Kind Connections

Shavuos is certainly the Yom Tov with the fewest Mitzvos HaYom or even Minhagim. When it comes to the Teffilos of the Yom Tov, there are few additions other than Hallel, setting Shavuos aside from the other Regalim. One of the few universal Minhagim that does exist, however, is the recitation of Akdamos on the first morning, just before Krias HaTorah. Seeing as this Piyut takes such a central role in the Yom Tov, and is in fact so commonly accepted, it is certainly worthwhile to attempt to extract from its words a message that can help shape our Avodas HaYom. Although there is lore surrounding the origins of Akdomos, it is clear that the version we say was written by R’ Meir ben Yitzchok Sha”tz, who lived around the time of Rashi. Certainly, then, the rhyming meter that Akodomos follows is deceptive: this is no mere poem. The words of Akdomos must have been written with much care and contain very lofty ideas and concepts. Throughout the ninety lines of the Piyut, many different themes can be found, but perhaps it is appropriate to focus on one section that seems specifically relevant to the Yom Tov.

The opening lines of the Piyut discuss the Gadlus of HKBH and then speak about Brias Haolam. The following stanzas describe the creation of the Malachim and the Kedusha which they recite. Then, the Paytan speaks about Klal Yisroel. The Am HaNivchar, he notes is different than the Malachim, as they are “Chavivin D’BiKivata”, enjoying permeant Chavivus before Hashem. Because of this, we are not limited in the times that we can say Shira before Hashem, rather: “Pirishusei Shvachei Yichavun B’Shausa”, the praise of Hashem is on their lips constantly.

The next two lines of the Piyut seem to continue this train of discussion but require some explanation.

“Tzvi V’Chamid V’Ragig D’Lan B’Lausa”, Hashem longs for and desires the Amelius HaTorah of his nation, “Tzilosihon B’Chen Mikabel V’Haniya Ba’usa”, and he therefore accepts their Teffilos and their Bakashos are effective.

The Paytan is clearly telling us that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between our Limud HaTorah and the acceptance of our Teffilos. From the way these lines are written it seems that we would understand this connection as follows: HKBH desires our Limud HaTorah and therefore he accepts our Teffilos. How can we understand this? Are we to assume that Hashem only accepts our Teffilos so that we will be free, in time and in mind, to dedicate ourselves to Ameilus BaTorah? What then of Teffilos that are not related to this pursuit? There are Bakashos that we make that are in no way tied to our ability to learn B’Hasmada—why are they listened to and accepted?

While R’ Meir Sha”tz composed the beautiful words of the Piyut, they are of course based on Divrei Chazal. Perhaps if we examine these sources, we can better understand his words here.

The initial words of these stanzas speak about the extent to which Hashem desires our Limud HaTorah: “Tzvi V’Chamid V’Ragig D’Lan B’Lausa”. This concept seems to be rooted in a Sifra at the beginning of Parshas Bechukosai which tells us that HKBH is “Misaveh SheYihiyu Yisroel Amelim BaTorah”. The use of the word Ta’avah with regard to the Kaviyachol is of course allegory, but it allows us to understand the level with which our Limud HaTorah is desired by HKBH.

The Medrash cites a number of Pessukim that support this idea, one of them from Parshas V’Eschanan: “Mi Yiten V’Haya Levavchem Zeh Lahem L’Yireh Osi V’Lishmor Es Kol Mitzvosai Kol HaYamim L’Man Yitav Lach”. HKBH expresses the desire that we possess Yiras Hashem and are Shomrei HaTorah V’HaMitzvos so that he may reward us and our children. This seems to tell us that indeed Hashem is “Misaveh SheYihiyu Yisroel Amelim BaTorah” so that he may reward us with all the good that we seek.

This Medrash would seem to tell us that the words of Akdomos are to be understood in the reverse: Hashem indeed strongly desires that we learn, but this is because he wishes to accept our Teffilos, “Tzilosihon B’Chen Mikabel V’Haniya Ba’usa”.

As we have seen, there is a definite connection between Limud HaTorah and the acceptance of our Teffilos, indicated by the words of Akdomos and now the Sifra. Based on this Medrash we would understand this relationship as almost transactional: if we learn Torah and keep Mitzvos, we will be rewarded with the acceptance of our Teffilos. This is a basic reality, and clearly seen from the Passuk in V’Eschanan, but perhaps we can understand the words of the Akdomos on a different plane as well.

The Medrash Tamchuma in Parshas Emor, on the words “Shor Oh Kesev Oh Eiz” speaks about the great love which HKBH has for Klal Yisroel. Among the various ways in which this love manifests itself, the Medrash tells us: “Amar HKBH B’Zechus HaTorah She’atem Oskin Bah Hayisi Makshiv V’Shomeah Tefilosechem”.

