ื‘ืกืดื“

Kavanot: Aequanimitas

Thoughts on Tanach and the Davening

Thou must be like a promontory of the sea, against which, though the waves beat continually, yet it both itself stands, and about it are those swelling waves stilled and quieted.

Marcus Aurelius, quoted by William Osler, Aequanimitas

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื– deals with how to look at the success of the wicked. (I have in my notes that this perek is relevant to our story, but I canโ€™t find the source.)

ื ืœื“ื•ื“: ืืœ ืชืชื—ืจ ื‘ืžืจืขื™ื; ืืœ ืชืงื ื ื‘ืขืฉื™ ืขื•ืœื”ืƒ
ื‘ ื›ื™ ื›ื—ืฆื™ืจ ืžื”ืจื” ื™ืžืœื•; ื•ื›ื™ืจืง ื“ืฉื ื™ื‘ื•ืœื•ืŸืƒ
ื’ ื‘ื˜ื— ื‘ื”ืณ ื•ืขืฉื” ื˜ื•ื‘; ืฉื›ืŸ ืืจืฅ ื•ืจืขื” ืืžื•ื ื”ืƒ
ื“ ื•ื”ืชืขื ื’ ืขืœ ื”ืณ; ื•ื™ืชืŸ ืœืš ืžืฉืืœืช ืœื‘ืšืƒ
ื” ื’ื•ืœ ืขืœ ื”ืณ ื“ืจื›ืš; ื•ื‘ื˜ื— ืขืœื™ื• ื•ื”ื•ื ื™ืขืฉื”ืƒ
ื• ื•ื”ื•ืฆื™ื ื›ืื•ืจ ืฆื“ืงืš; ื•ืžืฉืคื˜ืš ื›ืฆื”ืจื™ืืƒ
ื– ื“ื•ื ืœื”ืณ ื•ื”ืชื—ื•ืœืœ ืœื•, ืืœ ืชืชื—ืจ ื‘ืžืฆืœื™ื— ื“ืจื›ื•; ื‘ืื™ืฉ ืขืฉื” ืžื–ืžื•ืชืƒ
ื— ื”ืจืฃ ืžืืฃ ื•ืขื–ื‘ ื—ืžื”; ืืœ ืชืชื—ืจ ืืš ืœื”ืจืขืƒ
ื˜ ื›ื™ ืžืจืขื™ื ื™ื›ืจืชื•ืŸ; ื•ืงื•ื™ ื”ืณ ื”ืžื” ื™ื™ืจืฉื• ืืจืฅืƒ
ื™ ื•ืขื•ื“ ืžืขื˜ ื•ืื™ืŸ ืจืฉืข; ื•ื”ืชื‘ื•ื ื ืช ืขืœ ืžืงื•ืžื• ื•ืื™ื ื ื•ืƒ
ื™ื ื•ืขื ื•ื™ื ื™ื™ืจืฉื• ืืจืฅ; ื•ื”ืชืขื ื’ื• ืขืœ ืจื‘ ืฉืœื•ืืƒ
ื™ื‘ ื–ืžื ืจืฉืข ืœืฆื“ื™ืง; ื•ื—ืจืง ืขืœื™ื• ืฉื ื™ื•ืƒ
ื™ื’ ืื“ื ื™ ื™ืฉื—ืง ืœื•: ื›ื™ ืจืื” ื›ื™ ื™ื‘ื ื™ื•ืžื•ืƒ
ื™ื“ ื—ืจื‘ ืคืชื—ื• ืจืฉืขื™ื ื•ื“ืจื›ื• ืงืฉืชื ืœื”ืคื™ืœ ืขื ื™ ื•ืื‘ื™ื•ืŸ; ืœื˜ื‘ื•ื— ื™ืฉืจื™ ื“ืจืšืƒ
ื˜ื• ื—ืจื‘ื ืชื‘ื•ื ื‘ืœื‘ื; ื•ืงืฉืชื•ืชื ืชืฉื‘ืจื ื”ืƒ
ื˜ื– ื˜ื•ื‘ ืžืขื˜ ืœืฆื“ื™ืง ืžื”ืžื•ืŸ ืจืฉืขื™ื ืจื‘ื™ืืƒ
ื™ื– ื›ื™ ื–ืจื•ืขื•ืช ืจืฉืขื™ื ืชืฉื‘ืจื ื”; ื•ืกื•ืžืš ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื ื”ืณืƒ
