KMTT - the Torah Podcast
KMTT - Avodat Hashem #04
KMTT - Avodat Hashem #04, by Rav Moshe Taragin
KMTT king Mitzi'on, Tetsay Torah, today is Tuesday, Yom Shliche, Hafheb Iar, and today's Shiyu will be given by Arab Moshe Tarragan, the essentials of Al-Abadat Hashem. The issue is dedicated, the love of ashlima for a higher risk of bad shinglesar, and the kashpohu should send her, the love of ashlima, the recuperation in good health, the love of ashlima, the love of ashlima, the love of ashlima, the love of ashlima, and the love of ashlima, after the Shiyu Torah was taken back, the last week's Shiyu Torah introduced the various presidents for Tfilah. The Gomarin Brajos locates three different presidents, the Gomarin Brajos Khafab, the president of Avos, Avamiz Rakhinyaka Houdavind, and the president of Deilikar Banos, which were offered in Baysamiktrush. Each of these experiences are necessary presidents in building a complete and rich opportunity of davening. Had the president of the Avos been invoked in the absence of any president of karbanos, we may have imagined that the unique surpassing individuals who had achieved great unparalleled spiritual heights in their relationship with the karajbarahu, for them Tfilah may have been an option, but for ordinary common man, flawed and limited, blemished morally, perhaps Tfilah, speaking and encountering a karajbarahu, would have seen preposterous. Karbanos democratize the Tfilah experience, specifically the karban tamid, shalbokya, shalbokya, shalshahris, karban tamid, shalbainhar-bhayam, these were community karbanos offered on behalf of the entire people, and invoking their precedent reminds us of the universal democratic nature of Tfilah, kibesi, base tfilah yikare lekha lohamim. But alternatively, had merely their karbanos served as the foundation, historical foundation or warrant for Tfilah, perhaps it would have been too structured, too regimented and too disciplined. Indeed, karbanos endow regimentation and discipline to Tfilos. It is that strict and inflexible framework which reminds us that Tfilah is an encounter with a truly transcendent being, rather than merely a self-fulfilling experience of catharsis. But it would have been too structured, too formal, too sterile, too empty of any human element or human tongue of any human spirit reflecting the tumultuous human condition. And therefore, Tfilos were modeled upon the experience of the Avelos as well. Each of the Avelos dabbened in a different manner, at a different stage of their lives in their career, and by extension, each of their Tfilos represents a different element, a different facet of our own Tfilos. So, already, Tfilos didn't dabben at the same time of the day, presumably the morning is a more hope-filled dabbening, the afternoon is a dabbening in the midst of industry, evening is a dabbening when hope has been laid to rest, and the day has been shut down and collapsed, perhaps a dabbening of faith to pass through the frightening and challenging night. But not only is the timing of their dabbening different of their prayer, seemingly the orientation, the function, and these distinctions can be best grasped or discerned by inspecting the different verbs which the Torah includes to describe their dabbening. In Bracious Your Tests, Averham's Dabbening is described by the term Amad. "Averham's Dabbening is the first step, the first stairway, the first level of prayer, is captured in the verb of Amida. The primary experience of Dabbening is a non-verbal one. It can't be captured by words or speech, but by space and presence. Averham stood in front of Akharaj Barhu. What did he say? We don't know. What could he say? This pussock in Bracious Your Tests describes Averham returning to his place of prior dabbening. After, Stom and Amorah had been annihilated, had been eliminated. No more negotiations or petitions, no more prayers and supplication. I'm sure Averham had things to say that morning, had emotions to share with Akharaj Barhu, perhaps frustration, despair, sadness, hope. But the words which Averham spoke that morning were not recorded by the Tara, nor was any posture, were experience of speaking recorded. The Tara Milli records that he went back to the same place, which he stood the day before praying and pleading on behalf of the people of Stom and Amorah. Alhammed al-Mashram, Ayyen amid al- Letzfilah. The first step to Tzfilah is to recognize the capacity of the human being to stand in front of the Makhmacham, Lachim, in front of the Kisiakabur. Very often, the Talmud asks me for hints. To improve Tzfilah, I mentioned in the beginning of last week's year that the Balshemto was noted for saying, telling his Talmina that if any Rebbe suggests a fool-proof solution to Kavanah