[Avodah] Davening for Others

[Micha Berger]

Due to the relative quiet lately, I'm forwarding these two posts from
R' Chaim Brown that intrigued me to consciously try to generate some
converation.

http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/

:-)BBii!
-Micha

Thursday, July 21, 2011
tefilah and the war with Midyan

1. When Moshe Rabeinu criticizes those who fought against Midyan for
leaving alive the women, he poses his criticism as a question to them -
"Ha'chiyisem kol nekeivah?" To be fair, I could punctuate that sentence
a little differently and end it with a !? or a ?! instead of a plain ?,
but the point is that Moshe could have omitted the ? entirely and used
just a ! How about something like this - "Hamisu kol nekeivah!"

I had a moment before ma'ariv after the ta'anis and saw a beautiful vort
in the Divrei Chaim (the real one). We know that the difference between
teshuvah m'yirah and teshuvah m'ahava is the latter turns aveiros into
zechuyos while the former does not. Moshe Rabeinu threw in the ? because
ain hachi nami, through teshuvah m'ahavah the very same women that were
the source of aveirah could have been spared. Rather than be a source of
cheit or a reminder of cheit, they would have been a source of zechuyos.

2. On the topic of the war against Midyan, [37]see Havolim who writes
about the need to couple military might with tefilah. Contemporary gedolim
have encouraged each person to adopt an individual soldier to daven for. I
want to share with an insight of the Maor vaShemesh on the same theme.

After the battle and Moshe's collection of a percentage of the spoils
both from those who fought and those who stayed behind and shared in
the booty, the leaders of Bnei Yisrael came to Moshe and wanted to
contribute additional spoils of the war to the Mishkan. Ramban quotes
the Midrash that the purpose of this gift was as an act of contrition,
to obtain kapparah. Although there were no overt sins committed in the
war, the leaders were concerned for hirhurei aveirah, lest the people
sinned in thought even if not in deed.

Why did the leaders wait until after Moshe collected the "tax" from the
spoils? If indeed they were worried lest they had sinned, should they
not have stepped forward immediately after the battle finished?

I don't want to get involved in the nitty-gritty of his explanation
(the Maor vaShemesh loves remazim and gematriyos, topics that don't lend
themselves well to blog posts/translation), but the general idea of the
Maor vaShemesh is that the collection of a portion of the spoils as a
"tax" for the kohanim was a hint to the people that they did not deserve
to fully enjoy the spoils of war. There was something slightly off in
their avodas Hashem during the war, and hence something slight they had
to forfeit from the booty. Once the people realized the significance of
their having to surrender a portion of their booty, the leaders stepped
forward to make amends in a sincere way and offered an additional gift.

But why did those who stayed behind in the camp have to surrender a
portion of their booty as a "tax"? They were not exposed to the heat of
battle or the women in the camp of Midyan -- surely they were not guilty
of any wrongdoing either in deed or even in thought?!

The answer is that those who stayed behind had an important job to
fulfill -- it was their responsibility to daven for those who went to
fight on the front lines. If those in battle were guilty of wrongdoing,
even hirhurei aveirah, it meant that those who stayed behind were guilty
as well of not properly fulfilling their mission of davening to protect
the troops. An amazing idea -- I can share responsibility for anothers'
wrongdoing because I didn't daven hard enough for him!

How another person's tefilos can effect my ruchniyus (what about my
bechirah?) is an interesting philosophical question, but sof kol sof
that's how things work. The lesson here is that the spiritual ailments
of others are our ailments as well, for it is our Torah and our tefilos
that are falling short in serving as a shield to protect our community
from spiritual harm. You don't need to wait for a war either to daven
for another Jew.

   Anonymous great unknown said...
          Kohen Gadol is responsible for Golim l'Arei Miklat because he
          didn't doven well enough.

          There is also R' Meir's tefilla - with a little prompting from
          Brurya - that led to the lowlifes in his shchuna doing tshuva.
          Once again going back to my kiruv days, I was told by an adam
          chashuv in Bnei Brak that it would be appropriate for me to
          doven for my talmidim.

          10:33 PM

   Anonymous Anonymous said...
          as to the second paragraph:

          -does teshuvah m'ahavah work on the level of klal, or only
           of yachid?

          -weren't the dead by plague the kapparah for the national sin
           (reconciling Hashem completely with the survivors)?

          -with those 24,000 dead (& dead too to teshuvah), the living
           can acquire zechuyos??!

          even if teshuvah m'ahavah works 1) for the klal, 2) after
          devastating kapparah, & 3) beside the blood of fellow Jews
          no guiltier than they, wouldn't the sin-transform operate for
          these men of Israel only? wouldn't only their part in the sin
          be reversed, independently of the participation of midianite
          women (be the latter living or dead)?

          11:41 PM

   Anonymous chaim b, said...

          G.U. - I was going to post the example of K.G. and arei miklat
          this morning now that we are moving towards Masei, but you
          beat me too it.

