פרשת ויצא. 1 The entire verse reads:

Transcription

1 פרשת ויצא I don t think that what we read in this week s Parshas Vayetze would really qualify as Tefilas HaDerech, but it is certainly a prayer that was said while traveling. The very beginning of our Parsha details the travels of Yaakov Ovinu as he left his parents home to travel to Choron. The Torah writes (B reishis Perek 28/P sukim 10-11): ו י צ א י ע ק ב מ ב א ר ש ב ע ו י ל ך ח ר נ ה: ו י פ ג ע ב מ ק ום ו י ל ן ש ם כ י ב א ה ש מ ש ו י ק ח מ אב נ י ה מ ק ום ו י ש ם מ ר א ש ת יו ו י ש כ ב ב מ ק ום ה ה וא: Yaakov went out from Beer Sheba and went to Choron. He happened to the place and he slept there because the sun set and he took from the stones of the place and he placed them around his head and he slept in that place. Among the many ideas that need to be understood in this verse are two to which we will attend and both are part of the same phrase: He happened to the place. ו י פ ג ע ב מ ק ום First, the place does not seem to have a particular reference. If the specific place is not relevant, then why is it mentioned? It does not seem relevant to the unfolding events. If the place has a particular reference-then to what does it refer? Secondly, the word ויפגע which we translated as happened, which is in accordance with Targum Onkelos, is a unusual phrase when referring to travels and arrivals at destinations, planned or unplanned. Why is this word used? Unsurprisingly, these questions are not new and we find that Rashi, along with others, deals with them. He writes: ויפגע במקום - לא הזכיר הכתוב באיזה מקום אלא במקום הנזכר במקום אחר, הוא הר המוריה שנאמר בו )בראשית כב/ד ) 1 וירא את המקום מרחוק: 1 The entire verse reads:

2 He happened to the place the Torah did not mention here the specific makom-place. Thus it must refer to a place that was mentioned elsewhere. That is, Har HaMoriah which is mentioned earlier in the verse, Avraham saw the place from afar. As the commentators explain, since the Torah wrote the word המקום with the definitive letter heh it was certainly referring to a specific place. The place does not mean a random location, but a specific one. Since the Torah uses the phrase המקום earlier, in relationship to the Akeida, and since we know where that place is, it follows that the place that the Torah mentions here is the place that the Torah specifies earlier. That place is Har HaMoriah which takes its name from the verse that appears at the end of the episode of the Akeida (ibid. Posuk 14): ו י ק ר א אב ר ה ם ש ם ה מ ק ום ה ה וא ה' י ר א ה א ש ר י אמ ר ה י ום ב ה ר ה' י ר א ה: Avraham called the name of that place Hashem will see that is what is said today on this mountain Hashem will be seen. According to this Moriah is form of the word.יראה The absences of the letter aleph from the word is not problematic because there are many instances in which the letter aleph is omitted in various conjugations and declensions that stem from it. Of course, Har HaMoriah is the הבית,הר the Temple Mount and we learn that that is the location to which Yaakov arrived 2. ב י ום ה ש ל יש י ו י ש א אב ר ה ם א ת ע ינ יו ו י ר א א ת ה מ ק ום מ ר ח ק: On the third day Avraham raised his eyes and he saw the place from afar. 2 We have presented the fact that Yaakov arrived at Mount Moriah as a simple fact. Such will be the presentation of the geographical location under discussion. However, the Midrashim, some of which are brought by Rashi, teach us that the exact place where Yaakov arrived is very hard to determine. Subsequent verses seem to indicate that it is questionable if he was at Mount Moriah at all. On the one hand, we read further on (Posuk 17) ו י יר א ו י אמ ר מ ה נ ור א ה מ ק ום ה ז ה א ין ז ה כ י א ם ב ית א...ל'קים ו ז ה ש ע ר ה ש מ י ם:

3 Rashi continues: ויפגע - כמו )יהושע ט/ז ) 3 ופגע ביריחו, )שם יט/ אי ) 4 ופגע בדבשת. He happened this is the usage we find similarly it happened to Jericho and it happened to Dabeshes. We will note that that these verses refer to the division of Eretz Yisroel to some of the tribes and when the verses write ופגע there in Sefer Yehoshua it doesn t mean simply it happened. The word פגע is used numerous times in that Book in reference to the borders and there it refers to a change in direction of the border or to the border s stoppage. In fact, such a usage seems more appropriate for the word פגע because it implies a hit. For example, we read latter in the Novi in Sefer Shoftim (Perek 18/Posuk 21): Yaakov was afraid and he said, This can be nothing other than the House of G-d and this is the gate of the heavens. The implication seems to be clear: he was at the site upon which the Beis HaMikdosh, the בית א...ל'קים would be built. Yet, almost immediately after we read (Posuk 19): ו י ק ר א א ת ש ם ה מ ק ום ה ה וא ב ית א ל ו א ול ם ל וז ש ם ה ע יר ל ר אש נ ה: Yaakov called the name of that place Beit El but Luz was the name of the city originally. The implication is that this is a different location completely. See Rashi to Posuk 17 and Gur Aryeh there for an introduction to the complexities of what the geographical המקום is. 3 This verse and the following one deal with the division of Eretz Yisroel to the various shevatim and the precise boundaries of their inheritance. This verse reads in its entirety: ו י ר ד מ י נ וח ה ע ט ר ות ו נ ע ר ת ה ופ ג ע ב יר יח ו ו י צ א ה י ר ד ן: The border descended from Yonocho, Ataros and Naaroso and happened at Jericho and went out from the Jordan River. 4 See the previous note. This verse reads in its entirety: ו ע ל ה ג ב ול ם ל י מ ה ומ ר ע ל ה ופ ג ע ב ד ב ש ת ופ ג ע א ל ה נ ח ל א ש ר ע ל פ נ י י ק נ ע ם: There border ascended to the sea and from Re eila and it Daboshes and hit to the river that was on the face of Yokneam.

