Ki Sava – פרק ק׳׳א: Vocal Chords

Chazal tell us that there is a Takanas Ezra ensuring that Parshas Ki Savo is read prior to Rosh Hashana, with the hopes of “Tichlah Shana V’Kililoseha”. The Tochaha found in this week’s Parsha may be somewhat difficult to read and certainly to fully understand, but it seems to be an integral part of our Avodah this week. It therefore seems important to try and gain insight into the message of these Pessukim.

Most of the Pessukim of the Tochecha are dedicated to the “Klalos”, which foretell the travesties that will befall Bnei Yisroel if we do not cling to the Derech Hashem. The Torah, however, does not only predict disaster, it explains the root of our failings as well: “Tachas Asher Lo Avadeta Es Hashem Elokecha B’Simcha U’BiTuv Levav”. The Passuk makes it clear that a lack of Simcha in our Avodas Hashem will lead us astray, to the point that we are subject to the Klalos.

We know that our Avodas Hashem should be infused with joy, under the rubric of “Ivdu Es Hashem B’Simcha”, but it is jarring to see the Torah ascribe our destruction to a lack of Simcha. There is of course a very basic way to understand this Passuk: Simcha is such an integral part of our Avodah that its absence voids the Avodah itself. This may be true, but there is a Gemarah that may shift our understanding of these words.

The Gemara in Erachin discusses the requirement for Korbanos to be accompanied by Shira, and brings a number of possible sources for this Din. Rav Masna tells us that the source is this Passuk: “Tachas Asher Lo Avadeta Es Hashem Elokecha B’Simcha U’BiTuv Levav”. The Gemara explains that the Avodah of “Simcha V’Tuv Levav” is Shirah. The Gemarah then suggests that perhaps these words refer to Dirvrei Torah, as the Passuk says “Pikudei Hashem Yesharim Mesamchei Lev”, but rejects this notion because the word “Tov” is not used in that Passuk.

The implication of the Gemara is that the words “Simcha V’Tuv Levav”, as used in our Passuk, refer to Shira. If so, the Torah is not merely pointing to a lack of joy or happiness, it is telling us that the Klalos of Ki sav come because our Avodah lacks “Shira”.

How can we understand this idea? What is the Shira that we are meant to be singing as part of our Avodas Hashem, and why does its absence predict doom?

To answer these questions, we must consider the concept of Shira in general, which we can perhaps do through the eyes of the Ne’im Zemiros Yisroel, whose very essence was given to this Avodah.

Kapital 101 begins with the words “L’Dovid Mizmor” we encounter Shira at its very outset: “Chesed U’Mishpat Ashira Lecha Hashem Azamera”. Radak explains that the Pessukim are given to “Mishpitei Malchuso”, the way in which Dovid Hamelech ran his kingdom.

Indeed this theme seems to run through the Pessukim. Dovid writes of his disdain for those who do act properly: “Oseh Setim Sanesi Lo Yidbak Bi.” He hates those who are dishonest or crooked, and cannot bear there presence. Similarly, Dovid promises to remove those who posses a “Lev Ikesh”, so that he is not surrounded by those who are perverse and unclear. He also discusses the “Malshini B’Seser Re’ehu”, those who slander their fiends, promising to destroy them, lest their destructive ways pervade the Malchus.

Many of the Pessukim follow this pattern, as Dovid enumerates all those whose presence in his midst would be destructive to the Malchus, pledging to exclude them from his ranks. The “Geva Eynayim” and “Rechav Levav”, which Metzudos explains to the Ba’alei Gaiva and those who are overly indulgent, will not have a place in Dovid’s environs, as he places his trust in the “Ne’emanei Aretz” and the “Holech B’Derech Tamim”. By relying only on the most pure and elevated souls, Dovid ensures that this Malchus is one in which all denizens are treated fairly.

This, explains Radak, is the Pshat in the opening words of the Perek: “Chesed U’Mishpat Ashira Lecha Hashem Azamera”. Dovid sings Shira to Hashem about his ability to do Chesed and Mishpat within his Malchus. Recognizing that Malchus itself, and the ability to use his Lev Tov to treat his subjects fairly, are gifts from HKBH, Dovid raises his voice in Shira. Having expressed his gratitude, Dovid then goes on to explain his strategy to ensure that Chesed and Mishpat reign, as we have seen.

