[Avodah] Retzei

[Michael Kopinsky]

On 3/16/07, Samuel Svarc <ssvarc at yeshivanet.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> >From: Elliott Shevin <eshevin at hotmail.com>
> >Subject: [Avodah] Retzei
> >
> >
> >I've usually prayed from siddurim in which the brocha "retzei" is
> >punctuated, "... vehashaiv et avodah lidvir betacha (period). Ve-ishei
> >Yisrael utefilatam be-ahava tikabel...."
> >
> >In English, this becomes "... and return the service to the Holy of
> >Holies of your house. And receive with love the fire-offerings of Israel
> >and their prayers...."
> >
> >I've only recently noticed that many siddurim punctuate it, "...
> >vehashaiv et avodah lidvir betacha (comma) ve-ishei Yisrael (period).
> >Utefilatam be-ahava tikabel...."
> >
> >Or in English, "... and return the service to the Holy of Holies of your
> >house, and the fire-offerings of Israel. And receive with love their
> >prayers...."
> >I find the latter awkward; "return the service to... and the fire-
> >offerings?"
> 
> 
> The way my father explained it to me is the following: If one will say,
> "Ve-ishei
> Yisrael utefilatam be-ahava tikabel..." "And receive with love the
> fire-offerings of Israel
> and their prayers....", he has just said something incomprehensible. There
> are no fire-offerings these days (unfortunately). The most logical construct
> is, "vehashaiv et avodah lidvir betacha
> ve-ishei Yisrael" "and return the service and the fire-offerings of Israel
> to the Holy of Holies of your house".
> 
> KT and GS,
> MSS

Here is how I understand this sentence:

We are davening that HQBH will "Retzei b'amcha yisrael uvisfilasam", and
one day he will "hasheiv es ha'avodah lidvir beisecha," and THEN "v'ishei
yisrael us'filasam b'ahava s'kabeil b'ratzon." IOW, this is a
chronological progression - first, being pleased by the Jews/hearing our
tefillos, then Binyan BHMK, and then hearing our improved/amplified
tefillos forever. After all, what are our tefillos for Binyan BHMK, if not
a bakasha for an opportunity for kirvas Hashem?  And what is kabalas ishim
utefilos if not kirvas HKBH?

Why do none of the meforshim on siddur say this? (Caveat- I haven't looked
all the meforshim on this issue, but am being someich on (I think)  
Artscroll's commentary which mentions only the two pshatim that RES
brought.)  This pshat seems to me to fit the text perfectly (unlike the
second punctuation scheme above), and explain away RMSS's objection to the
first punctuation scheme.

Michael