Transcript

המצווה הנ"ט היא שציוונו לתקוע בחצוצרות במקדש עם הקרבת כל קרבן מקרבנות המועדים והוא אמור יתברך וביום שמחתכם ובמועדיכם ובראשי חודשיכם ותקעתם בחצוצרות ובביאור אמרו שמצות היום בחצוצרות וכבר הסבירו משפטי מצווה זו בספרי וראש השנה ותענית וכן אנחנו מצווים לתקוע בחצוצרות בעת הצורך והצרות כשנצעק לפני השם יתעלה והוא אמור וכי תבוא מלחמה בארצכם על הצר הצורר אתכם וגומר.

So the הרמב"ם includes within one mitzvah aseh the mitzvah of blowing the chatzotzros on the moadim as well as rashei chodashim bishas hakravas hakorban.

בימי המועדות ובפרק ג' של כלי המקדש בימי המועדות כולם ובראשי חודשים היו הכהנים תוקעין בחצוצרות בשעת הקרבן והלויים אומרים שירה שנאמר וביום שמחתכם ובמועדיכם ובראשי חודשיכם ותקעתם בחצוצרות.

So this together with the mitzvah of blowing the chatzotzros in an eis tzara, so the הרמב"ם includes in one mitzvah. The Maggid Mishneh at the beginning of Hilchos Taanios

וראיתי להרמב"ם בספר המצוות שלו שמנה תרועה זו למצות עשה מן התורה לזעוק ולהריע בחצוצרות על כל צרה שתבוא על הציבור ותקיעה שבשעת הקרבנות במצווה אחת ותמה אני למה שהרי שני פסוקים הם בכתוב.

Why do you find one mitzvah subdivided into two pesukim?

ונראה שדעתו זו שהמצווה היא אחת כוללת לתקוע בחצוצרות במקדש בעת הקרבנות ובעת הצרות בין במקדש בין בגבולין ואין ראוי למונם בשתי מצוות ועוד צריך עיון.

So maybe the הרמב"ם says the definition is blowing the chatzotzros. But the Maggid Mishneh isn't satisfied. I mean the הרמב"ם famously continues to elaborate what the mitzvah of blowing chatzotzros be-eis tzara is. First of all he already indicates by prefacing it with liz'ok u'lehariya. It's a kiyum ze'aka and the הרמב"ם famously elaborates ודבר זה מדרכי התשובה הוא. This is the blowing of the chatzotzros is something which is an outgrowth of teshuva. So where's the common denominator between blowing the chatzotzros be-eis tzara and blowing them וביום שמחתכם ובמועדיכם ובראשי חודשיכם? So the following, I guess, stream of consciousness was prompted by a heading that I saw in the Sefer Mafteach. I didn't have the sefarim that they were referring to, so to what extent it corresponds, whether zero or a hundred percent, I don't know, but it was prompted by a heading which I saw in the Sefer Mafteach. The הרמב"ם writes earlier in Sefer Hamitzvos... In Hashoresh Ha-achad Asar

שאין ראוי למנות חלקי המצוה בפרט חלק חלק בפני עצמו כשיחיה המקובץ מהמצוה אחת.

You don't enumerate each of the elements of the mitzvah as a separate mitzvah, but you count the mitzvah as a whole. So for instance, the dalet minim is one mitzvah in minyan hamitzvos, not four mitzvos. How do you know, how do you distinguish when different elements are chalakim of a single mitzvah and when they each one constitutes a mitzvah in its own right? So the Rambam says it would have been easy if it correlated with when they're מעכבין זה את זה or אין מעכבין זה את זה. When they're מעכבין זה את זה, so then we would have said so that's an indication that it's one mitzvah. That's why they're מעכבין זה את זה. And when they're אינם מעכבין זה את זה, so that's an indication that they're separate mitzvos. But the Rambam says that doesn't hold up because the Sifrei says that even though that we hold that

התכלת אינו מעכב את הלבן והלבן אינו מעכב את התכלת,

but nevertheless

יכול שהן שתי מצוות מצות תכלת ומצות לבן תלמוד לומר והיה לכם לציצית. מצוה אחת היא ואינה שתי מצוות.

So here, despite the fact that they're אינם מעכבין זה את זה אף על פי כן the Sifrei tells us that they comprise a single mitzvah. But they're einam me'akvin. You sort of hang the chut tcheiles independently of the chutei lavan. So what then is the klal for when they're chalakim of a mitzvah, of a single mitzvah, and when each represents its own mitzvah?

הנה כבר התבאר לך שאפילו החלקים שאינם מעכבין זה את זה פעמים יהיו מצוה אחת כשיהיה העניין אחד כי הכוונה בציצית למען תזכרו. אם כן כלל הדבר המחויב לזכרון מצוה אחת ימנה.