during Daveni, you should know he's a faker, because it doesn't exist. But nonetheless, what are the hints, what are the tactics which a person can begin to adopt to try even slightly to improve Tzfilah? My response is always the same. At the beginning, forget the words. Not to forget them. Obviously they must be spoken, but very often people will think that by picking up a new safea or understanding a deeper meaning to the words or deeper translation, perhaps Tzfilah will be correspondingly improved. Sometimes, the first step for Tzfilah is just recognizing as much as possible, as long as possible, as intensely as possible, channeling into the fact that you are standing in the presence of Akhaj Barah, maintaining that awareness. And this, I believe, is the spirit of the Gamaran Brahas. The Gamaran Brahas haphraasam abbeis record several deathbed scenes, several moments in which members of Khazal were about to depart, and their students visited them. And their students requested final nuggets of wisdom, of instruction, of insight. The Gamaran, the Gamaran records just such a conversation, between Obeliezer and Isthamidim, Tanirabhanan, Kishahala Obeliezer, Nickna Suhtamidah of Levakro. They entered to visit him. Amrulah Rabenu, Aribi, Lamdenu Archasayim, Veniskib, Ohem Lechayel, Olamaba, teach us the ways of life, teach us pathways to success. So you offer the following guidance. Amrulahaim yizaru bechvok haverhem, besensitive to respect and honor, but yeshiva ta'ra, besensitive to honor and to respect, other taming echa'amim, other Benet ta'ra who perhaps have slightly different approaches, manu Benet hamenhe gayon, a very controversial statement to protect your children from studying Tanakh too extensively, as Rashi interprets for all sorts of reasons. Vahoshivam vein bechrei ta'mei decha'amim, expose them sufficiently to ta'mei decha'amim ta'ra is not just learned, religious growth is not just achieved and abstract, but through contact with real, live, individuals open model and impassionate us with ta'ra. And finally, he instructed them, "Ochshatem mis-spalalim, when you daven, de ul lifnei atem omdin, recognize and maintain as intensely as possible, the sense of Akhur jbarah whose presence, de ul lifnei atem omdin." And of course, the passek about avarham echoes throughout Biskimar and Brakhoshasar Amracham, and really as her chose, the language of this passek in Pasha's Valyera, de ul lifnei atem omdin, Vigimar and Brakhoshas onkhavav, ein amidah al-atvila, and as her encourages ta'mei dem, to see in space and presence, the encounter where the Khuraj Barhu, which chvila, facilitates as the cornerstone of davening. Pasha's Valyera represents a very important moment in religious history. A yaira love Hashem balon imamre, uyoshay passe kha'ol kahomayom, why did Hashem come to avarham? He had dispatched various malachim to perform all sorts of tasks, to heal, to impry sarah of the pending birth, to destroy sudolmen, to save loat, why did Hashem have to come? The answer is Hashem came to come, this was the first moment in religious history in which man experienced direct encounter with Hashem. Previously God had spoken to man, had warned him, had sworn to him, had entered treaties with him, had promised him, had frightened him, punished him. There were moments of contact, but revelation on a personal level and encounter it yet to exist. Now that avarham has abreast mila, he can achieve the state of tambim, tiyya imashamalokaha, he is complete. In a level of completion, spiritual perfection which only mila can confer, now he has the privilege of experiencing tambim, tiyya imashamalokaha, and immediately Hashem fulfills that opportunity, vayaira love Hashem balon imamre, uyoshay passe kha'ol kahomayom. Parsha's vayaira begins with revelation, Parsha's vayaira concludes with encounter and revelation, vahara shambiraya, original name of yushalayim yiraya, yushalayim. Of course the only difference is that in the beginning of Parsha's vayaira, at the dawn of religious history, God appears to man. As religious history unfolds and emerges, men has to find and seek and to pursue God. Avarham has to depart from mila imamre, from civilization, from his home, from his community, and ascend the mountain of hara maria to discover Hashem, it takes human effort. But the final stages of Avarham's career, detailed and Parsha's vayaira of his prophetic and revelatory career, describe this evolving encounter where the Kaurajabarjo, and the day after stone was destroyed, that moment of encounter was sustained, and this forms the first and primary element of Tfilah. Adomar and Brakhos davavam in base, states his follows, amarebi halbo, amarefuna, kalhakovea amakom with Tfilah, so whoever establishes a permanent place of Tfilah, el okie avarhambi asro, the god of Avarham assists him, uchashimeis, and when that person passes, omrimla, they say about him, aya naav, the humble person, achasir, a pais person, mitalmidaav, shall avarham avinu, he is a pupil, he is a disciple of avarham avinu, and the gomara continues abhihavo continues vavarham avinu minalanda kavamakom, how do we know that avarham established a permanent place, tuksi vayashkim, avarham ba bokyaar, el amakomashir amacham, the anamida el atfilah. Navarham's Tfilah spins off the element of kvias makom, of makom kavuar for davening. One of the great challenges of davening in the modern era is the way that our space and location has changed. 