Silent Prayer

Most of Parshas Balak is given to the story of Bilaam’s repeated attempts to curse Bnei Yisroel, and the Brachos that he ended up bestowing instead. At the end of the Sedra, however, we learn about the events that occurred in Shittim, including the monumental act of Pinchas. Although we are familiar with the basic story, the episode is discussed in Sefer Tehillim in a way that provides some additional detail.

Kapital 106, which begins with the words “Hallelukah Hodu L’Hashem Ki Tov Ki L’Olam Chasdo”, is dedicated to words of Hallel V’Hoda’ah to HKBH for the various Chasadim done with Klal Yisroel after they left Mitzrayim. The Perek reads like an historical survey of that period, discussing the many times that we stumbled but were ultimately saved.

Dovid Hamelech sets the tone for the main portion of the Perek with the words “Chatanu Avoseinu He’evinu Hirshanu”, and goes on to describe the Chataim at length. First, the Passuk mentions the fact that the Yidden in Mitzrayim did not recognize the Niflaos that HKBH did on their behalf, but that they were saved “L’Hodiah Es Gevuraso.” This pattern continues, as the various foibles of Bnei Yisroel are remembered, along with the ways in which these shortcomings were overlooked as Hashem continued to save them. Chet HaEgel is mentioned as well, attributing it to the fact that Bnei Yisroel seemed to have forgotten that Hashem had saved them in Mitzrayim. there too, the nation faced disaster: “Vayomer L’Hashmidem Lulei Moshe Bechiro Amad BaPeretz Lifanav L’Hashiv Chamoso”.

The Perek serves as a review of the Parshios of Sefer Bamidbar as well, recalling all the events of the Midbar in turn: Kivros HaTaava, Adas Korach, and the Meraglim are each spoken about briefly. The story of Shitim is of course included as well.

The Passuk first speaks about the Aveiros that happened when Bnei Yisroel arrived in Shittim, “VaYitzmidu L’Bal Peor VaYochlu Zivchei Mesim”, and the punishment they received: “VaTifratz Bam Mageifah”. The Pessukim continue, speaking about the next part of the story: “VaYaamod Pinchas VaYipalel VaTeatzer Hamagefah”. This very brief, and somewhat cryptic, description of Pinchas’s actions requires some explanation.

We know, based on the Pessukim in the Torah, that the action which stopped the Mageifa was the execution of Zimri and Kosbi, which Pinchas carried out using a spear. The Passuk in Tehillim does not mention the Aveirah of Zimri, and uses only the word “Vayipalel” to describe the actions of Pinchas. This word itself is not immediately familiar, and we must understand its implication if we are to properly explain this Passuk.

Radak and Ry”d both explain that the word “Vayipalel” actually refers to the Ma’aseh Pinchas, as this word shares a Shoresh with the word Pelilim, which appears in Parshas Mishpatim and Hazinu. In both those places, Rashi explains that the term refers to Dayanim, and the implication is that when Pinchas decided how to act, he did so based on Din, and that is the meaning of the word “Vayiplalel”.

Sforno brings a similar Pirush to this word, “Asah Pelilah V’Din L’Kvod Kono”, but then adds a word: “V’Hispallel.” We must understand this addition— the explanation provided by the other Meforshim, and echoed by Sforno himself, seems adequate to understand the word “Vayipalel”, why add an additional word. In addition, the Torah does not mention that Pinchas was Mispallel, why would Sforno assume that this was the case? And, if we accept that Pinchas did indeed Daven at that time, it would seem important to understand the nature of his Teffilos—for what was he Misplallel?

It would seem that the source for the words of Sforno are a Ma’amar Chazal that appears in many places, chiefly among them the Gemara at the beginning of Brachos.

There, the Gemara discusses the importance of having a set place for Davening, stating “Kol HaKoveah Makom L’Tefilaso Elokei Avraham B’Ozro”. The implication of this statement is that when one is Koveah Makom he emulates Avrohom Avinu, and his Davening is affected by this Zechus. The Gemara then asks how we know that Avrohom himself was Koveah Makom L’Tefilaso, and answers with a Passuk in Parshas Vayera: “Vayaskem Avrohom Baboker El Hamakom Asher Amad Sham”. The Passuk says that the day after Sedom was destroyed Avrohom awoke, and went the same place he had previously stood. The Gemara explains that the words “Asher Amad Sham” refer to Tefillah, because “Ain Amida Ela Tefillah”, which we see from the Passuk here in Tehillim that says “VaYaamod Pinchas VaYipalel”.

It is clear from the Gemara that the word “Vayipallel” refers to Tefillah, which is of course a very similar term, and that the term “Amidah” that appears in reference to both Avrohom and Pinchas, shows that Avrohom went to Daven in the same place he previously had, and was therefore Koveah Makom L’Tefilaso. If so, we can understand why Sforno adds the word “V’Hispallel” here as, based on the Gemara in Brachos, the Passuk in Tehillim highlights that part of his actions.

