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):

קום וילן גע במ נה: ויפ ר בע וילך ח ר ש א ני ויצא יעקב מב אב א השמש ויקח מ ם כי ב ש

קום ההוא: כב במ יו ויש ראשת קום וישם מ המ

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:

קום גע במ ויפ

He happened to the place.

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:

לא הזכיר הכתוב באיזה מקום אלא במקום הנזכר במקום אחר, הוא -ויפגע במקום

( וירא את המקום מרחוק:1ד/כבבראשית הר המוריה שנאמר בו )

1 The entire verse reads:

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):

אה: הר ה' יר ר היום ב אה אשר יאמ קום ההוא ה' יר ם המ ם ש ה ר א אב ר ויק

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 הר הבית, the Temple Mount and we learn that that

is the location to which Yaakov arrived2.

חק: ר קום מ א את המ יניו ויר ם את ע ה ר א אב לישי ויש ביום הש

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) ית א ין זה כי אם ב קום הזה א א המ א ויאמר מה נור ים:...ל'קוייר מ ים וזה שער הש

Rashi continues:

( ופגע בדבשת. 4יא/( ופגע ביריחו, )שם יט3ז/)יהושע ט כמו -ויפגע

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): א א ר ראשנה:ויק עיר ל ם ה ם לוז ש ל ואול ית א קום ההוא ב ם המ ת ש

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: ן: ד גע ביריחו ויצא היר ה ופ ת רות ונער ה עט וירד מינוח

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: ם: נע ני יק גע אל הנחל אשר על פ שת ופ דב גע ב ה ופ על ה ומר ם לימ ה גבול ל וע

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.

עון ויהרג את זבח ם גד תו ויק נו כי כאיש גבור גע ב ה ופ מנע קום את ויאמר זבח וצל

מנע ויקח יהם:ואת צל י גמל צואר את השהרנים אשר ב

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):

עו כי וד וכי יד ם עם ד מיתו כהני ה' כי גם יד יו סבו וה ל בים ע צים הנצ ר ויאמר המלך ל

ח הוא ולא גלו את לח אתאזני ולא אבו עב בר י המלך לש כהני ה': ד גע ב ם לפ יד

גע הוא בכהנים ויאמר המלך אדמי ויפ ג ה גע בכהנים ויסב דוא ה ופ ג סב את דוא ל

ד: פוד ב א א ה איש נש מנים וחמש וימת ביום ההוא ש

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:

( ואל תפגע בי, ולמדנו שתקן תפלת 5טז/ורבותינו פירשו לשון תפלה כמו )ירמיה ז

רבית. ע

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:

ינני ש גע בי כי א ה ואל תפ פל ם רנה ות א בעד ם הזה ואל תש ע עד ה ל ב פל ה אל תת ךואת ע את :מ

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.

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 86):

רון עפ עוני ופגעו לי ב מ ני ש פ תי מל בר את מ כם לק ש אמר אם יש את נפ ם ל ר את דב וי

בן צחר:

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 prayer7.

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.

7 Further on we will discuss the meaning of this ‘prayer’ which was connoted by ויפגע.

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

אל המקום אשר עמד שם, ואין עמידה וישכם אברהם בבקר)בראשית יט/כז(שנאמר

-ויעמד פינחס ויפלל; יצחק תקן תפלת מנחה ( 8)תהילים קו/לאלא תפלה, שנאמר

ויצא יצחק לשוח בשדה לפנות ערב, ואין שיחה אלא תפלה, ( 9)שם כד/סגשנאמר

יעטף ולפני ה' ישפך שיחו, יעקב תקן תפלת -תפלה לעני כי )תהילים קב/א( שנאמר

נאמר ויפגע במקום וילן שם, ואין פגיעה אלא תפלה, שנאמר ואתה אל ש -ערבית

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:

ה: צר המגפ ע ל ות פל ס וי ויעמד פינח

Pinchos stood and he prayed and the plague stopped.

9 The entire verse reads:

א יניו ויר א ע רב ויש נות ע דה לפ שוח בש ק ל איםויצא יצח :והנה גמלים ב

Yitzchak went out to meditate towards evening and he raised his eyes and say

and behold camels were coming.

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:

:תפלת הערב אין לה קבע

The evening prayer has no fixed time.

The B’raisa explains:

שהרי אברים ופדרים שלא נתעכלו -ומפני מה אמרו תפלת הערב אין לה קבע

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 implication10? 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.

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): ף תחנה וכן תקנו תפלה אחר תפלת מנחה סמוך לשקיעת החמה ביום התענית בלבד כדי להוסי

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.

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 HaMikdosh12?

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.

