ื‘ืกืดื“

Kavanot: Concerto for All Generations

Thoughts on Tanach and the Davening

ื ืชื”ืœื” ืœื“ื•ื“: ืืจื•ืžืžืš ืืœื•ืงื™ ื”ืžืœืš; ื•ืื‘ืจื›ื” ืฉืžืš ืœืขื•ืœื ื•ืขื“ืƒ
ื‘ ื‘ื›ืœ ื™ื•ื ืื‘ืจื›ืš; ื•ืื”ืœืœื” ืฉืžืš ืœืขื•ืœื ื•ืขื“ืƒ
ื’ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื”ืณ ื•ืžื”ืœืœ ืžืื“; ื•ืœื’ื“ืœืชื• ืื™ืŸ ื—ืงืจืƒ
ื“ ื“ื•ืจ ืœื“ื•ืจ ื™ืฉื‘ื— ืžืขืฉื™ืš; ื•ื’ื‘ื•ืจืชื™ืš ื™ื’ื™ื“ื•ืƒ
ื” ื”ื“ืจ ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ื”ื•ื“ืš ื•ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื ืคืœืืชื™ืš ืืฉื™ื—ื”ืƒ
ื• ื•ืขื–ื•ื– ื ื•ืจืืชื™ืš ื™ืืžืจื•; ื•ื’ื“ืœื•ืชื™ืš ืืกืคืจื ื”ืƒ
ื– ื–ื›ืจ ืจื‘ ื˜ื•ื‘ืš ื™ื‘ื™ืขื•; ื•ืฆื“ืงืชืš ื™ืจื ื ื•ืƒ
ื— ื—ื ื•ืŸ ื•ืจื—ื•ื ื”ืณ; ืืจืš ืืคื™ื ื•ื’ื“ืœ ื—ืกื“ืƒ
ื˜ ื˜ื•ื‘ ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ; ื•ืจื—ืžื™ื• ืขืœ ื›ืœ ืžืขืฉื™ื•ืƒ
ื™ ื™ื•ื“ื•ืš ื”ืณ ื›ืœ ืžืขืฉื™ืš; ื•ื—ืกื™ื“ื™ืš ื™ื‘ืจื›ื•ื›ื”ืƒ
ื™ื ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ืžืœื›ื•ืชืš ื™ืืžืจื•; ื•ื’ื‘ื•ืจืชืš ื™ื“ื‘ืจื•ืƒ
ื™ื‘ ืœื”ื•ื“ื™ืข ืœื‘ื ื™ ื”ืื“ื ื’ื‘ื•ืจืชื™ื•; ื•ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ื”ื“ืจ ืžืœื›ื•ืชื•ืƒ
ื™ื’ ืžืœื›ื•ืชืš ืžืœื›ื•ืช ื›ืœ ืขืœืžื™ื; ื•ืžืžืฉืœืชืš ื‘ื›ืœ ื“ื•ืจ ื•ื“ืจืƒ
ื™ื“ ืกื•ืžืš ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ ื”ื ืคืœื™ื; ื•ื–ื•ืงืฃ ืœื›ืœ ื”ื›ืคื•ืคื™ืืƒ
ื˜ื• ืขื™ื ื™ ื›ืœ ืืœื™ืš ื™ืฉื‘ืจื•; ื•ืืชื” ื ื•ืชืŸ ืœื”ื ืืช ืื›ืœื ื‘ืขืชื•ืƒ
ื˜ื– ืคื•ืชื— ืืช ื™ื“ืš; ื•ืžืฉื‘ื™ืข ืœื›ืœ ื—ื™ ืจืฆื•ืŸืƒ
ื™ื– ืฆื“ื™ืง ื”ืณ ื‘ื›ืœ ื“ืจื›ื™ื•; ื•ื—ืกื™ื“ ื‘ื›ืœ ืžืขืฉื™ื•ืƒ
ื™ื— ืงืจื•ื‘ ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ ืงืจืื™ื• ืœื›ืœ ืืฉืจ ื™ืงืจืื”ื• ื‘ืืžืชืƒ
ื™ื˜ ืจืฆื•ืŸ ื™ืจืื™ื• ื™ืขืฉื”; ื•ืืช ืฉื•ืขืชื ื™ืฉืžืข ื•ื™ื•ืฉื™ืขืืƒ
ื› ืฉื•ืžืจ ื”ืณ ืืช ื›ืœ ืื”ื‘ื™ื•; ื•ืืช ื›ืœ ื”ืจืฉืขื™ื ื™ืฉืžื™ื“ืƒ
ื›ื ืชื”ืœืช ื”ืณ ื™ื“ื‘ืจ ืคื™; ื•ื™ื‘ืจืš ื›ืœ ื‘ืฉืจ ืฉื ืงื“ืฉื• ืœืขื•ืœื ื•ืขื“ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืคืจืง ืงืžื”