ื™ื— ื™ื•ื“ืข ื”ืณ ื™ืžื™ ืชืžื™ืžื; ื•ื ื—ืœืชื ืœืขื•ืœื ืชื”ื™ื”ืƒ
ื™ื˜ ืœื ื™ื‘ืฉื• ื‘ืขืช ืจืขื”; ื•ื‘ื™ืžื™ ืจืขื‘ื•ืŸ ื™ืฉื‘ืขื•ืƒ
ื› ื›ื™ ืจืฉืขื™ื ื™ืื‘ื“ื• ื•ืื™ื‘ื™ ื”ืณ ื›ื™ืงืจ ื›ืจื™ื; ื›ืœื• ื‘ืขืฉืŸ ื›ืœื•ืƒ
ื›ื ืœื•ื” ืจืฉืข ื•ืœื ื™ืฉืœื; ื•ืฆื“ื™ืง ื—ื•ื ืŸ ื•ื ื•ืชืŸืƒ
ื›ื‘ ื›ื™ ืžื‘ืจื›ื™ื• ื™ื™ืจืฉื• ืืจืฅ; ื•ืžืงืœืœื™ื• ื™ื›ืจืชื•ืƒ
ื›ื’ ืžื”ืณ ืžืฆืขื“ื™ ื’ื‘ืจ ื›ื•ื ื ื•; ื•ื“ืจื›ื• ื™ื—ืคืฅืƒ
ื›ื“ ื›ื™ ื™ืคืœ ืœื ื™ื•ื˜ืœ: ื›ื™ ื”ืณ ืกื•ืžืš ื™ื“ื•ืƒ
ื›ื” ื ืขืจ ื”ื™ื™ืชื™ ื’ื ื–ืงื ืชื™, ื•ืœื ืจืื™ืชื™ ืฆื“ื™ืง ื ืขื–ื‘; ื•ื–ืจืขื• ืžื‘ืงืฉ ืœื—ืืƒ
ื›ื• ื›ืœ ื”ื™ื•ื ื—ื•ื ืŸ ื•ืžืœื•ื”; ื•ื–ืจืขื• ืœื‘ืจื›ื”ืƒ
ื›ื– ืกื•ืจ ืžืจืข ื•ืขืฉื” ื˜ื•ื‘; ื•ืฉื›ืŸ ืœืขื•ืœืืƒ
ื›ื— ื›ื™ ื”ืณ ืื”ื‘ ืžืฉืคื˜ ื•ืœื ื™ืขื–ื‘ ืืช ื—ืกื™ื“ื™ื• ืœืขื•ืœื ื ืฉืžืจื•; ื•ื–ืจืข ืจืฉืขื™ื ื ื›ืจืชืƒ
ื›ื˜ ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื ื™ื™ืจืฉื• ืืจืฅ; ื•ื™ืฉื›ื ื• ืœืขื“ ืขืœื™ื”ืƒ
ืœ ืคื™ ืฆื“ื™ืง ื™ื”ื’ื” ื—ื›ืžื”; ื•ืœืฉื•ื ื• ืชื“ื‘ืจ ืžืฉืคื˜ืƒ
ืœื ืชื•ืจืช ืืœืงื™ื• ื‘ืœื‘ื•; ืœื ืชืžืขื“ ืืฉืจื™ื•ืƒ
ืœื‘ ืฆื•ืคื” ืจืฉืข ืœืฆื“ื™ืง; ื•ืžื‘ืงืฉ ืœื”ืžื™ืชื•ืƒ
ืœื’ ื”ืณ ืœื ื™ืขื–ื‘ื ื• ื‘ื™ื“ื•; ื•ืœื ื™ืจืฉื™ืขื ื• ื‘ื”ืฉืคื˜ื•ืƒ
ืœื“ ืงื•ื” ืืœ ื”ืณ ื•ืฉืžืจ ื“ืจื›ื• ื•ื™ืจื•ืžืžืš ืœืจืฉืช ืืจืฅ; ื‘ื”ื›ืจืช ืจืฉืขื™ื ืชืจืื”ืƒ
ืœื” ืจืื™ืชื™ ืจืฉืข ืขืจื™ืฅ; ื•ืžืชืขืจื” ื›ืื–ืจื— ืจืขื ืŸืƒ
ืœื• ื•ื™ืขื‘ืจ ื•ื”ื ื” ืื™ื ื ื•; ื•ืื‘ืงืฉื”ื• ื•ืœื ื ืžืฆืืƒ
ืœื– ืฉืžืจ ืชื ื•ืจืื” ื™ืฉืจ: ื›ื™ ืื—ืจื™ืช ืœืื™ืฉ ืฉืœื•ืืƒ
ืœื— ื•ืคืฉืขื™ื ื ืฉืžื“ื• ื™ื—ื“ื•; ืื—ืจื™ืช ืจืฉืขื™ื ื ื›ืจืชื”ืƒ
ืœื˜ ื•ืชืฉื•ืขืช ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื ืžื”ืณ; ืžืขื•ื–ื ื‘ืขืช ืฆืจื”ืƒ
ืž ื•ื™ืขื–ืจื ื”ืณ ื•ื™ืคืœื˜ื: ื™ืคืœื˜ื ืžืจืฉืขื™ื ื•ื™ื•ืฉื™ืขื ื›ื™ ื—ืกื• ื‘ื•ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืคืจืง ืœื–

