Remember When

Kapital 70 begins with the words “Lamenatzeach L’Dovid L’Hazkir”, and is a relatively short Perek with a definitive purpose. Radak explains that this Perek is connected to the one after it, which does not have its own introductory phrase for that reason. Although neither Perek mentions the context in which it was written, on of the Passukim in the next Perek says: “Al Tsashlicheni L’Es Zikana”, and Radak points out that this means that the Perek was written when Dovid Hamelech was older. Based on this, he explains that these Perakim were written as Dovid fled from his son, Avshalom. This episode occurred later in Dovid’s life, and so the words “Al Tsashlicheni L’Es Zikana” were therefore appropriate.

The few Pessukim of this Perek are easily understood against this backdrop, as they are singularly dedicated to a plea for help. The Mizmor itself begins with the word “Elokim L’Hatzileni Hashem L’Ezrasi Chusha”, and this theme is carried forward. Dovid asks that his enemies be thwarted, “Yevoshu V’Yachperu Mivakshei Nafshi” and that they retreat in shame, “Yisogu Achor V’Yikalmu Chafetzei Ra’asi”. It is noteworthy that Dovid does not wish his enemies harmed, just that their plans be disrupted. This is of course in line with the explanation of Radak: if Dovid said these words as he fled from his own flesh and blood, he would certainly hope that the entire affair come to a peaceful ending.

Dovid also explains why he hopes that his enemies are turned back: “Yasisu V’Yismichu Bicha Kol Mevaksehca”. When those who rise against HKBH are rendered powerless, the Mivakshei Hashem are gladdened and strengthened. They, in turn, offer Shira to HKBH, “V’Yomru Tamid Yigdal Hashem”, bringing increased Kvod Shamayim.

The Perek concludes with a renewed plea, based on the fact that Dovid does not seek Yeshuas Hashem on his own merit: “V’Ani Oni V’Evyon…Ezri U’Mifalti Attah Hashem Al Te’acher”.

While the message and purpose of this Perek is distinct and understandable, the way it begins is a little less so. There are many Perakim that begin with the words “Lamenatzeach Mizmor L’Dovid” but the term “L’Hazkir” is unusual, appearing only one other time in this form in Sefer Tehillim. One wonders, then, what this word adds.

Rashi, sensitive to this point, explains that the word “L’Hazkir” is a Lashon of Teffilah, as we find elsewhere in Tehillim: “V’Anachnu B’Shem Elokeinu Nazkir”. In one sense, this would explain he presence of this word as an introduction to a Perek of heartfelt Teffilah such as this one. At the same time, we know that many Kapitlach are Tefilos composed at trying times, but we do not find the word “L’Hazkir” as an introduction. What is different about this Perek—why is this word used here?

The Medrash Tehillim, which Rashi brings as a second explanation, focuses on this word in its explanation of this Perek. This word is included, explains the Medrash, for its potency: “B’Schar Shemazkirim Osi B’Chol Pa’am Ani Mazkir Ossam”. This statement is based on the Passuk in Yirmiyahu, which can perhaps help us understand its meaning: “Haben Yakir Li Ephraim…Ki Midei Dabri Bo Zachor Ezkerenu Od…Al Kein Me’ai Homu Lo…” It seems that the Medrash is telling us that when Klal Yisroel mentions HKBH, “Midei Dabri Bo” they are Zoche to be mentioned, or remembered, by Hashem, “Zachor Ezkerenu Od”.

The Medrash continues, placing extra emphasis on this idea: “V’Lo Goal Es Yisroel V’Asah Imahem Ela B’Shvil Sheyihyu Mazkirim Nifloasav”. The entire Geulah was only for the sake of the fact that Bnei Yisroel would be Mazkir the Nissim of HKBH. It was for this reason, concludes the Medrash, that Dovid added the word “L’Hazkir” in this case—he wished for his Teffilah to have the extra Koach of “B’Schar Shemazkirim Osi B’Chol Pa’am Ani Mazkir Ossam”.

