Kavanot: Imitatio Dei

This is largely based on Rav Elchanan Samet’s Tehillim shiurim on VBM, parts one, two and three.

Last time we looked at the aggadic reading of Chushai’s conversation with David, and how he demanded that David be דורש סמוכין, and that halachic concept came from ספר תהילים itself: (תהלים קיא:ח):‎ סְמוּכִים לָעַד לְעוֹלָם עֲשׂוּיִם בֶּאֱמֶת וְיָשָׁר. Now I would like to look at that perek in more detail.

פרק קיא is actually part of a diptych with פרק קיב. We looked at them before but I’m going to analyze them in much more detail now. They are the only chapters of תהילים with a complete alphabetic acrostic, and they have identical structures:

Each starts with הללויה, then has 8 psukim with 2 phrase each, then 3 psukim with 3 phrases each. And the text for each phrase is very regular and precise; they are in iambic tetrameter or iambic trimeter. We never talk about meter in Biblical poetry; it just wasn’t a thing. Except for now.

The alphabetic psalms were important:

But the two explanations for the acrostic—that it marks its importance and that it makes it easier to memorize—are not mutually exclusive. The two perakim are ordered and have such simple language because they are important. They read like children’s rhymes because they are meant for everyone. We don’t read them as part of davening now, except for one pasuk (generally said by little children): ראשית חכמה יראת ה׳ שכל טוב לכל עשיהם תהלתו עמדת לעד. But I would argue that they were intended for that.

The first perek is a praise of ה׳:‎ אודה ה׳ בכל לבב while the second is a paean to the righteous (specifically, generous) person: אשרי איש ירא את ה׳. They are tied together both by their identical structure, and by common language: the end of פסוק ג, which is identical: וצדקתו עמדת לעד, with similar themes in פסוק ד:‎ חנון ורחום, and in פסוק ח:‎ סמוכים/סמוך לבו, and there is a transition from קיא:י:‎ ראשית חכמה יראת ה׳ to קיב:א:‎ אשרי איש ירא את ה׳.

What is the lesson of the parallel between the praise of הקב״ה and the praise of the צדיק?

And both have at the beginning the identical phrase, וצדקתו עמדת לעד, and at the end the similar קדוש ונורא שמו and קרנו תרום בכבוד. We’re talking about their fame, how others see them.

The lesson of this pair of perakim is that we emulate הקב״ה as an example to others.

The structure of תהילים פרק קיא according to Rav Elchanan Samet:

There are two halves; each starts with the מעשים of ה׳ and ends with the ברית.

מעשי ה׳

There are two ways to appreciate the will of G-d in the universe.

And the two halves of the perek reflect this. The first half is addressed to all of humanity (at those who have the inherent moral sense to listen); they are the סוד ישרים, the counsel of the upright. The second half deals with עַמּוֹ, and is addressed to the עדה, the community, what we call כנסת ישראל.

And all of that can be understood by anyone, without direct revelation. מעשי ה׳ are דרושים לכל חפציהם. We look at the world with a sense of awe, what Rudolf Otto called the “numinous”. The universe itself is the זכר עשה לנפלאותיו.

The second half is כח מעשיו הגיד לעמו, which itself has two components: ה׳'s intervention in Jewish history, לתת להם נחלת גוים. But more than that, there is the gift of the Torah, the מעשי ידיו that are אמת ומשפט. The rest of the section is about the eternal value of His laws, נאמנים כל פקודיו. As we discussed last time, the פשט of סמוכים לעד לעולם is that the Torah is “reliable”, but the the דרש is that the laws are סמוך to one another, that they logically follow and the whole creates structure that defines אמת וישר.