100, 150 years ago, perhaps, our ancestors, our grandparents, davened almost every single tfilah of their lives, in the same building, on the same bench, next to the same people. And davening is so much more than just ideas and concepts, communication, piety, and fervor. It is first and foremost space, it's spatial, proximity to a kurjvarhu, that three times a day a person slightly, slightly suspends his activities, emotional world, and channels it to a spiritual encounter to heighten consciousness. Today, more often than not, our tfilos are scattered, are dispersed or diffused across so many different locations. We grab tfilos based on convenience and schedule constraints, and sometimes spatial continuity is obliterated. Unfortunately, modernity does not allow us, perhaps, other choices. But if we have those opportunities to consolidate our prayer in one location, it can certainly enrich and enhance the experience of davening. It's very poignant, that now from returns to the same location, a day after stone has been destroyed, he still sees the smoldering ruins. How different was his state of mind the day before, where hope and possibility for redemption still abounded. A day later, despair, frustration, and pity consumed him, yet he stood in the same place. The relationship with a kurjvarhu continued, superseded, circumstances, history, emotional state of Avraham, he stood in the same place and interacted with a kurjvarhu. Not only are our tfilos scattered in the modern era, but our whole concept of space has been altered. What is space really entail in a global village, where geography and a physical sense may be less important. Part of our reclaiming of tfilos is to reconstitute that sense of space, location, and that's why a person who was able to maintain kvias macho macho makum kavua, whether in the literal sense, which is something that should be aspired towards or in the figurative sense, he is considered a student of Avraham, and the God of Avraham supports his experience of prayer, not the God of Yitzchak, not the God of Yoko, but the God of Avraham. Tfilo has that communal element because space is enhanced by a communal setting. Much easier to conceive of space and location is a communal space rather than personal individual space. Gomara in Brakhos dafshasam and alaf claims that whoever does not daban properly, maras in Brakhos dafshasam and alaf. Ammarish lakish, komishi aishulaw baisak deses viro vino niknasham le spala, whoever has the opportunity to attend the shul, and passes on that opportunity. Nikra shahain rah is considered a poor neighbour. The Gomara casts Tfilo as a communal or civic responsibility. So part of the civic nature of Tfilo bitzibur is, of course, to support Tfilo for others. Each person decides to come to Tfilo based on personal schedule to attend minion based on personal convenience, the Tfilo will collapse. Only to say kadish, kriasathara needs to be read, minion needs to be sustained, and it's very easy for individuals to discharge or defer those responsibilities to others, and that's a poor civic ethic. Proper civic ethic is to shoulder communal responsibilities. But beyond the literal municipal element, Tfilo, beyond the technical, need to support the Tfilo. The sense of community which enables Tfilo, and which by extension Tfilo reinforces is something which this Gomara alludes to. So although Avram prayed individually, he conceived of the role of space in Tfilo, modeled it for us, and this forms the first facet and the primary facet of Tfilo. Just as I mentioned earlier, space encounter with Akurish Bargho even if the words are less a focus of a person's davening. Obviously, davening can't remain silent, but perhaps the first stage of recovering meaning in Tfilo is maintaining that continued sense of encounter with Akurish Bargho. Yitzak's Tfilo, the second Tfilo, was very different. In Parshas Haesara, Haesara returns from Aramna Harayim with Eliezer. In Parachavdalid, the Torah writes, "Yitzak La Suach Basada, Lifnos Ere, Vaisaina Vayar, Vinag Malim Vayim." That