Tactical Lesson

Kapital 78 begins with the words “Maskil L’Assaf”, and is one of the longer Perakim in Sefer Tehillim and the urgency of its message is sensed in its opening PAssuk which concludes with the words “Hazina Ami Torasi Hatu Aznechem L’Imrei Pi”. Sforno explains that the purpose of the Mizmor is to remind us of the various Chasdei Hashem, which pervade despite the Aveiros that threaten to sever our ties with HKBH. In a similar vein, Radak explains that recounting the Chasdei Hahsem reminds us that we must fear Hashem and not rebel against Him. While this is always an important message, Rashbam suggests that these Pessukim were actually said each year on Sukkos in order to remind us that our shortcomings have consequences and specifically to reinforce the primacy of Malchus Bais Dovid, which is discussed at the end of the Mizmor.

The Perek takes on the form of a review of our history as a nation, “Asher Shamanu V’Nedaem V’Avoseinu Sipru Lanu”. The events spoken about in these Pessukim are familiar to us, our fathers have related them for time immemorial, but they bear repetition nonetheless. The Passuk asserts the importance of relating these stories outright: “Lo NiChached M’Binehem L’Dor Achron M’Saprim Tehillos Hashem”. Rashi explains that these words express the importance of relating to the next generation the Tehillos Hashem, including “Uzo V’Niflaos Asher Asa”.

The Pessukim accomplish the goal of “Lo NiChached… M’Saprim Tehillos Hashem” by providing us with a survey of our history as a nation, noting our victories as well as our missteps. A central focus of these Pessukim is Shibud Mitzrayim and the ensuing Geulah. The Pessukim speak about the Bnei Ephraim, whom Rashi explainstried to leave Mitzrayim before the appointed time and were punished. More importantly, however, they missed the Nissim that were ultimately done with the Ketz arrived: “Neged Avosam Oseh Peleh B’Eretz Mitzrayim.”

The Perek continues, mentioning Krias Yam Suf briefly, “Baka Yam V’Yaavrem”, and then speaking at some length about our time in the Midbar. Here, too, the Pessukim mention the Nissim done by HKBH—the Mayim Min HaSelah and the Mon—but also our missteps, detailing the times in which we complained about the conditions in the Midbar. The Passuk refers to these unfortunate instances in very stark terms, with statements such as “B’Chol Zos Chetu Od V’Lo He’eminu B’Nifliosav” and “V’Libam Lo Nachon Imo V’Lo Neemnu B’Briso”.

Later, the Pessukim speak about our arrival to Eretz Yisroel, following the same pattern. We are reminded that HKBH paved the way for our success, “VaYigaresh Mipneihem Goyim…” and granted us rights to the land. Nonetheless, “V’Yinasu V’Yamru Es Elokim Elyon”, we tested and provoked HKBH. Rashi explains that this came during the days of the Shovtim, during which Klal Yisroel repeatedly rebelled against HKBH despite the constant Chasadim which we received. This led to the inevitable repercussions: “Shama Elokim…VaYimas M’Od B’Yisrol Vayitosh Mishkan Shilo…” Hashem despised Klal Yisroel and therefore left Mishkan Shilo, causing the Aron HaKodesh to fall into enemy hands and many to die in battle.

The thrust of the Perek is clearly understood: time and time again, we ignore the Chasadim done by HKBH on our behalf and turn our backs on all that is good and true. Without fail, this leads to destruction and a sense of abandonment, causing us much pain and suffering. The Perek ends with a reminder that HKBH chose Dovid Hamelech, and his progeny, to lead us so that we may avoid a recurrence of this cycle and live only in the Tzel HaShechina.

Although the cyclical nature of our history is at once understood, a series of Pessukim found in middle of the Perek, seems to assign explicit cause to our failings in an interesting way that is very relevant to this week’s Parsha.

As we noted, a number of Pessukim are devoted to the events of the years in the Midbar, during with time tested HKBH multiple times, “VaYashuvu Vainsu Kel…” There, the Passuk says: “Lo Zachru Es Yado Yom Asher Padam Mini Tzar”, which seems to indicate that the rebellions came because we did not adequately remember or keep in mind, the Nissim of Yetizas Mitzrayim. This is, of course, an understandable statement: if we truly had the proper Hakara for all that transpired when HKBH took us out of Mitzrayim, we would be less likely to turn our backs on Hashem. There seems to be a broader message, however.

The Pessukim continue, detailing that which we had forgotten: “Asher Sam B’Mitzrayim Ososav U’Mofsav B’Sdei Tzoan”. Not only did we fail to recall the Nissim of Yetzias Mitzrayim, but of the Makkos as well: the Osos that were done while we were still in Shibud. This is of course, an understandable extension of the previous Passuk, as remaining conscious of the multitude of Nissim that took place during the Makkos would likely prevent us from verring from the Derech Hashem. Indeed, Sforno points out that the Makkos displayed the Shlita of HKBH on all areas of the Briah—water, air and land—and this awareness would likely increase our Emmunah and Bitachon, preventing the failures we encountered. The purpose of these Pessukim is therefore well understood, but this topic is carried further as well.

The next series of Pessukim discusses the Maakos, specifically mentioning several. We find references to Dam, Tzefardeya, Arov, Dever, and Barad—all of which we learn about in this week’s Sedra—as well as Arbeh and Makas Bechoros. In addition, this section includes a Passuk with which we are quite familiar: “Yishlach Bam Charon Appo Evra V’Zaam V’Tzara Mishlachas Malchei Ra’im.” As we see in the Haggadah, these words encompass not only the Makkos that are spoken about explicitly in the Torah, but also those that are not. These Pessukim, then, refer to all the Makkos—either openly or by allusion—providing us with detailed explanation of that which the Passuk speaks about with the words “Lo Zachru Es Yado”.

