No Questions Asked

Kapital 37 begins with the words L’Dovid Al Tischar B’Meraim, and would seem to be quite different than most Perakim in Sefer Tehillim. Rashi explains that these Pessukim are written as Tochcha to Klal Yisroel, but does not explain why Dovid Hamelech penned these lines. What shortcomings did he sense that he wished to address? Granted the first words of the Perek “Al Tischar B’Meraim” urge us not to be distracted by the success of our enemies, which might lead us to emulate their actions, but Rashi makes it clear that this is Tochacha, not Chizuk or Hisorerus—why?

Also, the Perek has a distinct structure in which pairs of Pessukim begin with the same letter in the order of the Aleph Bais. As Radak tells us elsewhere, this is the sign of a particularly important Perek—what is the message conveyed in these Pessukim that makes them specifically Chaviv to Dovid Hamelech.

Radak here notes that the previous Perek speaks of the thoughts and plans of the Goyim. This Perek, then, is in response to those Pessukim: though we may see the machinations of our enemies coming to fruition, we must not be swayed, “Al Tikaneh B’osei Avla”. Radak also adds another detail about the Tochacha of this Perek: it is directed “L’Kol HaShomeah Musaro”, to all who hear his Mussar. This would seem to include anyone throughout millennia who reads these words. This Perek, then, has a very specific goal: Dovid knew that the nature of a person is to perhaps become distracted by the success of others, and feel that he might want to somehow mold himself in their image, he, therefore, wrote these Pessukim to remind us all that we are never to look at those who are unlike us, and be impressed by their apparent success.

Dovid Hamelech does not resort to mere Tochacha, however, he outlines a very clear path to avoid these pitfalls: unwavering Bitachon in HKBH. Indeed, this Perek contains many familiar Pessukim that discuss Bitachon.

Some are very plain, for example, the Passuk says “Betach B’Hahsem V’Aseh Tov” and Rashi explains that we are meant to have Bitachon in Hashem and not resort to theft or the like. Similarly, Dovid Hamelech writes, “Gol Al Hashem Darkecha U’Betach Alav”, and Radak explains that if we place our needs upon Hashem, and only Hashem, they will be fulfilled.

Other Pessukim are more circumspect while conveying the same message: “Na’ar Hayisi V’Gam Zakanti V’Lo Raisi Tzaddik Ne’ezav”. The Meforshim point out that these words must have been written with the help of the “Sar HaOlam”, for Dovid was not that old when these words were written, but their meaning is clear: when one has Bitachon, he has no fears.

These are but a sampling of the many Pessukim related to Bitachon and the reality that even when it seems like Reashaim are succeeding, they are in fact failing. These messages are of course vital to the goal of this Perek, as defined at its outset, but also to living life in the Derech Hashem. it is therefore understandable that the Perek is written in a way that conveys its importance. With this in mind, we must that each Passuk fits into this overall theme.

In the middle of the Perek, Dovid Hamelech writes: “Yodeah Hahsem Yimei Temim V’Nachalasam L’Olam Tihiyeh”. As Rashi explains, HKBH knows how Tzadikim used their days on the world, and their reward awaits them. Of course, we know that the Schar for Tzaddikim is unlimited, but we must understand the choice of the word “Temim” here. Why does Dovid Hamelech use this word here, and not Tzaddik as is used in many other Pessukim in this Perek? How does this add to the overall message about the primacy of Bitachon conveyed by this Perek?

Although the explanation of Rashi helps us understand how these words relate to the other Pessukim in the Perek, there is a well-known Mamar Chazal in this week’s Parsha that employs these words for a seemingly unrelated Drasha.

At the beginning of Parshas Chayei Sara, when we learn of the Petirah of SaraSra Imenu, the Passuk describes her age in unusual terms: “Meah Shana V’Esrim Shana V’Sheva Shana”. Rashi there quotes the Medrash, telling us that the age of Sara is written in this way, with the word “Shana” between each number, to teach us that each number is “Nedrash L’Atzmo”, understood on its own: “Bas Meah K’Bas Esrim L’Chet…U’Bas Esrim K’Bas Sheva L’Yofi”. When Sara Immenu was one-hundred years old it was as if she was twenty in terms of Chet, and when she was twenty it was as if she was seven in terms of beauty. This Rashi is well known, but the Medrash it is based on is perhaps less so.

The Beraishis Rabba on these words begins by quoting the Passuk in Tehillim, “Yodeah Hahsem Yimei Temim”, and brings a Drasha: “K’Shem Shehem Temimim Kach Shenosam Temimim”. If a person is a Tamim, his years are Temimim as well. Then, the Medrash brings the words quoted by Rashi, “Bas Meah K’Bas Esrim L’Chet…U’Bas Esrim K’Bas Sheva L’Yofi”. This idea, that a person’s qualities need not be defined by their age, is based on the words “Yodeah Hahsem Yimei Temim”.

