Pain Gain

Kapital 94 begins with the words “Kel Nekamos Hashem Kel Nekamos Hofiah”, and is familiar as the Shir or Yom Revi’i. Although the Perek begins without an introductory Passuk noting its author, we can identify the source of these words nonetheless. Rashi, earlier in Sefer Tehillim, tells us that Moshe Rabbeinu composed eleven Mizmorim on the final day of his life, corresponding to the eleven Brachos that he gave to the Shevatim. Dovid Hamleche later included those Mizmorim in Sefer Tehillim, arranging them consecutively, beginning with the words Teffilah L’Moshe.

The Medrash Tehillim speaks about the Mizmorim of Moshe Rabbeinu, going as far as to explain which Shevatim some of the Perakim correspond to. Although we may have assumed that the Perakim are in the same order as the Brachos of Moshe, this does not seem to be the case. To wit, the Medrash tells us that this Perek, “Kel Nekamos Hashem”, which is the fifth in the series, relates to Shevet Gad, whose Bracha is seventh. The connection between this Perek and Shevet Gad, explains the Medrash, is that Eliyhau HaNavi comes from Shevet Gad and will take part in the downfall of the Umos HaOlam in the Yemos HaMoshiach.

It seems that the Perek itself fits well with this Medrash, as its Pessukim seems to be closely related to this idea. Rashi explains that the opening words of the Perek, “Kel Nekamos Hashem Kel Nekamos Hofiah” ask Hashem to show us the Nekama on the Goyim. These words set the tone for the remaining Pessukim, which Radak explains are a Tefillah asking that the Geulah be brought closer, at which time HKBH will take Nekama upon the Umos Haolam.

As the Perek continues, we see this idea represented in a number of ways. First, the Pessukim are plaintive, asking Hashem “Ad Masai Reshaim…Ad Masai Resahim Ya’alozu”. How long, we ask, must this Galus persist, and the Resahim given cause to rejoice? Not only do they rejoice, but as they do so, “Amcha Hashem Yidaku V’Nachalascha Ya’anu.” Radak explains that the words “Nachalasecha” in this Passuk refers to Klal Yisroel itself, the Nachala of HKBH.

Later, the Pessukim speak directly to the Umos: “Binu Boarim B’Am U’Kesilim Masai Taskilu”. The Umos, whom Rashi refers to as “Shotim ShebaOlam”, are called to task, and asked when they might recognize “Hashem Yodeah Machshavos Adam”, that Hashem knows their intentions and evil plan.

A third part of the Perek reminds us that although the Umos threaten, we must not give up hope, “Ki Lo Yitosh Hahsem Amo V’Nachalaso Lo Ya’azov”, for we know that we will not be forsaken. This idea is reinforced, as we are reminded that it is only through the Chesed of Hahsem that we survive in Galus, “Lulei Hahsem Ezrasa Li Kimat Shachna Duma Nafshi”. Similarly, “B’Rov Sharafai B’Kirbi Tanchumech Yishashu Nafshi”, when we are troubled, it is Hashem that comforts us.

All said, the Perek seems to have a consistent theme: as we languish in Galus, we are secure in the knowledge that HKBH protects us, and will one day soon take Nekama upon those who have oppressed us. There is one Passuk in the middle of the Perek that seems to carry an additional message as well.

After the portion directed at the Umos HaOlam themselves, the Passuk says: “Ashrei HaGever Asher Tisrenu Kah U’Mitorascha Telamdenu”. Rashi explains that these words are to be read together with the next Passuk, “L’Hashkit Mimei Rah Ad Yikara L’Rasha Shachas”, and explained as follows: the Tzaddikim who are oppressed at the hands of the Goyim have cause to be glad, because their Torah and Mitzvos protect them from the Yimei HaDin, while they see that the Reshaim will be punished.

On the one hand, we can see how these words are related to the overall theme of the Perek, as they give some context to the suffering of Tzadikim in Galus, but they do seem to form their own section. The previous Pessukim were those directed at the Umos themselves, and Rashi tells us that the next words, “Ki Lo Yitosh Hashem”, are related to the Pessukim at the beginning of the Perek, which plead for our salvation. These Pessukim can of course be understood Al Derech HaPshat, as Rashi explains, but if we look at the words of Chazal related to these words, a question arises.

There are a number of Mamarei Chazal that quote this Passuk, all of which include the same Drasha. One of the places a Gemara at the beginning of Brachos: “Shalosh Matanos Tovos Nasan HKBH L’Yirsroel V’Kulan Lo Nasnan Ela Al Yidei Yisurin”. Hashem gave us three gifts, all of which are acquired with Yisurin: Torah, Eretz Yisroel and Olam Habah. The Gemara proves that Torah is acquired with Yisurin is from the words “Ashrei HaGever Asher Tisrenu Kah U’Mitorascha Telamdenu”, and that Eretz Yisroel is Niknis B’Yisurin from the words in week’s Sedra that speak about Yisurin, “Ki K’Asher Yiyaser Ish Es Beno Hashem Elokecha Miyasrecha…”

This concept is not foreign: we know that both Torah and Eretz Yisroel are Niknis B’Yisurin, but there are two questions that must be asked on this Chazal, one general and one specific.