          I thought R'M was a little different. There his helped effect
          their teshuvah, but it wasn't his absence of tefilah that led
          them to sin.

          10:38 AM

   Anonymous Anonymous said...

          what of one who quits the Torah for love of nonobservant living,
          "departure m'ahavah" (as distinct from a} he who quits for
          fear of missing out on secular living, "departure m'yirah",
          & b} he who simply fizzles)-- would his mitzvos become aveiros?!

          ...mai nafka minah?
          (according to the views that such souls are not cut off
          forever,) the different cheshbons for gilgul, gehinnom, etc.

          11:40 PM

   Anonymous great unknown said...
          I was using R.M. as an example of A's tefillot manipulating
          the bechira of B.

          12:01 AM

 -----------------------------

Thursday, July 28, 2011
tefilos on behalf of someone else

Last week [the post above -micha] we touched briefly on the power of one's
tefilos to affect another person's ruchniyus. The Maor Va'Shemesh writes
that even those who did join in the physical battle against Midyan shared
responsibility for the soldiers' hirhurei avirah during battle. Why are
those who remained behind responsible for the aveiros of the soldiers?
Because had they been davening better for the soldiers' success, there
would not have been aveiros!

We find the same idea in this week's parsha. One who murders b'shogeg
must remain in a city of refuge until the death of the kohen gadol. The
Mishna says that the mothers of the kohanim used to deliver food to
these refugees so they wouldn't daven for the death of their children.
What did the kohanim do wrong to deserve this? The gemara explains that
they should have davened that there be no killings on their watch (see
Maharal, Gur Aryeh, on Rashi 35:25!)

(Parenthetically, the Targum Yonasan says the K.G. should have davened
for this on Yom Kippur, opening the door to the question of why a K.G.
appointed after Y.K. who dies before the next Y.K. responsible. I'm not
so bothered if the details of derush don't match the halacha 100%, but
see the notes in the Gan Ravah which discusses this.)

Another example: The gemara (Brachos 10) tells us that Brurya told her
husband, R' Meir, that rather than pray for the demise of the sinners
in the neighborhood, he should daven that they do teshuvah.

Question: Hakol b'yedei shamayim chutz m'yiras shamayim - commitment
and belief must be arrived at through free will, bechira chofshis. How
then can one person's tefilos influence whether another person will do
teshuvah, will do aveiros or mitzvos?

There are two basic approaches to the issue:

1) Tefilah has an indirect effect. Most of the meforshim I have seen
take this approach. Bechira does not take place in a vacuum. There are
always obstacles which prevent us from being truly free to make any
choices we like. Temptation, a lack of ability to focus on what is
important, jobs and stress which sap energy and concentration all tilt
the scale. Another person's tefilah cannot cause me to choose to do the
right thing, but it can cause Hashem to remove some of the obstacles
that might be preventing me from framing the issue properly and being
truly free to choose.

2) Tefilah has a direct effect. This approach is developed by R'
Dessler in Michtav m'Eliyahu. Every cheit in effect is a chilul Hashem,
as it minimizes Hashem's glory in the world. Onesh is not punitive or
vindictive, but rather is meant to restore that glory to its proper
place by showing that those who act improperly suffer consequences. But
what if Hashem's glory could be restored in some other way? That's
exactly what happens when someone else is inspired to daven for a
chotei. Instead of sin desecrating G-d's name, sin becomes a vehicle
for people to draw close to Hashem.

There seems to be differences in the way this idea is presented in
different essays in Michtav. In my simplified version the chotei
escapes punishment because the chilul Hashem he/she caused is rectified
in some other way, namely by arousing tefilos of others. In other
places R'Dessler seems to stress that tefilah must also impact the
chotei. By becoming aware that he/she has served as an inspiration to
tefilah, the chotei him/herself is inspired to do better. In yet other
places Michtav relates this idea to his concept of nekudas habechira.
We do not actively engage in choosing every action we do. Most of what
we do is by rote and habit - e.g. I did not really have to exercise my
bechira chofshis in deciding not to eat treif for lunch today. On the
other hand, someone who is used to eating a Big Mac for lunch and then
becomes a ba'al teshuvah may really have to exercise bechira and choose
to not go down that road again. Which situations require active bechira
varies by person. Somehow tefilah can change someone's nekudas
habechira so they are not forces to choose how to act in scenarios that
might trip them up. I'm not clear on how this works or how it fits
together with the other points R' Dessler makes.

Along similar lines as this topic, Chassidishe seforim in many places
mention that a tzadik has the power to elevate tefilos of others even
where those tefilos are inadequate or would otherwise be rejected (one
example: see Tiferes Shlomo, Parshas Pinchas, on "Vayakreiv Moshe es
mishpatan...:) I don't fully understand how this works. How can someone
else help my tefilos do their job if the words are undeserving? Maybe
somebody can explain it.