As familiar as the words “Bas Meah K’Bas Esrim L’Chet…U’Bas Esrim K’Bas Sheva L’Yofi” are, we must understand what Chazal are telling us here, and how this idea fits into the overall Perek. What does it mean that at the age of one hundred someone is like twenty in terms of Chet? Does that mean that they have the same amount of Aveiros, or does it refer to their outlook on Chet? This question is even more pressing when it comes to the concept of “Bas Esrim K’Bas Sheva L’Yofi”: what does this mean? Is a seven-year-old considered more beautiful than a twenty-year-old? What lesson is the Medrash teaching us?

In addition, we must understand how and why this concept is learned from the words “Yodeah Hahsem Yimei Temim”. How does this Drasha relate to the overall message of the Perek in which these words are found? Why do we learn the idea of “Bas Meah K’Bas Esrim L’Chet…U’Bas Esrim K’Bas Sheva L’Yofi” from a Passuk that is otherwise understood in the context of Bitachon?

Being that the Drasha of the Medrash is also based on the word “Temim”, K’Shem Shehem Temimim Kach Shenosam Temimim. perhaps if we understand the implication of this term we can explain the Medrash and Passuk.

In Parshas Lech Lecha we learn that HKBH introduces the Tzivuy of Bris Milah to Avrohom Avinu with the words “Hishalech Lifanai V’Heye Tamim”. The Bais HaLevi, on these words, explains the concept of Temimus in very succinctly: “Inyan HaTemimus Hu SheYa’aseh Ratzon HaBorei V’Lo Yachkor Lama Tzivahu”. The definition of Temimus is to do the Mitzvos without thinking about why there was a Tzivuy.

The Bais HaLevi explains that although we learn about the Taamei HaMitzvos, that is from the perspective of Limud HaTorah, because we wish to understand all parts of the Torah. When it comes to actually doing the Mitzvos, however, we are not meant to focus on the reasons, only on the fact that this is Ratzon Hashem.

The Medrash Tehillim brings a prime example of Temimim: the Dor HaMidbar. When they received Mitzvos that are difficult to understand, such as Chelev and Orlah, they were Mekabel without asking about their purpose. This is Temimus, “SheYa’aseh Ratzon HaBorei V’Lo Yachkor Lama Tzivahu”.

Perhaps we can understand the words of the Medrash based on this concept.

“K’Shem Shehem Temimim Kach Shenosam Temimim” When a person lives a life of Temimus, focused on fulfilling the Ratzon HaBorei without distraction, he is unaffected by the changes that a person naturally undergoes as he ages. A seven year old is not concerned with Yofi, but as we get older this takes a more prominent role in our lives. A Tamim, however, who is fixated on the mission of fulfilling the Ratzon HaBorei, will be just as indifferent when she is twenty—the time of one’s life when they usuall are most concerned with physical appearance. This is true of Chet as well: a younger person is generally more cognizant of their actions, perhaps more careful about each detail of their Avodas Hashem. sometimes, however, as we age we become a little less aware. This does not happen to a Tamim, however, because his life is completely devoted to Ratzon Hashem, thus when he is one hundred, his relationship to Chet is comparable to that of a much younger person.

We can now understand why Sarah, who the Medrash later describes as a Tamim, is described as “Bas Meah K’Bas Esrim L’Chet…U’Bas Esrim K’Bas Sheva L’Yofi”. Her lifelong devotion to Ratzon Hashem ensured that she remained unchanged even as she aged, always focused on her singular goal.

We can understand the Passuk in Tehillim based on this idea as well.

One can only become a Tamim, and lead a life of “SheYa’aseh Ratzon HaBorei V’Lo Yachkor Lama Tzivahu”, if they are steeped in true Bitachon. Only if one truly understands the way the world works, that the Ratzon HaBorei is paramount and any appearance of Teva is but a mirage, can he dedicate his life to Kiyum HaMtzvos in this manner. The Tamim is by definition a Boteach.

That the word Tamim is also used to describe a simpleton is no coincidence: it is these people who are often seen, by those who don’t understand, as uninformed, or primitive. The Passuk therefore tells us “Yodeah Hahsem Yimei Temim V’Nachalasam L’Olam Tihiyeh”. This serves the ultimate purpose of the Perek, teaching us that although it may seem as though the Tamim is losing out, and the Reshaim succeeding, ultimately that is not the case. The Holech Tamim is rewarded in ways that we cannot imagine because he allows his deeply held Bitachon to guide him, to become one about whom it can be said: “Ya’aseh Ratzon HaBorei V’Lo Yachkor Lama Tzivahu”.