Last time we saw David coronated king in Chevron. He will next move his capital and the religious center of the country to Jerusalem. Weโll spend a long time talking about that.
But before that, I want to look at a ืคืจืง ืชืืืืื, written not by David but by Asaf the Levite, that tells us how we got here and where we are going:
Who was Asaf? He was one of the leaders of the ืืฉืืจืจืื, the Levitical singers in the ืืฉืื:
But he wasnโt literally ืขื ืืืื ื of ืืืื ืืืฉืืจืจ:
David would set up two centers of worship, one at the ืืฉืื in ืืืขืื, and one with the ืืจืื in ืืจืืฉืื.โ ืืกืฃ was the head of the latter. And he was more than a singer:
This particular perek is called a ืืฉืืื.
[Rav Schwab discusses the ืืจืื of ืืชื ืืื ื]โ ืืฉืื means practical, applied wisdom. If one has wisdom in theory only but does not apply it to his practical life, behavior and character, this wisdom is not called ืืฉืื. โฆWe find (ืืืืฉืข ื:ื)โ ืืืขื ืชืฉืืื, which means, in accordance with the context there, that by the practical application of the mitzvos HaTorah, you will be successful in your endeavors.
โฆThere may be people who are ืืืจืฉ ืืช ืืืืงืื in that they daven frequently, learn Torah in depth, and may even be the source of chidushei Torah; yet they could still lack the element of ืืฉืืืโฆ
Notably, a ืืฉืืื was not meant to be sung, but to be orated:
Itโs a lesson that Asaf wants to teach.
ืืืืขื ืืืืืช ืื ื ืงืื
The first 8 psukim are the introduction: Asaf is telling us what he is going to say. Itโs going to be a ืืฉื and a ืืืื, a parable and a riddle, so we have to pay attention. But itโs a lesson that has been handed down though history, and he is going to review Jewish history to make his point. ืคืกืืงืื ื-ื are the point: past generations were a ืืืจ ืกืืจืจ ืืืจื but we need to do better: ืืฉืืื ืืืืงืื ืืกืื.โ ืืกืื generallly means โfoolโ but here it means โrelianceโ:
Hirsch explains it as โthat unshakeable trust which men place in G-d and his promises even though there may be nothing in the physical world that might serve as visible or tangible vindicationโฆ[that may] seem utter โfollyโ to the materialist mind which can only understand that which it can see and touchโ.
ืื ื ืืคืจืื
The perek is largely about the selection of David and Jerusalem, and ืืคืจืื is a metonym for the Israel in the days of the Judges, when the center of the country was in ืฉืืื, in ืืคืจืื.
Itโs also a hint to the kingdom of Saul, who was from ืื ืืืื, from the children of ืจืื, as opposed to David, from ืืืืื, from the children of ืืื.
But thereโs also a reference to one of the first rebellions of ืื ื ืืฉืจืื, from an obscure verse in ืืืจื ืืืืื:
The midrash says that ืื ื ืืคืจืื tried to calculate the end of the Egyptian servitude, since ืืณ said (ืืจืืฉืืช ืื:ืื)โ ืืืืืจ ืืืืจื ืืืข ืชืืข ืื ืืจ ืืืื ืืจืขื ืืืจืฅ ืื ืืื ืืขืืืื ืืขื ื ืืชื ืืจืืข ืืืืช ืฉื ืื
They figured 400 years from the ืืจืืช ืืื ืืืชืจืื, but it was really 430 years from then:
(This is an object warning against trying to calculate when Mashiach will come: (ืกื ืืืจืื ืฆื,ื)โ ืชืืคื ืขืฆืื ืฉื ืืืฉืื ืงืืฆืื)
However, this doesnโt fit the ืคืฉื, since the psalm goes on to say that theyโืื ื ืืคืจืืโforgot the great deeds that ืืณ did in Egypt, which would have been after the premature exit.
ื ืื ืืืืชื ืขืฉื ืคืื
ืคืกืืงืื ืื-ืื describe the miracles that ืืณ did in the wilderness when the Jews left: He split the sea, led them with pillars of cloud and fire, and gave them water in the desert.
ืืืืกืืคื ืขืื ืืืื ืื
Hirsch translates ืืืกืืคื ืขืื ืืืื as โthey went on continually to sin against Himโ. The specific sins that the perek refers to is ืชืืขืจื and ืงืืจืืช ืืชืืื. Weโll see why specifically those two. But we need to review the story:
As presented in ืชืืืืื, the people admit ืืณ can give them water but question whether He can give them ืืื, in sense of โsubstantial foodโโืืืื ืืื ืื ืืฉ ืืกืขื. And they want fleshโืฉืืจ. This word is unusal; it generally means not โmeatโ but โflesh and bloodโ, a close relative:
This is the source of Rashiโs comment that ืืชืืื ืชืืื is more than a lust for meat, it was a lust for ืขืจืื:
I would read ืืื ืฉืืข ืืณโฆืืืฉ ื ืฉืงื ืืืขืงื as a reference to the previous incident of ืชืืขืจื: โThus ืืณ had heard and sent a fireโ. Asaf is saying that ืื ื ืืฉืจืื ignored the fact that they had just gone through the punishment for complaining, and forgot that ืืืืืจ ืขืืืื ืื ืืืื. Therefore ืืืืืจ ืขืืืื ืืขืคืจ ืฉืืจ,โ ืืณ sent them the flesh they demanded, then ืืืืจื ืืืฉืื ืืื.