There is, however, a Ma’amar Chazal—brought by Rashi here—that understands these words differently than Radak.

The Gemara in Brachos explains the words Chesed U’Mishpat Ashira as follows: “Im Chesed Ashira Im Mishpat Ashira”. Dovid tells HKBH: whether I find Chesed or Mishpat, Rachamim or Din, I will sing Shira. No matter his predicament, Dovid promises to respond with Shira. This, explains the Gemara, is a possible source for the Halacha that “Chayav Adam L’Barech Al HaRa’ah K’shem Shemevarech Al HaTov”—we are to follow the example of Dovid Hamelech, singing Shira in times of Chesed and Mishpat.

How can we understand the context of this Passuk in light of the Gemara? Why does Dovid Hamelech begin by declaring his intention to say Shira whether he finds Chesed or Mishpat, and then go on to discuss the way in which he rules his Malchus? What is the connection between the words “Im Chesed Ashira Im Mishpat Ashira” and the rest of the Perek?

Perhaps we can answer this question, and gain a new understanding into the concept of Shira, based on an Mamer of Rav Hutner brought in Pachad Yitzchok on Pesach.

As we know, the chief distinction of a human is that we are alone amongst the Briah in having the Koach Hidibur. Animals may make sounds, but they are unable to speak. It is for this reason that Avieros which include speech are particularly offensive: they violate our most sacred gift. Being that speech is in fact so elementary to our existence and distinction, it is a matter worth understanding on a deeper level.

Rav Hutner points out that many of Halachos related to speech—Nedarim, Shavuos, Erachin and the like—are discussed by the Rambam in a volume of Yad Hachazaka that he called “Sefer Hafla’ah”. This is of course based on the Passuk that says “Ish Ki Yafli L’Nidor Neder”, in which the word Peleh is assigned to speech. This word, Peleh, is commonly translated as “wonder” but there must be a connotation that fits this usage as well, relating the term to speech. Rav Hutner finds just such an explanation in a Rama in Orach Chaim.

The term “Peleh” is also used at the end of the Bracha of Asher Yatzar: “Rofeh Kol Basar U’Mafli L’asos”, a phrase which requires explanation as well. The Rama, in Hilchos Asher Yatzar, tells us that this term refers to a “Kesher Bein Davar Ruchani L’Davar Gashmi”, a link between the physical and spiritual. Rav Hutner explains the use of this word and connotation at the end of Asher Yatzar, but the key element for our discussion relates to the matter of speech.

In discussing the Birah of Adam, the Torah uses three phrases: “Vayitzer…Es HaAdam Afar Min HaAdama”, “Vaipach B’Apav Nishmas Chaim”, “Vayehi HaAdam L’Nefesh Chaya”. The first term refers to the physical creation of man, his corporal being, which came “Afar Min HaAdama”. The second, speaks of his Nesama, his Chelek Elokah Mimal which became his “Nishmas Chaim. The final phrase refers to the completion of Adam, which came when his Chelek Gashmi and Chelek Ruchani, his Guf and Neshama, were merged: “Vayehi HaAdam L’Nefesh Chaya”. ‘

Rav Hutner points out that the Targum translates the words “Nishmas Chaim” as “Ruach Mimalela”, referring to speech. It emerges that at the moment that Gashmi and Ruchani were fused, leading to “Vayehi HaAdam L’Nefesh Chaya”, was the moment in which Adam was rendered a Midaber: the Koach Hadibur came when there was a Kesher Bein Davar Ruchani L’Davar Gashmi, and as such can rightfully be refered to by the term Peleh. The explanation of the Rama, that a Peleh refers to a connection between Ruchani and Gashmi, therefore allows us insight not only into the meaning of this word, but also into the essence of the Koach HaDibur as well.

As is his Derech, Rav Hutner takes this idea a few steps further, highlighting another connection between the term “Peleh” and speech.