4 ו י אמ ר ז ב ח ו צ ל מ נ ע ק ום א ת ה ופ ג ע ב נ ו כ י כ א יש ג ב ור ת ו ו י ק ם ג ד ע ון ו י ה ר ג א ת ז ב ח ו א ת צ ל מ נ ע ו י ק ח א ת ה ש ה ר נ ים א ש ר ב צ ו אר י ג מ ל יה ם: Zevach and Tzalmuna said, You should arise and hit us because you are a mighty person ; Gidon arose and killed Zevach and Tzalmuna and he took the moon-like decorations that were on the necks of their camels. The same implication is found in Sefer Sh muel I Perek 22/P sukim 17-18): ו י אמ ר ה מ ל ך ל ר צ ים ה נ צ ב ים ע ל יו ס ב ו ו ה מ ית ו כ ה נ י ה' כ י ג ם י ד ם ע ם ד ו ד ו כ י י ד ע ו כ י ב ר ח ה וא ו לא ג ל ו א ת אז נ י ו לא אב ו ע בד י ה מ ל ך ל ש לח א ת י ד ם ל פ ג ע ב כ ה נ י ה': ו י אמ ר ה מ ל ך ל ד וא ג ס ב א ת ה ופ ג ע ב כ ה נ ים ו י ס ב ד וא ג ה א ד מ י ו י פ ג ע ה וא ב כ ה נ ים ו י מ ת ב י ום ה ה וא ש מ נ ים ו ח מ ש ה א יש נ ש א א פ וד ב ד: King Shaul said to the runners who were standing near him, Surround and kill the Kohanim of Hashem because they helped Dovid and they knew that he was fleeing and they did not reveal to me ; the servants of the king did not wish to send their hand to harm the Kohanim of Hashem. The king said to Doeg, Turn around and you should harm the Kohanim; Doeg the Edomite turned and harmed the Kohanim; on that day he killed eighty-five men who wore the linen garment. Thus, it is difficult to render the word ויפגע as a simple of event of happening to a place. Thus, Rashi tells us an alternative explanation of ויפגע based on a Gemara in Masseches B rachos (26 b). Rashi writes: ורבותינו פירשו לשון תפלה כמו )ירמיה ז/טז ) 5 ואל תפגע בי, ולמדנו שתקן תפלת ערבית. Our Rabbis explained that ויפגע is an expression of prayer as we find in Yirmiyahu, Do not beseech Me. We learn from this that Yaakov established the evening Amida. 5 The entire verse reads: ו א ת ה אל ת ת פ ל ל ב ע ד ה ע ם ה ז ה ו אל ת ש א ב ע ד ם ר נ ה ות פ ל ה ו אל ת פ ג ע ב י כ י א ינ נ י ש מ ע א ת ך: And you, do not pray for this people and do not raise up for them a cry or a prayer; and do not beseech Me because I will not listen to you.

5 We translated the word תפגע as beseech in accord with the explanation of the Metzudos Tziyon there. He refers us to another verse using the same root (B reishis Perek 23/Posuk 8 6 ): ו י ד ב ר א ת ם ל אמ ר א ם י ש א ת נ פ ש כ ם ל ק ב ר א ת מ ת י מ ל פ נ י ש מ ע ונ י ופ ג ע ו ל י ב ע פ ר ון ב ן צ ח ר: Avraham spoke with the people of Cheis saying, If you wish to help to bury my deceased from before me, listen to me and beseech Efron ben Tzochar. Avraham Ovinu had a wonderful dialogue with the people of Cheis, why didn t he address Efron directly? The answer is, as the ensuing dialogue there in Parshas Chayei Sarah shows, that Efron was a difficult person. He was not agreeable or easily approachable. Efron would say one thing and mean another. Avraham Ovinu did not make a simple request to be introduced to Efron; he said that Efron had to be beseeched. The wall that Efron placed before himself and to be breeched and therefore Avraham Ovinu chose the word ופגעו hit the wall that he is erected so that I can purchase the land that I have chosen. In the verse that Rashi brings, Hashem tells Yirmiyahu that even if he prays with great ferocity, it will not help. And thus, after telling the Novi not to pray, he adds, do not beseech. Even the strongest of efforts will not help. So we see that ויפגע in our Posuk can mean prayer 7. Before we continue our discussion, we will emphasize that prayer in this context does not refer to each instance when we turn to G-d to make our requests or to thank Him. Prayer in this context refers to the Amida, the weekday Shmoneh Esrei or that of Rosh Chodesh, Shabbos and Yom tov with their respective number of blessings. We read in Masseches B rachos there: 6 See also Rus Perek 1/Posuk 16..ויפגע 7 Further on we will discuss the meaning of this prayer which was connoted by

