Rogatchover on building the teivah: is the mitzvah the maaseh or the totza'ah?

The Rogatchover asks what the geder of Hashem's mitzvah to make a teivah was.  Was it the עצם המעשׂה, the act of building the teivah, or was it the end result, the תוצאה, of having a teivah, which was crucial?

I would say mi'sevara that it depends on what the real reason for building the teivah was.  If the point was to have a place of refuge for Noach and family during the flood, then all that matters is the end result of having a safe haven.  If the point was to raise awareness of the impending flood and thereby arouse the people to do teshuvah, then process of building, which people would take note of, was crucial.  (Baruch she'kivanti, my son pointed out that the L. Rebbe makes this point in a sicha (vol 15).)

The Rogatchover in his unmatched genius brought a proof from the following gemara (Sukkah 52b):

״וַיַּרְאֵנִי ה׳ אַרְבָּעָה חָרָשִׁים״, מַאן נִינְהוּ אַרְבָּעָה חָרָשִׁים? אָמַר רַב חָנָא בַּר בִּיזְנָא אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן חֲסִידָא: מָשִׁיחַ בֶּן דָּוִד, וּמָשִׁיחַ בֶּן יוֹסֵף, וְאֵלִיָּהוּ, וְכֹהֵן צֶדֶק.

Why are these 4 people called craftsmen?  Rashi explains that Mashiach ben David and ben Yosef will build Beis haMikdash; Eliyahu built a bamah on Mt Carmel; Kohen Tzedek is Shem ben Noach who helped his father build the teivah.

Had Noach been commanded in the עצם המעשׂה of building the teivah, then how could he have allowed his son to help?  He was given the mitzvah, not his son, and there is no din of shlichus for a ben Noach!  It must be, says the Rogatchover, that all that matters was the תוצאה, but who did the building or how it was done was not important.

an experience that makes an impression

Rashi writes that the gathering of  וַיַּקְהֵל מֹשֶׁה אֶת⁠ כׇּל⁠ עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל took place למחרת יום הכפורים, כשירד מן ההר.  When that gathering finished, the Torah reports וַיֵּ֥צְא֛וּ כׇּל־עֲדַ֥ת בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מִלִּפְנֵ֥י מֹשֶֽׁה.  It should go without saying that when Moshe was done speaking everyone went home.  Why mention it?  (See this post where we discussed this.)

R' Avraham Shapira quotes Chasam Sofer that the point the Torah is trying to make is that in this case it wasn't just stam you went home, business as usual, like you come home from the grocery store or a day of work. In this case it was clear on the faces and in the behavior of the people that they had come מִלִּפְנֵ֥י מֹשֶֽׁה, they had just experienced something important, something that made an impression. 

So too when we come to למחרת יום הכפורים, the experience of Y"K should leave it mark, and there should be an impression left even as we depart from the kedushas ha'yom. 

tefilas neilah - kaparah of the tzibur

Rambam writes in hil teshuvah 1:4 that teshuvah alone is not enough to be mechapeir on chilul Hashem:

 במה דברים אמורים בשלא חילל את השם בשעה שעבר אבל המחלל את השם אע"פ שעשה תשובה והגיע יום הכפורים והוא עומד בתשובתו ובאו עליו יסורין אינו מתכפר לו כפרה גמורה עד שימות. 

Yet earlier in halacha 1:2 Rambam indicates that the שעיר המשתלח brings kaparah for everything, even the cheit of chilul Hashem.

שעיר המשתלח לפי שהוא כפרה על כל ישראל כהן גדול מתודה עליו על לשון כל ישראל שנאמר והתודה עליו את כל עונות בני ישראל. שעיר המשתלח מכפר על כל עבירות שבתורה הקלות והחמורות. בין שעבר בזדון בין שעבר בשגגה. בין שהודע לו בין שלא הודע לו הכל מתכפר בשעיר המשתלח. והוא שעשה תשובה

R' Avraham Shapira explained that the difference is that שעיר המשתלח is a kaparah for the community as a whole, as the Rambam writes, מתודה עליו על לשון כל ישראל.  Although an individual's personal teshuvah is not enough to forgive chilul Hashem, it can be forgiven as part of the kaparah extended to the community.

