey in tefilla; of how profundity to our davening, most often from the Emori with his sword and bow. In an individual is supposed to go through these are not read, and if read, they don’t our standard versions of Onkelos, this verse profound soul searching in prayer. Our improve the tefilla experience. As Rabbi is interpreted not as a physical sword and failure to convey the difference between Shalom Carmy notes regarding tefilla, bow but rather as to two terms for prayer: my tefilla and your tefilla, our inability as quoting the legendary gaon Yogi Berra, tseloti and ba’uti. These two terms for educators to open our souls and share with “You can’t think and hit at the same prayer are often assumed to be synonymous our students what we pray for, may actually time.” In other words, one cannot learn but, in reality, they are quite different. impede our community’s ability to improve about tefilla and daven at the same time. Tseloti refers to the common prayers that the sincerity and devotion of our prayers. New siddurim are often left to adorn our everyone says. Ba’uti however, refers to bookshelves with their beautiful covers but supplication, to the personal requests that an Rabbi Ezra Schwartz is a Rosh Yeshiva do not do much to transform our prayer. individual can add during his or her prayers and the Associate Director of RIETS. He Music has been added to many tefillot, (See Avoda Zara 8a). These additional also serves as the Rabbi of the Mount Sinai particularly Kabbalat Shabbat, in an effort prayers are not referred to with the sword Jewish Center in Washington Heights. to engage more mispallelim in sincere metaphor, but with the metaphor of a

1 Bereshit 48:22. 2 Joseph B. Soloveitchik, “Ra’ayanot al haTefilla,” HaDarom 47 (1979), 84-106. Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 25 26 KOL HAMEVASER aspect ofhalakha.” ethical moment weareseekingisitself an relationship is one of inclusion: ‘The can belooked up,everymoraldilemma to an ambiguous term. It can refer narrowly way fullyimperative.” to anethical moment that[is]… initsown Judaism demands of the Jew…commitment however, isthat “traditional halakhic The overwhelming thrust of the sources, create as un-actionable in acourtoflaw. whatever imperatives the category may such anunimportantrolethathedeems ha-din meshurat for example, giveslifnim Rosh, The commandments. biblical within halakhaasbeingoneofthe613 dei forMaimonides) as important a role they prefertodiscuss,suchas ha-din (ortheanalogousconcept meshurat Other medieval scholars donot give draws the most“rigorous”versionofinclusion. Lichtenstein R. commandments, ha-din asoneofthe613biblical meshurat which liststhe obligation to behave work Corbeille’s of law.Isaac the R. of From letter the beyond ha-din– meshurat to theethical is lifnim The term taken to imply a legal appeal primary rabbinic source under examination. specific the on Lichtenstein, R. for depend, Halakha?” Jewish of “Does Independent Ethic an Recognize Tradition article, Lichtenstein’s that is exactly relationship? what But ethical. fulfilment the the of to related be to supposed is Judaism, of fulfillment principal the a mode of life, religion is is often bad. Halakha, the observance of which guide toward the good anddeterfromthe expected by itsadherentsandcriticsto Revisiting ClassicalEssays Recognize an Ethic Independant of Halakha" Recognize anEthicIndependantof R. Aharon Lichtenstein'sEssay, "Does Jewish Tradition Jewish Tradition onEthicsBeyondthe Law: Revisiting www.kolhamevaser.com B y din (law)only, whereby “everything D avid Halakha, The nuancesofthisinclusion That As R ubinstein is the question of R. Aharon of question the is 2 Hisansweristhat the 3 o R Lctnti, is Lichtenstein, R. for ee Mtvt Katan, Mitzvot Sefer 4 imitatio lifnim lifnim broadly construed,recognizes. halakha, narrowly construed, that halakha, halakha allowsforanethicnotidentical to ha-din. This conception of meshurat of Halakha.” themselves encompassedwithin thecorpus insists, areclearly objective and “are of subcategories that fall under thecategory ha-din that view Lichtenstein’s Lichtenstein’s thesis. R. of critics three discuss do not abound. However, here we will take Lichtenstein’s R. to responses critical strikes betweenthosetwoconsiderations, he balance the of Because law. construed while so does maintaining them distinctfromnarrowly it but norms, Jewish and relationship between ethical imperatives has thevirtue that it establishes an inclusive thesis His argument. main Lichtenstein’s vary withtheagent.” depending uponthecircumstances, may and, situation specific “a from evolves din ha- meshurat objective standards,” lifnim significantly, more While flexibility. its and, obligation its boundaries of halakha is the degree of ha-dinfromthenarrow meshurat lifnim obligatory nature. What distinguishes refer tobothbythetermhalakhafortheir more broadly bothto contain. However, halakhacanalsorefer system thatisconcernedwithmorality to imperatives we would expect a legal does notinclude many of the ethical This conception of halakha, unsurprisingly, resolved byreference to codeorcanon.” content of thisethic is formulated in the the recordedhalakha, hebelievesthatthe that “of course” R Bleich R. ha-din, mishurat lifnim can be divorced from R. So Presumably . ai Bec cnet R. contests Bleich David J. a w hv smaie R. summarized have we far 7 hl R Bec concedes Bleich R. While 8 there is anethic beyond , it is coherent to 5 ipss fixed “imposes din din andto inm meshurat lifnim din. 6 lifnim The Bleich. not place it in the Aggadic realm as does R. and one, defined a broadly if even realm, ethic for whichhesearcheswithin the legal the keep to Lichtenstein R. motivates what the corpus of halakhic content. This may be that thecontentofethical be includedin religious experience, it standstoreason is, asouropeninghypothesisstates,a legal one, and the pursuit of the ethical the religiousexperience is apredominantly halakhists andtheirpredecessors. that spoke about halakha – namely, sources medieval Jewish traditional about be is Lichtenstein R. predetermining that his discussion will halakha, about says tradition Jewish what asks he When way. surprising; histopicself-selects in this predecessors. This bibliography is not writings of medieval halakhists and their the from draws analysis Lichtenstein’s Namely, R. tradition. Jewish the in class texts of specific a surveyed he recognizes, tradition” “Jewish what uncover to order In article. this in employed Lichtenstein R. Torah commandment to actethically,” obligations that writes Meir although R. Asher Lichtenstein argues that “moral e turntoasecond critique, R. halakha. of does Judaism recognize an ethic that is independent fact in that argues which and directedbyrules,ontheother.” being, asummoned charged withamission,ontheonehand, foremost, and is, Jew first “The writes, he As normativity. of that is Judaism in of experience the religious of nature the genre Lichtenstein, R. For is. specific this literature: this ishisviewofwhathalakha R.Lichtenstein within stays that reason significant gaa rte ta te aah, o the to extent thatitisrecordedatall. halakha, the than rather Aggadah This bringsustothemethodology W But