6 איתמר, רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא אמר: תפלות אבות תקנום; רבי יהושע בן לוי אמר: תפלות כנגד תמידין תקנום. תניא כוותיה דרבי יוסי ברבי חנינא, ותניא כוותיה דרבי יהושע בן לוי. תניא כוותיה דרבי יוסי ברבי חנינא: אברהם תקן תפלת שחרית - שנאמר )בראשית יט/כז(וישכם אברהם בבקר אל המקום אשר עמד שם, ואין עמידה אלא תפלה, שנאמר )תהילים קו/ל ) 8 ויעמד פינחס ויפלל; יצחק תקן תפלת מנחה - שנאמר )שם כד/סג ) 9 ויצא יצחק לשוח בשדה לפנות ערב, ואין שיחה אלא תפלה, שנאמר )תהילים קב/א( תפלה לעני כי - יעטף ולפני ה' ישפך שיחו, יעקב תקן תפלת ערבית - שנאמר ויפגע במקום וילן שם, ואין פגיעה אלא תפלה, שנאמר ואתה אל תתפלל בעד העם הזה ואל תשא בעדם רנה ותפלה ואל תפגע בי. It was said: Rabi Yosei ben Rabi Chanina said: the prayers were established by the Patriarchs. Rabi Yehoshua ben Levi said: the prayers were established to be parallel to the daily Korbonos. There is a Braisa in accord with Rabi Yosei ben Chanina and there is a Braisa in accordance with Rabi Yehoshua ben Levi. The Braisa in accordance with Rabi Yosei ben Chanina teaches: Avraham established the morning prayer as it says, Avraham arose early in the morning to the place where he previously stood. Amida, standing, refers to prayer as it says, Pinchos stood and he prayed. Yitzchak established the afternoon prayer as it says, Yitzchak went out to meditate in the field and sicha refers to prayer as it says, A prayer for the poor person when he enwraps himself and before G-d he will pour out his sicha-prayer. Yaakov established the evening prayer as it says, he happened to the place and slept there and pegi a refers to prayer as it says, And you, do not pray 8 The entire verse reads: ו י ע מ ד פ ינ ח ס ו י פ ל ל ו ת ע צ ר ה מ ג פ ה: Pinchos stood and he prayed and the plague stopped. 9 The entire verse reads: ו י צ א י צ ח ק ל ש וח ב ש ד ה ל פ נ ות ע ר ב ו י ש א ע ינ יו ו י ר א ו ה נ ה ג מ ל ים ב א ים: Yitzchak went out to meditate towards evening and he raised his eyes and say and behold camels were coming.

7 for this people and do not raise up for them crying and prayer and do not beseech Me. The Gemara continues with a B raisa that supports Rabi Yehoshua ben Levi who said that the prayers were established to be parallel to the daily offerings. That B raisa teaches that times for prayer were set to be the times that the Korbonos were brought. That Braisa explains the fact why the Mishnah (26 a) upon which our Gemara is based lists specific times for the prayers but when it comes to the evening prayer it writes: The evening prayer has no fixed time. The B raisa explains: תפלת הערב אין לה קבע: ומפני מה אמרו תפלת הערב אין לה קבע - שהרי אברים ופדרים שלא נתעכלו מבערב קרבים והולכים כל הלילה; Why did they say that the evening prayer had to fixed time? Because the limbs and the fats of the Korbonos that were not consumed prior to nightfall would be burning on the altar for the entire night [until they were consumed]. That is, there was no obligation to put animal-parts on the altar. Only if the situation called for it and the parts were not consumed before nightfall were those parts on the altar after sunset. Is this question merely historical or does it have a halachic implication 10? After all, whether or not the Ovos established our davening or it came from the Anshei 10 The Gemara there itself showed one obvious halachic ramification of the dispute: Tefilas Musaf. Musaf is the fourth regularly scheduled prayer and it was not established by any of the Ovos who numbered only 3. According to Rabi Yosei ben Chanina the explanation for the Musaf Amida is: תפלות אבות תקנום, ואסמכינהו רבנן אקרבנות.

8 Knesses HaGedolah who said that the prayers should be parallel to the Korbonos, we daven in any case. The P nei Yehoshua teaches that there is a very clear halachic implication and ramification from this dispute and the dispute focusses on that very quotation from the Mishnah that was brought above. The Gemara later on (27 b) writes: תפלת הערב אין לה קבע. מאי אין לה קבע? אילימא דאי בעי מצלי כוליה ליליא - ליתני תפלת הערב כל הלילה! אלא מאי אין לה קבע? כמאן דאמר: תפלת ערבית רשות. דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל: תפלת ערבית, רבן גמליאל אומר: חובה, רבי יהושע אומר: רשות. The evening prayer is not fixed. What does it mean that it is not fixed? If you wish to say that it means that one can recite it the entire night, let the Mishnah write, The [time] for the evening prayer is the entire night! 11 The various Amida-prayers were established by the Patriarchs and the Anshei Knesses HaGedoloh connected them with the Korbonos. The Neila Amida which we recite only on Yom HaKippurim, but was recited on other especially decreed fast days as well, was not made dependent on either the Ovos or the Korbonos. Rather it was a special Tefila especially enacted for fast days. This is what Rambam writes in Mishneh Torah (Hilchos Tefilah Perek 1/Halachah 7): וכן תקנו תפלה אחר תפלת מנחה סמוך לשקיעת החמה ביום התענית בלבד כדי להוסיף תחנה ובקשה מפני התענית וזו היא התפלה הנקראת תפלת נעילה כלומר ננעלו שערי שמים בעד השמש ונסתרה לפי שאין מתפללין אותה אלא סמוך לשקיעת החמה. Similarly, Anshei K nesses HaGedolah enacted a prayer to be recited following the Minchah prayer close to sunset only on a fast day in order to add supplication and requests because of the fast day. This prayer is called Tefilas Neila, meaning that the gates of heaven are being locked [neila] as the sun sets and is hidden from sight because we only recite it close to the sun setting. 11 If such was the case, that the Mishnah wishes to teach that the evening prayer can be recited the entire night, its style should have been consistent with what it wrote regarding the Musaf prayers: ושל מוספין כל היום The time for the Musaf prayer is the entire day.