same Gomara in Brakhos Haav interprets, "Yitzak La Suach Basada." "Yayin Sicha Elatfilah," Chinamar, the Gomara in Brakhos, to convince us that Sicha is a terminology of Tfilo, a famous Pasak in Tehilim Parachukufbeis, Tehilah Leani Kiato, "Volefneh Hashem Yishpach Sicha" or a parallel Pasak in Tehilim Kufmem Gimmel, "Eshpach Lefanav Sichi, Sarasi Lefanavagit," Turb Suachim in Tehilim, each of which corroborate the term Sicha as a reference to Tfilo. At a literal level, Sicha means talking, conversation. The second element of Tfilo is that it should be a conversation between the human being and Akhur Jibarho. Very often, as I mentioned earlier, when counseling Tamidim for Tfilo, steps in Tfilo, I'll be faced with the following question, "I can't focus on my Davening because I'm perturbed or disturbed by so many other thoughts and worries and concerns and emotions, and I can't rid myself of these emotions which press on my soul so that I can dive in properly." My response is that those emotions and those issues and struggles should form the content of your Tfilo. Whatever is on your heart, whatever fears and hopes, dreams, gratification, joy, that should serve as the emotional fuel for a rich and vibrant Tfilo. In case your emotions, whatever they may be within the appropriate elements of Tfilo, the person has significant needs or schmakolino, should in case her encapsulate those needs. Person feels redeemed, so the Brakhov Google, a personal Google, should perhaps touch upon the satisfaction of personal redemption, success and business, perhaps should animate the Brakholino, Tfilo provides a very rich and diverse landscape to allow various emotions within the human heart to be expressed through the classic liturgy of Anchekinesis Avidola. Casting Tfilo as Sicha is an attempt to de-formalize Tfilo. There aren't emotions which are expected, but whatever emotions emerge within the daily affairs and daily experience should be incorporated within Tfilo. That is why, in Yitzchok's instance, the Tara intentionally describes where the Tfilo took place. We don't really know where Avraham davened, presumably some mountaintop overlooking Stom in Amara, but the Tara describes his location as makol. By Eshkim Avram Babok, your embrace is your test, Elha Makol, Ashar Amacha. Whereas in Yitzchok's instance, we know, first of all, where he davened in a more specific sense. By Eshkinesis, Yitzchok, Lasuach Basada, Yitzchok, Yitzchok daven in the field, and of course, we're reminded that it was Liffnus Erev, Yitzchok davens within the field. The field in Yitzchok's instance, being the field of industry, planting, of agriculture, Yitzchok really was a man of the field. He was the only one of the Avos to engage in agriculture. Avram and Yakov were shepherds, respectively. They roamed the land of Kanan as no man's, as wanderers shepherds take from the land, but don't plan and build the land. And part of their role as shepherds reflected the 400 years of gullis, which had already begun, geographically they were still in Ereti-Srel, but Avram left, of course, before Brisbane and Bessarim, but he was forced out of Ereti-Srel for a moment in the beginning of Pasha's Lakhlachov. Of course, Yakov is evicted from Ereti-Srel in two instances in his life, but even when they were in Ereti-Srel, their sovereignty wasn't complete, and this was the initial stage of gullis, which Akrushbar, who had promised. She promised Avram during the famous Brisbane and Bessarim that the Jewish people would be in exile for 400 years, are Bameo-Shannah, and of course, they were only in exile literally in Bessarim for 210 years, because the first 190 years they lived in Ereti-Srel, but they couldn't extend their sovereignty where they wanted and how they wanted, unfortunately. There were no man's and wanderers. Yitzchak was a farmer, he established the first homestead, he wasn't forced to leave Ereti-Srel, Gurbard, Schonbardz, as he tells him. Yitzchak's affiliation and affinity for field and agriculture perhaps made him more biased towards Asav, who was in Isha'dah, and part of his being blinded by Asav was at Asav, excelled, and hunting and other aspects of field and farm life, and Yitzchak was naturally drawn to this. For Yitzchak's sardah represents the professional sphere, the world of industry, Minchah typically is Daven within our daily routine, within our daily work schedule, more or less, within our daily activity, physical and emotional. That sense of being offered within Isha'dah is not just timing chronologically when the Tfilas offered, but, existentially, the Tfilas should stem from human experience. Yitzchak is an informal conversation between two friends. Yitzchak is walking in this field, perhaps as the sun begins to