First, why does the Gemara refer to Torah, Eretz Yisroel and Olam Habah as Matanos Tovos, choice gifts, only to then tell us that we can acquire them through Yisurin, suffering? Generally, a gift—especially one that will be classified as a Matana Tova—is given without any preconditions, and certainly can be obtained without suffering. How are we to understand this Gemara? Why are Torah and Eretz Yisroel both Matanos Tovos and Niknis B’Yisurin?

We must also understand why the concept of Ain Torah Niknis Ela B’Yisurin is learned from this Passuk. As we have seen, the focus of this Perek is the suffering we experience in Galus and the Nekama we hope to see. Although both Torah and Yisurin are mentioned in this Passuk, this Drasha certainly does not seem to fit with the overall thrust of the Perek. How can we understand this in context? Why is it here, specifically, that we are taught Ain Torah Niknis Ela B’Yisurin?

Although the statement of the Medrash, that these Matanos can only be accessed through Yisurin, seems absolute, it appears that this was not always the case.

The Yalkut, on the words of the Haftorah of Nachamu, tells us: “Keshenishtabru HaLuchos Nigzera Gezeira…SheYilmadu Torah Mitch Tzar UMitoch Tiltul…” It was only after the Chet HaEgel that the Lomdei Torah were Nigzar to do so Mitoch HaDEchak, but it seems that prior to that point one would have been able to be Koneh the Torah free of Yisurin. How can we understand this: is Yisurin a precondition of Torah or not? We must also understand if this idea applies to the Yisurin mentioned in this week’s Parhsa: was it the case that prior to our Chet we could have acquired Eretz Yisroel withour suffering as well?

R' Dessler, in a letter to his father published in Michtav M’Eliyahu, quotes this Medrash and explains the concept of Yisurin with great depth.

The Luchos HaRishonim came directly from HKBH and represented the Tikun of the world: Gashmius M’Toch Ruchnias. Their physical existence was totally secondary to their Ruchnias, which is how the world is meant to exist—and if not for the Chet HaEgel, it would have. A Chet, however, creates a Pirud, or separation, between Ruchni and Gashmi, and the world was therefore altered. This Pirud, explains R’ Dessler, is exploited by the Yetzer Harah, who constantly seeks to expand the rift and draw us closer to Gashmi and further from Ruchani.

This effect, explains R’ Dessler, was immediately seen in the Luchos Shnios, which Moshe Rabbeinu made and therefore had an existence of “Ruchnias Al Gabei Gashmiyus”. These Luchos maintained the Kedusha of the first set, but they represented a layering of Ruchni and Gashmi rather than the ideal of Gashmius M’Toch Ruchnias. The world that we live in currently is one of “Ruchnias Al Gabei Gashmiyus”, in which the spiritual and mundane coexist, but they are not joined as one, and Pirud exists.

Left to his devices, the Yetzer Hara would expand the Pirud without boundary, not allowing and Gashmi and Ruchni to coexist at all: we would have to choose one or the other. If we wished to live a life of Ruchni, there would be no room for a physical existence at all—the chasm of Pirud would be too wide.

HKBH found a solution, however, as the Yalkut in this week’s Parsha tells us that all the Gashmi we have come from the Brachos of Bilaam. Because these Brachos were Kedusha that came from Tumah, the Yetzer Harah allows us to benefit from them, despite his aversion to any Gashmius in a life of Ruchnias.

Based on these ideas, Rav Dessler concludes that in Galus all Gashmi comes at the expense of Ruchnias, as the Yetzer Harah ensures that some balance exists. When we enjoy the world we live in, it is only because the Yetzer Harah allows us to in order to create further Pirud. Thus, it when this Pirud came into existence, after Chet HaEgel and when the Luchos Shnios of Ruchnias Al Gabei Gashmiyus were given, that Limud HaTorah Mitoch HaDechak was necessary. It was in this new reality that the wishes of the Yetzr Harah took hold, and we were required to “pay” for Gashmi at the expense of Ruchni.

We can now understand the Yalkut in Yeshaya: the reality of Ain Torah Niknis Ela B’Yisurin indeed did not only exist, it was the result of Pirud. We can extend this concept to Eretz Yisroel as well: as the world exists now, we cannot access the true Kedusha of Eretz Yisroel, and its ultimate Ruchani, without “paying” for it with Gashmi.

Based on this we can answer our two questions on the Gemara in Brachos.

Torah and Eretz Yisroel are indeed Matanos Tovos, but our actions have ensured that they cannot be accessed without Yisurin. Because of the Pirud caused by Chet, we can now only reach Eretz Yisroel, or be Koneh the Torah, through physical suffering.

We can understand why this is learned from a Perek focused on Galus as well. The reality of Ashrei HaGever Asher Tisrenu Kah U’Mitorascha Telamdenu exists only because we are in Galus, and when the day of “Kel Nekamos Hashem Kel Nekamos Hofiah arrives this will end as well. When that day comes we will no longer have to suffer in order to acquire Kedusha, be it Torah or Eretz Yisroel, and that will be our ultimate revenge on the forces that oppress us.

In a Perek replete with descriptions of our physical suffering, and focused on Geulah, we are reminded that this is the result of our actions and can be ended by us as well. That day will be heralded by Eliyahu HaNavi, from Shevet Gad, who will arrive to inform us that the Pirud will be eliminated, inviting us all to live a life of Gashmius M’Toch Ruchnias with the ultimate Tikun HaBriah,