9 But, what does it mean that it is not fixed? This is according to the opinion that the evening prayer is optional. And this is like what Rav Yehuda taught in the name of Shmuel: The evening prayer- Rabban Gamliel says that it is obligatory; Rabi Yehoshua says that it is optional. What is the underlying reason for this dispute? P nei Yehoshua explains that Rabban Gamliel and Rabi Yehoshua were arguing on whether the source of the tefilos was the Patriarchs or the Korbonos. Rabban Gamliel holds, explains P nei Yehoshua, that the source of the prayers is the Ovos. In that case, there is no difference between any of the prayers and they are all equally incumbent. Rabi Yehoshua, explains P nei Yehoshua, posited that the source was the Korbonos. As we saw above, the burning of the various parts of the offerings was not an obligatory act. That burning was done when those parts were not burned before the end of the previous day. If they would have been consumed by the fire of the mizbeach on the previous day, nothing would have been burned at night. It is true that there were parts that burned nightly, because in fact there were always parts that were not completely consumed. But that burning was not obligatory. If, in fact, the parts were to have been fully consumed during the day time, nothing would have remained on the altar past nightfall. One might suggest that an additional difference would be whether the three daily Amidos were said while there was a Beis HaMikdosh. That is, according to Rabi Yeshoshua ben Levi, were the prayers established in place of the Korbonos and, therefore, while there were Korbonos, the regular three Amidos were not recited or whether the three Amidos were enacted parallel to the Ovos and they were recited daily, even when the Korbonos were brought in the Beis HaMikdosh 12? 12 We are careful to write regarding the three Amidos, implying that even if the three weren t said, there still was a daily prayer. Such a statement is particularly necessary according to Rambam who teaches us in Mishneh Torah (Hilchos Tefila Perek 1/Halachah 1) that some sort of daily prayer is obligatory upon all, man and woman, Kohen and non-kohen.

10 However, we see that this is latter possibility is not the case. We have many sources that indicate that the daily tefilos were recited even when the Bais HaMikdosh was extant and when its Korbonos were brought appropriately. Tashbetz (II/161) derives a proof from Masseches Sukkah (53 a) regarding the ongoing activities of the Simchas Beis HaShoeva that was observed nightly in Yerushalyim during Chol HaMoed Sukkos and then there was a Beis HaMikdosh. The Gemara writes: תניא, אמר רבי יהושע בן חנניה: כשהיינו שמחים שמחת בית השואבה לא ראינו שינה בעינינו. כיצד? שעה ראשונה - תמיד של שחר, משם - לתפלה, משם - לקרבן מוסף, משם - לתפלת המוספין, משם - לבית המדרש, משם - לאכילה ושתיה, משם - לתפלת המנחה, משם לתמיד של בין הערבים, מכאן ואילך - לשמחת בית השואבה. The Braisa taught: Rabi Yehoshua ben Chananya said, When we would rejoice at the Simchas Beis HaShoeva we never saw sleep. How was that? The first thing in the morning we saw the offering of the morning Korban Tomid. From there we went to prayer. From there we watched the offering of the Musaf Korban. From there we went to recite the Musaf prayers. From there we went [to learn in the] Beis Midrash. From there we went to eat and to drink. From there we went to the Mincha prayers, from there to watch the offering of the afternoon Korban Tomid and from there back to the next night s Simchas Beis HaShoeva. Thus, even after the second Beis HaMikdosh was built and all the time that it was functioning as required, prayers did not cease. He writes: מצות עשה להתפלל בכל יום שנאמר )שמות כג/כה( ועבדתם את ה' א...ל 'קיכם, מפי השמועה למדו שעבודה זו היא תפלה שנאמר )דברים יא/יג( ולעבדו בכל לבבכם אמרו חכמים אי זו היא עבודה שבלב זו תפלה, ואין מנין התפלות מן התורה, ואין משנה התפלה הזאת מן התורה, ואין לתפלה זמן קבוע מן התורה. It is a positive commandment to pray daily as it says, You shall serve Hashem your G-d. Our Rabbis learned through tradition that this service refers to prayer as it says, And to serve Him with all you heart. The Rabbis said, Which service is service of the heart? That is prayer. There is not a specific number of prayers that the Torah requires to be said and the text of prayer is not dictated by the Torah and it has not fixed time.

11 Thus, it remains difficult to say that the evening prayer, Tefilas Arvis is not obligatory. If, in fact, this prayer was established by Yaakov Ovinu and remained intact even when the Beis HaMikdosh was functioning, why is its status, according to Rabban Gamliel, less than that of the other two prayers? In order to develop an approach to this question, we must ask why it was that the prayer that Yaakov Ovinu initiated was Tefilas Arvis. It is simplistic to respond that since Avraham and Yitzchak has already instituted the other two prayers, only the evening prayer remained for Yaakov to inaugurate. It is simplistic to say that the prayers were a matter of happenstance and that Yaakov took advantage of the only opportunity that remained. Rather, it is apparent, as the sefarim write, that there was a unique reason why each of the prayers were instituted by each of the Ovos. Perhaps, part of the reasoning for the connection of each of the Ovos with each of the prayers can be learned from the term that is used to indicate that they prayed. It is certainly not by chance that the terms amida, sicha and pegiah are used differentially. After all, if there was no difference one from the other, a single term would have been sufficient. Furthermore, if there was nothing unique about the initiator of a particular prayer, why didn t the Torah just write that he prayed? Why did the Torah have to couch the prayers of the Ovos in distinctive expressions? 13 standing, is the term that the Torah employs to tell us of the prayers of,עמידה Avraham. The implication of such a term is that the prayer is appropriate as long as one knows that he is standing before the Ribbono Shel Olom. The change in posture from sitting or walking to standing-still indicates that there must be a new awareness that overtakes the individual. That awareness is, in and of itself, sufficient to pray to Him. 13 The analysis that follows does not mean that we think that we are entering the mindsets of our Ovos and determining what they thought about and what was their attitude towards prayer. Far be it from us to assume such ability and understanding. Rather, we will focus on the terms that the Torah chose to describe their prayer, distinct and separate terminology and attempt to interpret what the Torah wishes us to learn from these unique terms.