לעולם בריתו

ברית נח is unconditional. ה׳ vowed to maintain the laws of nature: (בראשית ח:כב)‎ עֹד כָּל יְמֵי הָאָרֶץ; זֶרַע וְקָצִיר וְקֹר וָחֹם וְקַיִץ וָחֹרֶף וְיוֹם וָלַיְלָה לֹא יִשְׁבֹּתוּ׃. On the other hand, בירת סיני is conditional on our behavior. Hence the difference between the two verses: טֶרֶף נָתַן לִירֵאָיו; יִזְכֹּר לְעוֹלָם בְּרִיתוֹ refers to all of humanity (indeed all of the universe). ה׳ remembers the ברית. But פְּדוּת שָׁלַח לְעַמּוֹ; צִוָּה לְעוֹלָם בְּרִיתוֹ refers to ישראל; the פְּדוּת depends on the commandments, צִוָּה לְעוֹלָם בְּרִיתוֹ.

קדוש ונורא שמו

After the parallel sections that celebrate what Rav Hutner calls the עשרה מאמרות and עשרה דברות, the ninth pasuk has a third phrase that synthesizes the two. What should our reaction to the גלוי רצון ה׳ be?

We keep the mitzvot, all those “petty” details, because of our יראת ה׳. We obey the Absolute Ruler of the universe.

So, while my אודה ה׳ בכל לבב about גדלים מעשי ה׳ and נאמנים כל פקודיו leads to אהבת ה׳ and the overwhelming desire to cleave to Him (and that’s a good thing), it must lead to the conclusion of קדוש ונורא שמו. Our closeness to הקב״ה is in the realm of imitatio Dei, of מה הקב״ה נקרא חנון, אף אתה היה חנון. Love of G-d must lead to awe of G-d, ראשית חכמה יראת ה׳ שכל טוב לכל עשיהם.

ראשית חכמה isn’t really the starting point for wisdom; to paraphrase Winston Churchill, it is “the end of the beginning”. ספר קהלת starts from zero, trying to understand the meaning of our existence if we will cease to exist; in Heidegger’s terms, life is Sein-zum-Tode, ”Being Toward Death“. He ends at the point that we, as believing Jews, start:

And only if we realize that will we have שכל טוב, which I would translate as “real success”.

תהלתו עמדת לעד

Who is the subject of תהלתו? The context of the perek, as well as the parallel to פסוק ג,‎ וצדקתו עמדת לעד, indicate that it is G-d’s praise that stands forever. תהלתו forms an inclusio with the initial הללויה (like תהילים קמה,‎ תהילה לדוד to תהילת ה׳ ידבר פי). But the pasuk itself is talking about כל עשיהם, and most מפרשים understand that it the praise of the ירא ה׳ and עושה פקודיו that will stand forever.

And that makes this pasuk the transition to the the next perek which starts with אשרי איש ירא את ה׳ במצותיו חפץ מאד. As we said above, the ambiguity emphasizes that the צדיק should strive to emulate הקב״ה, so that all the things we say about ה׳ will be said about them as well.

The structure of תהילים פרק קיב according to Rav Elchanan Samet:

The first section is an introduction to the צדיק who internalizes the message at the end of the last perek. They are ירא את ה׳ and therefore במצותיו חפץ מאד. And מאד has a specific meaning:

It’s a reference to שמע:

The other two sections deal with the two ways we serve ה׳ with our ממון, our belongings. One is to use it to help others: טוֹב אִישׁ חוֹנֵן וּמַלְוֶה, and פִּזַּר נָתַן לָאֶבְיוֹנִים. The other is to be satisfied with what ה׳ gives us:

When it says כי לעולם לא ימוט it doesn’t mean that bad things will never happen; it is like the pasuk we say after ברכת המזון:

Hirsch and the Etz Yosef (Enoch Zundel ben Yoseph, 19th century commentator on מדרש תנחומא, ויצא, ג) both translate וזרעו מבקש לחם as “[even] when his children are begging.” The צדיק does not feel himself abandoned when he has to depend on others; he is aware that ה׳ provides but does so in various ways. Just as the צדיק gives graciously, he accepts graciously. That is why הון ועשר בביתו.

