וָאֶתְחַנַּ֖ן אֶל־יְהוָ֑ה בָּעֵ֥ת הַהִ֖וא לֵאמֹֽר׃
J’implorai l’Éternel à cette époque, en disant:
Akeidat Yitzchak
In the Midrash in our opening paragraph, Rabbi Akiva does not really offer any novel explanation of his conduct when he was faced with the evidence of our national shame and degradation. He merely expresses in his attitude the hope and confidence our prophets tried to instill in us at the time when they themselves were surrounded by ruin and desolation. In the first story the Midrash deals with our hopes for physical restoration, whereas in the second story the emphasis is on the spiritual rejuvenation in store for our people.
Akeidat Yitzchak
(1) On the two previous occasions when the Torah deals with the "city of refuge" legislation, the point had been to teach us that the law treats unintentional crime differently from intentional crime; now the message is that since all other pieces of legislation dealing with law giving and law enforcement have been revealed, the practical observance of the city of refuge legislation can no longer be delayed. From now on, everyone who trespasses, is considered an intentional sinner. (since the law is known) Therefore the machinery to protect the person who is clearly an unintentional sinner has to be put in operation. This is why on this occasion we read about such details as erecting signposts pointing to the nearest "city of refuge." (Makkot 10) (2) The reason the Torah describes death as having occurred in a forest etc., is to teach that when it is evident through the circumstances where it occurred, that there could not have been criminal intent, then, even if there had been a feud between the two parties involved, the killer is believed, and he may take refuge in the city set aside for that purpose. Only, if in addition to the "hatred" between the two parties, there is evidence of an ambush, does the city of refuge not protect such a killer. In such an event, the killer is subject to retribution by human hands despite the absence of witnesses. The word im, in 19,8, refers back to the beginning of the subject matter in verse two. Once the West Bank would be conquered, the three cities Moses had designated on the East Bank would become operative. "You will add three more such cities on the West Bank as soon as practicable."
Olat Reiyah
R. Simlai expounded: One should always order the praises of the Holy One, blessed be He, and only afterwards pray. From where do we learn this? From Moshe; as it is written ”And I pleaded with the Lord at that time…” and it continues, “O Lord God, you have begun to show your servant your greatness and your strong hand; for what god is there in heaven and earth who can do according to your works and according to your mighty acts…” and afterwards is written, “Let me go over, I pray, and see the good land... (Devarim 3:23-25)” [Berachot 32a]39It is noteworthy that the gemara choses to learn this lesson from Moshe’s prayer in V’etchanan, where it is made clear once and for all that his desire to enter the land will remain unfulfilled. Why learn from Moshe’s ‘failed prayer’ and not his ‘successful ones’ like his intervention on behalf of Am Yisrael after the Golden Calf and Miriam after her slander? This question is what drives Rav Kook to insist that Moshe’s prayer was not premised on the notion that G–d would change. The coming sections are going to rework our understanding of the traditional three part structure which underlies prayer – praise, request, and thanksgiving. In this and the following section, R’ Kook is teaching us that the purpose of praise is not to “butter up the boss” before we make our request, but rather to disabuse us of the notion that G–d’s will can change by exposing us to His absolute grandeur. For his re-understanding of request see section 2:5. For a re-working of thanksgiving see Olat Reiyah, Modeh Ani 1.
Prayer must be clean of any notion of altering will40If we relate to the world as an expression of G–d’s will in a simple sense, then there is a fundamental problem with prayer as request. If G–d is perfect and therefor His will immutable, then what is the point of prayer? Not only is it arrogant to think I know better than G–d, it is futile to try and change Him. And yet we see that when Avraham Avinu was confronted with the immanent destruction of Sedom, he turns to G–d and says “Far be it from You to do such a thing…shall the Judge of all the earth not do justice?!” (Bereshit 18:25) Not only that, it seems from the verses which introduce the interaction between Avraham and G–d, that G–d expected such a response from Avraham. Avraham was not just arguing with G–d (the first instance we have of such a stance in the Torah and perhaps the reason that G–d felt the need to tell him of Sedom’s doom in the first place) he was saying – G–d, I know you better than that. You don’t want the innocent to die with the wicked. He is demanding not that his own will be done, but rather that G–d’s deepest will be manifest in creation. This is one way of understanding the requests we make of G–d – I know You don’t want sick mothers, or hungry children, or war, or exile, so please manifest your true will. This posture in prayer rejects the notion that the world as it is represents the full manifestation of G–d’s will and demands that He display His deeper will. Thus Rav Kook can say that we simultaneously ask for change while knowing that G–d does not change. As he says, we change and the world changes with us. We feel the lack in the world and allow it to change us through our desire that it be made whole. And when we lift up all the changes in ourselves and the world to Him, we become a channel for the manifestation of His higher will. And then the world changes. or affecting response in G–d’s decree, a false conception in relation to Divinity which brings about the destruction of the ways of human perfection41Perfection (שלמות) does not exist in this world of process, except in so far as one is always in the process of perfecting oneself ((השתלמות. This appears to be the aspect of G–dly perfection which this world expresses. See the gemara Bereachot 64a with the Maharsha. In contrast, the actual value of prayer and the surety of its impact, within the realm of its terms, even aside from the attainment of that which is sought and the elevation and clarification of the soul through prayer, is a great cornerstone in the completion of humanity. Therefore, all who pray must understand that prayer is a wondrous statute42The word חק is central to this piece. Traditionally the chukkim are understood as the laws given by G–d whose rationale lies beyond the comprehension of man, see Rambam, Hilchot Me’ilah 8:8 for a moving articulation of this definition. In biblical Hebrew it can also mean the fixed portion one receives from the one who sustains you (see Bereshit 47:22). In this piece it is important to see that Rav Kook is embracing the incomprehensible paradox of G–d’s grace in giving us the power of prayer, together with the impossibility of prayer changing anything within the Divine will. And that this is the lot we’ve been given from on high. which the Holy One, blessed be He, engraved43חקק This can mean legislated, or engraved. There is an aspect of receiving law comes from adding a layer to existence, like ink on paper. This presumes that the person stays as they were and receives something new. There is another aspect of receiving which is a removal of part of the self – like the removal of stone in order to communicate meaning through engraving. One might think that the first is liberating and the second constraining, but see Pirke Avot 6:2 about the Tablets we received at Sinai. in His world for the completion of His works in all manners of perfection, and in particular to accomplish of their moral completion which grows out of it. Prayer does not lie within the bounds of those things embedded in His decrees, G–d forbid (See Hilchot Teshuva 5:1-2) . It is therefore fitting that every prayer be preceded by the telling of praise, to teach that it is right to give great praise over the fixing of the statute of prayer not according to that which is understandable, so to speak, as the nature of His divinity44The vision of prayer laid out in this piece fights against any mechanistic notion of action and reaction, but rather embraces the wondrous paradox of intimate relationship with the Infinite.. And the proof from Moshe is very important. He, in his great understanding, would certainly never come to think that prayer could bring about any change in will or responsiveness in the decree of G–d. Nevertheless, his prayer was preceded by abundant praise, in order to reveal the truth of the proper consciousness fit to be impressed on the heart through prayer. All the more so we, ‘unsteady man,’ (See Tehillim 116:11) who might go astray after false ideas, should begin with that which elevates the soul and sets it on right conceptions.
