Pressed into Service

Kapital 128 begins with the words “Shir HaMaalos Ashrei Kol Yirei Hashem” and is the eighth of the fifteen Perakim known as the Shir Hamaalos. As Rashi explains earlier, these Kapitlach were written by Dovid Hamelech to be sung by the Leviim while standing on the Ma’alos in the Bais Hamikdash. As is the case with several of the Shirei HaMaalos, these words also have a longer term meaning, related to Galus and the Geulah HaAsida. To wit, Radak explains that these Pessukim are instructive: they teach those of us in Galus how to act so that we may see the ultimate Geulah.

The very first Passuk includes a crucial element: “Ashrei Kol Yirei Hashem HaHolech B’Drachav”. Ibn Ezra explains that “Yirei Hashem” refers to Mitzvos Lo Saseh and “HaHolech B’Drachav” to Mitzvos Asrei. This is the most important step in achieving the title of “Ashrei”: one must be meticulous in his Shemiras HaMitzvos. Then, the Passuk speaks about how one conducts himself in mundane matters: “Yigiah Kapecha Ki Tochal”. Radak explains that one must live off his own labors, and not rely on the largess of others if he wishes to attain this goal.

The next words are not immediately understandable in this context: “Eshtecha K’Gefen Poriah B’Yarkisei Beisecha”. The Meforshei HaPshat, however, explain that these words refer to the need to emphasize the Middos of Tznius and Kedusha inside and outside our homes' physical confines of our homes.

The Perek closes by reaffirming the reward that awaits one who is a “Gaver Yirei Hashem”: he will eventually be Zoche to the gift of “Yivarechecha Hashem M’Tzion U’Re’ah B’Tuv Yerushalayim”, to see many of his own offspring, “Banim L’Banecha” and the ultimate Bracha of “Shalom Al Yisroel”.

While the entire Kapital can be understood as guiding us towards a life of a “Gaver Yirei Hashem”, there is one phrase that seems to be slightly different. After speaking about the Ma’alos of Tznius and Kedusha, the Passuk says “Bonecha K’Shesilei Zeysim Saviv L’Shulachanecha”. It is not immediately clear how to understand comparison of one's children to olive saplings, but Radak explains that “Ain Etz HaZayis Mekabel Harkava”, an olive tree cannot be grafted, and the Passuk is to be understood as follows: one who maintains the ideals of “Eshtecha K’Gefen Poriah B’Yarkisei Beisecha” will have children free of any Safek in their Yichus.

This is itself difficult to understand, for a number of reasons. First, it is obvious that if man and wife maintain appropriate boundaries their children will not have any Pesul—why does the Passuk have to tell us that a life of “Eshtecha K’Gefen Poriah…” lead to the comfort of “Bonecha K’Shesilei Zeysim”? Second, why here does the Passuk talk about the proximate effects of a person’s actions, which we don’t find elsewhere in the Perek? As the Meforshim establish at the outset, this Perek is focused on the behaviors of a “Yarei Hashem HaHolech B’Drachav”, which lead the Brachos found at its conclusion—why do the words Bonecha K’Shesilei Zeysim seem to differ in this way?

Even more pressing, perhaps, is a question that can be asked on the application of the Drasha itself. This source for the Pshat brought by both Radak is a Yerushalmi in Kelayim that brings this Drasha: “Bonecha K’Shesilei Zeysim Mah Zeisim Ein Bahem HarKava Af Banecha Ein Bahem Pesulos”. The Gemara there, however, asks a Kasha from a Braisa that implies that olive trees can in fact be grafted. The Gemara answers that olive trees can in fact be grafted, but the result is an improvement in the olives themselves. In other words, it is not the case that Zeisim Ein Bahem Harkava at all, just that this will not result in Pesulos.

If this is the case, how can we understand the Pshat Radak offers here? If the Passuk is telling us a cause and effect—teaching that if one establishes a home of Estecha K’Gefen Poriah he will be Zoche to Bonim SheAin Bahem Pesulos, why use the example of the Zayis which we now understand can be grafted, albeit only with positive outcomes? How does this aspect of the Zayis relate to the context of this Passuk.

Also curious is that Rashi and Radak both choose the Drasha brought by the Yerushalmi to explain this Passuk—although there are questions to be asked on this approach, as we have seen—while there are other Drashos that seem to fall better in line with the overall theme of the Perek. For example, the Medrash Rabba in Parshas Nasso makes a Drasha based on the fact that olives can be used in a variety of ways—eaten fresh or dry, pressed for oil to use in cooking, or for light and so on. So to, the Medrash tells us, the outcome of “Estecha K’Gefen Poriah” is children that are elevated in a variety of ways: “Ba’alei Mikra Ba’alei Mishna Ba’alei Ma’asim Tovim…” This Drasha would seem to be free of at least some of the questions raised on the approach taken by the Meforshei HaPshat—why did they choose the Drasha of the Yerushalmi instead?