Similarly, Meshech Chochma at the end of parshas VaYelech writes that tefilas neilah also has that exceptional power to afford kaparah even for chilul Hashem:

והנה כל ימי תשובה שמלך יושב על כסא וצבא השמים עומדים עליו יכול להועיל רק על עבירות שאין בהם חלול השם שוקלין זכויות כנגד עבירות, אבל על חה״ש ע״ז אמרו אם יכופר לכם העון עד תמותון ב״י, כי אין יוהכ״פ מכפר (סוף יומא), ורק בעת החתימה שהשי״ת דן יחידי אז הוא שעת הכושר שהשי״ת יסלח מרוב טובו אחרי גודל הבכי והחרטה, כי אם הוא ימחול על חלול כבודו מי יאמר אליו, לכן בנעילה סדרו הפסוקים למה תמותו, השיבו וחיו כי לא תחפץ במות כו׳ וכיו״ב, כי הכל על עון חלול השי״ת   

This is because, explained R' Avraham, tefilas neilah, like the שעיר המשתלח, is the time of kaparah for the tzibur, not just for each of us as individuals.

This is the climax of the avodah of Y"K -- joining as a tzibur, receiving kaparah as a tzibur.  

What we cannot achieve as individuals, we can achieve as a klal.  

bracha on besamim on Y"K which falls on motzei shabbos; bracha on ner when a woman recites havdalah

There is a machlokes ha'poskim whether the bracha on besamim is said in havdalah when Y"K falls on Shabbos. The SA writes (624:3) writes that the bracha is omitted, as the purpose of besamim is to help us recover from the loss of our neshoma yesira, but on Y"K there is no neshama yseira since we can't eat or drink.  The Mordechai disagrees.  Taz quotes Maharashal who argues that there is no downside to being choshesh for the Mordechai and adding the bracha, as the bracha is a birchas ha'nehenin.  If you smell the spices and enjoy the fragrance, it's not a bracha levatala.  This is how the Mishna Berura paskens l'maaseh:

אבל רבים מהאחרונים חולקין ע"ז וסוברין דכשחל בשבת יש לברך על הבשמים ואין כאן חשש ברכה לבטלה כיון שנהנה. ומ"מ אין להורות לצבור כן ולמחות בידם במקום שנהגו בבהכ"נ שלא לברך על הבשמים רק לעצמו בביתו יכול לברך [פמ"ג].

Aside from the issue of bracha levatala, Taz raises a different concern.  If one is not obligated to say it, wouldn't adding the bracha on besamim constitute a hefsek between the bracha on the kos and the bracha of havdalah?  He draws an interesting analogy to tekiyas shofas to get out of this problem:

וויש לכאורה לדחות זה שכ' מאחר שנהנה כו' דמ"מ יש כאן הפסק בין ברכת בורא פרי הגפן לברכת המבדיל בבשמים אם אין הכרח להם מ"מ נראה דעדיף טפי לצאת ידי כל הדיעות מלחוש להפסק וראיה מדברי ת"ה סימן קמ"ב לענין קשר"ק שתוקעין בסדרים דבזה נפיק ידי כל הקולות דהיינו או קר"ק או קש"ק ולא חיישינן להפסיק אם קש"ק עיקר הוה התרועה הפסק ואם קר"ק עיקר הוה השברים הפסק דכיון דעכ"פ כבר יצא י"ח לא חיישינן להפסק  אע"ג דעיקר התקיעות הם על סדר הברכות הכי נמי  כיון דיוצא ממ"נ לא חיישינן להפסק:

I think the simplest solution to be yotzei both deyos here is that of the Chayei Adam (klal 145.  My son pointed out to me that R' Ovadya says the same in Chazon Ovadya.):

והרוצה לעשות מן המובחר לצאת דעת האומרים לברך גם על הבשמים כשחל בשבת נ"ל דלאחר שסיים ברכת המבדיל בין קדש לחול אז יברך על הבשמים ולא באמצע הבדלה

This Taz has ramifications not just when Y"K falls on Shabbos, but for other havdalah issues as well.  The Biur Halacha at the end of OC 296 is medayek from the MG"A that women are exempt from the birchas ha'ner when reciting havdalah on motzei Shabbos.  Had you asked me, I would have said based on this Taz that if they have no chiyuv recite the birchas ha'ner, they should not be allowed to recite the bracha, as it would constitute a hefsek.  This is in fact how R' Tukashinski paskens in his luach.  