12 This term stands in contrast to,שיחה the meditation that is implied by this word. Amida, standing only, is insufficient to enter into prayer. Prayer is far more than the words uttered. The words that are expressed must represent the inner thoughts of the individual has he turns directly to G-d and addresses Him. Perhaps this concept of sicha is what led our Chachamim to make sure that prayer is meticulously prepared and not entered with a lackadaisical attitude. Thus we learn in Masseches B rachos (Perek 5/Mishnah 1): חסידים הראשונים היו שוהים שעה אחת ומתפללים כדי שיכונו את לבם למקום The early pious people would wait one hour and then say the Amida in order to direct their hearts to Hashem. Finally, we learn that פגיעה is a term for prayer. As we have seen, pegiah connotes a hard meeting, that which is forceful. Prayer is not only arising to speak with G-d, even after deep thought and meditation. Sometimes, at least, prayer has great energy and force as it seeks to penetrate upon high and reach the benevolent ear of HaKodosh Boruch Hu. Not for naught does the Torah associate amida with Avraham Ovinu. Our Father Avraham lived at a time of personal redemption. G-d redeemed him from Choron and Ur Kasdim; He brought him to Eretz Yisroel. At a time of redemption, when there is revelation, one is attuned to the Cosmic Director 14 of life and when arising to speak to Him, it is relatively simple to stand before Him in prayer. That attitude is reflected in one of the three periods of the day, morning, afternoon and night 15. In the morning light shines forth. There is clarity. That is the time when there is redemption and the presence of G-d is undeniable. That time period is associated 14 My Rebbe, Rav Aharon Soloveichik ZT L used this term to refer to G-d, particularly on Rosh Hashanah when he termed the Ribbono Shel Olom as The Cosmic Director of Tekios. 15 This association of the periods of the day with attitudes and outlooks is found in many sefarim.

13 with Avraham Ovinu and is accentuated by the fact that there were so many who streamed to find themselves within the embrace of the Shechinah. That is what we read in Parshas Lech Lecha (B reishis Perek 12/Posuk 5): ו י ק ח אב ר ם א ת ש ר י א ש ת ו ו א ת ל וט ב ן אח יו ו א ת כ ל ר כ וש ם א ש ר ר כ ש ו ו א ת ה נ פ ש א ש ר ע ש ו ב ח ר ן ו י צ א ו ל ל כ ת אר צ ה כ נ ע ן ו י ב א ו אר צ ה כ נ ע ן: Avram took his wife Sarai and Lot, the son of his brother and all of their property that they acquired and the souls that they made in Choron and they went out to go to the Land of Canaan and they came to the Land of Canaan. Rashi writes: אשר עשו בחרן - מגיירת הנשים שהכניסן תחת כנפי השכינה, אברהם מגייר את האנשים, ושרה That they made in Choron They brought them under the wings of the Shechinah. Avraham converted the men and Sarah converted the women. However, that clarity can be become blurred when the redemption and revelation remain incomplete. That which clear is the morning of time, came become gradually less clear as time continues. Thus, in such a situation, a deeper insight into prayer must be realized. The Hand of G-d is not completely evident when His salvation is not so apparent. The innerself must be awakened to recognize the presence of G-d even when that presence does not seem to be manifest. Of course, G-d is always there; but, sadly enough we do not see Him. It was Yitzchak who was blind in his later life who would teach us of this necessary attitude of prayer as the force of the sun recedes and nightfall approaches. Amida alone is insufficient but thoughtfulness can raise the awareness and one can turn to G-d in the time of the sun setting and speak to Him as was done when the sun was at its brightest. Already, earlier in his life, Yitzchak prepared himself, and thereby preparing us, his descendants, to add the nature of special thoughtfulness and meditation so that we can perceive that which is beyond the shadows that make G-d s Hand less visible to us.

14 But, there is night when dark descends. Darkness is the Exile in which we find ourselves for almost the last 2000 years. The wall of darkness can seem to enshroud us, wrapping us up with a sense that there is no outlet, no exit. It takes a great person who wants to see the Hand of G-d despite that darkness. A lesser person might think that they have to battle the threats of enemies, conquerors or demons that threaten one in the darkness. The great person knows that in darkness, the battle is against the darkness itself. In such darkness, the battle cannot be won by arising to prayer; it cannot be won even by thoughtful meditation and contemplation as a prerequisite to prayer. In such darkness, the great person must battle the darkness and break through the seemingly impervious wall that has been erected before us. The prayer of such a great person is more than amida and even exceeds sicha. That prayer will be one of pegiah, striking out at the sense that inundates that there is no hope, no future, no expectation. The prayer of pegiah first strikes at the despair that may take hold of the individual when the odds against are so great. Yaakov Ovinu knew despair. When he arrive in Choron and met Rachel for the first time the Torah tells us of his reactions (Perek 29/Posuk 11): ו י ש ק י ע ק ב ל ר ח ל ו י ש א א ת ק ל ו ו י ב ך : Yaakov kissed Rachel and he raised his voice and cried. Of course, a kiss is a sign of hope and future. Why then did Yaakov Ovinu cry? Rashi explains: לפי שבא בידים ריקניות, אמר אליעזר עבד אבי אבא היו בידיו נזמים וצמידים ומגדנות, ואני אין בידי כלום. לפי שרדף אליפז בן עשו במצות אביו אחריו להורגו והשיגו, ולפי שגדל אליפז בחיקו של יצחק משך ידו. אמר לו מה אעשה לציווי של אבא, אמר לו יעקב טול מה שבידי, והעני חשוב כמת:

15 He cried Because he came to the house of Lovon empty-handed. Yaakov said, Eliezer the servant of my grandfather had in his hands rings and bracelets and delicacies. I have nothing. [The reason that Yaakov had nothing is] because Elifaz, son of Eisav, pursued Yaakov to kill him, as Eisav commanded him. Elifaz intercepted Yaakov but because Elifaz was raised in the bosom of Yitzchak, he retreated from killing Yaakov. Elifaz said to Yaakov, What shall I do about my father s command to kill you? Yaakov replied, Take whatever I have and I will be impoverished and one who is totally impoverished is considered dead. Yaakov Ovinu cried because he was dead. If this was the conclusion of what the Torah had to tell us, we would assume that he would go off to some corner and disappear from the active world. He was dead; he had no life. But, the Torah does not leave its description of events here. It continues: ו י ג ד י ע ק ב ל ר ח ל כ י א ח י אב יה ה וא ו כ י ב ן ר ב ק ה ה וא ו ת ר ץ ו ת ג ד ל אב י ה: Yaakov told Rachel that he is the brother of her father and that he is the son of Rivka and she ran and told her father. This verse presents us with three questions. First, it would seem to have been sufficient if Yaakov would have told Rachel that he was Rivka s son. The family relationships would have fallen into place and have been understood with that one piece of information. Secondly, the word הוא appearing twice in this verse seems to give emphasis to Yaakov He was the brother of Lovon. He was the son of Rivka. What is the need for the emphasis? The third point is that he wasn t Lovon s brother; he was his nephew. If the latter question would have been the sole issue we would have been able to dismiss it noting that close relatives are called brother s in the Torah 16. Didn t Avraham Ovinu say to Lot (B reishis Perek 13/Posuk 8): 16 Rashi explains that point here.

16 ו י אמ ר אב ר ם א ל ל וט אל נ א ת ה י מ ר יב ה ב ינ י וב ינ ך וב ין ר ע י וב ין ר ע י ך כ י א נ ש ים אח ים א נ ח נ ו: Avram said to Lot, Let there not be a dispute between me and between you and between my shepherds and between your shepherds because we are men who are brothers. Of course, they were not brothers; Avraham Ovinu was the uncle of Lot. But because of the other difficulties Rashi brings us the Midrash by which we can understand the subtleties and nuances that Yaakov expressed in a guarded conversation with Rachel: כי אחי אביה הוא - ומדרשו אם לרמאות הוא בא גם אני אחיו ברמאות, ואם אדם כשר הוא, גם אני בן רבקה אחותו הכשרה: That he is the brother of her father - The Midrash teaches that [Yaakov hinted], If Lovon wishes to approach me with deceit, also I can be his brother, his equal, in deceit. If he is an honest person, I am so, the son of his sister Rivka who is honest. The continuity of these two verses is remarkable. Yaakov Ovinu cried and said, it is as if I am dead and then he said, I can stand up to any challenge that Lovon will present me. How do we understand the strength of character and determination that Yaakov exhibited immediately following his terrible situation? The answer is as we have said above: The prayer of pegiah first strikes at the despair that may take hold of the individual when the odds against are so great. Think for a moment about Birchos Krias Shema that are recited every evening, weekday, Shabbos and Yom Tov. Those evening blessings are parallel to the ones recited in the morning. Immediately following the recitation of Shema, morning and evening, is the blessing that concludes with: Blessed are You, Hashem, He Who has redeemed Israel. ברוך אתה ה' גאל ישראל.

17 However, in Tefilas Arvis this blessing is introduced with a verse from Sefer Yirmiyahu (Perek 31/Posuk 10): כ י פ ד ה ה' א ת י ע ק ב וג אל ו מ י ד ח ז ק מ מ נ ו: Because G-d has redeemed Yaakov and He saved him from the hand of he who was stronger than him. Why is this verse attached to our evening prayers specifically? The answer is clear. Yirmiyahu talks about an instance of despair. A person or a nation is hopelessly outnumbered. There is no possibility that he or they will survive the confrontation, physical or spiritual, that is about to descend upon them. But Hashem is the Redeemer and it is the prayer of Yaakov, davka, the one who taught his descendants that prayer sometimes requires more than amida and sicha. It can require pegiah and when utilized well, the prayer of Yaakov can bring us the redemption of salvation against all odds. It is with this extensive background that we can ask: How could it be that there is an opinion that the Amida of Arvis is non-obligatory, that it is a reshus and not a chova? Isn t the prayer of Yaakov vital for our existence? Was it not the prayer of Yaakov, the pegiah, that has let his people survive for all of these millennia?