The Tanchuma seems to be telling us that it is the not the Kiyum HaMitzvos which arise out of our learning that allows our Teffilos to be answered—it is the act of Limud itself. The fact that we learn, that we are Osek BaTorah, is itself a reason for Hashem to listen to our Teffilos.

With this in mind we can understand the words of Akdomos slightly differently: Hashem indeed desires our Ameilus BaTorah for it is the Ameilus itself which allows our Teffilos to be answered.

How can we understand this idea? Why does our Ameilus BaTorah allow our Teffilos to be answered, as indicated by the Tanchuma? Is this a mere calculation of Schar V’Onesh—the reward for Limud HaTorah is the acceptance of our Teffilos—or is there perhaps a deeper connection?

In the Perek of Tehillim known as Hallel HaGadol, the words “Ki L’Olam Chasdo” are repeated twenty-six times. The Gemarah in Pesachim assigns significance to this number: “Hanach Esrim V’Shisha Ki L’Olam Chasdo K’neged Esrim V’Shisha Doros M’Brias HaOlam Ad Matan Torah”. There were twenty-six generations between Brias HaOlam and Mamed Har Sinai, which correspond to the twenty-six mentions of “Ki L’Olam Chasdo.” The Gemarah explains the connection: during those initial twenty-six Doros, the Torah had not yet been given “V’HaOlam Zan Osam B’Chasdo”, the world was supported by the Chesed of HKBH.

Rav Hutner in Pachad Yitzchok on Shavuos asks a question on this Chazal: it seems from the Gemara that the world was supported up by the Chesed of Hashem until Mattan Torah, at which point this Hanhaga ended. How can we understand this? Can it be that the Chesed of Hashem ended at Mattan Torah, that we were Zoche to less Chesed after we accepted the Torah than before it? The Rosh Yeshiva insists that this cannot be the case and provides an alternate explanation Al Pi Darko.

There are two ways for one to provide sustenance to another: Reuven can provide Shimon with his daily needs, or he can setup a business which will allow Shimon to earn money and provide for himself. In the vernacular, we would say that he can fish for him, or teach him how to fish. These two forms of Chesed, explains Rav Hutner: the first is called Chesed Vitur and the second Chesed Mishpat. When one receives Chesed directly, at the whim of the Baal Chesed, he receives Chesed Vitur. When, however, he is able to earn the Chesed, it is given through Chesed Mishpat.

It is understood that while it seems easier to receive through Chesed Vitur, without any effort necessary, the level of Chesed Mishpat is, in actuality, much higher. By providing a person a method with which to earn his needs, a person does true, and much more impactful, Chesed.

Prior to Mattan Torah, explains the Rosh Yeshiva, the world relied on Chesed Vitur. Because there was no Torah, there was no system of Schar and Onesh, and therefore no way for a person to earn the Chasdei Hashem. This is why there are twenty-six separate mentions of the Chesed Hashem in Hallel HaGadol: the Chesed that each Dor was was specific to that generation with no connection from one to the next.

Once we were Mekabel the Torah, however, the calculus changed. We now had a framework through which we could earn our own Schar, through which we could be Zoche to the Chesed Hashem. The world now entered a Hanhaga of Chesed Mishpat—a deeper form of Chesed than that which existed prior to Mattan Torah. As R’ Hutner puts it: after Mattan Torah each of us had a business from which we could earn unlimited Chesed. In this reality, each Dor does not require its own “Ki L’Olam Chasdo” because our Chesed is connected from one generation to the one before all the way back to its ultimate source: Har Sinai.

With this in mind, we can understand the Tanchuma in a new way: “B’Zechus HaTorah She’atem Oskin Bah Hayisi Makshiv V’Shomeah Tefilosechem”. When we are Osek BaTorah, we are reestablishing the dictate of Chesed Mishpat on which we rely. Because we remain connected to Sinai, through our Limud HaTorah, we allow Hashem to answer our Teffilos in the way that is most effective, through true and impactful Chesed Mishpat.

On Shavuos morning, we Lein the Parsha of of Mattan Torah, as we stand prepared to experience Kabalas HaTorah anew. At this most sacred moment we proclaim: “Tzvi V’Chamid V’Ragig D’Lan B’Lausa Tzilosihon B’Chen Mikabel V’Haniya Ba’usa”. We remind ourselves that it is our Limud HaTorah that connects us back to Har Sinai, and allows HKBH to answer our Teffilos through Chesed Mishpat. HKBH is Misaveh for our Limud HaTorah, “Tzvi V’Chamid V’Ragig D’Lan B’Lausa”, because He wishes to treat us with Chesed Mishpat and answer our Teffilos and Bakashos.

As we renew our commitment to Limud HaTorah on the Zman Mattan Toroseinu, we must remember that the Torah is not only the source of our survival in Ruchnias, but our Gashmiyus also. A connection to the Torah is the way in which we can be Zoche to have our Teffilos heard and be the recipients of true Chesed Hashem.