One thing to note is that it is alphabetical, but each stich is generally two psukim long. The ืข is missing, though (ื“ืขืช ืžืงืจื says it is in the middle of pasuk ื›ื—, with an extra ืœ:โ€Ž ืœืขื•ืœื ื ืฉืžืจื• ื•ื–ืจืข ืจืฉืขื™ื ื ื›ืจืชืƒ), and the ืช stich starts with a ื•.

ืจื•ื— ื”ืณ, redux

The introduction is also interesting. It is one of nine ืคืจืงื™ื that are listed only as ืœื“ื•ื“ (by my count), with no ืžืืžืจ ืฉืœ ืฉื‘ื— (see the introduction to ืกืคืจ ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื). The gemara says:

ืœื“ื•ื“ ืžื–ืžื•ืจ ืžืœืžื“ ืฉืฉืจืชื” ืขืœื™ื• ืฉื›ื™ื ื” ื•ืื—ืจ ื›ืš ืืžืจ ืฉื™ืจื” ืžื–ืžื•ืจ ืœื“ื•ื“ ืžืœืžื“ ืฉืืžืจ ืฉื™ืจื” ื•ืื—ืจ ื›ืš ืฉืจืชื” ืขืœื™ื• ืฉื›ื™ื ื”

ืคืกื—ื™ื ืงื™ื–,ื

ืœื“ื•ื“ is read not as โ€œby Davidโ€ but as โ€œto Davidโ€ by the ืจื•ื— ื”ืงื•ื“ืฉ. We will have to look into what that implies in general, but here there is only ืœื“ื•ื“. This perek is much more like a ื ื‘ื•ืื” than a paean to ื”ืงื‘ืดื”. The Zohar explains:

ืœื“ื•ื“ ืื™ ืฉื™ืจืชื ืœื ืงืืžืจ, ืื™ ืชืคืœื” ืœื ืงืืžืจ, ืืœื ื‘ื›ืœ ืืชืจ ืœื“ื•ื“ ืกืชื ืจื•ื— ื”ืงื“ืฉ ืืžืจื•

ื–ื•ื”ืจ, ื•ื™ื—ื™ ืจืœื˜,ื

Most of this interpretation is from Hirsch.

There are three themes intertwined in this perek. The bulk of the psukim are advice, in the imperative: โ€œThis is how to look at the success of the ืจืฉืขโ€. This is unusual in โ€Ž ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื and makes the perek feel more like ืžืฉืœื™. The second theme is a reassurance that ื”ืณ will reward the ืฆื“ื™ืง and punish the ืจืฉืข. The third theme runs throughout the perek with a few psukim about the behavior of the ืฆื“ื™ืง and the ืจืฉืข.

The first 8 psukim are advice to the ืฆื“ื™ืง who is worried about the success of the ืจืฉืข. Donโ€™t make yourself upset (ืชืชื—ืจ is the reflexive of ื—ืจื”, to become angry) or be jealous of them; their apparent flourishing is as temporary as grass that will be mowed down. Trust in ื”ืณ; Hirsch interprets ืฉื›ืŸ ืืจืฅ as โ€œbe a neighbor to the earthโ€โ€” participate in earthly things but donโ€™t be too involved in them; and shepherd your faithโ€” it requires active nurturing to keep alive. Be reassured that your righteousness will be publicized even if others slander or mock you.

The advice is not so much about how to behave but how to think. Stay calm, even in the face of the apparent injustice of the world. It is noteworthy that this perek apparently addressed to David himself; Rabbi Eisemann in Music Made In Heaven says that David is described as ืื“ืžื•ื ื™ is to reflect his personality, his impestuousness. David himself needed the message of this perek to keep himself focused on what is truly important. ืกืคืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ is the โ€œhistoricโ€ David, reflecting his weaknesses and mistakes; ืกืคืจ ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื is the โ€œrealโ€ David, as he tries to be and tries to teach posterity.