18 But the fact is that not only is there an opinion in Chazal that Tefilas Arvis is optional 17 but, such is the Halachah as Aruch Hashulchan elaborates in Siman How can we understand that this most powerful of Amidos was not established as being obligatory? I think that the answer to this question can be understood from the verse from Yirmiyahu that was brought above. That verse reads: כ י פ ד ה ה' א ת י ע ק ב וג אל ו מ י ד ח ז ק מ מ נ ו: Because G-d has redeemed Yaakov and He saved him from the hand of he who was stronger than him. Anshei K nesses HaGedoloh fixed this verse as part of our davening at night and placed it to immediately precede the Bracha that is recited as the conclusion of that section. What words did Anshei K nesses HaGedoloh determine to be the proper text of the blessing per se? We read it in all of our Siddurim: 17 It is worthwhile to re-emphasize that the discussion revolves around the obligation to recite the Amida in the evening. The recitation of Shema in the evening is a Torah obligation as the Torah writes (D vorim Perek 6/Posuk 7): ו ש נ נ ת ם ל ב נ י ך ו ד ב ר ת ב ם ב ש ב ת ך ב ב ית ך וב ל כ ת ך ב ד ר ך וב ש כ ב ך וב ק ומ ך: You shall teach them well to your sons and you shall speak about them when you are sitting in your house and when you are going on the way and when you lay down and when you arise. Laying down refers to the Shema that is said in the evening and arising refers to the Shema that is said in the morning. 18 Aruch Hashulchan notes there (s if 9), as the Rishonim write, that for many, many centuries, Am Yisroel as accepted to recite the evening Amida as if it was a chova, obligatory. Nonetheless the obligation of the evening Amida, even after Am Yisroel accepted it as if it was obligatory, has a number of halachos which distinguish it from the objectively obligatory Amidos of Shacharis and Mincha.

19 Blessed are You, Hashem, He Who has redeemed Israel ברוך אתה ה' גאל ישראל When we read this blessing before in the context of its morning recitation, we did not pay special attention to it. However, now, in its evening recitation we are struck by a seeming oddity. We introduce this blessing by saying that G-d saved Yaakov and we bless G-d by saying that He redeems Israel. Why isn t the blessing consistent? If the blessing needs to be introduced by G-d s promise to redeem Yaakov, why doesn t it bless Hashem as the Redeemer of Yaakov? If Anshei K nesses HaGedoloh deemed it necessary that this segment should include the verse that Hashem saved Yaakov, why did they not prepare a text that blesses G-d Who is the Redeemer of Yaakov? The answer to this question is the answer as to why Tefilas Arvis is not obligatory, in contrast to Tefilas Shacharis and Tefilas Mincha. Tefilah is always necessary. It is a Mitzvah with its own specific halachos, no different than any other Mitzvah. And, of course, prayer requires kavanah intent. If one says words and has no idea that he is praying to G-d, it isn t prayer. And thus, when a person stands up before Hashem to pray, the Amida of Avraham Ovinu, he has the requisite intent. But, it isn t sufficient to stand up alone. Prayer requires thought and introspection. One who prays must consider He before Whom he is praying, His greatness, His unlimited ability to do what He wishes to do and our gratitude to Him for all that He has done until now. Such an attitude takes us to the realm of Sicha. We should not think that the prayer of Avraham Ovinu was only Amida without Sicha. The Gemara in Masseches Yoma (28 b) teaches:

20 צלותא דאברהם מכי שחרי כתלי The prayer of Avraham was when the walls started to darken [because of the shadows of the approaching nightfall]. That is, Avraham Ovinu davened Mincha as well 19. His prayer was Sicha, an ingredient necessary for all. However, the pegi a of Yaakov Ovinu was not a basic necessity of all prayer. Pegi a was only necessary during the dark nights of history when it appeared that we were surrounded by an impenetrable and impregnable wall of disaster and destruction. We believe that the dark nights of history will come to an end when the Geula Shleima will arrive. We believe that the dark nights of history 20 are the legacy of our third forefather who was known as Yaakov 21. However, the legacy of our third forefather known as Yisroel will be different. We will continue to pray; we will stand up to prayer with the deep concentration and thoughtfulness that it requires. 19 Tosfos (d.h.yitzchak) in Masseches Brachos 26 b notes that Avraham did not initiate the Mincha prayer. Only after Yitzchak initiated it did Avraham recite it. 20 It is certainly true that in Bris bein HaBsorim the forthcoming exile was revealed to Avraham Ovinu as we read in Parshas Lech Lecha (B reishis Perek 15/P sukim 7-21). However, the historical event of exile began with Yaakov s descent to Egypt that we will learn in Parshas Vayigash. 21 We note that the third blessing of Krias Shema in the morning also concludes with the words: We bless G-d Who redeemed Israel. ברוך אתה ה' גאל ישראל. However, in contrast to Tefilas Arvis when Yaakov is first mentioned and then followed by Yisroel, in Tefilas Shacharis there is no mention of our third Patriarch as Yaakov whatsoever. This underscores our point that pegi a is an exceptional type of prayer that will no longer be necessary when the Beis HaMikdosh will be built.