פסוק ב is the reward of the צדיק: their legacy will be carried on by their children, taking גבור in a moral sense (אֵיזֶהוּ גִבּוֹר, הַכּוֹבֵשׁ אֶת יִצְרוֹ), parallel to ישרים.

חנון ורחום וצדיק

The מפרשים generally interpret חנון ורחום וצדיק as referring to ה׳:

But as we mentioned above, it is ambiguous, and it fits the theme of the perek better to say it refers to the צדיק:

Just as ה׳ is טרף נתן ליראיו, so too is the צדיק,‎ פזר נתן לאביונים. And just as הוד והדר פעלו of ה׳, the צדיק enlightens the world.

קרנו תרום בכבוד

Each of the three sections ends with a similar message: צדקתו עמדת לעד or לזכר עולם יהיה צדיק. Why is their fame so important? Should the צדיק care what others think of them?

That is an important part of being a צדיק. When the brothers conspire to kill Joseph, Reuven tries to save him:

There’s an interesting midrash on this:

The quote from Malachi is about the אחרית הימים and the line is וַיִּכָּתֵב סֵפֶר זִכָּרוֹן לְפָנָיו לְיִרְאֵי ה׳:

Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky is bothered by this. Were Reuven, Aharon and Boaz so vain that they needed the fame to do the right thing? If they had known that their deeds would be recorded, they would have done a better job? He has two answers:

Rashi makes a comment that seems obvious:

The Torah never tells us what people are thinking (as we see with Aharon, וראך ושמח בלבו). All we see are external actions and words, and we have to derive the characters' internal states:

There is an implied criticism that the midrash is picking up on. The רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ finds it necessary to tell us what they were thinking; they didn’t show it well enough. The advice to authors is always “show, don’t tell”. That’s good advice for the characters as well.

But the point that the midrash is making is that we are also literary characters; there is a plot and purpose to our lives. If we are going to be an object lesson to others, we must “show, don’t tell”.

וַיַּקְשֵׁב ה׳ וַיִּשְׁמָע וַיִּכָּתֵב סֵפֶר זִכָּרוֹן לְפָנָיו לְיִרְאֵי ה׳ וּלְחֹשְׁבֵי שְׁמוֹ is the message of אַשְׁרֵי אִישׁ יָרֵא אֶת ה׳…צִדְקָתוֹ עֹמֶדֶת לָעַד; קַרְנוֹ תָּרוּם בְּכָבוֹד. What we do, the way we act is being watched and recorded. We are a lesson not only to those around us but for the future, and we need to act like it.

And so קרנו תרום בכבוד is the climax of the perek. The צדיק emulates הקב״ה, and the world will emulate the צדיק. Then the last pasuk is the response of the רשע:‎ יראה וכעס; שניו יחרק. I have to say I am disappointed with this pasuk; the thought would work well in the middle of the perek, but it seems too vindictive for the conclusion. I realize it’s a terrible chutzpah to criticize the poetics of תהילים, but I would rather have the perek end with something like תהילים עא:‎ כי בשו כי חפרו מבקשי רעתי; the רשעים are discomfited, then something about שובה as they return to ה׳, then a conclusion that ends with תהילה like the previous perek, tying it back to the הללויה of the beginning.

But no one asked me.

But perhaps I am missing the point of this last pasuk. תאות רשעים תאבד may not be a vindictive cry for vengeance, but a trope about the nature of תהילים.

Rav Hutner goes on to say that the victory of קודש over חול is the ability to take everything in the world and turn it into לשם שמים. The battle of טוב ורע in תהילים is symbolic of that, and only when that is accomplished can we sing שירה. So רשע יראה וכעס…תאות רשעים תאבד is in fact parallel to the הללויה that starts our diptych, when we can take this world created with עשרת המאמרות and elevate it with the mitzvot created with עשרה דברות.