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:

ושע בן חנניה: כשהיינו שמחים שמחת בית השואבה לא ראינו תניא, אמר רבי יה

לקרבן -לתפלה, משם -תמיד של שחר, משם -שינה בעינינו. כיצד? שעה ראשונה

לאכילה ושתיה, משם -לבית המדרש, משם -לתפלת המוספין, משם -מוסף, משם

לשמחת בית -לתפלת המנחה, משם לתמיד של בין הערבים, מכאן ואילך -

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: יכם, מפי השמועה 'קל...ועבדתם את ה' א)שמות כג/כה( מצות עשה להתפלל בכל יום שנאמר ולעבדו בכל לבבכם אמרו חכמים אי זו היא )דברים יא/יג( למדו שעבודה זו היא תפלה שנאמר

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.

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.

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

Director14 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 night15.

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.

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):

כשו ואת הנפש ם אשר ר כוש תו ואת לוט בן אחיו ואת כל ר רי אש ם את ש ר ויקח אב

צה כנען ויבאו לכת אר ן ויצאו ל ר ח שו ב צה כנען: אשר ע אר

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:

יר את האנשים, ושרה שהכניסן תחת כנפי השכינה, אברהם מגי -אשר עשו בחרן

…מגיירת הנשים

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 inner-

self 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.

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):

ך: א את קלו ויב ל ויש ח ר וישק יעקב ל

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

של יצחק משך ידו. אמר לו מה אעשה לציווי של והשיגו, ולפי שגדל אליפז בחיקו

אבא, אמר לו יעקב טול מה שבידי, והעני חשוב כמת:

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:

אביה ויגד ץ ותגד ל ר ה הוא ות ק ל כי אחי אביה הוא וכי בן רב ח ר :יעקב ל

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 Torah16. Didn’t

Avraham Ovinu say to Lot (B’reishis Perek 13/Posuk 8):

16 Rashi explains that point here.

ין ינך וב יני וב ה ב ריב הי מ ם אל לוט אל נא ת ר ין רעיך כי אנשים אחים ויאמר אב רעי וב

נו: אנח

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:

א גם אני אחיו ברמאות, ואם אדם ומדרשו אם לרמאות הוא ב -כי אחי אביה הוא

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:

ברוך אתה ה' גאל ישראל.

Blessed are You, Hashem, He Who has redeemed Israel.

However, in Tefilas Arvis this blessing is introduced with a verse from Sefer

Yirmiyahu (Perek 31/Posuk 10):

ד זק ממנו:כי פ ה ה' את יעקב וגאלו מיד ח

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?

But the fact is that not only is there an opinion in Chazal that Tefilas Arvis is

optional17 but, such is the Halachah as Aruch Hashulchan elaborates in Siman 23518.

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:

זק ה ה' את יעקב וגאלו מיד ח ד ממנו:כי פ

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): קומך: ך וב כב ש ך בדרך וב לכת יתך וב ב ך ב ת שב ם ב ת ב ניך ודבר ב ם ל ושננת

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.

ברוך אתה ה' גאל ישראל

Blessed are You, Hashem, He Who has redeemed Israel

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:

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 well19. 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 history20 are the legacy of our third forefather

who was known as Yaakov21.

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: ' גאל ישראל.ברוך אתה ה

We bless G-d Who redeemed Israel.

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.

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 days22.

22 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

למען תזכר את יום )דברים טז/יג( שתאמר יציאת מצרים בלילות עד שדרשה בן זומא. שנאמר: יך הלילות; וחכמים אומרים: ימי חי -הימים, כל ימי חייך -צאתך מארץ מצרים כל ימי חייך. ימי חייך

להביא לימות המשיח. -העולם הזה, כל -

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: יו מצות לחם ל עת ימים תאכל ע ץ שב מ יו ח ל רים לא תאכל ע ארץ מצ זון יצאת מ חפ עני כי ב

י חייך: רים כל ימ ארץ מצ ך מ מען תזכר את יום צאת ל

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.

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: הגת בלילה קוראין אותה בלילה מפני שיש בה זכרון יציאת מצרים אף על פי שאין מצות ציצית נו

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):

ים: כי ר ארץ מצ ל מ א ר ני יש ה את ב ל רו עוד חי ה' אשר הע אים נאם ה' ולא יאמ כן הנה ימים ב אם לתים צות אשר הדח אר פונה ומכל ה ארץ צ ל מ א ר ית יש ביא את זרע ב ה ואשר ה ל ם חי ה' אשר הע ש

ם: ת מ בו על אד ויש

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.

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:

ך עוד יעקב כי 'קל...ויאמר לו א )בראשית לה/י( כיוצא בו אתה אומר: א שמ ר ך יעקב לא יק ים שמ

ל: אם א ר מו יש א את ש ר מך ויק יה ש ל יה א ר ר ויעקב לא שיעקר יעקב ממקומו, אלא ישראל עיק יש :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.