21 However, when the permanent daylight of history will become our reality, we will no longer have to resort to pegi a. We will need to seek G-d; our complete dependence upon Him will not change one iota. However, to reach Him we will not have to break through external barriers. Our arising to prayer, with our deep kavanah will have the potential to break through our internal walls that separate us from Hashem, but those barriers erected by our outside enemies will be dismantled with finality. The Halachah did not establish the evening Amida as permanently obligatory because we know that it reflects a situation is only temporary. Am Yisroel assumed the responsibility on its own to recite those prayers nonetheless so that, B ezras Hashem, we can rapidly rid ourselves of those barriers. We turn to HaKodosh Boruch Hu to save Yaakov so that we can praise Him for bringing the final redemption to Yisroel speedily in our days It is intriguing to take the Halachah of Tefilas Arvis R shus and attach it to a famous statement that is found in the Mishnah (Masseches B rachos 12 b) and appears early on in the Maggid section of Haggadah Shel Pesach. We read there: מזכירין יציאת מצרים בלילות. אמר רבי אלעזר בן עזריה: הרי אני כבן שבעים שנה, ולא זכיתי שתאמר יציאת מצרים בלילות עד שדרשה בן זומא. שנאמר: )דברים טז/יג( למען תזכר את יום צאתך מארץ מצרים כל ימי חייך. ימי חייך - הימים, כל ימי חייך - הלילות; וחכמים אומרים: ימי חייך - העולם הזה, כל - להביא לימות המשיח. One recites the third paragraph of Shema, mentioning that G-d took us out of Egypt, in the night [as well as in the morning. Rabi Elazar ben Azarya says, I am like one who is 70 years old and I could not prove that one should recite the third paragraph of Shema, mentioning that G- d took us out of Egypt, in the night until I learned the interpretation of Ben Zoma. Ben Zoma interpreted the verse: לא ת אכ ל ע ל יו ח מ ץ ש ב ע ת י מ ים ת אכ ל ע ל יו מ צ ות ל ח ם ע נ י כ י ב ח פ ז ון י צ את מ א ר ץ מ צ ר י ם ל מ ע ן ת ז כ ר א ת י ום צ את ך מ א ר ץ מ צ ר י ם כ ל י מ י ח י י ך: Do not eat chametz when you bring the Korban Pesach; for seven days you shall upon it matzos, poor-man s bread because in haste you went out of Egypt in order that you should remember the day of your exodus from the Land of Egypt all the days of your life.

22 Ben Zoma interpreted: the days of your life refers to remember the exodus in the daytime. All the days of your life refers to remembering the exodus at night. The Chachamim said, the days of your life refers to nowadays. All the days of your life refers to the period of the Geula Shleima. In Hilchos Krias Shema (Perek 1/Halachah 3), Rambam writes: אף על פי שאין מצות ציצית נוהגת בלילה קוראין אותה בלילה מפני שיש בה זכרון יציאת מצרים ומצוה להזכיר יציאת מצרים ביום ובלילה שנאמר למען תזכור את יום צאתך מארץ מצרים כל ימי חייך: Even though there is no Mitzvah of Tzitzis at night, we read the third paragraph of Shema (that contains the Mitzvah of Tzitzis) at night because it contains the remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt. It is a Mitzvah to have a remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt in the daytime and the night time as it says, In order that you remember the day of your Exodus from Egypt all the days of your life. Obviously, Rambam paskens like Rabi Elazar ben Azarya. Rabi Elazar ben Azarya says that the third paragraph of Shema will not be recited in the night time when the Geula Shleima will arrive because the final redemption will be greater than the redemption of the Exodus, as we read in Sefer Yirmiyahu (Perek 23/P sukim 7-8): ל כ ן ה נ ה י מ ים ב א ים נ א ם ה' ו לא י אמ ר ו ע וד ח י ה' א ש ר ה על ה א ת ב נ י י ש ר א ל מ א ר ץ מ צ ר י ם: כ י א ם ח י ה' א ש ר ה על ה ו א ש ר ה ב יא א ת ז ר ע ב ית י ש ר א ל מ א ר ץ צ פ ונ ה ומ כ ל ה א ר צ ות א ש ר ה ד ח ת ים ש ם ו י ש ב ו ע ל אד מ ת ם: Therefore, behold, the days are approaching, said Hashem, and they will no longer say we praise G-d who took B nei Yisroel from the Land of Egypt. But they will say, Praise G-d Who brought the seed of the House of Israel from the northern land and from all of the lands where He forced them there and they will dwell upon their land. We will view the Exodus differently. Our thanks to G-d will be qualitatively different and thus we will not praise Him for the past salvation; rather we will praise Him for the present one. [The third paragraph of Shema will continue to be recited in the morning because of Parshas Tzitzis which will remain a Mitzvah, of course.] Now, the blessing of Go al Yisroel is parallel to the third paragraph of Shema. Perhaps its combination of Yaakov and Yisroel makes this very point that Rabi Elazar ben Azarya makes in this Halachah of Shema. The form of our prayers to G-d will be qualitatively different in the world to come ; peg iah will no longer be necessary.

23 Shabbat Shalom Rabbi Pollock Furthermore, the Gemara tells us that the Chachamim who say that even following the Geula Shleima we will continue to recite the third paragraph of Shema at night, agree that there will be a difference as the verses in Yirimayhu imply. They say (ibid): לא שתעקר יציאת מצרים ממקומה, אלא שתהא שעבוד מלכיות עיקר, ויציאת מצרים טפל לו. It is not that remembering the Exodus will be uprooted. Rather the servitude of the nations of the world before G-d in the time of the redemption will be the central focus of praise and remembering the Exodus will be secondary. And then, remarkably, the Chachamim add the following: כיוצא בו אתה אומר: )בראשית לה/י( ו י אמ ר ל ו א... ל 'קים ש מ ך י ע ק ב לא י ק ר א ש מ ך ע וד י ע ק ב כ י א ם י ש ר א ל י ה י ה ש מ ך ו י ק ר א א ת ש מ ו י ש ר א ל: לא שיעקר יעקב ממקומו, אלא ישראל עיקר ויעקב טפל לו: Similarly we find that you say, G-d said to him, Your name is Yaakov; your name will no longer be called Yaakov, but it will be Yisroel. Hashem called his name Yisroel. This means, say the Chachaim, It is not that the name Yaakov will be uprooted from its place, but the name Yisroel will be central and the name Yaakov will be secondary. The world will be qualitatively different in the era of the Geula Shleima. May G-d grant us the merit to see it in our days.