Last time we spoke of ืชื”ื™ืœื™ืโ€Ž 30 as a musical work. This week Iโ€™d like to look at a perek that lends itself even more to that sort of analysis, one with which we are very familiar but probably never read in depth. ืชื”ื™ืœื™ืโ€Ž 145, โ€œืืฉืจื™โ€, is striking in the way it keeps changing grammatical person, from first person (I) addressing ื”ืณ in the second person (You), to third person (they) addressing ื”ืณ in the third person (Him). The ืžืœื‘ื™ืดื sees it as a sort of dialog between the psalmist and the rest of the world, but I think it reads like a unified work in two voices, a sort of concerto in words.

A concerto (from the Italianโ€ฆ) is a musical composition usually composed in four parts or movements, in which (usually) one solo instrument (for instance, a piano, violin, cello or flute) is accompanied by an orchestra.

Wikipedia

The Lost Soloist

The whole perek, of course, is one work of praise to ื”ืงื‘ืดื”. It is the only perek of ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื that is called a ืชื”ืœื”. The first โ€œmovementโ€ is in the first person; David himself declaring that he want to praise ื”ืงื‘ืดื” as king of the world (I somehow imagine it as a simple violin theme): ืืจื•ืžืžืš ืืœื•ืงื™ ื”ืžืœืš. This is all David wants, every day (ื‘ื›ืœ ื™ื•ื) and always (ืœืขื•ืœื ื•ืขื“). And he starts: โ€œื’ื“ื•ืœ ื”ืณ ื•ืžื”ืœืœ ืžืื“.โ€ But then he comes against an insurmountable obstacle (this analysis is similar to that of Rabbi Avi Baumol, The Poetry of Prayer: Tehillim in Tefillah): โ€œืœื’ื“ืœืชื• ืื™ืŸ ื—ืงืจโ€โ€Ž. ื”ืณ's greatness is incomprehensible. How can finite man even start to praise it?

Thereโ€™s a wonderful phrase that I have seen in Rabbi Soloveichikโ€™s works (though I canโ€™t find the source right now), calling prayer a โ€œhorrific ontic arrogance.โ€ It really is a ื—ื•ืฆืคื for us to say that ื”ืณ is great. What gives us the right?

The Voice of History

The answer is in the next pasuk, with the start of the second movement. ื”ืณ has been praised since the dawn of history, and we learn how from previous generations: โ€œื“ื•ืจ ืœื“ื•ืจ.โ€ While we cannot understand His essence, we can appreciate His actions, His manifestation in the world we live in: โ€œื™ืฉื‘ื— ืžืขืฉื™ืš.โ€ What we see is โ€œื”ื“ืจ ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ื”ื•ื“โ€ and it is this that David can speak about. ื”ื“ืจ, โ€œsplendorโ€, as Rabbi Schwab (Rav Schwab on Prayer) says, comes from the root meaning โ€œreturningโ€ or โ€œreflectingโ€; the ื”ื“ืจ that David acknowledges is the reflected glory of ื”ืณ in the world.

David continues to talk about the praises of the generations until we finally hear them ourselves (the โ€œorchestraโ€): โ€œื—ื ื•ืŸ ื•ืจื—ื•ื ื”ืณ,โ€ โ€œื˜ื•ื‘ ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ.โ€ Then David introduces another theme, that of ืžืœื›ื•ืช, quoting the generations: โ€œื›ื‘ื•ื“ ื”ื“ืจ ืžืœื›ื•ืชื•โ€ and we hear his voice directly praising ื”ืณ:โ€Ž โ€œืžืœื›ื•ืชืš ืžืœื›ื•ืช ื›ืœ ืขืœืžื™ื; ื•ืžืžืฉืœืชืš ื‘ื›ืœ ื“ื•ืจ ื•ื“ืจ.โ€

The โ€œื“ื•ืจ ื•ื“ืจโ€ serves as a sort of bookend (an โ€œinclusioโ€ for the second movement of this perek, paralleling the โ€œื“ื•ืจ ืœื“ื•ืจโ€ that started it. The third movement no longer is about the praise of ื”ืณ, it is the praise of ื”ืณ.