set, the cool winds towards the end of the day and he's here all stark, refreshing humanity from the oppressive heat of the afternoon. He takes a walk with Akrash Barahu figuratively, and he shares his Tikhai, he shares whatever emotions, whatever issues rest on his heart. It's a de-formalization of Tfilah. It's a very interesting gamara in Avarizara, Dabzayana Mibes. The gamara says, "Ribalyazer Elmer, Balyazer says, "Shawel Adam Surahov, Viyachar Kachispalel. First a person should request his need, then he should Daven. Chinamar Tfililani, Kiyatov, La Phneashem, Yishpok, Siho. Ribyashua Elmer, Yispahlo, First Yishid Daven, Viyachar Kachispal Surahov, and then he should request his needs, Chinamar, Eshpok, Lefanav, Sihi, Sara Sihilafanavagir." The gamara cites the makhlokas between Ablyaz and Ablyashua. The makhlokas reflects the contrast, the discrepancy between Tehilim Khufbeiz and Tehilim Khufbeim The word Tfililah appears before the word Siha, Tehilim Leani, Kiyatov, Lefanashhem, Yishpok, Siho, Siho, Siho, Siho, Siho, Siho, Siho, Eshpok, Lefanav, Sihi, Sara Sihilafanavagir. So based on these differing sequences, Ribyashua adopt different chronologies or different sequencing for Tehilah. But in each instance, they recognize a difference between She'elas Surahim, which is connoted by the word Tfilah, and Tehilah, which is connoted by the word Siha. Namely, there are two components to Tehilah. One is She'elas Surahim, requesting needs, specific petitions, whether they be individual, communal, historical. But beyond specific requests, they each recognize a separate component of Tehilah, referred to as Siha, not She'elas Surahim, but Siha and in fact, each of them paraphrase this concept of Siha as real Tehilah. She'elas Surahim versus Tehilah. Ribyashua says, "Sha'el Adam Surahib, the Akharkar Yespale, first he should request his Tehilahim his needs, and then he should Daven. Maybe Yoshua says, first he should Daven, his Tehilah, and then he should request his needs. But each of these opinions in a Vodazara Daphzayan confirms the independent aspect of Siha within our overall Tehilah, of incorporating the emotional state into our Tehilas, sharing our fears, our hopes, our dreams, our interests, our frustrations, struggles with the Ribyashua. The third component to Tehilah is evoked by Yaakov's Tehilah. In many respects, Yaakov's Tehilah was the most bold and the most different from all the other Tehilas. In Parshas Vayetsay, a penniless, betrayed, expelled brother Yaakov flees from the murderous conspiracy of Asa. Parshas Parachathas Pasagudalaf, Vayevka Bhamakom, Vayolin Sham, Kivah Hashemesh, Vayekach Mehvnaamakom, Vayosemirashosav, Vayevkaav, Bhamakom Hahu. The verb which the Tehilahri employs to describe Yaakov's Tehilah is the term Vayevka Bhamakom, whereas the Gemara in Brachoskavav establishes Yaakov Tehilah's Arvis, Chanaemar Vayevka Bhamakom, Vayolin Sham. The Aynn Pigilla Ella Tehilah. Abraham's Tehilah is captured by the term Amad, Aynn Amida Ella Tehilah. Yitzhach's prayer is conveyed by the term La Suach, Aynn Siha Ella Tehilah. Yaakov Tehilah is described as Pigea, Aynn Pigilla Ella Tehilah. What does the term Pigea mean and what component of Tehilah does it establish? The word Pigea live Goa means to impact, to affect, to change. It could be to change and impact in a very hostile and traumatic manner, unfortunately we've been exposed in Ertz Israel to the phenomena of a Pigea of a terror attack, which is of course the most vicious impact upon another human being and human dignity. But of course Pigea can refer to any form of impact or change, which a person produces upon another. Enbracious Perich of Gimmel, Avram pleads with the people of Veneheis. By Ydabri Tamlimar, Amiacious Nafshacham lik barris may see milafanai, Shma Oni, he begs them, listen to my request, U fig Uli, the Ephron ben Selchar, and a range of meeting, but it's not just a ranging of meeting, but allow me to confront, perhaps not in a hostile manner, but in a negotiating stance, Ephron ben Selchar ultimately, Avram is Pigea, Ephron ben Selchar, he meets him, and he persuades him to sell him, Maras Amapela. Yaakov was the first of the avos to establish the notion, or at least the first recorded notion. That Fila can actually change Akhosh barris' will, can impact La Havdiil, the human being has an impact upon Akhosh barris, through his Fila's. How he does and why we do, that's of course something which is beyond our comprehension, how the malakmafam lafim, the creator of our world, the transcendent, invisible, unknowable being is impacted by human prayer, but Akhosh barris who programmed, his world, and our relationship with him, premised on the notion that Akhosh barris can have an impact, Mosch or Abenu