So when the Torah says lema'an tizkeru va'asitem, so the Rambam says that the Torah is telling us that's the overarching kiyum of tzitzis. And heyos that both tcheiles and lavan are geared toward the lema'an tizkeru, so that's what unifies them into one mitzvah, that overarching kiyum. That single overarching kiyum of lema'an tizkeru is what combines tcheiles and lavan into a single mitzvah despite the fact that they're אינם מעכבין זה את זה. And then the Rambam says the emes is that even when they מעכבין זה את זה, there also has to be a single kiyum, which is why earlier he explained

כמו שצונו שנשמח לפני השם היום הראשון מסוכות ומבואר שהשמחה היא תהיה בלקיחת כך וכך.

What unifies the pri eitz hadar, kapos temarim, etc. into a single mitzvah is the fact that they combine to achieve usmachtem. The same way lavan and tcheiles also converge on lema'an tizkeru.

וכי תבאו מלחמה בארצכם על הצר הצרר אתכם והרעתם בחצצרות ונזכרתם לפני השם אלהיכם. וביום שמחתכם ובמועדיכם ובראשי חדשיכם ותקעתם בחצצרות על עלתיכם ועל זבחי שלמיכם. והיו לכם לזכרון לפני אלהיכם.

So the Torah says that the chatzotzros, both vechi tavo milchama as well as uvyom simchaschem is lezikaron. The same way the Torah says that both the techeiles and the lavan al lemaan tizkeru, so that indicates to the Rambam that it's mitzvah achas. But even so, how do how do we understand that? In the case of techeiles and lavan, we understand. But here it seems to be different zichronos, different, how do how do we understand this? So I just want to read a few lines from the Rav's essay, Kol Dodi Dofek.

היהדות העמיקה את הרעיון הזה בצרפה את ענין תיקון הסבל והעלאתו עם תיקון החסד והעלאתו.

Judaism combines the way a person elevates the chesed that he receives from Hakadosh Baruch Hu with the way he elevates suffering and adversity imposed by Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Skipping several lines: limdunu raboseinu hagedolim

חייב אדם לברך על הרעה כשם שמברך על הטובה. כשם שהטובה מחייבת את האדם למעשים נעלים ותובעת מן היחיד או הכלל פעולת יצירה וחידוש כך דורשים הייסורים תיקון הנפש וטיהור החיים.

Both the experience of receiving chasdei Hashem as well as rachmana litzlan being plunged into an eis tzara מחייב השתעבדות מוחלטת להקדוש ברוך הוא. A person experiences in such a dramatic fashion the fact that that he's totally chasar onim, totally helpless. He experiences that most deeply in either of two opposite circumstances. A person can be in an eis tzara and just totally overwhelmed and clearly, clearly at a total loss in terms of how he can even survive in the eis tzara. But paradoxically, that helplessness, a person has the same experience when he receives tremendous bracha and realizes that there's nothing in the world that he could have done, he can't even delude himself into thinking that. A person feels helpless in an eis tzara, but also in the moments of the greatest chesed and the greatest simcha, a person is also acutely aware of that helplessness. You know, the first day Yom Tov, so we all heard at different points the news about how Tzahal had finally eliminated Sinwar yemach shemo. And it's just nifla me'od. For a year, they've concentrated all their kochos, intelligence, military to tracking him. And please don't misunderstand. It would not have happened without their mesirus nefesh. Ribbono Shel Olam's bracha is only through their mesirus nefesh. It wouldn't have happened without their mesirus nefesh. And then they got him accidentally. Nifla me'od. So what does that point to? That the biggest accomplishment a person realizes, you know, at the end of the day, I wasn't responsible for that. There's no way. We did everything possible and then they, very much to their credit with complete transparency and honesty, we didn't know that he was there. We didn't know that he was there. So when a person receives a chesed, a person has that same awareness of total helplessness that he has in eis tzara. וכי תבוא מלחמה בארצכם is v'hare'osem bachatzotzros, but u'veyom simchaschem u'vemoadeichem. On the days which accentuate kedushas Yisrael, מקדש ישראל והזמנים וראשי חדשים when bringing an olas tzibbur, which the Gemara characterizes ola doron. First the melitz arranges for the reconciliation between the subject and the king and then וכשבא להקביל פניו מביא דורון בידו. So when we stand in the Mikdash lifnei Hashem in a kedusha zman that accentuates kedushas Yisrael, bechiras Yisrael, and we bring olas tzibbur, we bring a doron, we have that same sense of מה אנו מה חיינו that one has beis tzara. And that's what the psukim say, that there's a common kiyum, just like תכלת וארגמן על מנת תזכרו. So chatzotzros is always for zikaron. Well what does the word rina mean? So vayeira ha'am vayarounu, so I think Onkelos says v'shabachu in kol rina viyishua the targum in Tehillim says tushbachata. But in one of the Pirkei Tehillim that we've been saying this past year, הקשיבה אל רנתי כי דלותי מאד. So nothing to do with shavach. So the Ba'alei Lashon say, Ibn Janach says it, the Radak says it also. Rina is hagbahas hakol and I'm not sure about the nekudos here, v'chizkaso. Raising and strengthening the voice. Mimmennu shavach. There is a third one but it's not germane to what we're saying. Mimmennu shavach. Sometimes it means raising jubilantly the voice to praise Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Mimmennu shavach like Harninu L'Elokim uzeinu. וממנו מה שיהיה שמחה וגילה. Umimmennu bechi v'anaka. And sometimes it means to lift one's voice crying. So it's the same word. It's the same word because even though on the one hand they are at opposite ends of the spectrum, but there is a common experience at the moments of greatest simcha and at the moments of greatest tzara, there is a common experience to those two. The word rina encompasses both, the same way the one mitzvah of chatzotzros encompasses both as well. Maybe that's what this Gemara means also. I'm not sure about this.