Perhaps we can answer these questions, and explain the Passuk in the Derech of Drush, based on a Medrash related to this week’s Parsha.

At the beginning of Parshas Titzaveh, the Torah tells us: “V’Yikchu Elecha Shemen Zayis Zach LaMeor L’Haalos Ner Tamid”, to use Shemen Zayis Zach, specifically, to light the Menorah. The Tanchuma on this Passuk asks a question: “Lamma Lo Shemen Egozim V’Lo Shemen Tzenonis V’Lo Shemen Daggim”. There are many types of oil, asks the Medrash, why does the Torah specify Shemen Zayis for the Menorah? The Medrash answers: “Lefi SheHaZayis Siman Ohr L’Olam”, the Zayis is a sign of light for the world.

The Medrash does not seem to be speaking about the quality of the light provided by Shemen Zayis—though we know that olive oil burns cleanly and beautifully—but rather about a quality of Shemen Zayis itself, and its role as a Siman Ohr L’Olam. What does this mean?

The Medrash Rabba at the beginning of the Parsha speaks about the Zayis in a different way, comparing Klal Yisroel to this fruit. The Zayis, explains the Medrash, goes through many stages of physical torment—all manner of squeezing and crushing—until Shemen Zayis is produced. Bnei Yisroel, concludes the Medrash, is much the same: the Umos HaOlam abuse and malign us, subjecting us to physical torment, until we do Teshuva and our Teffilos are answered.

The Mahry”tz Dushinsky, the first Dushsinsky Rebbe, asks the obvious question on this Medrash: why does HKBH have to put us through all this trauma just to bring us to Teshuva—why, indeed, must we be comparable to the Zayis in this way?

The Rebbi answers with a keen insight.

The reality of human nature is that nothing which comes easily is long-lasting: Hisorurus that comes easily is generally momentary, escaping our consciousness as quickly as it entered. When we work hard for something, however, the impression it makes upon us is not easily erased. It is true that HKBH could have allowed us to do Teshuva easily, without enduring the punishing treatment of the Umos HaOlam, but this would not have been Teshuva Sheleima. True Teshuva is permanent, as the Rambam writes, “Ad Sheya’id Alav Yodeah Ta’alumos Shelo Yashuv L’Kesila Od”, to the extent that HBKH would say Eidus that this person will not return to the Aveira, and cannot be achieved without true exertion.

Because HKBH wished for us to achieve this level of Teshuva, the world exists in a way that Klal Yisroel undergoes Yisurin at the hands of our enemies, leading us to examine our own actions. When we do so effectively, and realize that our reality was brought about by our actions, the Teshvua that results can be at the level of “Sheya’id Alav Yodeah Ta’alumos Shelo Yashuv L’Kesila Od”, permanent in nature.

This, explains the Mahary”tz, is the meaning of the term “SheHaZayis Siman Ohr L’Olam”: the Zayis represents the Teshuva that is “L’Olam”, whose light burns forever. When we look at the Zayis we understand that the pain it endures, so to speak, brings great light, and we must take that lesson for ourselves: the agony that we undergo can be the impetus for light that is long-lasting, even eternal, “L’Olam”.

This is a very empowering idea: we all do Aveiros, and may at times feel that Teshuva is beyond our grasp. The lesson of this MEdrash, however, is that HKBH so desires our Teshuva that world events are arranged in a way that ensures the possibility of Teshuva Sheleima. Our Aveiros need not be eternal, because our Teshuva may itself be.

Perhaps we can explain the words “Bonecha K’Shesilei Zeysim” based on this idea.

The Passuk tells us: if you wish to be a “Gaver Yirei Hashem”, look at your children as Shesilei Zeysim, young olive trees. It is natural for a person to understand and perceive the shortcomings and inadequacies of his own children—but it is vital to realize that these need not be eternal. Just as a Zayis goes through a process that yields light, so too our children will have life experiences that can spur them to Teshuva. We must think of them as being free of Pesul, like the Zayis which is “Ein Bahem HarKava”, understanding that even their perceived flaws will one day improve their fruit, as the Yerushalmi says.

If we have this outlook when it comes to our children, of whom it is natural to be critical, we will realize this about ourselves as well. rather than assuming that our qualities are inborn and cannot be changed. By internalizing the message of the Zayis, however, we can be spurred to Teshuva, improving ourselves in a meaningful way. This, in turn, will allow us to be defined as “Yarei Hashem HaHolech B’Drachav”, achieving the ultimate Bracha of “Yivarechecha Hashem M’Tzion U’Re’ah B’Tuv Yerushalayim Kol Yimei Chayecha”.