rescues Am Misal from annihilation through his Fila's. Asham listens to Akhosh barris and is altered by Akhosh barris, sometimes we understand the answer, sometimes we don't understand the answer, but Akhosh barris, Frans Kafka, one said, that prayer doesn't impact God, it merely impacts the person who prays. Through a degree, Judy is in the doppes, something of the reflexive nature of prayer, in fact the verb to pray is articulated in a reflexive grammar. Person isn't Mifalel, but is Mispalel. Through a degree, prayer does act as a catharsis of self, as a cleansing of the human spirit, as a venting of the need to speak to God and to encounter God, but that is not the totality of prayer. Prayer, davening, is a tomb which Akhosh barris who empowered us with, to pray, to request and to determine, to a degree to dictate, the laws of providence, the laws of Hasghah. When Yitzhak Daven, there was really nothing in particular he was davening for. His life at that point was not in crisis or under duress, there was no particular need in Parshas Khaesara, which Yitzhak prayed for. Dida with Avraham, the day before Avraham had prayed on behalf of an entire metropolis, an entire civilization, but that's Fila ironically wasn't recorded, it's Fila of Avraham which is recorded in Parshas Vayira. The President of Avraham is a post, the aftermath, the day after the destruction of stone. Avraham had nothing to ask of Akhosh barris, we merely wanted to identify and encounter a gem, to sustain that encounter, as I mentioned before, throughout the vicissitudes of the human experience. But in Parshas Vayate say, Yaakov has everything to fear, an uncertain future, no support, no family as far as he knew, who would never return to Arits Israel, at that moment before he had this, a perfanious dream, who would he marry, who would support him, would he have a family, would he still be part of Jewish history? Yaakov Daven, with a sincerity and urgency that can only and can best be captured by the term Vayevkaba Makom, Ayal Ansham. Interestingly enough, Yaakov so deeply identifies with this form of Tfilah, that he refers to it towards the end of his life. Before he distributes Brahas to all the Shvatim, he calls Yosef in for a private audience and he promises him a unique chair in the land of Israel, traditionally he offers him the city of Shrem, where Yosef's grave is. The Anina Santi Lecha, he writes, the Torah writes in Brahes Memchas Pasecha Beis. Shrehemecha and Allah Shrecha. Asheolakakti miyadhemari, the sini which I seized from the M.R.A.im, Piharbe uvakashti, with my bow on with my arrow, referring to a war which took place over the city of Shrem, surrounding of course Lea's encounter, Lea's being raped, excuse me, not Lea, Dina's being raped, by Khamor Ben Shrecha. However, Unkelos interprets Yaakov's description of seizing the city of Shrem, he interprets the words Vaharbe uvakashti, is not referring to his literal bow and arrow, but in the words of Unkelos Vitzalosi uvivahusi, Zalosi is in Aramaic description of prayer, as is the word vivahusi, comes from the word to request. Lea-ba-i means to ask, ba-mina-in-gamar means to ask, y ba-ilu. Yaakov mentions that he sees Shrem through prayer, it's to remind Yosef it is not just force and might, but the prayer. It's finlet al-Kurshbakhul during that crisis, allowing him to see Shrem. Interesting that Yaakov uses military terms, a bow and an arrow, a chaira vinikash, it's not a bow and an arrow, Chaira was actually a sword, and Chaira was a sword and Akashti is a bow and arrow. He employs military terminology to describe his vivos. Yaakov was the first to Daven, or at least the first recorded Davening, which he sought to impact the Kurshbakhul's ratsalm, and the metaphor of military arms is an appropriate one. The Gomara in Brakhos on daflamid days describes Moshe's prayer in the aftermath of the Aegel debacle, Va'yachal Moshe's Pena'a'Shem, Ama'rib'li'a'za, Melamai, Ch'amad Mosheb, it's Fula's Na'kurshba'rachul, Acha'hekli'u. Moshe's stood in prayer until he made a Kurshba'rachul'il, the Rav'amar Acha'he'r for lonidra, until he rescinded God's Nader from the word Va'yachal, Va'yachal, according to the word Va'yachal stems from the word Hola, he made Acha'hem as it were sick. Rav'a suggests that Moshe forced Acha'hem to rescind his Nader. Rabban and Amrid the Gomara continues, Melamai, Ch'amad, Ama'm mucha fekurshba'rachul, hulan hulach, it should be unthinkable, it should be distant from you to perform such an act of destroying Amisra. There are differences and nuances between a Belozar statement, Rav'a's statement, the Rabbanan's statement, other interpretations cited by the Gomara and Aflamad base, but the common denominator is that this was an aggressive