The sefer Halichos Beisa (end of ch 15) disagrees.  He suggests that even according to the Biur Halacha, women may recite the bracha if they desire to do so.  The difference between this case and that of the Taz is that when it comes to a regular motzei Shabbos, the fact that women lack a chovas ha'gavra (odd to use that term here : ) to say the bracha does not change the fact that it is part of the takanah of what constitutes the normal seder of havdalah.  On Y"K which falls on Shabbos, however, since according to the SA since there is no neshoma yseira, the bracha of besamim is not part of the "cheftza" of the takanah of havdalah for that day.  

As proof to this argument he cites the PM"G that an aveil is exempt from reciting the bracha on besamim since he is too upset to have the enjoyment of a neshama yseira; however, the PM"G implies that if the aveil may recite the bracha if he chooses to do so.  Here too, the aveil may lack a chovas hagavra because of his circumstance, but the takana of havdalah on motzei Shabbos includes the bracha, and therefore there is no issur to say it.

Important to note that this issue is only with respect to a regular motzei Shabbos. The Halichos Beisa suggests that when Y"K falls on Shabbos even according to the M"B women are obligated in the birchas ha'ner, as the purpose of the ner on motzei Y"K is part of havdalah -- to distinguish between the ner that we were not allowed to use for 24 hours and ner that we now can use -- as opposed to on a regular motzei Shabbos where it is a shevach for the creation of candlelight.

five thoughts on this 10/7 anniversary

I am not sure why we are marking the date of 10/7 and not the Hebrew calendar date when the tragedy of Hamas' attack occurred (albeit a Yom Tov), but be that as it may, I have five very simple and perhaps obvious thoughts:

1) We have seen nisim v'niflaos over the past year, and at the same time suffered heartbreak.  One day we see the yad Hashem b'giluy, the next day it is shrouded in hester panim.  What the Divine plan is is incomprehensible, but one cannot help but feel that we stand at a moment in history that will shape Jewish destiny for years to come.

2) We have discovered who our true friends are, and they have both mourned and celebrated with us.  We have also discovered who our enemies dressed in sheep's clothing are, and they are many.

3) The debt owed to the soldiers of Tzahal is immense.  They and their families have given everything.  

4) If you are a Jew and do not realize that history is now calling you to action -- to do something, whether big or small, for our nation -- then I fear רוח והצלה יעמוד ליהודים ממקום אחר ואת ובית אביך תאבדו.  

5) Finally, we should be confident in the certainty that no matter how long it takes and what obstacles must be overcome, ultimately רוח והצלה יעמוד ליהודים, and I mean specifically Eretz Yisrael.  We have no future in galus.  It is not enough to think of shivas Tzion as an abstract dream, but we must struggle to make it a reality, if not for ourselves, then for our children or grandchildren. 

judgment of the individual and judgment of the tzibur

There is a din that before R"H a person has to bathe and take a haircut before Y"T because it's a day of celebration, as we are confident that we will emerge triumphant from standing before Hashem and being judged.  

Meforshim ask: The gemara writes that we do not recite hallel on R"H because it would be inappropriate when the sifrei chaim and sifrei meisim are open and our fate hangs in the balance to be celebrating.  If we are so confident of a positive outcome, why not celebrate?   

To tell you the truth, I am not so bothered by this question.  It seems to me that there is a difference between showing confidence and being happy.  A lawyer can be confident going to trial, but that doesn't mean he is happy to have to face litigation.  We are confident that Hashem will judge us fairly and get us to a positive outcome, but that doesn't mean we should be in a celebratory mood.  The mood is still solemn, as becoming the seriousness of being judged.  Hallel is therefore out of place.

The Chochmas Shlomo on the SA as well as the Netziv at the end of Emor in the Harchev Davar offer a different answer.  On R"H, we actually face two different judgments.  Each and every one of us is individually judged as to what kind of year we will have, but in addition, Klal Yisrael as a whole isjudged.  Will our enemies have the upper hand, or will we as a people thrive and grow this upcoming year?