Rabbi Eisemann connects this to the ืจื•ื— ื”ืณ that David had. After he is annointed, the pasuk says, (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื ื˜ื–:ื™ื’)โ€Ž ื•ืชืฆืœื— ืจื•ื— ื”ืณ ืืœ ื“ื•ื“ ืžื”ื™ื•ื ื”ื”ื•ื ื•ืžืขืœื”.โ€Ž The root ืฆืœื— means โ€œto pass over forcefullyโ€, a synonym of ืขื‘ืจ (Rabbi Eisemann adduces examples where ืฆืœื— is translated in the Targum as ืขื‘ืจ). Thus, Davidโ€™s ืจื•ื— ื”ืณ would โ€œpass overโ€ him, implying its transience. Sometimes he would be inspired, other times he would be left with what his brother called (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื ื™ื–:ื‘ื—)โ€Ž ื–ื“ื ืš ื•โ€ฆืจืข ืœื‘ื‘ืš.

Rabbi Eisemann compares this to the description of ืžืœืš ื”ืžืฉื™ื—,โ€Ž (ื™ืฉืขื™ื”ื• ื™ื:ื‘)โ€Ž ื•ื ื—ื” ืขืœื™ื• ืจื•ื— ื”ืณ.โ€Ž ื ื—ื” means โ€œrestingโ€, more permanent than ืฆืœื—. He also deals with why the king of Israel had to be someone less than perfect; we will have to deal with this as well in the future.

ืคืื•ืง ื—ืณ completes the inclusio with ืืœ ืชืชื—ืจ ืืš ืœื”ืจืข.

When Bad Things Happen To Bad People

Psukim ื˜ through ื› describe the fate of the wicked, that they will soon be destroyed. Again the reassurance is not that there is some far-off balancing of accounts, but that the ืฆื“ื™ืง himself will see how ื’ื ื–ื• ืœื˜ื•ื‘ื”, everything will work out. The meek shall inherit the earth.

The ืจืฉืข may plan and threaten, but it is all a joke.

However strong the weapons of the ืจืฉืข, those very weapons will be turned against him. The small forces of the ืฆื“ื™ืง will overwhelm the masses of the ืจืฉืข.

ืื™ื‘ื™ ื”ืณ ื›ื™ืงืจ ื›ืจื™ื, the enemies of ื”ืณ are like valuable sheep, has a brilliant interpretation in the midrash (cited in the Artscroll Tehillim):

(ืืกืชืจ ื’:ื) ืื—ืจ ื”ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื”ืืœื” ื’ื“ืœ ื”ืžืœืš ืื—ืฉื•ืจื•ืฉ ืืช ื”ืžืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื”ืžื“ืชื ื•ื’ื•ืณ. ื–ื” ืฉืืžืจ ื”ื›ืชื•ื‘ (ืชื”ืœื™ื ืœื–:ื›) ื›ื™ ืจืฉืขื™ื ื™ืื‘ื“ื• ื•ืื•ื™ื‘ื™ ื”ืณ ื›ื™ืงืจ ื›ืจื™ื ืฉืื™ืŸ ืžืคื˜ืžื™ืŸ ืื•ืชืŸ ืœื˜ื•ื‘ืชืŸ ืืœื ืœื˜ื‘ื—ื” ื›ืš ื”ืžืŸ ื”ืจืฉืข ืœื ื ืชื’ื“ืœ ืืœื ืœืžืคืœืชื•. ืžืฉืœ ืœืื“ื ืฉื”ื™ืชื” ืœื• ืกื™ื™ื—ื” ื•ื—ืžื•ืจื” ื•ื—ื–ื™ืจื” ื•ื”ื™ื” ื ื•ืชืŸ ืœื—ื–ื™ืจื” ื‘ืœื ืžื“ื” ืœื—ืžื•ืจื” ื•ืœืกื™ื™ื—ื” ื‘ืžื“ื” ืืžืจื” ืกื™ื™ื—ื” ืœื—ืžื•ืจื” ืžื” ืฉื•ื˜ื” ื–ื” ืขื•ืฉื” ืื ื• ืฉืื ื• ืขื•ืฉื™ืŸ ืžืœืื›ืชื• ืฉืœ ื‘ืขืœ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ื ื•ืชืŸ ืœื ื• ื‘ืžื“ื” ื•ืœื—ื–ื™ืจื” ืฉื”ื™ื ื‘ื˜ืœื” ืฉืœื ื‘ืžื“ื” ืืžืจื” ืœื” ืชื‘ื ื”ืฉืขื” ื•ืืช ืจื•ืื” ื‘ืžืคืœืชื” ืฉืื™ืŸ ืžืื›ื™ืœื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื” ื™ื•ืชืจ ืœื›ื‘ื•ื“ื” ืืœื ืœืจืขืชื” ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ืฉื‘ื ืงืœื ื“ืก ืžื™ื“ ื ื˜ืœื• ืœื—ื–ื™ืจื” ื•ื ื—ืจื•ื” ื”ืชื—ื™ืœื• ื ื•ืชื ื™ืŸ ืฉืขื•ืจื™ื ืœืคื ื™ ื‘ืชื” ืฉืœ ื—ืžื•ืจื” ื•ื”ื™ืชื” ืžื ืฉื‘ืช ื‘ื”ืŸ ื•ืœื ืื›ืœื” ืืžืจื” ืœื” ืืžื” ื‘ืชื™ ืœื ื”ืžืื›ืœ ื’ื•ืจื ืืœื ื”ื‘ื˜ืœื” ื’ื•ืจืžืช ื›ืš ืœืคื™ ืฉื›ืชื•ื‘ ื•ื™ืฉื ืืช ื›ืกืื• ืžืขืœ ื›ืœ ื”ืฉืจื™ื ืืฉืจ ืืชื• ืœืคื™ื›ืš ื•ื™ืชืœื• ืืช ื”ืžืŸ.