1 e searesuperseded bya per hr i pras more a perhaps is there Volume X Issue2 9 Since 10 there is evidence that areas of natural [Isn’t] this exposition mere creates a framework within which the Jew Prayer morality are not subsumed under any sham? Having conceded, in can “integrate” his or her “whole self.”16 other halakhic category. His evidence is effect, the inadequacy of the drawn from somewhat different types of halakhic ethic, it implicitly For R. Lichtenstein, then, one of sources than the ones R. Lichtenstein used. recognizes the need for a the more significant virtues of his view is The examples R. Meir provides of “large complement, only to attempt that halakha, with his broad conception, can swathes of natural morality” that “remain to neutralize this admission reflect the “full range of personal activity”– outside not only the halakhot themselves by claiming the complement the totality of a person’s being.17 This recalls but also beyond what is included by lifnim has actually been a part of R. Lichtenstein’s religious ontology of the mishurat ha-din”11 are not the specific the Halakhah all along, so Jew that we have already cited: “first and wording of medieval scholars.12 Rather, that the fiction of halakhic foremost, a summoned being, charged with they are the products of observations comprehensiveness can be a mission, on the one hand, and directed by combined with logic. One example is saved after all.15 rules, on the other.”18 All actions, whether debating with God in the face of apparent legal or ethical, exist only with relation to injustice as Abraham and Moses did. On R. Lichtenstein ultimately resolves his own the will of the “commanding Taskmaster,” this, R. Meir asks rhetorically, “Was this challenge by pointing out three concrete who deems them obligatory or optional, ethical principle subsequently subsumed ramifications of including within halakha permitted or forbidden. Halakha is “the into Halakha at Mount Sinai?”13 Another the heretofore independent ethic. First, by quintessential devar Hashem (word of example: the requirement to adhere to including the ethical within the halakhic, God),”19 and inasmuch as the devar Hashem agreements, which cannot originate in technical exemptions of lifnim meshurat points to good and bad, in addition to musts the Torah “for the simple reason that our ha-din are decreased. While the din-level and must-nots, it points there through the obligation to keep the Torah originates law would have excluded some cases due halakha. in it.”14 Thus, instead of integrating all to legal technicalities, the lifinim mishurat ethical imperatives into Halakha, R. Meir ha-din extension of halakha legislates to concludes that “the tension between ethics include those cases as well. The second David Rubinstein is a Yeshiva College and halakha remains.” ramification is providing halakhic context for ethical decisions. The third, and perhaps senior majoring in philosophy and Finally, we mention a critique R. most significant ramification is that the economics. Lichtenstein raises himself: marriage of Jewish law and the ethical

1 I thank my friend and teacher 2013), 125–141. so finding medieval scholars is not in line with Avraham Wein for the motivation to write this the form of his argument. article and much of the information contained 7 Bleich, 133. herein. I also thank my friend and colleague 13 Meir, 46. Yair Strachman for his time and willingness to 8 Bleich, 141. discuss some of the content of this article. 14 Meir, 46. 9 Aharon Lichtenstein, “Why Learn 2 Aharon Lichtenstein, “Does Judaism Gemara,” in Aharon Lichtenstein, Leaves of 15 Lichtenstein, “Does Jewish Tradition Recognize an Ethic Independent of Halakha?” Faith v. 1 (Jersey City, NJ: Ktav, 2003), 1-17, at Recognize an Ethic Independent of Halakha,” in Modern Jewish Ethics: Theory and Practice, 3. 76-7. He also formulates another objection ed. by Marvin Fox (Columbus, OH: Ohio before this one but due to the structure of this University Press, 1975) 62-85. 10 Asher Meir, “Does an Ethic exposition it is not relevant at this point. Independent of Halakha Remain an Autonomous 3 Lichtenstein, 70. Source of Obligation?” in That Goodly 16 Lichtenstein, 81. Mountain, ed. by Reuven Ziegler, Shira Schreier 4 Lichtenstein, 83. with Dov Karoll, Yitzhak S. Recanati, (Alon 17 Lichtenstein, 82. Shevut, Israel: Yeshivat Har Etzion, 2012), 41- 5 Lichtenstein, 79. 47, at 41. 18 Lichtenstein, Leaves, 3.

6 J. David Bleich, “Is There an Ethic 11 Meir, 46. 19 Lichtenstein, Leaves, 4. Beyond Halacha?” in J. David Bleich, The Philosophical Quest: of Philosophy, Ethics, 12 This is true also by design of the Law and Halakhah (Jerusalem: Maggid Books, argument. R. Meir’s argument is from omission,

Volume X Issue 2 www.kolhamevaser.com 27