The Rama (OC 583) quotes the well known minhag of eating apple dipped in honey.  Biur haGR"A explains:

תפוח. ע"ש ופריו מתוק לחכי וכמ"ש כריח שדה ומתרגמינן חקל תפוחים והיה בר"ה כידוע:

It was on R"H that Yaakov went in and got the brachos from Yitzchak (other Midrashim place the date as Pesach), usurping Eisav and making sure we would have the bechora.  Chazal (Taanis 29) comment on the pasuk וַיֹּאמֶר רְאֵה רֵיחַ בְּנִי כְּרֵיחַ שָׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר בֵּרְכוֹ ה׳ that Yaakov smelled like an apple orchard, אמר רב יהודה משמי' דרב, כריח שדה של תפוחים.  (See Torah Temima on that pasuk who notes that although the GR"A refers to the Targum as the source for it being an apple field, it is not found in the Targum, and GR"A probably meant this derasha).

This was not just a personal victory for Yaakov over his brother, but this is maaseh avos siman la'banim, and it resonates on a national scale.  Every year the conflict between Yaakov and Eisav plays itself out on R"H.  Every year we and the umos ha'olam face off in judgment, each one of us trying to earn the bracha that will put us on on top.  Every year we dip the apple in the honey, assured that we will be the ones to emerge with bracha, just as our forefather Yaakov did.

The gemara writes that R' Abahu in Keisari made a takanah to blow all the different kolos: tekiya-teru'ah-tekiya, tekiya-shevarim-tekiya, and tekiya-sh"t-tekiya.  The fact that this takanah was made in Keisari is not just a trivial detail, says R' Chaim Feinstein, but perhaps is linked to the essence of what the day is about.  The gemara elsewhere (Meg 6a) tells us:

קסרי וירושלים אם יאמר לך אדם חרבו שתיהן אל תאמן ישבו שתיהן אל תאמן חרבה קסרי וישבה ירושלים חרבה ירושלים וישבה קסרי תאמן שנאמר אמלאה החרבה אם מליאה זו חרבה זו אם מליאה זו חרבה זו רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר מהכא ולאום מלאום יאמץ

Keisari is the stronghold of Eisav, while Yerushalayim is our stronghold.  When one is ascendant, the other must fall.  Rosh haShana is a replay of the age old conflict between Eisav and Yaakov, between Keisari and Yerushalayim, and so it is davka there that R' Abahu instituted his takana of tekiyos, so as to weaken Eisav.

(Parenthetically, the Rishonim quote BH"G that there was no real doubt that mi'doraysa one is yotzei with any of the combinations of kolos.  The R' Abahu made his takanah was to create a unified minhag in Klal Yisrael.  You don't have a similar takana, for example, that all of klal yisrael should do nanau'im the same way.  Perhaps the reason why is because shofar is linked to this idea of judgment on the tzibur, and so factionalism, having different groups with different practices, would be antithetical to the spirit of the day.)

The poskim write based on Midrashim that the reason we take the lulav and esrog after Yom Kippur is because when an army would emerge victorious from battle they would have a parade and wave their standards and their arms in the air.  The lulav is our standard, and we hold in high and wave it around to show that we alone have emerged victorious from the conflict with Eisav.  

The mitzvah to bathe and get a haircut, assured that we will have a good outcome on the yom ha'din, is viz a viz the judgment that occurs on a national level.  Yaakov every year triumphs over Eisav and remains Hashem's chosen one. (I am still a bit perplexed.  So why not say hallel in commemoration of the national victory over Eisav?)  As for each one of us individually, what will happen remains to be determined.  

That being given, I think one way we can assure ourselves of a positive outcome is to throw our lot in with that of the nation, the tzibur, the klal.  This, I think, is what the Isha haShunamit (Melachim 2 4:13) meant when she told Elisha that she does not need any reward because וַתֹּאמֶר בְּתוֹךְ עַמִּי אָנֹכִי יֹשָׁבֶת  If instead of focusing on our individual needs and our individual lot we focus on our simply being members of the klal, our judgment will tie in with that of the klal.