Sustenance and Salvation

It starts, of course, with a missing pasuk, the letter ื .

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ ืžื” ืœื ื ืืžืจ ื ื•ืดืŸ ื‘ืืฉืจื™ ืžืคื ื™ ืฉื™ืฉ ื‘ื” ืžืคืœืชืŸ ืฉืœ ืฉื•ื ืื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ืขืžื•ืก ื”) ื ืคืœื” ืœื ืชื•ืกื™ืฃ ืงื•ื ื‘ืชื•ืœืช ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื‘ืžืขืจื‘ื ืžืชืจืฆื™ ืœื” ื”ื›ื™ ื ืคืœื” ื•ืœื ืชื•ืกื™ืฃ ืœื ืคื•ืœ ืขื•ื“ ืงื•ื ื‘ืชื•ืœืช ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื‘ืจ ื™ืฆื—ืง ืืคื™ืœื• ื”ื›ื™ ื—ื–ืจ ื“ื•ื“ ื•ืกืžื›ืŸ ื‘ืจื•ื— ื”ืงื“ืฉ ืฉื ืืณ (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืงืžื”) ืกื•ืžืš ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ ื”ื ื•ืคืœื™ื.

ื‘ืจื›ื•ืช ื“:

David wrote ืชื”ื™ืœื™ืโ€Ž with ืจื•ื— ื”ืงื•ื“ืฉ; he was driven to write the words he wrote. He knew that the pasuk that started with ื  would have the same theme as ืขืžื•ืก's โ€œื ืคืœื” ืœื ืชื•ืกื™ืฃ ืงื•ื.โ€ We speak about something similar when a secular author, ืœื”ื‘ื“ื™ืœ, is inspired by his muse. David lets us imagine the missing pasuk by the contrast with the next one, โ€œืกื•ืžืš ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ ื”ื ืคืœื™ืโ€ and the parallelism lets us fill in the blanks. The ืžื”ืจืฉืดืโ€Ž (ื‘ืจื›ื•ืช ื“:ื‘, ื“ืดื” ืœื ื ืืžืจื” ื ื•ืŸ ื‘ืืฉืจื™) explains that omitting the ื ืคื™ืœื” line hints that no fall is permanent, that ื”ืณ will always allow us to rise again.

With ืขื™ื ื™ ื›ืœ ืืœื™ืš ื™ืฉื‘ืจื• we hear Davidโ€™s voice praising ื”ืณ again, but now he is not just echoing the voice of the previous generations. They were praising ื”ืณ for saving the fallen; David sees that we depend on ื”ืณ not just when we need rescuing, but our very existence is dependent on Him. As the ืžื”ืจืดืœ says:

ื•ืžื–ื” ืชืงื ื• ื›ื•ืก ื—ืžื™ืฉื™, ื›ื™ ืื—ืจ ืฉืชืงื ื• ืืจื‘ืข ื›ื•ืกื•ืช ืฉืœ ื’ืื•ืœื” ืชืงื ื• ื›ื•ืก ื—ืžื™ืฉื™ ื ื’ื“ ื”ืคืจื ืกื” ืฉื”ื™ื ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืžืŸ ื”ื’ืื•ืœื”, ืจืง ืฉื”ื•ื ืจืฉื•ืช ืฉื‘ืœื™ืœื” ื”ื–ื” ืชืงื ื• ืืจื‘ืข ื›ื•ืกื•ืช ื‘ืฉื‘ื™ืœ ื”ื’ืื•ืœื”, ืื‘ืœ ื‘ื•ื“ืื™ ืžืฆื•ื” ืื™ื›ื ื›ื™ ื›ื•ืก ื”ืณ ื”ื•ื ื”ืฉืœืžืช ื”ื’ืื•ืœื”, ื›ื™ ืื—ืจ ืฉื’ืืœ ืื•ืชื ื”ื™ื” ืžืคืจื ืกื ื‘ื›ืœ ืฆืจื›ื™ื”ื ื•ื”ื›ืœ ื‘ื›ืœืœ ื’ืื•ืœื” ื›ืžื• ืฉื ืชื‘ืืจ ืœืžืขืœื” ื•ื–ื” ืขื ื™ืŸ ื›ื•ืก ื—ืžื™ืฉื™.