That said, we must still understand what the Teffilos of Pinchas were, and why Dovid Hamelech specifically alludes to them in Tehillim. What were these Tefillos, and why are they important to speak about?

In order to answer these questions, we must better understand one of the statements made in the Gemara: “Ain Amida Ela Tefillah”. The Gemara seems to assign a connection between the Amidah, standing, and Tefillah, but what does this mean? There are many words used to describe Davening, but all of them refer to types of Teffilos or the way in which they are expressed. How does the term “Amidah” refer to Tefillah?

This question is perhaps compounded by a statement made by the Gemara in Sotah. There, the Gemara tells us that once the Sefer Torah is opened for Kriah, one is not allowed to speak in front of it. This Halacha is based on a Passuk in Sefer Nechemiah which tells us that Ezra HaSofer opened a Sefer Torah to read from it, “U’Kipischo Amdu Kol Ha’am.” The Gemara concludes that this shows the importance of not speaking once the Sefer Torah is open because “Ain Amidah Ela Shtika”.

How can we reconcile these two statements of the Gemara? Tefillah is something that is necessarily verbal—how then can the term “Amidah” refer to both Teffilah and Shtikah, which would seem to be opposites?

Perhaps if we understand the concept of Shtikah, and specifically the type of silence referred to by the word “Amidah”, we can better explain these Ma’amarei Chazal, and therefore the Pessukim.

The Gemara in Chulin brings a Passuk in Tehillim which says “HaAmnam Elem Tzedek”, and tells us: “Mah Umnaso Shel Adam B’Olam HaZeh Ya’aseh Atzmo K’Ilem”. Rashi there explains that the “Umnus Yaffeh Hi HaIlum”, the most admirable craft, is that of silence. This is somewhat difficult to understand as the term “Umnus” generally refers to a skilled craft, one which is honed and perfected—how is silence a skill? If one does not speak, he has made himself “K’Ilem”, what aptitude or talent is involved?

R’ Moshe Yechiel Epstein, the Ozharover Rebbe, in his Sefer Be’er Moshe discusses the concept of Shtikah, and specifically the Umnus of silence. He explains that the Gemara is not referring to someone who simply does not speak, but to one who knows when to speak and when to stay silent—an ability which indeed takes skill and practice. The Rebbe also adds another level of Umnus which can perhaps be instructive here.

While we generally think of Shtikah in the category of “Sur Me’Ra”—one stays silent instead of speaking Devarim Assurim or even Devarim Betelim. The Be’er Moshe explains, however, that there is another level of Shtikah which is “Asei Tov”. When one is silent so that he can concentrate what is being said, and allow it to affect him, he is engaged in the Umnus of Shtikah.

This, explains the Rebbe, is referred to by the words “Ain Amidah Ela Shtika”. When Erza began to read from the Torah and those around him stood silently, they did so in an effort to allow his words to penetrate their hearts and affect them. They were not silent merely out of respect, which would be a Shitak of “Sur Me’Ra”, but out of a desire to concentrate fully on what they were hearing—a Shtikah of “Asei Tov”.

If we think about it, the word “Amidah” contributes to this implication as well. Only if one stands still, and does not allow himself to be distracted, can he use his Shtika in this way. Amidah is therefore a necessary component of constructive silence, which allows one to allow the words he is hearing to penetrate his heart and affect him.

Perhaps we can explain that this is an element of Teffilah as well.

Most often, one is Misplallel for his own needs and desires. We have a recognition that only HKBH can provide for us, and Teffilah is therefore a way to present our Bakashos. There is another type of Teffilah, though, one in which the supplicant does not know what he needs or what circumstance calls for—he asks for the Ratzon Hashem to be made clear so that it can be carried out. This is the Teffilah of Amida, in which even as a person speaks, he is silent to an extent, ready for his Teffilos to be answered in a way that will guide him.

When Avrohom was Mispallel for Sedom he did so in a way which was clear that he was concerenced only for Kavod Shamayim. He asked Hashem to spare the cities on account of any Tzaddikim that could be found within them, for the destruction of righteous people would cause Chillul Hashem. This was not a Tefillah for Avrohom’s own good, it was a Teffilah that begged for the Ratzon Hashem to be made clear—a Teffilah that had an element of Amida and Shtikah.

The Teffilos of Pinchas were also accompanied by Amidah. It is clear from Chazal that when Pinchas saw what was happening he was unsure how to proceed. Perhaps this led to his Teffilah: he was not seeking for any specific outcome, but rather Davened for clarity so that the Ratzon Hashem could be carried out. This, too, was a Teffilah of Amidah and Shtika, one in which the supplicant waited the response so that he could know how to act: “VaYaamod Pinchas VaYipalel”.

When we find ourselves in a situation of dilemma, unsure how to proceed, we too can employ the Teffilah of Amida, standing at the ready to have our Teffilos answered in a way that allows us to discern the Ratzon Haborei and act so that Kiddush Hashem is ensured.