The Medrash seems to answer our original question: although there are many other Teffilos found in Sefer Tehillim, the situation in which Dovid found himself, at the mercy of a rebellious son, was so precarious, that he felt the need to add the word “L’Hazkir” in order to be Zoche to a reality of “Zachor Ezkerenu Od”.

That said, the actual idea presented by the Medrash must be better understood. Why, in fact, does HKBH say “B’Schar Shemazkirim Osi B’Chol Pa’am Ani Mazkir Ossam”? Why does the fact that we mention HKBH, and his Nissim, affect the way that Hashem answers our Teffilos? Why, indeed, does “Ki Midei Dabri Bo” bring about an eventuality of “Zachor Ezkerenu Od”?

These questions are closely related to this week’s Parsaha, in which we find the concept of Zikaron.

Towards the end of the Tochacha, the Torah tells us: “V’Zacharti Es Brisi Yaakov V’Af Es Brisi Yitzchok V’Af Es Brisi Avrohom Ezkor V’HaAretz Ezkor”. This seems to indicate that even when all seems lost, even as the frightening Pessukim of the Tochecha come to life before our eyes, HKBH is Mazkir the Zechus Avos, which can lead to Yeshuos. A few Pessukim later, the Passuk makes a similar statement: “V’Zakarti Lahem Bris Rishonim Asher Hotzesi Osam…” seeming to repeat the idea that Zikaron will bring the end of the terrors that we had brought upon ourselves.

The connection between these Pessukim and the words “Lamenatzeach L’Dovid L’Hazkir” is mentioned the Sforno at the beginning of this Perek. Although he explainins that this Mizmor was written about Churban Bayis Sheni, taking a different approach from Radak, he notes that the word “L’Hazkir” is related to the appearance of this word at the end of the Tochacha. It seems, then, that if we can understand the Pessukim in Parshas Bechukosai we may be able to explain the Passuk in Tehillim.

In viewing these Pessukim, there are several questions that may be asked. First, why does the Torah mention this idea of Zikaron twice—first referencing the Avos Hakedoshim and then the “Bris Rishonim”? in addition, these two instances are separated by two Pessukim that seem to return to the premonitions of the Tochecha itself—why does the Torah speak about the Zikaron of the Avos, return to the Tochacha, and then speak about the Bris Rishonim? Finally, we must understand if the Bris Rishonim is different than the Bris Avos. If so, what does that represent?

There is a Medrash found in the Batei Medrashim, a collection of Medrashim that were discovered and published at the end of the nineteenth century, that discusses the words “V’Zakarti Lahem Bris Rishonim”. The Medrash tells us: “B’Sha’ah SheHu Osek B’Torasi Ani Zocher Mah SheAmar Lifanai Na’aseh V’Nishma”. When a person learn Torah, HKBH remembers the moment at which we said Na’aseh V’Nishma, “V’Chen Ani Zocher Zos B’Es Tzarav”. The Medrash concludes by citing the words of the Passuk here: “V’Zakarti Lahem Bris Rishonim”.

This Medrash appears to define the Bris Rishonim as Kabbalas HaTorah, the moment at which we said “Na’aseh V’Nishma”. When we are Osek BaTorah, it causes HKBH to recall our Kabalas HaTorah, and it is this Zechus to which the Torah refers with the words “V’Zakarti Lahem Bris Rishonim”, and it is this Zikaron that comes in times of Tzar.

It follows that there are two Zichronos that HKBH calls to mind, so to speak, when we are in Tzar: the Zechus Avos represented by the words “V’Zacharti Es Brisi…”, and Kabbalas HaTorah, represented by the words “V’Zakarti Lahem Bris Rishonim”. How can we understand this duality? Why does the Torah first mention one, and then a few Pessukim later the other?

R’ Shlomo Kluger, in Chachmas Shlomo, explains the first Passuk, “V’Zacharti Es Brisi Yaakov V’Af Es Brisi Yitzchok V’Af Es Brisi Avrohom Ezkor…” with an important insight.

