Hamaayan / The Torah Spring Edited by Shlomo Katz Devarim Tishah B'Av Volume XII, Number 39 9 Av 5758 August 1, 1998 Today's Learning Taharot 9:4-5 Kitzur 181:15-20 Eruvin 89 Yerushalmi Eruvin 19 In this parashah, Moshe recounts many of the events that occurred during Bnei Yisrael's 40 years in the desert. One of these was that Moshe appointed judges to assist him. In connection with this occurrence, Rashi (to 1:13) writes that Moshe criticized the nation, saying, "You should have said, 'From whom would it be better to learn, from you or from your student? Surely it would be better to learn from you, Moshe, who toiled so hard to acquire the Torah'." R' Meir Bergman shlita asks: What does the fact that Moshe toiled to acquire Torah have to do with choosing him as a teacher? The answer is that the more one knows that his teacher sacrificed and suffered for Torah learning, the more one can appreciate what his teacher has to say. The gemara (Shabbat 33b) relates that before R' Shimon bar Yochai spent 13 years hiding in a cave, his son-in-law used to offer twelve rebuttals to every argument that R' Shimon presented. In contrast, after R' Shimon emerged from the cave, he (R' Shimon) offered 24 answers to every question that his son- in-law asked. What changed? asks R' Bergman. The answer is that before R' Shimon risked his life for Torah study, his son-in-law failed to appreciate his greatness. Under such circumstances, it is easy to rattle off superficial answers to a teacher's questions. However, after R' Shimon's son-in-law witnessed his father-in-law's suffering and sacrifice, then he was ready to learn from his father-in-law. In more recent times, R' Bergman writes that R' Shimon Shkop z"l (died 1940) studied in the Volozhin yeshiva but never attended the lectures of the rosh yeshiva, R' Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin z"l (the "Netziv"). Once, late at night, R' Shkop was struggling unsuccessfully to understand a certain commentary when he saw the Netziv enter the study hall. He approached the rosh yeshiva with his difficulty, only to be told, "If you only knew how many times I have cried at the graves of various tzaddikim that I should merit to understand that particular commentary." Thereafter, R' Shkop began attending the Netziv's lectures. (Sha'arei Orah, Vol. II, p. 218) ********** The Dual Nature of Tishah B'Av [The following is adapted from a tape-recorded lecture delivered by R' Joseph B. Soloveitchik z"l in Boston on Tishah B'Av 1979.] Tishah B'Av has a dual nature. On the one hand, it is a fast day, a day of repentance, like Yom Kippur. Because of this aspect of the day, we observe the five afflictions - no eating and drinking, no marital relations, no anointing the body with oils, no washing, and no wearing shoes - just as on Yom Kippur. These same five afflictions also were observed on the special fast days that used to be observed in years of drought, as described in Tractate Ta'anit, as those too were days of repentance. Also, like Yom Kippur, Tishah B'Av begins at sundown. On the other hand, Tishah B'Av is a day of mourning. Because of this aspect of the day we do not study most Torah subjects on Tishah B'Av, just as a mourner may not study Torah. More specifically, the hours before noon on Tishah B'Av are like the time period before the deceased is buried, when the mourners are exempt from mitzvot, including prayer. This is why we do not wear tefilin on Tishah B'Av morning and our prayers are scaled back, most noticeably by the absence of the paragraph of kaddish beginning, "Titkabbel." (That paragraph beseeches: "May the prayers and requests of all of Israel be accepted before our Father in Heaven.") The kinot of Tishah B'Av are an expression of the day's mournful nature. Specifically, they parallel the eulogy at a funeral. There are two parts to a eulogy: praising the deceased and expressing the survivors' sense of loss. Similarly, the kinot discuss the beauty of Yerushalayim and of the Jewish people that once was and also express our sadness at their destruction. The dual nature of the day is reflected in the two haftarot which we read. The afternoon haftarah relates to the repentance aspect of Tisha B'Av; in fact, it is the same haftarah which is read on the afternoon of all other fast days (except Yom Kippur). However, the haftarah for the morning - other fast days do not have a haftarah in the morning - relates to the mourning aspect of the day. And, unlike all other haftarot, the haftarah for Tishah B'Av morning does not end with words of consolation because one is prohibited to console a mourner before the deceased is buried. (As explained above, the "funeral" is represented by the kinot.) [Ed. Note: Although Yom Kippur also has a haftarah in the morning, that is because Yom Kippur also has a dual nature; it is a fast day and it also is a yom tov like Pesach and Sukkot. (See She'eilot Uteshuvot R' Akiva Eiger No. 24)] There is another aspect to the haftarah on Tisha B'Av morning. One could argue that we have no right to cry on Tisha B'Av, for we must accept Hashem's decree. The haftarah teaches that this is not so; the prophet Yirmiyah himself proclaims in the haftarah (9:16-), "Therefore, so says Hashem . . . , 'Contemplate, summon the dirge-women and let them come . . . Let them hurry and raise a lament for us, let our eyes run with tears and our pupils flow with water'." It is the haftarah which gives us permission to cry and to question Hashem. Similarly, the reading of Eichah (with its question, "Eichah?"