assertive Tvila. Moshe's stood in front of Akhurshba'rachul with a purpose, the ultimate purpose, rescuing Jewish history, and he went to war, as it were, of course Akhurshba'rachul wanted him to. Rav'a'rachul solicited this Tvila, this response, but Tvila is a militant encounter with the Rabbanan shalallam, as it were, who wants us to be desperate and urgent and plead our case on a personal and national level, and Ya'akov was the first of the Avos to capture this. Vayif Gaba Makom, ain pigi'a l'atvila, vayachal masha, he turned Akhurshba'rachul's will, he transformed Akhurshba'rachul in some way, shape, or form, and Moshe, Dav'n's, in the man, are first captured by Ya'akov's verb, vayif Gaba Makom. These are three elements amongst many of Tvila, which evidently are primary enough to be encoded into the Tvila's of the Avos. The first facet of Tvila is space, an encounter, beyond, before words, to maintain the channel between human and God. The second element is to incorporate the emotional landscape of human experience into the religious encounter, vayif s'yitraq la su'ach basada ain s'yitra'el atvila. The third element, vayif Gaba Makom, is to remember as difficult as it seems, conceptually, and as depressing as it may be from time to time when we don't understand Akhurshba'r kurshba'rachul's response, that our Tvila's do have the capacity to impact Ashem, and Ashem does answer our Tvila's, perhaps, not in the way in which we had expected. And for today's halakha'i omit, we started hazara tashats. When the hazzan says hazara tashats, he repeats the s'mon essay, we say kdushah in shaharit and minhra. Kdushah, meaning sanctification, is considered to be the fulfillment of the verse vinik dash dibatosh bin nay israel, and I shall be sanctified, God is speaking, and I shall be sanctified in the midst of the children of Israel. Meaning that the Jewish people have a role, have a job, have a task, to sanctify the name of God. God's sanctification belongs to God, he's holy because he's holy, but nonetheless God says it's not enough to be holy in heaven. The holiness of God is expressed by the fact that the world accepts the yoke of heaven, and the Jewish people that stay well, vinik dash dibatosh bin nay israel. Just all postkim state that halakha lemai sa, saying kdushah is a vinik obligation and not mediviter. It's connected to this person, but the person doesn't mean you have to say kdushah. It is worth noting that in the kabbalah, it's considered to be a qib diviter, that's what we'll appear to say fazara, and many makubadim state based on fazara, they think saying kdushah is a dioriter, obligation, obligation from the Torah. But again, but halakha lemai, the opinion of all the postkim, almost all the postkim, is that it's the Baba'ana. How does one say kdushah? From the shoshan agok, and the Beit was said, and many, many of the Vishanim, it's clear that kdushah was said by the Khazan saying, nikadesh on that Vishra, and when he got at the end of that line, the kdushah al-zah, the amal, the congregation answered by saying the verse kdush, kdush, kdush, ashem, sokot, lok, lok, lok, lok, lok, lok, lok, lok, lok. Same thing with the second verse, he would say, the umatam bawok yomeru, and they would answer bawok bawok, bawok, bawok, ashemim komal. He would say, bawakha chokakha chokakha tuvangal, and they would answer, yimlok, yimlok ashem, lok, lok, yimlok, siyon, lidaw, vadaw, hallelukah. And then, in fact, is the way the shokhanah al-huk states, the way it should be said, nor does the vamah state anything different. However, the meaning in all of ushos, in all kraudisah, is that the tibuhah says, nikadesh, and nakrushah as well, and in most places they also say the lines in between. And the verses, umatam bawok yomeru, or shakrim yomeru, and we would say, kochokakha tuvlimo. Same thing on shabbat, where there were longer connecting lines between the sukem, and komal even bawakha mab, etcetera, and this is said by the tibuhah. This is based on the opinion of the avi, and in this case, it is spread to bring the kamim in out. Nonetheless, in principle, the postkim explained that tushah is meant to be call and response. In general, the vah should be tushah like bawokha, like karish, and tushah, the hazzan calls out to the congregation to sanctify God's name, and then nikrushah. And therefore, although from the avi we appear that he, when he meant, was that the congregation and the hazzan would say, nikradashit shimkhah together, but the men of generally, in Nashkenazi communities for sure, and sometimes in study communities as well, is that the congregation says nikradash before the hazzan, and the reason is in order to preserve the fact that the hazzan will call to them. So what happens is that they