We must of course answer a simple question on these Pessukim: why is it necessary to list and speak about the Makos here? The point of the Perek seems to be that when we forget the Tovos that Hashem does for us, we fall into the trap of digressing from His ways. We could have learned that without repeating the Makos specifically. Why do the Pessukim repeat what the nature of the Makkos when we already know about them from the Pessukim in Parshas Vaera and Bo?

It is interesting to note, that while the exact purpose of these Pessukim must be explained, they are the source for many of the Maamarei Chazal that describe the myriad details of the Makkos. These Medrashim provide us with insight as to the extent of these Nissim, and certainly increase our awareness of the Tovas Hashem as well as the totality of the Hashgacha Eloyna. There is one Medrash related to these words, however, that is a little broader and requires some explanation.

The Tanchuma in Parshas Bo tells us: “K’Taksin Shel Melachim Hevi HKBH Aleinhen Es HaMakkos”. In bringing the Makkos upon Mitzrayim, Hashem followed the same tactics as a king would when attacking an enemy. The Medrash goes into great detail, first explaining the sequence followed by a Melech Basar V’Dam in an offensive and then showing us how that relates to the Maakos. For example, the first step a king takes is to disrupt the water supply of the enemy and the first Maakah played this role as well, as the Passuk here in Tehilim tells us: “V’Yahapoch L’Dam Yorehem”. Similarly, if the initial measures do not force the enemy into submission, the king may release wild animals upon them. this was the purpose of Makas Arov, described here with the words “Yishlach Bahem Arov”. The Medrash continues in this regard until reaching the final step of slayng the leaders of the enemy, which was of course accomplished with Makas Bechoros.

How are we to understand this Medrash? First, why in fact did HKBH follow the tactics used by human rulers in attacked their enemies? Surely Hashem could have wiped Mitzrayim off the face of the earth in one fell swoop, but the Medrash seems to imply that there was a purpose in extending the campaign in this manner, so to speak. What may that have been? Second, why does the Medrash go to such lengths to explain this—what are we meant to learn from the fact that Hashem employed the “Taksin Shel Melachim” in Mitzrayim?

Perhaps we can answer these questions and better understand these Pessukim, based on an insight from The Mashgiach R’ Chatzkel Levenstein, zt”l.

In Ohr Yechezkel on Darchei HaAvodah, R’ Chatzkel addresses a common misconception. People assume, he explains, that if they focus on Torah, Mitzvos and Maasim Tovim they will be able to excel in their Avodas Hashem. This is of course important, but missing is a vital component: the identification of their own shortcomings. By focusing only on Tov, and not on the Rah that exists in each of us, we fail to paint a complete picture of the work that we must do, and our growth suffers.

This is true not only because we may do Aveiros, but because of an important reality: the Rah that exists in a person affects his Ma’asim Tovim as well. Therefore, if a person does not identify, and try to eradicate, his imperfections, not only will they persist on their own, but they will tinge the good that he does as well.

The Mashgiach explains that this important truth—that one must identify and confront his own shortcomings—can be seen from the Pessukim that speak about Shibud Mitzrayim. Based on Divrei Chazal it is apparent that one of the many reasons that Yetzias Mitzrayim had to come before Mattan Torah is so that the evil of Pharaoh could be seen. By bearing witness to the Rah displayed by Pharoah, we are able to identify evil and can, therefore, be truly introspective. This concept represents one of the great truths of life: only if we recognize the enemy can we hope to eradicate him. Before receiving the Torah, we had to learn to identify its antitheses so that we may avoid those behaviors at all costs.

It emerges that the process of Yetzias Mitzrayim was not just a method of punishment for the Mitzrim, but a display meant for us, Klal Yisroel, so that we may be successful in our Avodas Hashem.

The Tanchuma is now understood: HKBH employed the “Taksin Shel Melachim” for our benefit. Hashem gave Pharoah so many opportunities for Teshuva, only for him to squander each one, becoming increasingly stubborn as time went on. This was an important lesson for us: we had to see that Hashem sends us messages and that we must either heed them or suffer the consequences. Of course HKBH could have taken us out of Mitzrayim at any time, but he followed the tactics used by human kings so that we could learn in the process. This is, of course, an important lesson for the Medrash to bring out, because it drives home the message that each part of the process was for our benefit.

This idea can also help us understand the Pessukim in Tehillim.

When we erred in the Midbar, it was because we forgot the messages of Mitzrayim, “Lo Zachru Es Yado…” This can refer to a basic lack of Hakaras HaTov, or to an ignorance of the Hashgachas Hahsem that was Manifest then, but it can also refer to the process itself. We made mistakes because we disregarded the lesson we were supposed to learn from the Makos—what Rah is, how to identify it within ourselves, and the need to eliminate it. If we don’t recall “Ososav U’Mofsav”, not only the Makkos themselves but their progression and the way in which the entire process unfolded, we will be doomed to failure.

We can now understand why the Pessukim describe the Makos here: the message is not about the actual Nissim but about what we were meant to learn from the fact that they even took place. We are supposed to learnt he Parshios of Yetzias Mitzrayim in the hopes of using their lessons to improve ourselves, and avoid the fate of “Lo Zachru Es Yado”. It was this failure, this lack of awareness, that led us to be Mored in Hashem then, and each time since.

This is the lesson that is so important to recall at all times, and pass on to our children, “Lo NiChached M’Binehem L’Dor Achron M’Saprim Tehillos Hashem”, for in it lies the path to the ultimate Geulah.