ืืกืชืจ ืจื‘ื” ื–:ื

It seems to me that there is an important pun here; the ืจืฉืขื™ื are called ืžืจืขื™ื, which certainly means โ€œdoers or causers of evilโ€, but also has the sense of ืžืจืขื”, pasture. ืžืจืขื™ื really does mean โ€œsheepโ€ and that is the way to think of them.

ื”ืฉืžื— ื‘ื—ืœืงื•

Pasuk ื›ื describes the difference between a the ืฆื“ื™ืง and the ืจืฉืข. Hirsch explains that the loan that the pasuk is talking about is the world that we have been given. We need to treat it as a loan, to be used to further G-dโ€™s will. The ืจืฉืข simply takes and never helps others, while the ืฆื“ื™ืง gives graciously (ื—ื•ื ืŸ ื•ื ื•ืชืŸ is a hendiadys).

Psukim ื›ื‘ to ื›ื˜ describe the reward of the ืฆื“ื™ืง, and end with the inclusio back to pasuk ื˜, concluding the description of the ultimate fate of both.

The most difficult pasuk is the one we say in bentching, ื ืขืจ ื”ื™ื™ืชื™ ื’ื ื–ืงื ืชื™, ื•ืœื ืจืื™ืชื™ ืฆื“ื™ืง ื ืขื–ื‘; ื•ื–ืจืขื• ืžื‘ืงืฉ ืœื—ืืƒ This is more than a statement that the ืฆื“ื™ืง will ultimately be rewarded; how can David claim that he has never seen a ืฆื“ื™ืง whose children were beggars? That is clearly not true in our own experience. Hirsch and the Etz Yosef (Enoch Zundel ben Yoseph, 19th century commentator on ืžื“ืจืฉ ืชื ื—ื•ืžื, ื•ื™ืฆื, ื’) both translate ื•ื–ืจืขื• ืžื‘ืงืฉ ืœื—ื as โ€œ[even] when his children are begging.โ€ The ืฆื“ื™ืง does not feel himself abandoned when he has to depend on others; he is aware that ื”ืณ provides but does so in various ways. Just as he gives graciously, he accepts graciously.

Psukim ืœ to the end return to the advice, starting with a description of the other characteristic of the ืฆื“ื™ืง: his words and his thoughts and actions are consistent with ื—ื›ืžื”,โ€Ž ืžืฉืคื˜ and ืชื•ืจืช ืืœืงื™ื•. Even if the ืจืฉืข catches him, ื”ืณ ืœื ื™ืขื–ื‘ื ื• ื‘ื™ื“ื•; it will not be permanent. The ืฆื“ื™ืง has an ืื—ืจื™ืช, a future, but the ืจืฉืข's will be cut off.

The perek ends with the reassurance that ื”ืณ has already saved the ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื and therefore they have only to have faith; He is ืžืขื•ื–ื ื‘ืขืช ืฆืจื”, the source of their strength in bad times.