דתנינא ג' באין בהיסח הדעת. אלו הן משיח מציאה ועקרב.

Mashiach comes only b'hesach hada'as. What does that mean? Previously the Gemara says, עד שיתייאשו מן הגאולה. It's only when we despair of the geulah that Mashiach comes. You find a metzia unexpectedly. When you've looked everywhere you can think and it doesn't turn up and then unexpectedly you stumble upon a metzia. And Rashi says that the bite of a scorpion happens very suddenly, nosheich adam pisyom. When we realize that despite whatever we're supposed to do, that we're not going to bring the geulah, despite our teshuva isn't going to rise to the level, we're not going to bring the geulah, metzia and akrav represent these two ends of the spectrum. That sense of total dependence upon Hakadosh Baruch Hu that a person experiences at the times of greatest bracha, metzia, and at the times of greatest tzara. neshikas akrav. itachen. So when a person encounters an expression of Hakadosh Baruch Hu's middas harachamim, or whether a person is encountering a powerful expression of a middas hadin, but for all the difference, there's a fundamental common reaction of a sense of total dependence upon Hakadosh Baruch Hu. itachen, just to maybe just indicate a direction, not to elaborate this point, that this should be seen as part of a pattern.

והיאך הדרך לאהבתו ויראתו? בשעה שיתבונן האדם במעשיו ובברואיו הנפלאים הגדולים, ויראה מהן חכמתו שאין לה ערך ולא קץ, מיד הוא אוהב ומשבח ומפאר ומתאוה תאוה גדולה לידע השם הגדול, כמו שאמר דוד צמאה נפשי לאלהים לאל חי. וכשמחשב בדברים האלו עצמן, מיד הוא נרתע לאחוריו ויירא ויפחד וידע שהוא בריה קטנה שפלה אפלה, שפלה אפלה, עומדת בדעת קלה מעוטה לפני תמים דעות.

So the very different mindsets and experiences of ahava and yira, again, on the human spectrum, we would plot them distant from each other, kerachok mizrach mima'arav, there's a common basis. They're generated by the same experience. What these two examples have in common, the fact that there's one mitzvah of blowing the chatzotzros, whether it's vechi savo milchama or whether it's uveyom simchaschem, or the fact that the same experience can engender ahava and yira, the fact that experiencing a tremendous middas harachamim uveyom simchaschem, the fact that experiencing, rachmana litzlan, a din kashe engenders the same experience, the fact that there's a oneness despite the contrast and the difference, it's possible that that's built into the beriah as a reflection of yichud Hashem, lest we disassociate rachamim and din from each other, lest we separate between ahava and yira, lest we think that the ribui that we experience in the world, lest we misunderstand it, no, it comes to a common source or it engenders the same reaction in one case. I'm going to just one last mareh makom on this direction. In perek rishon of Sha'ar Habechinah says, ki hachochmah, chochmas Hashem that we discern in the briyah ואם סימניה נחלקים בברואים. We see a dazzling diversity in terms of chochmah in the briyah, but says the Chovos HaLevavos היא ביסודה ועיקרה אחת. But fundamentally, there's one common point of chochmah. He gives the following mashal: כשמש אשר היא אחת בעיקרה ועצמה. If you have the sun, but then its rays will be reflected through different colored glass. So then you'll have, again, this dazzling array of colors, and we, on the human level, experience it as riboy, but fundamentally it's achas בבחינת תן לחכם ויחכם עוד. The mitzvah of chatzotzros provides us with a paradigm of how to try to experience and be mekayem the מצות שמחת יום טוב this year. Even though on one level there's obviously tremendous tension between the mitzvas simcha and the involvement with the ongoing eis tzarah. But most fundamentally, the two converge the same way the two expressions and manifestations of mitzvas chatzotzros converge as well, and the avodah is that the simchas haregel doesn't eclipse, for that reason it doesn't eclipse, simcha and aveilus are incompatible, but simcha and eis tzarah are not a tarti desasri for exactly this reason. The simcha shouldn't eclipse the involvement with the eis tzarah, and the eis tzarah shouldn't eclipse the simcha because ultimately the two converge the same way the veki savou milchamah and uveyom simchaschem is one and the same mitzvah of blowing the chatzotzros.