Wednesday, August 28, 2019

Serving Hashem

The possuk (13:5) says אַחֲרֵ֨י י״י֧ אֱלֹקיכם תֵּלֵ֖כוּ וְאֹת֣וֹ תִירָ֑אוּ וְאֶת־מִצְוֺתָ֤יו תִּשְׁמֹ֙רוּ֙ וּבְקֹל֣וֹ תִשְׁמָ֔עוּ וְאֹת֥וֹ תַעֲבֹ֖דוּ וּב֥וֹ תִדְבָּקֽוּן.  What does it mean וְאֹת֥וֹ תַעֲבֹ֖דוּ? The Sifri says that it means learning Torah and serving Him via the mikdash.  (There are similar Sifri in Ve’eschanan on verse 6: 13, and in Akev chapter 11 verses 13 and 22.)  We see from the Sifri that learning Torah is called the service of Hashem.  The Netziv however, understands the Sifri is only a reference to the study of the laws of the korbanot for then the learning counts in place of offering sacrifices which would be avodah.  However, it seems apparent from the Ramban (that will be cited shortly) that this is not the case, rather it’s a perspective on all Torah learning.

The meaning of mikdash according to the Rambam in his count of the mitzvot #5 refers to prayer which ideally should take place in the mikdash.  The Ramban disagrees (hasagos on Sefer Hamitzvot and in Va’eschanan 6:13) and understands it refers to coming to the mikdash to bow and sing to Hashem. Therefore, the Ramban rejects the counting of prayer as a mitzvah rather its merely an opportunity for man to beseech God.   We see the Ramban understands the Sifri is reflecting different modes of serving Hashem either via Torah learning or coming close to Hashem via service in the mikdash.  This would seem to be a Chassidic approach that all these ideas come under the rubric of serving Hashem

[The Ramban ends of his comment on the possuk says that  one should be like a slave constantly ready to do the bidding of his master and therefore the work of his master is his main work.  Furthermore, one should reach the level were all he does is for the sake of Hashem even what he does for his own body as the possuk (Tehillim 146:2) says “ahallelah Hashem bechayai.”  How does the Ramban see in that possuk in Tehillim that all of one’s actions should be for the sake of Hashem, the possuk seems to be saying that one should thank Hashem for the life that he has been given?  Rav Yeruchem Levovitz (journal Hatevuna from year 5707) explains that we see from the Ramban that the peshat in the possuk isn’t that one should thank Hashem for the life he has, rather the point of one’s life is to thank Hashem.  The whole point of living is to give thanks to Hashem; therefore, it follows that all one’s actions should be for this purpose, for the sake of Hashem.]

The halacha is that Rashbi and his colleagues are except from prayer (Shulchan Aruch 106:2.)  Why is it different than any other mitzvah that they must fulfill?  Based upon the Sifri we can understand for Torah and Tefillah are really two sides of the same coin, that is service of Hashem.  Since Rashbi served via learning he didn’t need to pray.

1 comment:

  1. I understand your explanation of rashbi's petur from krias shema from a philosophical perspective, but how halachically do we give tefilah a different status. presumably this answer will be different depending on the opinion of the rambam who holds tefillah is deoraisa every day and the ramban who says only for an ace tzarah. Seemingly from rashi shabbos 11a ( i think) the distinction is that tefillah is dirabbanan. this would fit nicely with the ramban. However the rambam cannot say so as explained above but also because he holds that one must stop for mitzvos dirabbanan as well as can be proven from the fact that he requires rashbi to stop for shema and its accompanying brachos. If it were just for the fact that the rambam requires stopping for dirabbanans, one could use your philosophical sevara to explain why chazal created a special petur from tefillah. However the rambam holds tefillah is deoraisa once a day. See mishna brura 106:7. i don't get it. see also his explanation why tefillah is different but in a way that treats tefillah as kind of a lesser mitzvah. I would have thought this was a more misnagdish approach except that I vaguely recall that the shulchan aruch harav says a similar sevara

    ReplyDelete