say nikradash, because they want to say nikradash at the minute, they say, we will sanctify God. But the halakh extractor is that the hazzan says to them nikradash, or nikrushah. And then they answer to that call. And therefore, the proper way to do it is the hazzan should wait until the entire congregation has finished saying the opening line, and then so they can hear him, he says the first word is the kushah word here, because he's calling them to do so. The kadash let us sanctify God's name, as is written in the pasoc, bakarazazaviyamah, and then they all say kadash. Concerning the verses themselves, there is a dispute among the postkim. Some postkim say specifically that the hazzan should say kadash at the same time as the congregation says kadash, you say together with them, and what they're concerned about is that if you wait till they finish, he'll wind up saying it by himself, and you can't say kushah by yourself, you can only say kushah by jibur. Many postkim however, say the exact opposite, that the hazzan should say kadash after the jibur has finished saying kadash. He waits till they've said to the end, kadash kadash kadash shamsakot madok hoda kodah agak hoda, and then he says out loud, kadash kadash kadash shamsakot madok hoda agak hoda, and goes on to the next line, of course for them to say the next line. Why is that, in the last generation both Ramosha finds him, and the hazzan should say kadash after the jibur, but for two different reasons, Ramosha was mostly concerned about the nature of hazzarata shats, the hazzan repeats the schmonesser, kadushah is part of the repetition of schmonesser, the Ramosha states explicitly, it doesn't think you say in the repetition, the Ramosha says when the hazzan gets to the third bakhad, this is the nusok of the third bakhad, it begins with the word nakadash, and therefore Ramosha said, since this hazzarata shats, the din other hazzarata shats is that the hazzan should say the hazzarata shats out loud, so kadush is part of hazzarata shats, he has to say it out loud, people can hear it. Secondly, practical consideration, if someone is in the middle of schmoness, right, so dalachah is quoted in the post game, so two opinions in the post, but the hazzarata is quoted in the most post game, is that you are not about to interrupt your schmonesser to say kadushah, but you can be quiet and listen to the hazzan saying, and in that way, fulfill your application, because of shomeya on there, one who hears is like one who has said, so you listen to the hazzan saying kadush kadush kadush kadush, and you have said kadush kadush kadush kadush, but for that you have to listen, and if you say it together with other people, nobody will be able to hear it, so for those two reasons, Ramosha said, kadush kadush in a manner that it can be heard, which means to wait until everyone has finished, and then to say it. The love you should best celebrate check had a different reason, the love claimed that the nature of the vahrshippu shah is, call, response and repetition. The source of this is in bahrshu, where in fact the post game explicitly talk about the hazzan repeat, a rahshimab rahshiram vahrad after the kahara said, bahrsh. The love said that is where the vahrshippu shah consists of, call, answer, and maybe summation of repetition by the hazzan. This also answers the question, how he can say it by himself. It's not said bihidut, it's not said in private only in public. This is called in public. In fact, he's saying it, and no one else is saying it at the same time, but the structure is, it's like a duet, it's like a symphony orchestra, where different, different instruments have different parts, but the whole is the whole is put together, you have to say it together to be saying it vitzibu. The war post game, the Mr. Buhrer, was uncertain about this question, but as I said, two of the greatest post game of the previous generation, both agreed, the hazzan should say it afterwards. It's not the kamminag, and there are two opinions, but I'm simply quoting the halakhat, the halakhat in the names of those who have said it. That's it for today. You've been listening to the shiul al-hahabmoshu tarragan in Essentials al-hahabadata sham. We're back tomorrow, and share in rakhatil rakhat rakhat al-hahabadah, which I will be given. You've been listening to kmtt, kimitsion tece tora uda vahra shami ushalaim, kmtt is the tora podcast, your chance and opportunity to be coveya e tim la tora, to learn every day, try to give a good share, half hour day, 40 minutes a day, every day, to learn tora and to grow in tora. And this has been as we've been questioning you, koto til tomorrow, vipakat a tora nitsion. This is kmtt, let me shivat haretion, in erot Israel. [BLANK_AUDIO]