And that continues in the cycle of Jewish history. The Jews forget ืืณ, suffer, call out for mercy, ืืณ forgives them, but then they sin again. That is the message of ืคืกืืงืื ืื-ืื. Itโs the central theme of ืกืคืจ ืฉืืคืืื:
And this is the message of ืชืืขืจื and ืงืืจืืช ืืชืืื. They just got out of one fire and they go and provoke ืืณ again. They never learn. Thatโs what Asaf wants his audience to hear: ืืื ืืืื ืืืืืชื ืืืจ ืกืืจืจ ืืืจื.
The first part of the perek ends on a relatively happy note that we quote at ืืขืจืื:โ ืืืื ืจืืื ืืืคืจ ืขืื ืืื ืืฉืืืช. But itโs not as positive as it seems when we quote it out of context: ืืณ is promising that He wonโt destroy everyone, since we are only human, ืจืื ืืืื ืืื ืืฉืื.
The second part of the perek goes through some of the same themes as the first, that ืื ื ืืฉืจืื keep sinning because they do not remember ืืณโs power and wrath. But here it reviews the ten plagues. Itโs very interesting; the list is out of order (and Iโm not sure why). It also leaves out three of them: ืืื ืื,โ ืฉืืื and ืืฉื. Hirsch (among others) explains that before most of the plagues, Moshe warned the Egyptians what was coming, so they would have a chance to repent. Before these three, there was no warning. They were meant simply as punishment. The lesson of this perek is to listen to ืืณโs warning, so those plagues are not relevant.
Frogs?
When we illustrate the plagues in childrenโs books, we always use the frogs because they are so cute; itโs a much less intimidating plague than wild animals or massive hailstorms. But are they really so benign? Our perek says ืฆืคืจืืข ืืชืฉืืืชื, the frog destroyed them. Are ืฆืคืจืืขืื really just frogs?
Google translate tells us that ุชู ุณุงุญ, tamsach, means crocodile.
The Netziv puts them together:
The Netziv reads the text carefullyโwhat does ืคืกืืง ืื add?
ืืื ืื ืืืื
And then ืืณ led the Jews to safety in ืืจืฅ ืืฉืจืื, and they messed up. ืืืกืื ืืืืืื ืืืืืชื. They betrayed G-d with idol worship, and even warped the service of the ืืฉืื:
And this corruption led to the destruction of ืืฉืื ืฉืืื, and all of Israel falling into the hands of the Philistines. This was in the generation immediately before Asaf, and probably within the memories of many of his audience. Not only was the ืืฉืื lost, but ืื ื ืืฉืจืื were devastated:
ืืืืื ืชืื ืื ืชืืืื ื
ืืื ืื ืืืจื ื ืคืื; ืืืืื ืชืื ืื ืชืืืื ืื is a reference to a specific incident in the fall of Shilo:
Pinchasโs wife (the daughter-in-law of Eli) did not weep over the death of her husband but over the loss of the ืืจืื. Many look at this as a positive:
But Rabbi Shulman argued that this was a reflection of the misplaced priorities of the kohanim of the time; they cared more for the ritual of the ืืฉืื than for respect for people.
ืืืืืจ ืืช ืฉืื ืืืืื
The end of the perek extols David and his tribe, and the sanctuary that he plans on building in Jerusalem. This is why I called this essay โPolitically Incorrectโ. Thereโs no way David himself could say this; he is trying to unite all of Israel under his leadership. Boasting about how wonderful he is and how the other tribes were rejected just wouldnโt help. But Asaf can say this.
But reading the subtext gives a very different understanding. The ืืฉื and ืืืื that Asaf speaks about in the beginning is the cycle of Jewish history, how ืืณ punishes Israel but eventually forgives, then Israel sins again and is punished again. Asaf is telling David, โremember the destruction of Shilo. Your ืืงืืฉ may be built ืืืจืฅ ืืกืื ืืขืืื but it can still be destroyed.โ This is the message that got ืืจืืืื, the prophet of the ืืืจืื ืืืช ืจืืฉืื, almost killed:
This, however, is not a prophecy of destruction, itโs a ืืฉืืื, a lesson for the future.