The Gemarah in Bava Basra teaches: “HaMeniach Ben K’Moso K’Ilu Lo Mes”. If a person leaves over a son who follows in his footsteps, it is as if he is still alive. It follows, explains R’ Shlomo, that when Bnei Yisroel follow in the footsteps of the Avos HaKedoshim, it is as if they are alive: if our actions mirror theirs, we keep them alive and when our actions fall short, they are like Mesim.

It is hard to understand what “Ben K’Moso” means in relation to the Avos HaKedoshim—can we really hope to follow in their footsteps? R’ explains, however, that the prime Middah of the Avos was Emunah, as we see time and again in Sefer Beraishis. The definition of “Ben K’Moso” with respect to the Avos, then, is Emunah: if we cling to our Emunah, than it is as if the Avos are alive, and if not, the opposite is true.

Perhaps we can explain the two Pessukim that mention Zikaron based on this idea.

Even when we are in turmoil, when our actions have led to all the tragic events described in the Tochecha, we may retain a sense of Emunah. We can cling to a basic belief in HKBH, reflecting the concept of “Yesh Manhig LaBira” expressed by Avrohom Avinu, even in difficult times. When this is true, there is hope: “V’Zacharti Es Brisi Yaakov V’Af Es Brisi Yitzchok V’Af Es Brisi Avrohom Ezkor V’HaAretz Ezkor”. Our Emunah brings the Avos to life, and their Zechus can stand for us, bringing our suffering to an end.

But sometimes that Emunah falters, and we cannot attain the level of “HaMeniach Ben K’Moso K’Ilu Lo Mes”. Even then, Hashem tells us, all is not lost, for we may still cling to Limud HaTorah: “B’Sha’ah SheHu Osek B’Torasi Ani Zocher Mah SheAmar Lifanai Na’aseh V’Nishma… V’Chen Ani Zocher Zos B’Es Tzarav”. When we learn, we bring to life all those who said “Na’aseh V'Nishma” and we can be saved in their Zechus, “V’Zakarti Lahem Bris Rishonim.”

This can help us understand the Medrash Tehillim as well.

It is obvious that only if someone believes in Hashgacha Elyona will he relate to, and discuss, the Niflaos HaBorei done for us and our forebearers. Therefore, “B’Schar Shemazkirim Osi B’Chol Pa’am Ani Mazkir Ossam”. The words “B’Chol Pa’am” seem to highlight that this occurs always, even in difficult times. When a person is B’Tzar but maintains his Emunah, and even disucsses the Nifloas Hashem, then he is Zoche to a reality of “Ani Mazkir Ossam” under the rubric of “V’Zacharti Es Brisi Yaakov…”

Perhaps this is why Dovid chose to use the word “L’Hazkir” here specifically. On one hand, Dovid wished to highlight his own Emunah, speaking about the Nissim that Hashem does even though he was in a difficult position, in the hopes of arousing the Zechus Avos, “Ani Mazkir Ossam”. At the same time, his enemy in this case was his own son, who Dovid hoped would be steered away from his mistaken path. The word “L’Hazkir” calls to mind not only the level of “V’Zacharti Es Brisi Yaakov...” but also “V’Zakarti Lahem Bris Rishonim”, which can be accessed through Limud HaTorah. Perhaps Dovid felt that if Avsholom engaged in some sort of Limud HaTorah he could grab onto the Zechus of “Ani Zocher Mah SheAmar Lifanai Na’aseh V’Nischma” and be Zoche his own Yeshua.

The words “Lamenatzeach L’Dovid L’Hazkir” therefore reflect not only the cries of Dovid for his own safety, but also a Teffilah for his beloved son, whom he was later Maspid with bitter tears. By clinging to the Zechus Avos as well as the Zechus of Kaballas HaTorah, Dovid hoped that perhaps both could be saved, leading to the ultimate expression of V’Yomru Tamid Yigdal Hashem.