/"Why?") precedes and makes possible the recitation of the nighttime kinot. Because Eichah is in essence the first kinah there is no kaddish after Eichah as there is after the reading of other megillot. (It is noteworthy that the prophet Yirmiyahu wrote both Eichah and the haftarah which we read in the morning. Why is Eichah read at night and this haftarah in the morning, and not vice- versa? Because the haftarah comes from a part of Tanach (i.e., Nevi'im) which has greater sanctity than does Eichah (which is from the Ketuvim). The mourning of Tishah B'Av should be greater during the day than it is at night, for the Temple was destroyed by day; therefore, the work which has greater sanctity is read in the daytime.) In contrast to the morning haftarah which relates to the mourning aspect of the day, the morning's Torah reading relates to the fast day/repentance aspect of the day. Thus we read (Devarim 4:30), "When you are in distress and all these things have befallen you, at the end of days, you will return to Hashem, your G-d, and listen to His voice." Why is this read at this time? It reminds us that the destruction which we mourn has a purpose; it presents us with a challenge. Chazal say that any generation in which the Bet Hamikdash is not rebuilt is equivalent to the generation in which the Temple was destroyed. Our challenge, therefore, is to repent so that our generation will not be likened to that generation. ********** It is customary to refrain from learning most Torah subjects on the afternoon preceding Tishah B'Av. Why? R' Yekutiel Yehuda Halberstam z"l (the Klausenberger Rebbe) explains as follows: Chazal say that the Bet Hamikdash was destroyed because people neglected Torah study. (Although other sins also are mentioned as causes of the destruction, Chazal explain that the only sin which Hashem cannot forgive is the neglect of Torah study. Had Torah been studied, the other sins might not have sufficed to destroy the Temple.) Chazal also say that any generation in which the Bet Hamikdash is not rebuilt is equivalent to the generation in which the Temple was destroyed. Putting these teachings together, it follows that we are guilty of neglecting Torah study. We are instructed to refrain from learning Torah on the afternoon preceding Tishah B'Av in order to awaken us to the connection between neglecting Torah study and the fact that the Temple site lays desolate. The afternoon before Tishah B'Av is a time to reflect on this sin. (Shefa Chaim: Michtavei Torah Vol. II, No. 144) ***************** R' Elazar/Eliezer Hakalir z"l R' Elazar or Eliezer Hakalir was one of the most prolific liturgical poets in Jewish history and the author of many of the kinot/lamentations for Tishah B'Av. Oddly enough, nothing is known about him, not even his true name or in what century he lived. It is certain that R' E' lived before the time of Rashi (died 1105) as Rashi quotes R' E's poems numerous times in both his Tanach and Talmud commentaries. Some say that the paytan/liturgist was R' Eliezer the son of R' Shimon bar Yochai, one of the sages of the Mishnah in the second century. Others contend that he lived in the fifth century and is the R' Eliezer ben R' Shimon who is mentioned in Midrash Rabbah to Vayikra 23:40. Still others identify him as R' Elazar ben Arach, a member of the generation which saw the destruction of the Bet Hamikdash around the year 70. Those who reject all of the above opinions point to a line in the Tishah B'Av Kinot which states that more than 900 years have passed since the destruction. (Others say that this was a later addition.) In addition, those who place R' E' later find it incredible that, if he lived as early as has been suggested, he is not mentioned (at least by the name "Hakalir") in any place in the Talmud or the major midrashim. (He is mentioned in one midrash, although that may reflect a later addition.) This silence is particularly incredible considering that some of R' E's poems actually state halachic opinions that one would expect to find quoted by later sages. Similarly, if R' E' preceded the authoring of the major midrashim, why is he not quoted in them, even when the words of his poems and of the midrash are identical? Also, why do Sephardim not recite any of his poems? Some attribute to R' E' a kabbalistic work called Kevudah in which the sage R' Hai Gaon is referred to as being "of blessed memory." R' Hai Gaon died in 1038. It also is not known what the name "Hakalir" means. Some say that Kalir was the grandfather of R' E' and that his name was adopted as a surname. Others say that "kalir" means "cake," and that R' E' had eaten a certain kind of cake which was a segulah/charm for wisdom. The evidence that this paytan lived in Eretz Yisrael includes the fact that we know of no prayers that he wrote for the second day of any yom tov. It appears that he lived in the town of Kiryat Sefer. (Sources: Introduction to Seder Hakinot Ha'meforash Im Beur Kol Be'ramah; Introduction to Machzor Korban Aharon)