Prayer must be clean of any notion of altering will40If we relate to the world as an expression of G–d’s will in a simple sense, then there is a fundamental problem with prayer as request. If G–d is perfect and therefor His will immutable, then what is the point of prayer? Not only is it arrogant to think I know better than G–d, it is futile to try and change Him. And yet we see that when Avraham Avinu was confronted with the immanent destruction of Sedom, he turns to G–d and says “Far be it from You to do such a thing…shall the Judge of all the earth not do justice?!” (Bereshit 18:25) Not only that, it seems from the verses which introduce the interaction between Avraham and G–d, that G–d expected such a response from Avraham. Avraham was not just arguing with G–d (the first instance we have of such a stance in the Torah and perhaps the reason that G–d felt the need to tell him of Sedom’s doom in the first place) he was saying – G–d, I know you better than that. You don’t want the innocent to die with the wicked. He is demanding not that his own will be done, but rather that G–d’s deepest will be manifest in creation. This is one way of understanding the requests we make of G–d – I know You don’t want sick mothers, or hungry children, or war, or exile, so please manifest your true will. This posture in prayer rejects the notion that the world as it is represents the full manifestation of G–d’s will and demands that He display His deeper will. Thus Rav Kook can say that we simultaneously ask for change while knowing that G–d does not change. As he says, we change and the world changes with us. We feel the lack in the world and allow it to change us through our desire that it be made whole. And when we lift up all the changes in ourselves and the world to Him, we become a channel for the manifestation of His higher will. And then the world changes. or affecting response in G–d’s decree, a false conception in relation to Divinity which brings about the destruction of the ways of human perfection41Perfection (שלמות) does not exist in this world of process, except in so far as one is always in the process of perfecting oneself ((השתלמות. This appears to be the aspect of G–dly perfection which this world expresses. See the gemara Bereachot 64a with the Maharsha. In contrast, the actual value of prayer and the surety of its impact, within the realm of its terms, even aside from the attainment of that which is sought and the elevation and clarification of the soul through prayer, is a great cornerstone in the completion of humanity. Therefore, all who pray must understand that prayer is a wondrous statute42The word חק is central to this piece. Traditionally the chukkim are understood as the laws given by G–d whose rationale lies beyond the comprehension of man, see Rambam, Hilchot Me’ilah 8:8 for a moving articulation of this definition. In biblical Hebrew it can also mean the fixed portion one receives from the one who sustains you (see Bereshit 47:22). In this piece it is important to see that Rav Kook is embracing the incomprehensible paradox of G–d’s grace in giving us the power of prayer, together with the impossibility of prayer changing anything within the Divine will. And that this is the lot we’ve been given from on high. which the Holy One, blessed be He, engraved43חקק This can mean legislated, or engraved. There is an aspect of receiving law comes from adding a layer to existence, like ink on paper. This presumes that the person stays as they were and receives something new. There is another aspect of receiving which is a removal of part of the self – like the removal of stone in order to communicate meaning through engraving. One might think that the first is liberating and the second constraining, but see Pirke Avot 6:2 about the Tablets we received at Sinai. in His world for the completion of His works in all manners of perfection, and in particular to accomplish of their moral completion which grows out of it. Prayer does not lie within the bounds of those things embedded in His decrees, G–d forbid (See Hilchot Teshuva 5:1-2) . It is therefore fitting that every prayer be preceded by the telling of praise, to teach that it is right to give great praise over the fixing of the statute of prayer not according to that which is understandable, so to speak, as the nature of His divinity44The vision of prayer laid out in this piece fights against any mechanistic notion of action and reaction, but rather embraces the wondrous paradox of intimate relationship with the Infinite.. And the proof from Moshe is very important. He, in his great understanding, would certainly never come to think that prayer could bring about any change in will or responsiveness in the decree of G–d. Nevertheless, his prayer was preceded by abundant praise, in order to reveal the truth of the proper consciousness fit to be impressed on the heart through prayer. All the more so we, ‘unsteady man,’ (See Tehillim 116:11) who might go astray after false ideas, should begin with that which elevates the soul and sets it on right conceptions.