The natural order of the world, explains the Rosh Hayeshiva, is that of “Rasha V’Tov Lo”. In the Derech Hateva, a person can enjoy life despite his missteps. In the Olam HaRuchani, however, the Hanahaga of “Rasha V’Ra Lo” pervades: a person will always experience retribution for his actions. Olam Hazeh, as we know, is dictated by the Derech HaTeva, and so we experience the reality of “Rasha V’Tov Lo”, while Olam Habah of course follows the opposing dictates of the Olam HaGashmi.

It emerges that when we see that a Rasha experience downfall—a Kiyum of “Rasha V’Ra Lo”—we are witnessing a moment of Olam Habah in Olam Hazeh. If even for a moment, the Hanhaga of the Olam HaGashim, “Rasha V’Tov Lo” is suspended, as the realities of the Olam HaRuchani prevail. At that moment, we are seeing a Peleh, a “Kesher Bein Davar Ruchani L’Davar Gashmi”, and must react accordingly. As usual, the Torah tells us exactly what that reaction should be.

When Bnei Yisroel witnessed the Mapalah of Pharoah, the ultimate exhibit of Rasha V’Ra Lo, they sang Shira: “Norah Tehillos Oseh Pelleh”. Shira, explains Rav Hutner, is the most elevated use of the Koach Hadibur, when the true Chiyus of this gift emerges. When we see a Peleh, a “Kesher Bein Davar Ruchani L’Davar Gashmi”, expressed in the world itself we respond with the essence of Dibur, which is itself a Peleh. Shira, then, is best used to recognize when Olam Hazeh is suffused with the influences of Olam Habah, when Ruchani and Gashmi coalesce.

Dovid Hamelech says: “Im Chesed Ashira Im Mishpat Ashira”. This portends a worldview that is in a constant state of Peleh. If we view Tov and Rah as two separate existences, then we live in a world in which “Tzaddik V’Rah Lo” is possible. If, however, we recognize that Chesed and Din are truly one, that all HKBH does is Emes and Tov, then we transcend Olam Hazeh and live in a world of Peleh in which there is a constant “Kesher Bein Davar Ruchani L’Davar Gashmi”.

It was this approach that allowed Dovid to rule his Melucha in such an exacting manner. Rulers tend to surround themselves with the “Geva Eynayim” and “Rechav Levav”, who peddle their opinions and assistance for a little bit of access, in an effort to consolidate power. Similarly, the “Malshini B’Seser Re’ehu” keep the king informed of any palace intrigue in the interests of his continued control. If one lives in world in which there is no distinction between Teva and Ruchani, however, he has no need for these characters. A true Melech, who lives an existence of “Im Chesed Ashira Im Mishpat Ashira” does not resort to these relationships, as he knows that the Melech Malchei Hamelachim is the only source of power and control.

Perhaps this can help us understand the Passuk in the Tochecha.

Shira, as we have seen, is the reaction to a Davar Peleh—the recognition of a “Kesher Bein Davar Ruchani L’Davar Gashmi”. When we don’t see the Hanhaga of Olam Habah in Olam Hazeh, when we draw a distinction between Chesed and Mishpat, we cannot sing Shira. The Torah tells us that the Klalos come “Tachas Asher Lo Avadeta”. This means that we are not being Oved Hashem with Shira, as the Gemara says. It is not our Avodah that is lacking Simcha—it is we that are lacking the Avodah of Shira, which can only come if we live in a world of Peleh. If we delude ourselves into thinking the Olam HaGashmi is distinct from the Olam HaRuchani, we cannot use our Koach Hadibur to its fullest—raising our voice in song—and we are no Oved Es Hashem Elokecha B’Simcha U’BiTuv Levav

Perhaps this is hinted to in the Passuk, which uses two Sheimos of Hahsem: the Shem of Rachamim and the Shem of Din. When we separate the two, we cannot find our voices, Shira esacapes us and we are in a position of “Tachas Asher Lo Avadeta Es Hashem Elokecha B’Simcha U’BiTuv Levav”

The concept of Tichlah Shana V’Kililoseha is not automatic. Rather, if we subsume the lessons of the Tochecha, if we hone our ability to sing Shira, we will be Zoche to Ezra’s promise of “Tachil Shana U’Birchoseha”.