ืžื”ืจืดืœ, ื’ื‘ื•ืจื•ืช ื”ืณ, ืคืจืง ืกืดื“

Chazal see the verse of ืคื•ืชื— ืืช ื™ื“ืš ื•ืžืฉื‘ื™ืข ืœื›ืœ ื—ื™ ืจืฆื•ืŸ as the central pasuk of the entire perek.

ื›ืœ ื”ืื•ืžืจ (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืงืžื”) ืชื”ืœื” ืœื“ื•ื“ ื‘ื›ืœ ื™ื•ื ืฉืœืฉ ืคืขืžื™ื ืžื•ื‘ื˜ื— ืœื• ืฉื”ื•ื ื‘ืŸ ื”ืขื•ืœื ื”ื‘ืโ€ฆืžืฉื•ื ื“ืื™ืช ื‘ื™ื” ืคื•ืชื— ืืช ื™ื“ืš

ื‘ืจื›ื•ืช ื“:ื‘

Finale

Almost all of the remainder of the perek is in the third person, as David and โ€œthe orchestraโ€ present a series of praises of ื”ืณ. They seem to have little to do with one another or with the overall theme of the perek, going from ื”ืณ's justice (ืฆื“ื™ืง ื”ืณ) to His desire for prayer (ืงืจื•ื‘ ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ ืงืจืื™ื•) to His helping those who fear Him (ืจืฆื•ืŸ ื™ืจืื™ื•) to the destruction of the wicked (ื›ืœ ื”ืจืฉืขื™ื ื™ืฉืžื™ื“). Rabbi Baumol has a striking insight: these pesukim serve as an introduction to the perakim that follow, the ones we say as part of ืคืกื•ืงื™ ื“ื–ืžืจื”:

ืฆื“ื™ืง ื”ืณ ื‘ื›ืœ ื“ืจื›ื™ื•; ื•ื—ืกื™ื“ ื‘ื›ืœ ืžืขืฉื™ื• corresponds to ืขืฉื” ืžืฉืคื˜ ืœืขืฉื•ืงื™ื ื ืชืŸ ืœื—ื ืœืจืขื‘ื™ื; ื”ืณ ืžืชื™ืจ ืืกื•ืจื™ืโ€Ž (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืงืžื•โ€Ž)

ืงืจื•ื‘ ื”ืณ ืœื›ืœ ืงืจืื™ื• corresponds to ืจื•ืฆื” ื”ืณ ืืช ื™ืจืื™ื• ืืช ื”ืžื™ื—ืœื™ื ืœื—ืกื“ื•โ€Ž (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืงืžื–โ€Ž)

ืจืฆื•ืŸ ื™ืจืื™ื• ื™ืขืฉื” corresponds to ื•ื™ืจื ืงืจืŸ ืœืขืžื• ืชื”ืœื” ืœื›ืœ ื—ืกื™ื“ื™ื•โ€Ž (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืงืžื—)

ื›ืœ ื”ืจืฉืขื™ื ื™ืฉืžื™ื“ corresponds to ืœืขืฉื•ืช ื ืงืžื” ื‘ื’ื•ื™ื; ืชื•ื›ื—ื•ืช ื‘ืœืืžื™ืโ€Ž (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืงืžื˜โ€Ž)

ื•ื™ื‘ืจืš ื›ืœ ื‘ืฉืจ ืฉื ืงื“ืฉื• corresponds to ื›ืœ ื”ื ืฉืžื” ืชื”ืœืœ ื™ึพื”โ€Ž (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืงื )โ€Ž

Coda

The final line, in addition to echoing the final perek of ืชื”ื™ืœื™ืโ€Ž, brings us back to Davidโ€™s voice with an inclusio of ืชื”ืœืช ื”ืณ that returns to the theme of the first pasuk, but now ending with all humanity praising ื”ืณ, with the โ€œืืžืŸโ€ of the ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ:โ€Ž ื‘ืจื•ืš ืฉื ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ืžืœื›ื•ืชื• ืœืขื•ืœื ื•ืขื“.